Loading...
Hearings Officer Packet - 06/09/2008 • 111 1T ,I! City of Tigard Hearin s Officer — g Agenda MEETING DATE: June 9, 2008, 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard — Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 STAFF REPORTS: Available to the public 7 days prior to the hearing date Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on the Friday prior to the meeting. Please call 503- 639 -4171, ext. 2438 (voice) or 503 - 684 -2772 (1 )D - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. To request such services, please notify the City of Tigard of your need(s) by 5:00 p.m. no less than one (1) week prior to the meeting date at the same phone numbers listed above so that we can make the appropriate arrangements. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 " APPEAL" OF RCM OFFICE BUILDING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2007 -00010 ITEM ON APPEAL: On April 17, 2008, the Director issued a decision to approve a request for Site Development Review approval to build a two-story 14,400 square foot office building with surface parking for 42 vehicles on a 36,130 square foot site in the Tigard Triangle. On May 1, 2008, an appeal was filed by the applicant pertaining to tree mitigation and fees to the City's signalization fund for the two major intersections in the vicinity (Dartmouth Street /72' Avenue and Dartmouth Street/68 Avenue). LOCATION: 7050 and 7020 SW Clinton Street; Washington County Tax Map 1S136DC, Tax Lots 3600 and 3700. ZONE: MUE: Mixed -Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed -use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99W) Highway 217 and I -5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business /professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi - family housing at a maximum density of 25 units /acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit- related park - and -ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra - district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the City through the legislative process. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: Community Development Code Chapters 18.790 and 18.810. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT HEARINGS OFFICER A GENDA — JUNE 9, 2008 _ _ City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 503- 639 -4171 1 www.tigard - or.gov 1 Page 1 of 1 • • AGENDA ITEM NO. .11 2.1 " i .<1 1). Ali � r. 1 k re 111 " � h 1k' AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1 v H-i re It z 1 L "Appeal" of RCM Office Building NI I SDR2007 -000 I 0 �A iL I---- - :N 3 4 A N711 ili r C ,lk h ,d k,I. , N ,,,., i WTI! k. , 1 11 411 I Q r � aF� F NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELL& THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOURECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER • • • PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, JUNE 9, 2008 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2007 -00010 FILE TITLE: "APPEAL" OF RCM OFFICE BUILDING OWNER APPLICANT'S Myers Family, LLC REP.: LRS Architects, Inc. Attn: Randall Myers Attn: Gary Minis zewski Five Centerpointe Drive, Suite 280 720 NW Davis, Suite 300 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Portland, OR 97209 APPELLANT/ RCM Homes, Inc. APPLICANT: Five Centerpointe Drive, Suite 280 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 ITEM ON APPEAL: On April 17, 2008 the Director issued a decision to approve a request for Site Development Review approval to build a two -story 14,400 square foot office building with surface parking for 42 vehicles on a 36,130 square foot site in the Tigard Triangle. On May 1, 2008, an appeal was filed major Intersections in the to (Dartmouth /72n Avenue lg Dartmouth t and for the Street/ 8 Avenue). LOCATION: 7050 and 7020 SW Clinton Street; Washington County Tax Map 1S136DC, Tax Lots 3600 and 3700. ZONE: MUE: Mixed -Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed -use employment distnct bounded by Pacific I- ighway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I -5. This zoning distnct permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices civic uses and housing; the us latter includes multi - family housing at a maximum density of 25 units /acre, equivalent to the zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools utilities and transit - related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support akernative modes of transportation to he greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra- district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone maybe applied elsewhere in the Qty through the legislative process. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED:CommunityDevelopment Code Chapters 18.790 and 18.810. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MA1 "1ER WILL BE CONDUCIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER AND QTY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT QTY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES AIOAVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH ID HEARING. THE QTY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639 -4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR (503) 684 -2772 (1DD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. • ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRI "I"1"EN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACIION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE QTY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRT1"1hN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACIION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE OR DOCUMENTS LESS THAN 7 DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE, THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY MAY ALLOW A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING, SUBJECT TO ORS 215.428 OR 227178. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THE CRITERIA LISTED OR OTHER CRITERIA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH THE PERSON BELIEVES TO APPLY TO THE DECISION. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LE 1 AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST, ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECI ED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE -NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECIION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY -FIVE CENTS (25 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECIION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY - FIVE CENTS (250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER EMILY ENG AT (503) 639 -4171, TIGARD QTY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223, OR BY EMAIL TO emilyatigand- or.gov 'ir" Il . ' �ICINITI I , -ill= SD Ii^i�p7- iliiUlil ` 5. ` !IIb 11117 11111 pi .-. is a . Ai 1� . . % %s, EC.,. a 111111 URST T p1J ___- . . .,. , c . V1 iii i t t' - I Ld N ` T S = ..... -. r.. s... .„........ • PUBLIC HAWING ITEM The following will be considW by the Tigard Hearings Officer on Monday June 9, 2008 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral COMMUNITY and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter • �� r will be conducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code NEWSPAPERS and the rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available L J at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Chapter 18.390. 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 • PO Testimony may be submitted in writing prior to or at the public i Box 370 • Beaverton, OR 97075 hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an Phone: 503 - 684 -0360 Fax: 503 - 620 -3433 issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the Email: hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision -maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes legaladvertising @commnewspapers.com appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. A copy of the application and all State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost. A I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no depose and say that I am the Accounting cost at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, and copies for all Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. Further informa- Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of tion may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Emily Eng) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, by general circulation, published at Beaverton, in calling 503- 639 -4171, or by email to emily @tigard - or.gov. SITE the aforesaid county and state, as defined by DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2007 -00010 - "APPEAL" ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that OF RCM OFFICE BUILDING - ITEM ON APPEAL: On April 17, 2008, the Director issued a decision to approve a request for Site City of Beaverton Development Review approval to build a two -story 14,400 square of Public Hearing foot office building with surface parking for 42 vehicles on a 36,130 Notice Notice 2 square foot site in the Tigard Triangle. On May 1, 2008, an appeal was filed by the applicant pertaining to tree mitigation and fees to the City's signalization fund for the two major intersections in the vicinity (Dartmouth Street/72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street/68th A copy of which is hereto annexed, was Avenue). LOCATION: 7050 and 7020 SW Clinton Street; published in the entire issue of said Washington County Tax Map 1S136DC, Tax Lots 3600 and 3700. newspaper for ZONE: MUE: Mixed -Use Employment. REVIEW CRITERIA ■ 1 BEING APPEALED: Community Development Code Chapters Successive and consecutive weeks in the 18.790 and 18.810. Publish 5/22/2008. TT11142. following issues May 22, 2008 � , {. ,, f ' oI ./ ! , .. \ . 1 1 VICINITY MAP i iftc - Li f 1,0 g-U4- , Charlotte Allsop- (Accounting M nager) .--4,-,1 ; !-----r- -I - (J-; L I - BUILDING OFFICE 3 1.--i � Subscribed and sworn to before me this I . - 1 - ' i ,_} , 5 May 22, 008 - j ; . J __ft /KACt..6. 4, ___-___.:____„ ,,__ I r i 1 j 7% _ - = fir / :�' i , . � ' a :p 4_– NOTARY PUBLIC FOR G N I �r1 – =� r m � "�!� � �1-I � � .i �'��;s My commission expires 1 �-- i 4 i I 6' A _` _ -H mo t - i . 1 -- � i F - i ` Acct #10093001 ! f - I T --f 1 i 1 ' 1 - 7 , Patty Lunsford � -, i , ! 1 ' — ., � _ _ City of Beaverton ; H- _ I .. I: -- .-J ` i L i ; -°- - __ – PO BOX 4755 P..' , _ . - ti ' - . --- r : I - -' .,-.. _,_= _..... Beaverton, OR 97076 4 Size 2 x 8.5 011 OFFICIAL SEAL ',, ROBIN A. BURGESS Amount Due $141.95 w� ` . ° - NOTARY Pt18UC- OREGON 'remit to address above` ''' COMMISSION NO. 390701 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 18, 2009 • IIIII Depending on the mber of people wishing to testify, Tigard Hearing's Officer may limit am of t i m e each nu person has to spe We ask you to the l i Ti m it yo oral co to 3-5 m inutes the . The Hearing's Officer may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Hearing's Officer to supplement oral testimony. AGENDA ITEM NO.: 2.1 DATE: JUNE 9, 2008 PAGE 1 OFJr FILE NAME: "APPEAL" OF RCM OFFICE BUILDING CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2007 -00010 IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY ON THE ITEM INDICATED ABOVE, PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME, ADDRESS & INCLUDE YOUR ZIP CODE PROPONENT OF APPLICATION OPPONENT OF APPLICATION - (Speaking In Favor or Neutral)- - (Speaking Against) - Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone o. _ 11 . 21. 1 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 5evc �� @ �R �e s 7 n �p �- Tic* 1 N ame, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. T W ;Ise 0 F CeAAc.-po;NN-z TN1vc- '* 2' O C.- gk c _ OSWego 07 91O35 i — — — - - - - -- - - - - - — N ame, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 I 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — ..n. — — Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I 1 1 N • • BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an appeal of conditions of approval of a director's) FINAL ORDER decision approving an application for site development ) review for a proposed office development at 7050 and ) SDR2007 -00010 7020 SW Clinton Street in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (RCM Office Building) A. SUMMARY 1. On April 17, 2008, the City of Tigard Planning Director (the "director ") issued a decision conditionally approving site development review for a proposed two -story, 14,400 square foot, office building at 7050 and 7020 SW Clinton Street, Washington County Tax Map 1 S 136DC, Tax lot 3600 and 3700 (the "site "). 2. On May 1, 2008 the applicant, RCM Homes, Inc., filed an appeal of the director's decision. The written appeal disputes condition of approval 4, which requires that the applicant provide mitigation for removal of an existing tree that is located within the existing right -of -way, beyond the boundaries of the site. The applicant argued that it has been the City's practice to not require mitigation for removal of offsite trees. The applicant also appealed conditions 30 and 31, which require that the applicant contribute towards the cost of a traffic signals at the intersections of SW 72 "d Avenue and Dartmouth Street (Condition 30) and SW 68th Avenue and Dartmouth Street (Condition 31). However the applicant withdrew this portion of the appeal at the hearing. 3. City of Tigard Hearings Officer Joe Turner (the "hearings officer ") conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal. City staff recommended the hearings officer deny the appeal and affirm the director's decision. Representatives of the applicant testified in support of the application and the appeal. No one else testified orally or in writing other than public agency staff. The principal issues in this case include the following: a. Whether the tree protection and mitigation standards of TDC 18.790 apply to offsite trees within existing rights -of -way abutting the site; b. Whether the tree protection and mitigation standards of TDC 18.790 apply to trees located within future rights -of -way that are proposed to be created by the development; and c. Whether trees located on the boundary of the site are subject to the tree protection and mitigation standards of TDC 18.790; 4. Based on the findings and conclusions contained herein and the testimony and evidence in the public record, the hearings officer grants the appeal, in part and affirms the administrative decision conditionally approving the application with certain modifications for the reasons provided herein. • • B. HEARING AND RECORD HIGHLIGHTS 1. The hearings officer received testimony at the public hearing about the appeal on June 9, 2008. All exhibits and records of testimony are filed with the Tigard Department of Community Development. At the beginning of the hearing, the hearings officer made the declaration required by ORS 197.763. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parte contacts, bias or conflicts of interest. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected testimony and evidence offered at the hearing. 2. City planner Emily Eng summarized the appeal and her May 30, 2008 Memorandum in response to the appeal (the "Memorandum "). She argued that the Code requires that applicants provide mitigation for removal of healthy trees. The Code does not provide an exemption for trees located within an existing right -of -way and, contrary to the applicant's assertion; it has not been the City's practice to provide such an exemption. 3. Engineer Steve Roper and Dwayne Wilson, Development Manager for RCM Homes, testified on behalf of the applicant. a. Mr. Roper expressly withdrew the portion of the appeal regarding conditions 30 and 31. The applicant only objects to condition of approval 4, which requires that the applicant mitigate for removal of tree # 731, which is located in the public right -of -way abutting the site. i. He argued that it had been the City's practice to exempt trees in the right -of -way from the mitigation requirements. ii. He argued that the Code requires removal of the tree in this case. The conditions of approval require that the applicant construct road improvements in a specific location abutting the site. The applicant must remove the tree in order to construct the improvements. The applicant cannot modify the road improvements to retain the tree. iii. He argued that the Code only requires mitigation for removal of trees within the development site. CDC 18.790.030.A requires that the applicant's arborist prepare a tree plan showing all trees within the "lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application...is filed." The Code does not require that the plan include trees located outside the boundaries of the development site. The Code defines "right -of -way" as an area that is "[S]eparate and distinct from the lots or parcels adjoining such right -of -way and not included within the dimensions or areas of such lots or parcels." CDC 18.120.030.A(124). Therefore, since the right -of -way is not part of the site, the applicant is not required to mitigate for removal of trees within the right -of -way. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 2 of 10 • • iv. He opined that trees #677, 734, 811 and 892 are located within the existing or proposed rights -of -way. Therefore the applicant should not be required to provide mitigation for removal of those trees either. The Code defines "right -of -way" as " A strip of land occupied or intended to be occupied by a street ... ." Mitigation should not be required for removal of these trees, since they are located in an area intended to be used as right -of -way. b. Mr. Wilson argued that CDC 18.790.030.A clearly limits the scope of the tree plan to trees located on the site. Tree #731 is located offsite, within the existing right -of -way. Therefore no mitigation is required. Trees 892, 811, 677 and 734 are also within existing or proposed right -of -way and should be excluded from the mitigation requirement. He requested the hearings officer hold the record open for one week to allow the applicant to submit additional evidence regarding the location of the existing trees near the boundaries of the site. He agreed to toll the 120 -day clock for one week to accommodate the open record period. 4. At the end of the hearing, the hearings officer ordered the public record held open for one week to allow the applicant to submit additional evidence regarding the location of the existing trees near the boundaries of the site. The record in this case closed at 5:00 p.m. June 16, 2008. C. DISCUSSION 1. TDC 18.390.040.G and ORS 227.175 authorize the hearings officer to hear appeals of Type II decisions as a de novo matter. The hearings officer is required to conduct an independent review of the record and is not bound by the prior determination of the manager. The hearings officer adopts the findings in the manager's decision and the Memorandum and the findings and supporting evidence relied on therein, except to the extent inconsistent with the following findings. The hearings officer incorporates by reference the entire planning file regarding the original Type II review of SDR2007- 00010. 2. At the hearing the applicant withdrew that portion of the appeal objecting to conditions 30 and 31, which require contribution towards the cost of certain traffic signals. Therefore the hearings officer affirms that portion of the director's decision. 3. The only issue in this case is whether the applicant is required to mitigate for removal of trees located within existing or proposed rights -of -way. a. The hearings officer finds that the tree protection and mitigation standards of TDC 18.790 do not apply to offsite trees located within an existing public right -of -way. The tree removal ordinance is limited to trees located on the site, based on the plain meaning of the words in the Code. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 3 of 10 • • i. CDC 18.790.030.A requires a tree plan for the "[L]ot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application ... is filed." CDC 18.790.030.B(1) requires that the tree plan identify "[T]he location, size and species of all existing trees ...." (emphasis added). CDC 18.790.030.A clearly limits the tree plan to "[A]ll existing trees ... " located within the boundaries of the development site; the "[L]ot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application ... is filed." ii. CDC 18.790.030.B(2) requires that the tree plan include "Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper ...." As the tree plan is limited to the "[L]ot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application ... is filed," the mitigation requirement is also limited to trees within those boundaries. Therefore the hearings officer finds that mitigation is only required for trees that must be included within the tree plan; trees located on the "[L]ot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application ... is filed" The applicant is not required to mitigate for the removal of trees located outside the boundaries of the site. b. The hearings officer finds that the right -of -way abutting the site is not part of the "[L]ot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application ... is filed." The Code expressly provides that the right -of -way is "[S]eparate and distinct from the lots or parcels adjoining such right -of -way and not included within the dimensions or areas of such lots or parcels." CDC 18.120.030.A(124). Therefore the examiner finds that the applicant is not required to mitigate the removal of trees located within existing rights -of -way. c. The hearings officer further finds that the tree plan is required to include trees located within future rights -of -way within the site that the applicant proposed to create with the development. Areas of proposed right -of -way are clearly part of the site at the time the tree plan is prepared and the development application is submitted. These areas will remain part of the site unless and until the dedication process is completed. Because these areas of future right -of -way are part of the "[L]ot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application ... is filed," they must be included in the tree plan. CDC 18.790.030.B(2) clearly requires mitigation for removal of trees that are subject to the tree plan. Therefore the applicant should be required to mitigate the removal of trees located within proposed rights -of -way within the site. 4. The applicant must remove Tree #731 in order to construct required frontage improvements for SW 70 Avenue. However this tree is clearly located within the existing SW 70 Avenue right -of -way, abutting the east boundary of the site. Therefore the applicant is not required to mitigate for removal of this tree. Condition of approval 4 should be modified to that effect. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 4 of 10 0 • 5. There is a dispute about whether Trees #734 and #677, which the applicant proposed to remove, are located on the site and therefore subject to the tree plan and mitigation requirements. Based on the applicant's revised survey, attached to the applicant's June 16, 2008 letter, the center of Tree #734 is located east of the east property line of the site, within the existing 70 Avenue right -of -way. The center of Tree #677 is located west of the east property line of the site, within the boundaries of the site. a. Mitigation is only required for the "removal" of trees larger than 12- inches in diameter. CDC 18.790.030.B(2). CDC 18.790.020.A(5) defines "removal" as: [T]he cutting or removing of 50 percent (50 %) or more of a crown, trunk or root system of a tree, or any action which results in the loss of aesthetic or physiological viability or causes the tree to fall or be in immediate danger of falling. "Removal" shall not include pruning; b. Given this definition, the hearings officer finds that the applicant is not required to mitigate for removal of Tree #734. As discussed above, the applicant is only required to mitigate for removal of trees located on the site. In this case less than 50- percent of the crown, trunk and root system of the tree is located on the site. Therefore the hearings officer finds that cutting down this tree does not constitute "removal" as defined by the Code, because more than 50- percent of the of the crown, trunk and root system of the tree is exempt from regulation under CDC 18.790.030. c. The hearings officer finds that the applicant is required to mitigate for removal of Tree #677, because more than 50- percent of the of the crown, trunk and root system of the tree is located on the site and subject to regulation under CDC 18.790.030. 6. Trees #811 and 892 are located entirely on the site, based on the applicant's revised survey. Therefore the applicant is required to mitigate for removal of these trees. The fact that the applicant proposed to dedicate the area where these trees are located as public right -of -way is irrelevant. D. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings adopted and incorporated herein, the hearings officer concludes that the appeal should be granted, in part. The applicant is only required to mitigate for removal of trees where 50- percent or more of the crown, trunk and root system of the tree is located within the boundaries of the site. Therefore the hearings officer should affirm the manager's decision with one modification to eliminate the mitigation requirement for trees #731 and #734. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 5 of 10 • • E. DECISION In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained and incorporated herein, the hearings officer hereby grants the appeal in part, affirms the decision of the planning manager and approves SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) subject to the following revised conditions of approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO DEMOLITION PERMITS: Submit the following to the City Arborist (Todd Prager (503) 718 -2700) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 1. Prior to any site work, including demolition, the applicant shall create a separate tree protection plan that shows fencing, tree protection specifications (including after construction specifications), and a signature of approval from the project arborist. The applicant shall also include the tree protection fencing on the grading plan. 2. Prior to any site work, including demolition, the applicant shall position the tree protection fencing as directed by the project arborist to protect the trees to be retained. The neighboring trees to be retained shall be protected with 5' -6' chain link fencing. Fences are to be mounted on two inch diameter galvanized iron posts, driven into the ground to a depth of at least 2 -feet at no more than 10 -foot spacing. The applicant shall allow access by the City Arborist for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. 3. From initial tree protection zone (TPZ) fencing installation throu the building construction phases, the applicant shall have an on -going responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the City Arborist, at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist monitors the construction activities The reports shall evaluate the condition and location of the tree protection fencing, determine if any changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced, then the Project Arborist shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the overall, long -term health and stability of the tree(s). If work is required within an established TPZ, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely impacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arborist may require changes prior to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is occurring within the tree protection zone and submit a summary report certifying that the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and/or stability of the trees. If the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan are not being followed by the contractor or a sub - contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the City Arborist and the Project Arborist. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 6 of 10 • • THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE/BUILDING PERMITS: Submit the following to the City Arborist (Todd Prager, (503) 718 -2700) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 4. Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised mitigation plan that excludes tree 731 (24- caliper inch Oregon Ash) and tree 734 (18- caliper inch Douglas Fir) from their mitigation calculations, for a total of 166 caliper inches to be mitigated. 5. Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall submit a combination fee in -lieu of planting and cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation inches required. Any trees successfully planted on or off -site, in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and TDC 18.790.060.D, will be credited against the assurance two years after all of the trees are planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The Tree Mitigation Plan shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist and be due for review and approval prior to tree planting or the issuance of PFI permits, whichever is first. The mitigation proposal shall show the species, location, and spacing of mitigation trees in relation to buildings, infrastructure, existing trees, street trees, and each other. After the plan is approved and the trees are planted, the project arborist shall submit a letter to the City Arborist to certify that all of the mitigation trees were properly planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan in order to set the starting point of the two year tree establishment period. After the two year establishment period, the applicant shall provide a re- inventory of the mitigation trees conducted by a certified arborist in order to document mitigation tree survival, and compliance with the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The remaining value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in -lieu of planting from the original cash assurance. Submit the following to the Current Planning Division (Emily Eng, (503) 718 -2712) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 6. Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall apply for a lot line consolidation through Washington County for Tax Lots 3600 and 3700 and provide the City evidence that the consolidation was approved. • 7. Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall provide written approval of the waste storage area by Pride Disposal. 8. Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall revise the plans to indicate 8 bicycle parking spaces. 9. Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall revise the site lan to show a clear vision triangle for a driveway access (See Figure 18.795.1). 10. Prior to a site/building permits, the applicant shall indicate any rooftop equipment on the site plan and show that it is adequately screened or that its exposure from the adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard (18.620.040.A.6). Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 7 of 10 • Submit the following to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, (503) 718- 2642) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 11. Prior to commencing onsite improvements, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover half - street improvements and any other work in the public right -of -way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.tigard- or.gov). 12. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee ", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 13. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. 14. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, which indicate that they will construct a half - street improvement along the frontages of SW Clinton Street and SW 70th Avenue. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for a local street from curb to centerline equal to 18 feet, but no less than 24 feet total; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curbs, or curb and gutter as needed; D. storm drainage, including any off -site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. 8 foot concrete sidewalk with a 4 foot planter strip; F. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; G. street striping; H. streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City Engineer; I. underground utilities; J. street signs and NO PARKING signs (if applicable); K. driveway apron (if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Clinton Street and SW 70` Avenue in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 15. The applicant's engineer shall submit a paving plan for the intersection of SW 70th Avenue /SW Clinton Street with turning templates for review and approval to ensure adequate paving in the intersection. 16. A profile of SW Clinton Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 8 of 10 17. A profile of SW 70th Avenue shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 18. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. 19. Final design plans and calculations for the proposed private water quality facility shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) as a part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans. 20. The applicant shall verify the extent of the existing public storm sewer line in SW Clinton Street to ensure it reaches the intersection of SW Clinton Street/SW 70th Avenue. The applicant shall extend the storm sewer if it does not reach the intersection. 21. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Bethany Stewart, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering). 22. Additional right -of -way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of 70th Avenue to increase the right -of -way to 30 feet from the centerline (60 feet total). The description shall be tied to the existing right -of -way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit the following to the City Arborist (Todd Prager, (503) 718 - 2700): 23. Prior to a final building inspection, the Project Arborist will submit a final certification indicating the elements of the Tree Protection Plan were followed and that all remaining trees on the site are healthy, stable, and viable in their modified growing environment. Contact the Current Planning Division (Emily Eng, (503) 718 -2712) to satisfy the following: 24. Prior to a final building inspection, a member of the Current Planning Division shall walk through the site to determine whether development is in conformance with the decision. Submit the following to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, (503) 718- 2642) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 25. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one -year maintenance assurance for said improvements. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 9 of 10 • • 26. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as- built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar, 2) a diskette of the as- builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as -built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). 27. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Clinton Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in- lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $35.00 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $6,566.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 28. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. 29. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant's engineer shall submit a final sight distance certification for the two access locations. 30. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall contribute $9,251.00 to the signal fund for SW 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street. 31. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall contribute $2,005.00 to the signal fund for SW 68th Avenue/Dartmouth Street. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. DATED this 26 day of June 2008. oe Turner, Esq., AICP City of Tigard Land Use Hearings Officer Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR2007 -00010 (RCM Office Building) Page 10 of 10 M • "TAB A" Testimony Received at the Public Hearing. Subv►•t4d o 16 Zc( J, y c!(c, - .............. ck i,„, . ,`ikd .... 1,7 -t-a— 4-- 1ftn j ...a. .. 6/1- • 8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232 ( Beaverton, Oregon 97008 (I) Phone 503.469.1213 • Toll free 866.469.1213 _� \ Fax 503.469.8553 www.srdlic.com , MEMORANDUM To: Joe Turner, Tigard Hearings Office From: Steve Roper, PE — SR Design LLC CC: Emily Eng, Assistant Planner Date: June 16, 2008 Re: Tigard Office Building — Tree #734, #677, #811 and #892 SR Design's Survey Department re- surveyed two trees to determine whether they are or are not located on the subject property. The survey crew set up their equipment and recorded three separate survey measurements for tree # 734 and tree # 677 located on the eastern property line. After further review, it has been determined by the Project Engineer and confirmed by the Project Surveyor that the center of tree # 734 was located east of the applicant's property line, meaning that the center of the tree is located on the City's current right -of -way. Furthermore, it was determined that tree #677 was located west of the applicant's property line; thus indicating that the center is currently located on the applicant's property. At issue is whether mitigation measures should be used of tree #734, #677, #811 and #892. The applicant's project engineer has determined that since tree # 734 is currently located on City owned property that mitigation measures should not be used and that the tree should be removed without any impact to the project (financial or the planning of additional trees). The applicant also holds the position that the remaining three trees at issue (tree # 677, #811 and #892) should be held at the same standard as tree # 734. Mitigation for trees should be limited for trees located on the applicant's lot and not for trees located in the public right -of -way. As stated in the Tigard Development Code the definition of right -of -way is as follows: "Right -of -way - A strip of land occupied or intended to be occupied by a street." (Emphasis added) A tree plan for development purposes included only trees located on the subject lot. One can make the rational conclusion that trees located on a lot after the public right -of -way has been dedicated as the definition clearly states should be included in the mitigation calculations. The applicant and I believe that findings have been made to support our argument that only trees that are located in the right -of -way (current or intended) should not be included in the required tree plan and should not count towards mitigation. Therefore, tree #734, #677, #811 and #892 are exempt. 1" I IP a iI W i O �iFi;'ifi .' II rb 7 d ; •6 la :iii.. k. --- -_ - - -_ ...I -- - t ���' !'� \ � 1 i - I , 1 I I \ \ \� \ T / r so j r I I1' 1 m�l T A \/ 7 �` •r -1 I Ct -' - k - \� I C� - ;--- \ —\ I ' \ J - T�v - - - 1 SOME Iwv i •r /m.dj' � 1 a g 4 e \ I \° \ 1 — I •-�5 -\ / ,, '1 014,4 • � f I a / / 7 .: .06117 , ... ,, 1 fir --C--.3.... .. ^ 41i8lelE IMBUE .■ ppr Alr I '. ..1 • .7 I \ a ° "x 1 I \ \ P q ` Its' llii�Mi'�i -- - I r / \ �' I � o-ns e V I 1 r I I :a•: ..;a_I... , r..' �N o .::.:1 .. : .f_a�r -•,_ I r rui i .: a r :— a_r•'' ��'.- >• ':.::. . . .a_a>_ �' ■ 11':I:..��I..''' !.'.''mss .�■ :. .;I:v.t .S ` : ::�, •l -I l:_!�•L I /.// / ..,././ 1,:.\ \ I :;�� i : I ■ r ::,, ,, ..1 :, r :.,, ...._■ ; >t = ;..,,, .: 1..S: u - n ::,_L,_ ppp( - I n 1 ■ �i -•. TT"- �S'1 ■ :.1 :.n:•n.: a':..— G- al:�!•L P / Cato a ■...I:., �I. ,. , , . ..■ ... :.. ....,�.' . . ;1::• i:''•„•'1 • . '•,.' . 1. al:: _I.:>• traiP . -11 . • .1. 717 T 1 ;- . ...— t7�;..;1::• ..•.:•' •i_AI: -1• 1.: ■ k \ I � • 1 . 7 ∎r:�.1 �NUMN :•1• •.∎ . i'',:„•: ��■l i�I.. g 6 \ / i / 1 / / / / / � \ \ / 1 ,l / 1 jam .. .:. 1 : u 1::.: ' I': �� .■ . .,: : ..• i . . , . ,,. , ..i'i . ,. • • _.I::L' !/L I 1 n! +� 1.w ... -, . �erI�� 4 $M I I / , \Q \ /,1 \ I1 OA 1 \ \ • .d 1 .r.r:.:'ter:" 1 . ,...:..-. cc,•. c_ar.:>_L� 4 B • I 111111111111.121=11 ■ns•u : .O . 1 1 \ I 1 1 1I \ 1 �I • ■--1r -•t•: . .ra_ . r'- ,- r. ■=-.■..n. .1 :.-.A .:.: :.1 • \•. .,1: • a<.: .,,: +_a�Lall� \ t / ��\ \ I I1 a 11 : • : ._ alb , . • � =tea.1. :•.1:..• u_+1:11•Lalllll. . g rlr:'. :.. ' - 1 - f =I= WIN : 1 ■■ . d''...It : — •i_a�L \� \ \ \ 1 1 / / ` _ I I . 't ! �,! '�T••!■M a P a ::• � 1.. ,:,7. firiir�Lri�C'7■!! d • \ 1 \ \ \ 1 / 1 n •i :.1 •1_a�L.■ \ \ / III ll ■ lr :r.::..>_r._'_ ' �>.■.:a a' , ,•: t:',r•� c_a�� \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ 1 1 :APT .. .. ' >_ : ' , . ? 1 - - . - .: n a' ..., ; 1 : :4 J .: •.- . ,.r>_ c -a =L� - p \ 1 ` ' n J I 1 -- •1_a�,._ \ �, ._. r :•. = ' : i.0 ■d . J :•1. - . I ' n . v �C_a =,._>• \ 1b1'a \ �. - \ \ 1 / _ // ofito ■ 1 .. a -r , .c. -ma :i - .:a a'', : .,, •: 1. •.:.1',r • a, �IC.a�,._,_ 1 g — \ �(/\ ■. 6'. . .. „, : „.J::-- r.■..:a .n.a'',:n•:1.'•:.J �L ,a�,._� \ \\ \ ■ 1 1 11 l \ \ \ ., 4 f 71s ` ,UR " ? t a •...:,1: i.'X.. L. \ { \ \ / 1 it ■..:•:�. �F'. 1 ..••• = ...:'I' . 1. 1. : .1 41 a : 1♦L Jam.._!• 1 \ ) \ \ \ • • / _n ;' , . .. 1 •. 1 . • \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I \ I \ l \ r - „ 1.: 1,•1 °r 1- .'..c•: ■ a te .... \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ � \ I, \; 1 . - i ° \ I1 ,,,, I�; 1 MEND a• r ... ,. 1 \ \ 1 �� ,- m —• —•— ■ \ T r M 1\ _ 'M\ ti- 1 � 1 I _ o..00n... • f ' tl I 1 1 1 1 - -- ---- - MI6 MOW la I\ : • \' . \ 1 Z4 m v - -- - - -- -..la 1 1I li1 ` 1 --am -- - 06.....117■. 1/` P I \ \\ .Wl \, f, ?!I .4k * 1.f:1 yy - - - - e • - 7. ..A.. [ Wl. , 11/1401 .b - 06. .A WOE GOOCD, 1 atop pal, Iml l 1 ,IVO, War nn. ® - m. W.ar WOW EXTC. COMMON War ,..•7 ca i • • TM;HLoL s „„ fy (11-16 Vb.1 K_r e)H \-/ — LP , ( hr-,'oc-Ff7 > 12)( o _- r \ -A '.i 1 „.„,...-- ________ g 0” \IV • L I - - te --- ��- oD \--._ _/....7.__ G AS 0 __,....„\---- — ----- I-- - ________. __,.,------ AL a n I'M -•■■L---- rto S V E _______ HO 'd Pk VELRO A s Ci CO --------- — M 1■/ 4- U, () 71) • • ^. . , v . • Emily Eng From: Jeff Caines [jeffc @srdllc.com] Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 4:54 PM To: Emily Eng Cc: Dick Bewersdorff Subject: RCM Office Building - trees Attachments: 20080616165454866.pdf; TREES 734 AND 677.pdf SR DESIGN LLC 1 Jeff Caines 1 Land Use Planner 8196 SW Hall Blvd, Suite 232 1 Beaverton, Oregon 97008 1 www.SRDLLC.com P 503.469.1213 (x104) 1 F 503.469.8553 1 ieffc@srdllc.com Dirt Design With The Builder In Mind (c) Planning 1 Engineering 1 Surveying 1 Landscape Architecture 1 ESB Certified Original Message From: Scanner @srdllc.com [mailto:Scanner @srdllc.com] Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 1:55 PM To: Steve Roper; Jeff Caines Subject: . This E -mail was sent from "RICOH3500" (Aficio MP C3500). Scan Date: 06.16.2008 16:54:54 ( -0400) Queries to: Scanner(asrdllc.com 1 Sulam' f J ' f itrarn Page l of 2 6 / q / 7 1, Jeff Caines From: Dick Bewersdorff [Dick @tigard -or.gov] Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 11:34 AM To: Jeff Caines; Emily Eng; Todd Prager; Cheryl Caines; Gary Pagenstecher Cc: dwilson @rcmhomes.net; Steve Roper; Duane Subject: RE: RCM Office Building Jeff: A careful reading of the code would indicate the tree plan requires identification of all trees. It also lists identification of all trees to be removed. It does not say only trees on the lot to be removed. All trees are subject to the point where mitigation is required. This particular tree is in the right of way but must be removed for the property to meet conformance of the development standards for street improvements. The removal of this tree is so the builder can meet the standards without which we wouldn't be able to issue an approval. In other words, the development of the property is the reason for tree removal. The $125 /caliper inch was established by the public works arborist years ago based on his figures for what it would cost the City to plant trees. That fee is years old and probably should be updated based on current costs. We won't do that until decisions are made regarding what will be required in a revised tree code. Dick • From: Jeff Caines [mailto:jeffc @srdllc.com] Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 10:58 AM To: Emily Eng; Todd Prager Cc: Dick Bewersdorff; dwilson @rcmhomes.net; Steve Roper; Duane Subject: RCM Office Building Good morning all, I saw that the appeal for the RCM office building is scheduled for June 9th at 7 pm. We are going through the codes in preparation of the meeting and could not find certain items in the Tigard Development Code. After a more detailed review of the Code, specifically Chapter 18.790.030.A, which identifies when a tree plan is necessary. The Code section states that a tree plan is to be "provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application ..." The staff report identifies Tree #731 to be included in the mitigation calculations. However, this tree is outside of the project boundary, more specifically the tree is located in the public right -of -way. The development code only identifies that a tree plan incorporate trees within the parcel or lot. (There are other trees in the public right of way that may be subject to the same requirement as Tree #731.) So my first question is: Does Tigard have a Development Code provision that states that mitigation shall be required for trees already located in the public right -of- way? What about the trees that are required to be removed due to City street standards, required dedication and improvements? My second question is where did the $125 / caliper inch mitigation fee come from? That is what methodology or study did the City use in order to determine the appropriate mitigation fee? Thank you for your time. I look forward hearing for you. 6/9/2008 ' • • 3. "Hazardous tree" means a tree which by reason of disease, infestation, age, or other condition presents a known and immediate hazard to persons or to public or private property; 4. "Pruning" means the cutting or trimming of a tree in a manner which is consistent with recognized tree maintenance practices; 5. "Removal" means the cutting or removing of 50 percent (50 %) or more of a crown, trunk or root system of a tree, or any action which results in the loss of aesthetic or physiological viability or causes the tree to fall or be in immediate danger of falling. "Removal" shall not include pruning; 6. "Tree" means a standing woody plant, or group of such, having a trunk which is six inches or more in caliper size when measured four feet from ground level; 7. "Sensitive lands" means those lands described at Chapter 18.775 of the title. B. General rule. Except where the context clearly indicates otherwise, words in the present tense shall include the future and words in the singular shall include the plural. 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement A. Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. B. Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: 1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; 2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation . must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: a. Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees; b. Retention of from 25% to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two - thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; c. Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; d. Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation. 3. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; 4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. Tree Removal 18.790 -2 SE Update: 10/04 • • 110. "Party" - A person who makes an appearance in a proceeding through the submission of either written or verbal evidence. 111. "Perimeter" - The boundaries or borders of a lot, tract, or parcel of land. 112. "Permitted use" - Any use allowed in a zoning district and subject to the restrictions applicable to that zoning district as provided in the development code. 113. "Person" - An individual, corporation, governmental agency, official advisory committee of the City, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, or two or more people having a joint or common interest or any other legal entity. 114. "Plat" - A final map, diagram or other writing containing all the descriptions, specifications and provisions concerning a subdivision. 115. "Projection" - Part of a building or structure that is exempt from the bulk requirements of the Development Code. 116. "Public business day" - The regular hours of business of the Tigard City hall as designated and posted by the City. 117. "Quasi-judicial" - Action which involves the application of adopted policy to a specific development application or amendments. 118. "Receipt" - A mere acknowledgment of submittal. 119. "Recreational vehicles" - A vacation trailer or other unit, with or without motor power, which is designed for human occupancy and to be used temporarily for recreation or emergency purposes. The unit shall be identified as a recreational vehicle by the manufacturer. 120. "Remodel" - An internal or external modification to an existing building or structure which does not increase the site coverage. 121. "Reserve strip" - A strip of property usually one foot in width overlaying a dedicated street which is reserved to the City for control of access until such time as additional right -of -way is accepted by the City for continuation or widening of the street. 122. "Residence" - A structure designed for occupancy as living quarters for one or more persons. The term is synonymous with "dwelling unit." 123. "Residential trailer" - A structure constructed for movement on the public highways that has sleeping, cooking, and plumbing facilities, that is intended for human occupancy, that is being used for residential purposes and that was constructed before January 1, 1962. 124. "bgh� of_way' - A strip of land occupied or iritended to be occupied by a street, crosswalk, pedestrian and bike paths, railroad, road, electric transmission line, oil or gas pipeline, water main, sanitary or storm sewer main, street trees or other special use. ThP41CAge -of hectenn_rig of- .wayaor land= diivision_ nkrposes_ shall -mean-that- e-veLy sight -of -way hereafter established =and Definitions 18.120 -12 Code Update: 5/07 7 .. • shown= on= aLplat= or_map #o=bi separat an iste�ct from= th�lots or�azcelsadj ©iningsuch= right= oPway and - not - mcluded=wdlu - the- dtmensions areas of such - lots or prcels. 125. "Road" - See "Street." 126. "Roof" - The exterior surface and its supporting structure on the top of a building. 127. "Setback" (front, rear, side, street and garage entrance) - the minimum allowable horizontal distance from a given point or line of reference, which shall be the property line unless otherwise stated to the nearest vertical wall of a building or structure, fence or other elements as defined by this title. 128. "Site" - Any plot or parcel of land or combination of contiguous lots or parcels of land. 129. "Slope" - The deviation of a surface from the horizontal, usually expressed in percent or degrees. 130. "Story" - That portion of a building included between the upper surface of any floor and the upper surface of the floor next above, except that the topmost story shall be that portion of a building included between the upper surface of the topmost floor and the ceiling or roof above. If the finished floor level directly above a basement or unused under -floor space is more than six feet above grade as defined in this section for more than 50 percent of the total perimeter or is more than 12 feet above grade as defined in this section at any point, such basement or unused under -floor space shall be considered as a story. 131. "Story, first" - The lowest story in a building which qualifies as a story, as defined in this section, except that a floor level in a building having only one floor shall be classified as a first story, provided such floor level is not more than four feet below grade, as defined in this section, for more than 50 percent of the total perimeter, or more than eight feet below grade, as defined in this section, at any point. 132. "Story, half' - A story under a gable or gambrel roof, the wall plates of which on at least two opposite exterior walls are not more than two feet above the floor of such story. If the finished floor level directly above a basement or unused under -floor space is not more than six feet above grade, as defined in this section, for more than 50 percent of the total perimeter or is not more than 12 feet above grade as defined in this section, at any point, such basement or unused under -floor space shall be considered as a half story. 133. "Street" - A public or private way that is created to provide ingress or egress for persons to three or more lots, parcels or tracts of land, excluding a private way that is created to provide ingress or egress to such land in conjunction with the use of such land for forestry, mining or agricultural purposes. 134. "Street, public" - An accessway in public ownership. Also see "Right -of- way." 135. "Street, private" - An accessway which is under private ownership. 136. "Structure" or "building" - See "Building." 137. "Subdivision" - To divide an area or tract of land into four or more lots within a calendar year when such area or tract of land exists as a unit or contiguous units of land under a single Definitions 18.120 -13 Code Update: 5/07 ( 1 D I 0 I I D I 1 I * f 1 1 \ I 1 1 I J a T 1 - -_ __ _ _ I • I ° 11 I � a il • 1 1 Igg ;el: '1.11r ---.:. F: -- ._. m ;14 II IP H --------- t -l_ — � 15.1r s.0.2sx ..`1� �� I 1 ,...,g .- .. .pr P .� ! e _ Ina ► L t I PJRI • 611 I..' I� .i ':' lir " ._ ��� !#I � ■I � ■!1 � '�! I - - I : —eC! �1.mi`4:G�: - a , - - , .- » � iai :M�5 ge,,g p� y Y 6 �m`� a I:. till g '� 1 o 2 � a I 5 jilts 0 9 ..- .:,.. 11 :Fq 411 1 Ton, I 7. 8 0 LSI ii g o p )( . _ 1 1 on 0 lim ..„...., IX 11 III 014 6 Pr."1.1=1.111.11 WRIMAIIIII6MMENiall■ Ifilk' % 0 . , \ i irrig, ft, In= sil N. u il_______ imr.L.-71 A - " 4.__,,_ Mar MI _<•,,/ Ill ,..,,,. ., c 1 _20Arri 6sCO_L 7 —,--- ---,--- -- . -- , . 'ilk _ I N _ ""al Etaktilli VI 111.1E - ti; ,,,,4 , ' ,..,... . Avsvi r - -4- T ,--.41 m ® I II I Im mi , �,_ � _ k -- sd \ �, -- �� - _ - - - - - -- - a 1 NO1'45'51'E 1 1:. 1 g X 0 C $...P . C4" k ..._ (INS 1; EN I 1 I I i ° +1 I I I I I 1 it 1 1 II I Q 0 y e I o emeoP?i 1 I o 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 !Mill NWT i i i NI i ll Eg Q Q PROJECT N0. REV.1 DESCRIPTION I alE iN p a 6 1 I TREE REMOV A l EXHIBIT 'fi • o PRf� f �� 8196 SW Hall °ouleva d, C.1 I 1 ��p� f7 / G � 1111V/1 � V p� ��y��/� ,; SuIte 232 D rn - 55ddd - .- CASE FILE N0. I 1 I IVl4fly OFFICE pyI{yII�� ///,��J�_ Beaverton, Oregon 970U6 S � 1A N m X 1 I Phase (50.3)469 -1213 fax (503) 4696553 1 I 1 SW CLINTON ST. AND SW 70TH �r : ' , „,�,�. p E S I G N 1 I - WARD, OREGON ES C• • °°� 4'.24'."'" � RCM HOMES INC. LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035 EXPIRES 12 -31 -04 Pk " """"j" 41 • "TAB B" Applicant's Materials & All Correspondence Filed with Hearings Officer Prior to the Public Hearing. co • • MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Joe Turner, Tigard Hearings Officer FROM: Emily Eng, Assistant Planner O.. RE: Staffs Responses to the Grounds for Appeal of RCM Office Building/ SDR2007 -00010 at 7020 & 7050 SW Clinton Street DATE: May 30, 2008 Staff comments are in bold type. For reference, the following Code Sections pertain to this appeal: 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement 18.810 Street and Utility Improvements Standards Tree Mitigation (Condition 4) Condition #4: Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised mitigation plan that includes tree 731 (24- caliper inch Oregon Ash) in their mitigation calculations, for a total of 208 caliper inches to be mitigated. Applicant's Argument: [The] Code doesn't qualify that [an] existing tree in existing right -of -way has to be mitigated by the applicant. Existing practice in [the] city has been to exclude trees within right -of -ways. Staff Response: It has not been City practice to exempt trees in existing right -of -way from mitigation. Nowhere in Chapter 18.790 does the Code mention that trees in existing right -of -way are exempt from mitigation. Chapter 18.790 refers to "trees" and "existing trees" as those which must be accounted for in the tree plan, including an inventory, removal plan, protection program and mitigation plan. The only trees that the City excludes from the mitigation formula are those that are not greater than 12 caliper inches or are "hazardous," as defined by the Code. The Code defines "hazardous tree" as one that "by reason of disease, infestation, age, or other condition presents a known and immediate hazard to persons or to public or private property" (Section 18.790.020). Therefore, trees in existing right -of -way are not exempt from mitigation unless they are not greater than 12 caliper inches or are hazardous as defined by the Code. The City's tree mitigation policy is provided in Section 18.790.030.B.2, which states that "retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D of no net loss of trees." The applicant proposed to retain 0% of the trees over 12 caliper inches and, therefore, must mitigate for Page 1 of 3 • • • 100% of these trees. While the applicant's tree removal plan indicated that 9 of 9 trees over 12 caliper inches would be removed, the applicant only accounted for 8 of these trees in the mitigation plan. The applicant excluded Tree #731 (a 24- caliper inch Oregon Ash) because it is in existing right -of -way and would need to be removed to construct the required street improvements. However, as already discussed, the code does not exempt trees in right -of- way from mitigation. Therefore, the City required the applicant to account for Tree #731 in the mitigation plan. Mitigation for Tree #731 is valued at $3,000.00 ($125 per caliper inch x 24 inches). Tree #731 is located in the existing SW 70`' Avenue right -of -way. SW 70`' Avenue is currently unimproved. The project arborist describes the condition of the subject tree in the inventory as "no identified limitations," meaning no sign of being in poor condition or hazardous as defined by the Code. . Staff found that the applicant did not account for Tree #731. Because it is not hazardous as defined by the Code, it is not exempt from mitigation. Therefore, staff concludes that the applicant must account for Tree #731 in the mitigation plan and nowhere in the Code does it direct staff to exempt the tree. Fees Toward Signal Funds (Conditions 30 & 31) Condition #30: Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall contribute $9,251.00 to the signal fund for SW 72" Avenue /Dartmouth Street. Condition #31: Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall contribute $2,005.00 to the signal fund for SW 68 Avenue /Dartmouth Street. Applicant's Argument: The City told us [that] our assessment was based on [our] proportionate share of $3.6 million ($2 million for one signal and $1.6 million for the other signal). We don't believe the cost for those signals should be that high and, therefore, the assessment is too large. Staff Response: The applicant has not provided any facts to show that the assessment is "too large." As authorized by Mayor Jim Nicoli and City Council, the signal fees for the two major intersections in the Tigard Triangle (SW 72n Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street; and SW 68` Parkway and SW Dartmouth Street) have been assessed since the Babies "R" Us project in 1999. Since Babies "R" Us, all development projects within the Tigard Triangle requiring Site Development Review approval are subject to fees representing their proportionate share toward the signal funds. The fees have been applied as conditions of approval and are determined based on a formula developed by the former Mayor City Council. As discussed in the Traffic Study Findings section of the decision, SDR2007- 00010, the formula is based on PM peak hour trip contributions to the intersections and was established during the Babies "R" Us project. That project had an impact of 1.1% at SW 72n Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street, requiring the developer to pay $20,000.00 toward the signal fund for that intersection. The project had an impact of 0.75% at SW 68` Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street, requiring the developer to pay $10,000.00. Page 2 of 3 • • Charbonneau Engineering's report showed that the project will generate about 13 PM peak trips at SW 72° /SW Dartmouth and about 4 PM peak trips at SW 68 Parkway /SW Dartmouth. With a total entering volume (TEV) of 2,555 vehicles and 2,660 vehicles to those intersections, respectively, the project has an impact of 0.51% and 0.15% to those intersections, respectively. Therefore, the applicant was assessed the following fees: $9,251.00 toward the signal fund for SW 72" Avenue /SW Dartmouth; and $2,005.00 toward the signal fund for SW 68 Parkway /SW Dartmouth. The applicant was aware of the subject fees before the review period began. Staff spoke with Ron Lightner of RCM Homes on February 20, 2008 concerning the formula used to determine the fees (See email chain in Attachment 4). Staff informed RCM Homes that they could calculate the fees at $711.62 per PM peak trip at SW 72" Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street and $501.25 per PM peak trip at SW 68 Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street. Based on the City's existing and past practice in reviewing development in the Tigard Triangle, staff does not agree that the assessment is "too large." The assessments have been consistently applied to all development in the Triangle based on a project's proportionate PM peak trip generation at the intersections. Also, paying the fees will reduce the applicant's Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) by the exact amount they are paying into the signal funds. Because of the signal fees, the applicant is eligible to apply for a TIF credit voucher with the City that would reduce their TIF (estimated at $63,210.00) by $11,256.00. CONCLUSION The appellant argues that 1) trees in the existing right -of -way to be removed should be excluded from mitigation; and 2) that the City has assessed fees for the signal funds that are too excessive. However, the Code does not support the applicant's argument regarding tree mitigation and past practice shows that the signal fees have been assessed in the same way for new development within the Triangle since the decision approving the Babies "R" Us project in 1999. The applicant will also pay a reduced TIF fee because they are contributing to the signal funds. The reduced fee will offset the cost of the signal fees by the exact amount of the fees, and the applicant will not be "losing" anything. The applicant may disagree with Conditions #4, 30 and 31, but has not provided any facts to show that these conditions are unjustified. Attachments: 1. Director's decision 2. Appeal filing form and attachments 3. Applicant's submittal 4. Email correspondence between City staff regarding conversations with applicant, dated 2/8/2008 and 2/20/2008 Page 3 of 3 • • ATTACHMENT 1 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION - : . t yA ,., SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2007-00010 ,, 7,;-•• RCM OFFICE BUILDING 120 DAYS = 6/21/2008 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: RCM OFFICE BUILDING CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2007 -00010 APPLICANT'S APPLICANT: RCM Homes, Inc. REP: LRS Architects Attn: Ron Lightner Attn: Gary Minis zewski Five Centerpolnte Drive, 720 NW Davis Street, Suite 300 Suite 280 Portland, OR 97209 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 OWNER Myers Family, LLC Attn: Randall Myers Five Centerpointe Drive, Suite 280 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to build a two -story 14,400 square foot office budding with surface parking on a 36,130 square foot site in the Tigard Triangle. The office building will be located at the corner of SW 70 Avenue and SW Qinton Street. Materials for the facade will be brick, wood lap siding, wood shingles and glass. LOCATION: 7050 and 7020 SW Clinton Street; Washington County Tax Map 1S136DC, Tax Lots 3600 and 3700. ZONE: MUE: Mixed -Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed -use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I -5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business /professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi - family housing at a maximum density of 25 units /acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit- related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majonty of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1 support altemative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2 encourage a mix of uses to facilitate infra - district pedestrian and transit trips even or those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the City through the legislative process. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 1 OF 30 • • • • SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby iven that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO DEMOLITION PERMITS: Submit the following to the City Arborist (Todd Prager, (503) T18 -2700) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 1. Prior to any site work, including demolition, the applicant shall create a separate tree protection plan that shows fencing, tree protection specifications (including after construction specifications), and a signature of approval from the project arborist. The applicant shall also include the tree protection fencing on the grading plan. 2. Prior to any site work, including demolition, the applicant shall position the tree protection fencing as directed by the project arbonst to protect the trees to be retained. The neighboring trees to be retained shall be protected with 5' -6' chain link fencing. Fences are to be mounted on two inch diameter galvanized iron posts, driven into the ground to a depth of at least 2-feet at no more than 10 -foot spacing. The applicant shall allow access by the City Arborist for the purpose of . monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and /or civil citations can be processed. 3. From initial tree protection zone (TPZ) fencing installation through the building construction phases the applicant shall have an on -going responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the City Arborist, at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist monitors the construction activities The reports shall evaluate the condition and location of the tree protection fencing, determine if any changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced, then the Project Arborist shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the overall, long -term health and stability of the tree(s). If work is required within an established TPZ, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely impacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arborist may require changes pnor to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is occurring within the tree protection zone and submit a summary report certifying that the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and /or stability of the trees. If the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ 's or the Tree Protection plan are not being followed by the contractor or a sub - contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the City Arborist and the Project Arborist. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE /BUILDING PERMITS: Submit the following to the City Arborist (Todd Prager, (503) 718 -2700) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 4. Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised mitigation lan that includes tree 731 (24- caliper inch Oregon Ash) in their mitigation calculations, for a total of 208 caliper inches to be mitigated. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 2 OF 30 • • 5.. Prior to site /building permits, the a plicant shall submit a combination fee in -lieu of _planting cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation inches requu-ed. Any trees successfully planted on or off -site, in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and '1'DC 18.790.060.D, will be credited against the assurance two years after all of the trees are planted f per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The Tree Mitigation Plan shall include a signature of approval rom the project arborist and be due for review and approval prior to tree planting or the issuance of PFI permits, whichever is first. The mitigation proposal shall show the species, location, and spacing of nutrgation trees in relation to buildings, infrastructure, existing trees, street trees, and each other. After the plan is approved and the trees are planted, the project arborist shall submit a letter to the City Arbonst to certify that all of the mitigation trees were properly planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan in order to set the starting point of the two year tree establishment period. After the two year establishment period, the applicant shall provide a re- inventory of the mitigation trees conducted by a certified arborist in order to document mitigation tree survival, and compliance with the approvir,u iree ivLlkg2tion Plan. The remaining value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in -lieu 01 pi i;t:_ng cal assurance. Submit the following to the Current Planning Division (Emily Eng, (503) 718 -2712) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal condition has been satisfied: 6. Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall apply for a lot line consolidation through Washington County for Tax Lots 3600 and 3700 and provide the Qty evidence that the consolidation was approved. 7. Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall provide written approval of the waste storage area by Pride Disposal. 8. Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall revise the plans to indicate 8 bicycle parking spaces. 9. Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall revise the site plan to show a clear vision triangle for a driveway access (See Figure 18.795.1). 10. Prior to a site /building permits, the applicant shall indicate any rooftop equipment on the site plan and show that it is adequately screened or that its exposure from the adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard (18.620.040.A.6). Submit the following to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, (503) 718 -2642) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 11. Prior to commencing onsite improvements, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover half - street improvements and any other work in the public right -of -way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the En meering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PH) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.tigard - or.gov). 12. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Pernnittee ", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 13. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 3 OF 30 r 14. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, which indicate that they will construct a half - street improvement along the frontages of SW Clinton Street and SW 70th Avenue. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for a local street from curb to centerline equal to 18 feet, but no less than 24 feet total; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C concrete curbs, or curb and gutter as needed; D. storm drainage, including any off -site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and /or subsurface runoff; E. 8 foot concrete sidewalk with a 4 foot planter strip; F. street trees in the planter strip spaced per 'WC requirements; G. street striping; H streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City Engineer; I. underground utilities; street signs and NO PARKING signs (if applicable); driveway apron (if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and /or horizontal alignment to construct SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 15. The applicant's engineer shall submit a paving plan for the intersection of SW 70th Avenue /SW Clinton Street with turning templates for review and approval to ensure adequate paving in the intersection. 16. A profile of SW Clinton Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 17. A profile of SW 70th Avenue shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 18. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. 19. Final design plans and calculations for the proposed private water quality facility shall be submitted to the Engmeenng Department (Kim McMillan as a part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans. 20. The applicant shall verify the extent of the existing public storm sewer line in SW Clinton Street to ensure it reaches the intersection of SW Clinton Street/SW 70th Avenue. The applicant shall extend the storm sewer if it does not reach the intersection. 21. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Bethany Stewart, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be aid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart,Engi neerung). 22. Additional right -of -way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of 70th Avenue to increase the right -of -way to 30 feet from the centerline (60 feet total). The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available f the Engineering Department. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit the following to the City Arborist (Todd Prager, (503) 718 - 2700): 23. Prior to a final building inspection, the Project Arborist will submit a final certification indicating the elements of the Tree Protection Plan were Project and that all remaining trees on the site are healthy, stable, and viable in their modified growing environment. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 4 OF 30 • Contact the Current Planning Division (Emily Eng, (503) 718 -2712) to satisfy the following: 24. Prior to a final building inspection, a member of the Current Planning Division shall walk through the site to determine whether development is in conformance with the decision. Submit the following to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, (503) 718 -2642) and include a cover letter indicating where in the submittal the condition has been satisfied: 25. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one -year maintenance assurance for said improvements. 26. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawiri s of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar, 2) a diskette of the as- builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features ) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). 27. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Clinton Street underground as apart of this project, or theyshall pa the fee in -lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $35.00 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $6,566.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 28. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. 29. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant's engineer shall submit a final sight distance certification for the two access locations. 30. Prior to a fiiia1 building inspection, the applicant shall contribute $9,251.00 to the signal fund for SW 72nd Avenue /Dartmo Jtrcct. 31. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall contribute $2,005.00 to the signal fund for SW 68th Avenue /Dartmouth Street. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Information and History: The proposed office site is in the Tigard Triangle. It is comprised of two tax lots at the corner of SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue, about 400 - feet from SW 72"c Avenue and about 200 feet from SW Dartmouth Street. SW 70 Avenue is unimproved. The entire portion of SW Clinton Street between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 70 Avenue is made up of single- family homes. A single- family home exists on each of the subject properties. Some large trees exist on the properties, but they are not heavily treed. The site is mostly grassy with an upward slope of less than 10% toward the northeast corner. The site is just north of the Dartmouth Square office building, which is currently under construction. There have been no previous land use decisions related to the subject properties. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RQvI OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 5 OF 30 • Proposal Description: The applicant 1s requesting Site Development Review approval to build a two -story 14,400 square foot office building with surface parking on a 36,130 square foot site in the Tigard Triangle. The office building will be located at the corner of SW 70 Avenue and SW Clinton Street. Materials for the facade will be brick, wood lap siding, wood shingles and glass. SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET Staff sent public notice to interested parties and property owners within 500 feet of the site and received no comments. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections: A. Zoning Districts 18.570 Commercial Zoning Districts B. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.745 Landscaping and Screening 18.755 Mixed SolidWVaste and Recyclable Storage 18.765 Off - Street Parking and Loading Requirements 18.780 Signs 18.790 Tree Removal 18.795 Visual Clearance C. Specific SDR Approval Criteria 18.360 D. Specific Tigard Triangle Approval Criteria 18.620 E. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 F. Impact Study 18.390 Impact Study SECTION VI. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS A. ZONING DISTRICTS Commercial Zoning District: Section 18.520.020 Lists the description of the Commercial Zoning Districts. The proposed site is in the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) zone. The proposed use, office, is permitted in the zone. Development Standards: Section 18.520.040.B States that development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in the following Table 18.520.2: NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RQVI O1 FIr BUILDING PAGE 6 OF 30 • • TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES STANDARD MUE Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 36,130 sq ft (gross) 29,103 sq ft (net) Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 200 ft Minimum Setbacks - Front yard Oft O ft to 3ft - Side comer yard Oft O ft to 9 ft 9 in - Side yard 0 ft 78 ft -Rear yard 20 ft 60 ft Maximum Height 45 ft 39 ft 6 in Maximum Site Coverage 85% 79% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 21% Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.40 0.3985 FINDING: The applicant has shown that the proposed development meets all development standards in the MUE zone. B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS Access, Egress and Circulation (18.705): Public Street Access (18.705.030.D): All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030(I) shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. The proposed development will have direct access to SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue, a public street. Therefore, this criterion is met. Walkways (18.705.030.F): On -site pedestrian walkways comply with the following tandards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi - building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall loe constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; An entrance will be located on SW 70 Avenue for which the applicant proposes an 8 foot sidewalk An 8 foot sidewalk will also wrap around the building, connecting the side and rear entrances to the street. Therefore, this criterion is met. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6 -inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3 -foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, ancd sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; No walkways will cross the parking lot, nor is a walkway in the parking lot necessary. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and /or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft - surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The required walkway is paved with scored concrete, thereby meeting the criterion. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 7 OF 30 • . Section 18.705.020.G.3 states that in no case shall the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward movement or other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. Single- family and duplex dwellings are exempt from this requirement. The site's design would not facilitate the backward movement or other vehicular maneuvering into the street. Any maneuvenng would happen within the parking lot. In addition, there are two two-way access points that would prevent having to back out. Therefore, this cnterion is met. Access Management (18.705.030.H): Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. The applicant's engineer, SR Design, LLC, submitted a preliminary sight distance certification for the two proposed access locations. There is a proposed access on Clinton Street and another located on SW 70th Avenue, each requiring a minimum 250 feet of sight distance. The engineer states that the sight distance from the access to SW Clinton Street was measured to be 250 feet to the east and more than 250 feet to the west. There is vegetation growing along the site frontage and this vegetation shall be removed to ensure sight distance is obtained from this access point. The engineer also analyzed the sight distance from the access to SW 70th Avenue and measured it to be in excess of 250 feet to the north and south of the access location. Again, vegetation will need to be removed to ensure sight distance is obtained. Upon completion of all public improvements, and prior to a final building inspection, the applicant's engineer shall submit a final sight distance certification for the two access locations. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right -of -way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. Both SW Clinton Street and SW 70th Avenue are classified as local streets; therefore this criterion does not apply to the proposed driveways. Section 18.705.030.H.4 states that the minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The proposed site is already in an area with a developed network of streets that meet the spacing standard for local streets. The proposed development does not include the creation of new streets. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use (18.705.030.J): Vehicular access, egress and circulation for commercial and industrial use shall not be less than as provided in Table 18 05.3. Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with fewer than 100 parking spaces is one 30 -foot accesses with 24 feet of pavement. The required access width for developments with 100+ parking spaces is one 50 -foot access with 40 feet of pavement or two 30- foot accesses with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 8 OF 30 • • The proposed driveway aisle is paved and 24 feet wide, meeting the pavement width standard. With about 160 feet of frontage on SW Clinton Street and about 192 feet of frontage on SW 70 Avenue, there is more than 30 feet of access for both driveways. Therefore, minimum access requirements are met. FINDING: All access, egress and circulation standards have not been met. CONDITION: Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant's engineer shall submit a final sight distance certification for the two access locations. Environmental Performance Standards (18.725): These standards require that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 (Performance Standards) regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340 -21 -015 and 340 -28 -070) apply. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Odors. The emissions of odorous ,gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340 -028 -090) apply. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. The proposed use, office, does not typically generate noise, visible emissions, vibrations, odors, glare, heat, insects and rodents. The applicant has acknowledged the environmental performance standards. It is the responsibility of the property owner to comply with the standards and any violations will be enforced through the City's Code Enforcement Program. For the purposes of this land use review, this criterion is met. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): General Provisions (18.745.030): Obligation to maintain. Unless otherwise provided by the lease agreement, the owner, tenant and his agent, if any, shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping and screening which shall be maintained in good condition so as to present a healthy, neat and orderly appearance, shall be replaced or repaired as necessary, and shall be kept free from refuse and debris. The property owner is responsible for the maintenance of the landscaping. Lack of maintenance may be enforced - through the City's Code Enforcement Program. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 9 OF 30 • • • Protection of existing vegetation. Existing vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as possible: 1. The developer shall provide methods for the protection of existing vegetation to remain during the construction process; and 2. The plants to be saved shall be noted on the landscape plans (e.g., areas not to be disturbed can be fenced, as in snow fencing which can be placed - around individual trees). The tree removal and landscaping plan both show that four existing offsite trees on the neighboring property to the south (Dartmouth Square) will be protected. The tree removal plan indicates a 66 ft x 30 It fenced area around trees # 648, 649 and 650 and a 22 ft x 20 ft fenced area around tree # 625. Therefore, protection of existing vegetation is adequate. Street Trees (18.745.040): All development projects fronting on a public street, private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the ad - option of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040.C. The landscape plan indicates street trees along the projects frontage in a 4 -foot wide planter strip. Therefore, this criterion is met. Street tree planting list (18.745.040.B): Certain trees can severely damage utilities, streets and sidewalks or can cause personal injury. Approval of any planting list shall be subject to review by the Director. The landscape plan indicates that Greenspire Linden will be planted along SW Clinton Street and Trident Maple will be planted along SW 70 Avenue. The City Arbonst finds these trees to be suitable. Therefore, this criterion is met. Size and spacing of street trees (18.745.040.C): Street trees shall be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The landscape plan indicates that the street trees are spaced at 28 feet on center, with the exception of the driveway cuts. The Tigard Triangle chapter requires all trees to be spaced no greater than 28 feet apart. Therefore, the spacing standard is met. Screening of Parking and Loading Areas (18.745.050.E.1): Screening of parking and loading areas is required. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be lanted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The parking lot is screened with a combination of trees, shrubs, grasses and groundcover. Scarlet Sentinel Maple will be spaced at least every seven Darking spaces, with BIue Leyland Cypress and Chanticleer Pear lining the perimeter of the parking lot. Tie landscape plan indicates that Chanticleer Pear will be planted along the entire length of the walkway within the site. The plan shows that all landscaping is protected by a curb. In addition each parking space includes a wheel guard, preventing overhang into the landscaping. Therefore, the parking area screening standards are met. Screening Of Service Facilities (18.745.050.E.2): Except for one - family and two- family dwellings, any refuse container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area; The only service facility that may be visible from a neighboring property or the street is the waste storage area, which will be screened by a masonry enclosure at least 5 feet m height. Therefore, this criterion is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RC;NI OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 10 OF 30 • • Screening of refuse containers (18.745.050.E.4): Except for one- and two- family dwellings, any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or ark shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. The waste storage area will be screened by a masonry enclosure at least 5 feet in height. Therefore, this criterion is met. Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right -of -way, buffering, but not screening, shall be required as specified in the matrix; The proposed commercial development abuts a single - family home along its entire western boundary. Therefore according to Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2, a "C" buffer is required. Table 18.745.2 specifies that the C buffer shall be 6, 8 or 10 feet with a combination of trees and shrubs and a wall, fence or hedge, respectively. As shown on the landscape plan, the applicant has proposed a C buffer- 8 -foot wide with shrubs, trees and a 5 -foot high fence along the site's western boundary. Therefore, the buffering criteria are met. FINDING: Landscaping and screening requirements have been met. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.755): Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on -site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick- up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign -Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign -off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The applicant has chosen the minimum standards method to demonstrate that the proposed waste storage area complies with the code. However the applicant has not provided written sign -off from the waste hauler, Pride Disposal. Therefore, the applicant shall provide written sign -off as a condition of approval. Minimum Standard Specific Requirements ( 18.755.040.C): Non - residential buildings shall provide a minimum storage area of 10 square feet, plus: (1) Office: 4 square feet/ 1,000 square feet gross floor area (GFA). The required storage area shall be at least 58 square feet for the proposed office building using the following formula: 10 sq ft + (14,400 sq ft x 4/1,000 sq It floor area). The proposed waste storage area shown on the plans is 267 square feet, thereby exceeding the criterion. Location Standards. To encourage its use the storage area for source- separated recyclables shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed- solid waste; Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements- Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, anc can combine both interior and exterior locations; Exterior storage areas can be Located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at feast the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 11 OF 30 • The proposed waste storage area is located at the southwest corner of the site in the parking lot, within the intenor side and rear yard. As previously discussed, the waste storage area will be screened by a 6 -foot high masonry wall. The storage area is located at the end of the drive aisle, making it accessible to collection vehicles and requiring garbage collection activity within the site and not on or near the street. Therefore, location standards are met. Design Standards. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearlylabeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. The waste storage area will be enclosed by a 6 -foot masonry wall and the gate opening will be over 10 feet wide, as shown on the site plan. Access Standards. Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons. However, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service; 2. Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment, considering paving, grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered; 3. Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. As discussed in location and design standards above, the waste storage area will be accessible to collection vehicles the location will keep vehicles out of the street, and the gate opening will provide more than the required 10 feet of horizontal clearance. Therefore, access standards are met. FINDING: All Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage criteria have not been met. CONDITION: Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall provide written approval of the waste storage area by - Pride Disposal. Off -Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Location of vehicle parking (1 65.030.B): Off -street parking spaces for single - family and duplex dwellings and single- family attached dwellings shall be - located on the same lot with the dwellings. Off -street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building with the following exceptions: a) commercial and industrial uses which require more than 40 arking spaces may provide for the spaces in excess of the required first 40 spaces up to a distance of 300 feet distance from the primary site; The 40 parking spaces which remain on the pnmary site must be available for users in the following order of priority: 1) Disabled - accessible spaces; 2) Short-term spaces; 3) Long -term preferential carpool and vanpool spaces; 4) Long -term spaces. Off- street parking spaces are located in the parking lot within the same site as the building, thereby meeting the criterion. Joint Parking (18.765.030.C): Owners of two or more uses structures or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same parking and loading paces when the peak hours of operation do not overlay, subject to the following: 1) The size of joint parking facility shall be at least as large as the number of vehicle parking spaces required by the larger(est) use per Section 18.765.070; 2) Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the Director in the form of deeds, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; 3) If a joint use arrangement is subsequently terminated, or if the uses change, the requirements of this title thereafter apply to each separately. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 12 OF 30 • • The applicant has not proposed joint parking, nor has it been determined necessary. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Preferential Long -Term Carpool /Vanpool Parking (18.765.030.F): Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long -term parking spaces shall provide preferential long -term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5% of total long- term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool /vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpools /vanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking. except parking spaces designated for use by the disabled. Preferential carpool /vanpool spaces shall be full -sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The proposed parking will provide 42 parking spaces; therefore, this standard applies. Five percent of the parking spaces are required to be reserved for carpooUvanpool. Therefore, two carpool/vanpool spaces are required. The plan shows two carpooUvanpool spaces (standard size) near the entry, thereby meeting the requirement. Disabled - Accessible Parking (18.765.030.G): All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The Building Code requires two disabled- accessible parking spaces for a parking lot with 26 to 50 spaces. Two disabled - accessible spaces are provided, thereby meeting the standard. Access drives (18.765.040.B): With regard to access to public streets from off -street parking: 1. Access drives from the street to off -street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety�or pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; 2. The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; 3. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; 4. Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; 5. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and 6. Excluding single- family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements, or other maneuvering within a street or other public right -of -way will be required. The access drive is marked with directional arrows to facilitate the safe flow of traffic to and from the site. Two accesses are provided, exceeding the requirement of one access with 24 feet of pavement. As indicated by the site plan, the access drives will be paved with asphalt. The parking lot and drive aisles have been designed to facilitate movement only within the parking lot and not in the street. Therefore, access drive standards are met. Parking Lot Landscaping (18.765.040.G): Parking lots shall be landscaped in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 18.745. As discussed in findings for Chapter 18.745, parking lot landscaping meets the criteria. Parking Lot Striping (18.745.040.I): Except for single - family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off -street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed -to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. Plans show that the parking spaces are clearly marked and access aisles are clearly marked to show the direction of flow. Therefore, this criterion is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 13 OF 30 • • Parking Lot Surfacing (18.745.040.H.1): Except for single-family and duplex residences, and for temporary uses or fleet storage areas as authorized in 18.765.040.H.3 and 4, all areas used for the parking or storage or maneuvering of any vehicle, boat or trailer shall be improved with asphalt or concrete surfaces. The parking lot will be paved with asphalt; thereby meeting this criterion. Wheel Stops (18.765.040.J): Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parkin stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the .wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. All parking spaces will have wheel stops. In addition, landscaping will be protected by a curb. Therefore, parked vehicres will not overhang into the landscaping. Drainage (18.765.040.K): Off -street parking and loading areas shall be drained in accordance with specifications approved by the City Engineer to ensure that ponds do not occur except for single - family and duplex residences, off-street parking and loading facilities shall be drained to avoid flow of water across public sidewalks. The parking area will be drained through the onsite detention and treatment facility for the entire site. The onsite facility will prevent water from flowing over the sidewalk. Signs (18.765.040.M): Signs which are placed on parking lots shall be designed and installed in accordance with Chapter 18.780, Signs. The applicant does not propose any signs within the parking lot at this time; however, the applicant acknowledges this requirement. Signs in the MUE zone shall comply with the regulations in the GG and CBD zones. Chapter 18.780 states that directional signs are exempt from permits; however, one sign with an area of four square feet per face shall be permitted per driveway and such signs shall be consistent with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas. Space and Aisle Dimensions (18.765.040.N): Except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18 765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parkin spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space ; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. No more than 50% of the required spaces may be compact spaces. All standard spaces are 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. Compact spaces are 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet. The two drive aisles accommodate two directions of traffic and range from 24 feet, 26 feet and 27 feet 2 inches wide. Only 16.7% of the spaces are compact. Therefore, space and aisle dimension criteria are met. Bicycle Parking Location and Access (18.765.050.A): Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parkin areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on -site buildings andfor the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi -story residential building. The bicycle parking area is located in the plaza by the main entrance within the parking lot and is visible from - SW Clinton Street; thereby meeting location and access standards. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements (18.765.050.C): The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long -term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RQvI OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 14 OF 30 • at least 2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At -cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Scaled plans show that the bicycle parking_racks provide 2 ft x 6 ft of space for each bicycle and that they are secured to the ground. The bike racks will not be placed so that there are two rows of bike racks requinng a 5 -foot access aisle. The bike parking detail in Exhibit F shows that each rack accommodates two bicycles and each space is accessible without having to move a bike. Therefore, the design requirements are met. Paving (18.765.050.D): Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced matenal, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The bicycle parking area is paved with scored concrete and will remain well - drained along with the overall drainage of the site, thereby meeting the standard. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements (18.765.050.E): The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is srecifi.ed in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. The bicycle parking r' for office use is 0.5 space per 1,000 square feet of floor area. The 14,400 square for't win require 8 bicycle parking spaces (0.5 x 14.4 = 7.2 = 8 spaces). Seven (7) spaces are shown on the site plan and indicated in the narrative. Therefore, the applicant shall revise the plans to indicate 8 bicycle parking spaces. Minimum Off -Street Parking (18.765.070.H): The minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. The minimum parking requirement for office use is 2.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. The site is in Parking Zone A, which requires a maximum of 3.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The minimum spaces required for a 14,400 square foot office building is 39 spaces and the maximum is 49 spaces. The site plan and narrative indicate the applicant is proposing 42 spaces total. Therefore, the proposed development complies with minimum and maximum parking requirements. Off -Street Loading Spaces (18.765.080.A): Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off -street loading and maneuvering space as follows: A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. The proposed 14,400 square foot office building will not be receiving or distributing materials or merchandise by truck While the applicant anticipates occasional packages delivered by UPS and other mailing services, the nature of the office use will not require a loading space. The site will have an excess of three parking spaces, which may serve as temporary parking for the occasional mail delivery trucks. When or if the use of the site changes so that a loading space would be required, then the property owner or new tenant shall apply for the appropriate permits. FINDING: The off - street parking and loading criteria have not fully been met. CONDITION: Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall revise the plans to indicate 8 bicycle parking spaces. Tree Removal (18.790): Tree plan required (18.790.030. A): A tree plan for the planting removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RQvI OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 15 OF 30 • • As required, the applicant submitted a tree plan conducted by Walt Knapp, a certified arborist. However, some information regarding mitigation and protection is missing. Plan Requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; The applicant has identified the location, size and species of all existing trees on Sheet C1 of the plan set, thereby meeting this criterion. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D in accordance with the following standards and shall - be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: • Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees; • Retention of from 25% to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two - thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; • Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; • Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation. The applicant has stated that they are removing 8 of 8 trees (totaling 184 caliper inches) that are subject to mitigation. A review of their arbonst report indicates that they are actually removing 9 of 9 trees (totaling 208 caliper inches). It appears that they exempted tree 731 (a 24 caliper inch Oregon Ash) because it is in the right of way improvement area; however, this is inconsistent with City standar The applicant shall submit a revised mitigation plan that includes tree 731 in their mitigation calculations, for a total of 208 caliper inches to be mitigated. The applicant has roposed to use onsite trees to mitigate for 92 inches, as shown on sheet L1 of the plan set. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a combination fee in -lieu of mitigation planting and cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of caliper inches planted. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; The applicant has identified all trees to be removed on Sheet C1, thereby meeting this criterion. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. It appears that there is significant grading, paving, and landscaping proposed for the tree protection zones. The tree protection plan needs to include a detailed description of the methods that will be used to retain the neighbonng trees (trees 625, 648, 649, and 650). After construction protection specifications should be included in the protection plan. Specifically the project arborist should address appropriate landscape materials and methods around preserved trees. The applicant shall include the tree protection fencing on tie ( grading plan as well as create a separate tree protection plan that shows fencing, tree protection specifications including after construction specilications), and a signature of approval from the project arbonst. Subsequent tree removal. Trees removed within the period of one year prior to a development application listed above will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060D. There is no evidence trees have been removed within a period of one year prior to this development application. FINDING: The Tree Removal criteria have not fully been met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RQvI 01-1 -10E BUILDING PAGE 16 OF 30 • • CONDITIONS: • Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised mitigation plan that includes tree 731 (24- caliper inch Oregon Ash) in their mitigation calculations, for a total of 208 caliper inches to be mitigated. • Prior to site/building permits, the applicant shall submit a combination fee in- lieu of planting and - cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation inches required. Any trees successfully planted on or off -site, in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and TDC 18.790.060.D, will be credited against the assurance two years after all of the trees are planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The Tree Mitigation Plan shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist and be due for review and approval prior to tree planting or the issuance of PFI permits, whichever is first. The mitigation roposal shall show the species, Location, and spacing of mitigation trees in relation to buildings, infrastructure, existing trees, street trees, and each other. After the plan is approved and the trees are planted, the project arborist shall submit a letter to the City Arbonst to certify that all of the mitigation trees were properly planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan in order to set the starting point of the two year tree establishment period. After the two year establishment period, the applicant shall provide a re- inventory of the rrutigation trees conducted by a certified arbonst in order to document mitigation tree survival, and compliance with the approved Tree Mit Plan. lhe remaining value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in -lieu of planting from the original cash assurance. • Prior to any site work, the project arborist shall provide a detailed description of the methods that will be used to retain the neighboring trees (trees 625, 648, 649, and 650) and protect them during and after construction. The after construction protection specification shall address appropriate landscape materials and methods around preserved trees. • Prior to any site work, including demolition, the applicant shall create a separate tree protection plan that shows fencing, tree protection specifications (including after construction specifications and a signature of approval from the project arborist. The applicant shall also include the tree protection fencing on the grading plan. • Prior to any site work, including demolition, the applicant shall position the tree protection fencing as directed by the project arbonst to protect the trees to be retained. The neighboring trees to be retained shall be protected with 5' - 6' chain link fencing. Fences are to be mounted on two inch diameter galvanized on posts, driven into the ground to a depth of at least 2 -feet at no more than 10 -foot spacing. The applicant shall allow access by the Qty Arbonst for the purpose of monitonng and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and /or civil citations can be processed. • From initial tree protection zone (TPZ) fencing installation through the building construction phases, the applicant shall have an on -going responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the City Arborist, at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist monitors the construction activities The reports shall evaluate the condition and location of the tree protection fencing, determine if any changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced, then the Project Arborist shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the overall, long -term health and stability of the tree(s). If work is required within an established TPZ, the project arbonst shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RQv1 O1-1 -ICE BUILDING PAGE 17 OF 30 • techniques to be employed and the likely impacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arbonst before proposed work can proceed within a tree pprotection zone. The City Arbonst may require changes prior to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is occumng within the tree protection zone and submit a summary report certifying that the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and /or stability of the trees. If the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the scheduled intervals and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan are not being followed by the contractor or a sub - contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the City Arborist and the Project Arbonst. • Prior to a final inspection the Project Arborist will submit a final certification indicating the elements of the Tree Protection Plan were followed and that all remaining trees on the site are healthy, stable, and viable in their modified growing environment. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right -of -ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall - contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). The site plan shows a clear vision triangle for each driveway, however, the clear vision triangles shown are for the intersection of two street right -of -ways, providing a greater clear vision area than is necessary. Therefore, the applicant shall revise the site plan to snow a clear vision triangle for a private access (See Table 18.795.1). FINDING: Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall revise the site plan to show a clear vision triangle for a private access (See Figure 18.795.1). C. SPECIFIC SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.360.090(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The following sections have been discussed elsewhere in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.A4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility_ Between Adjoining Uses); 18.360.090.A.12. (Landscaping), 18.360.090.A.13 (Parking); 18.360.090.A.15 (rainage); and 18.360D90.A.14 (Provision for the Disabled). Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment (18.360.090.A.2): Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; locate in as not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. The applicant provides the following reasons for the building's proposed location at the corner of SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue: First, the building as been placed to satisfy Tigard Triangle site design standards. Trees will not be preserved due to re- grading needs. The ground is not subject to slumping or sliding with an overall slope of 10 %. The location at the northeast corner of the site will cause the building to cast shadows on the parking lot, not neighboring properties and buildings. The applicant has considered the building's orientation in relation to sun and wind, but states that the guideline cannot be met because of the need for a corner location, a functionally efficient rectangular shape, and access. The site will be fully accessible to fire-fighting vehicles and equipment. While trees are not being preserved on site, offsite trees will be protected. Therefore, the applicant has placed the building with consideration to the natural and physical environment. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RcM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 18 OF 30 • • Demarcation of Public, Semi - public and Private Spaces for Crime Prevention (18.360.090.A.9): a. The structures and site improvements shall be designed so that public areas such as streets or public gathering places, semi- public areas and private outdoor areas are clearly defined to establish persons having a right to be in the space, to provide for crime prevention and to establish maintenance responsibility and b. These areas may be defined by, but not limited to: (1) A deck, patio, low wall, hedge, or draping vine; (2) A trellis or arbor, (3) A change in elevation or grade; (4) A change in the texture of the path material; (5) Sign; or (6) Landscaping. There is both a street -side entryway on SW 70 Avenue and a plaza entryway within the parking lot that are highly visible and clearly define public and private space. The street entry is set back from the majority of the SW 70 Avenue facade and enhanced with awnings. The plaza entry is oriented toward the parking lot defining it as a private space. Landscaping along the perimeter of the site also demarcates what is public anci private space. Therefore, these criteria are met. Crime Prevention and Safety (18.360.090.A.10): A. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; B. Intenor laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; C. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; D. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and - the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and E. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Windows are located at the ground -floor level, exceeding 50% of the wall facade and providing opportunities for surveying crime. Mail boxes will be located inside the building. The parking lot and interior plaza will have lighting oriented for safe entry and exiting, but will not spill out onto neighboring properties. As shown on the utility plan, there will be lig_nting along the perimeter of the parking lot and along the pedestrian path (meettn the IBC requirements for foot -candle illumination levels where pathways connect to the public street). In addition, the Bard Police Department reviewed the lighting plan and has no objections or concerns regarding safety. Therefore, crime prevention and safety cntena are met. Public Transit (18.360.090.A.11): Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to or vvL i 500 feet of existing or proposed transit route. The requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: (1) The location of other transit facilities in the area; and (2) The size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tn -Met review: (1) Bus stop shelters; (2) Turnouts for buses; and (3) Connecting paths to the shelters. There is a bus line along SW 68 Parkway over 500 feet away from the proposed office site. Therefore, Tri- Met was not notified of this proposal and provisions for public transportation would not be considered. FINDING: The Site Development Review criteria are met. D. TIGARD TRIANGLE The following sections either do not apply or have been discussed elsewhere in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.620.060 (Entry Portals); 18.620.070 (Landscaping and Screening); and 18.620.080 (Street and Accessway standards). NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 19 OF 30 • w Site Design Standards (18.620.030.A): 1. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials - Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterial Streets. The proposed building will not be on a major or minor arterial. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. However, the budding is located at the intersection of two local streets and occupies more than 60% of the street frontage on both SW Clinton Street and SW 70` Avenue. 2. Building setback - The minimum building setback from public street rights -of -way or dedicated wetlands /buffers and other environmental features shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. The proposed building is set back 0 to 3 feet from the public right -of -way on both streets, complying with minimum and maximum setbacks. 3. Front yard setback design - Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard - surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping be developed to an L -1 standard on public streets and an L-2 standard on accessways. Hard- surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. Sidewalk improvements will span the project's entire frontage. The building will be set back 0 feet in one portion and then up to 3 feet. As shown on the landscaping plan, there will be landscaping between the building and sidewalk designed to an L -1 standard. Hard - surfaced areas will be paved with scored concrete. The applicant has not proposed benches or other street furnishings. Front yard setback design is met. 4.' Walkway connection to building entrances - A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. This walkway must be at least six feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. The applicant proposes an 8 -foot scored concrete walkway that connects the building's plaza entry to the public nght-of-way. In addition there is also a street entry to the building. While the street entry is not at the comer the building is placed at the corner, with the street entry about 48 feet from the building corner. Therefore, walkway standards are met. 5. Parking location and landscape design - Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildin. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L -1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L -1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to an L -2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L -1 Landscape Standard. Parking is to the side of the building on both frontages. Parking makes up 31% of the frontage on SW Clinton Street and 30% of the frontage on SW 70 Avenue. On Clinton, parking is behind a landscape strip that is 15 feet deep. On 70`'' Avenue, parking is behind a landscape stnp that is 10 feet deep. The L -1 standards section includes planting criteria that are required for landscaped /screening areas on major and minor arterials and specifies that landscaped /screening areas on collectors and local streets, L -2 standards apply. Therefore, L-2 standards are met for the entire parking lot, as discussed later in this section. Therefore, parking location and landscape design standards are met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 20 OF 30 • • Building Design Standards (18.620.040.A): 1. Ground floor windows - All street - facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street- facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. The wall facing SW Clinton Street has a ground floor wall area of 544 square feet, with windows comprising 321 square feet (59 %). The wall facing SW 70 Avenue has a ground floor wall area of 632 square feet, with windows compnsing 357 square feet (56 %). Therefore, the proposed building meets the standard for ground floor window coverage. 2. Building facades - Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off -set of at least 1 foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. As shown by the building footprint and elevation drawings, the building design uses facade offsets and varies building materials to create interest. At most, the building's facade extends for 36.5 feet without a variation in features. The 70 Avenue facade is 105 feet 4 inches long with an entry pedestrians. The facade on Clinton nton Street is 90 feet 8 inches long An 8 -foot pedestrian path wraps around sides of the building not fronting on the street. Therefore, the building facades do not extend more than 300 feet without pedestrian connections. Building facade criteria are met. 3. Weather protection - Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard - surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. Awnings will be provided at each of the main entries on the east and west sides of the building. There will also be awnings along the outermost walls of each building facade to provide some relief for pedestrians walking long the sidewalk and pedestrian walkway. Therefore, weather protection standards are met. 4. Building Materials - Plain concrete block, plain concrete, con metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. Materials are brick, wood lap siding, wood shingles and glass. The building base will be scored concrete, not plain concrete or plain concrete block Therefore, building material standards are met. 5. Roofs and roof lines - Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. In keeping with its "Traditional American Style," the proposed building mainly has dormered roofs. The roof will be dark composition to complement the bnck facade material and colors. Therefore, this criterion is met. 6. Roof - mounted equipment - All roof - mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other conununication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. NOTICE OF TYPE H DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 21 OF 30 • • . • The applicant indicates that mechanical equipment will be mounted on the roof, but has not indicated the equipment on the plans. Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall indicate any rooftop equipment on the site plan and show that it is adequately screened or that its exposure from the adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. Signs (18.620.050.A): The applicant does not propose any signs at this time, but is required to receive a sign permit prior to installing any signs. Signs in the MUE zone shall comply with the sign requirements of the GP zone as well as the limitations in the Tigard Triangle. Landscaping (18.620.070): Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Tnangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth or the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub - sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. - Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. 1. L -1 Low Screen - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots and along local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L -1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 3 i/2 inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provided a 3 foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. L -1 standards do not apply because the proposed building is located on local streets. Therefore, L -2 standards apply, as discussed below. 2. L -2 General Landscaping - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within S parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and creening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 2 -1/2 inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 -inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. General landscaping and parking lot landscaping meets L -2 standards. All trees are at least 2 V2 caliper inches, with the Greenspu-e Linden street trees and Scarlet Sentinel Maple parking lot trees being 3 caller inches. Landscaping is comprised of various types of groundcover, grasses, shrubs and trees. Street trees Greens ire Linden, �TIIndent Maple) and parking lot trees (Scarlet Sentinel Maple, Chanticleer Pear and Blue Le and Cypress) are not spaced more than 28 feet apart. Therefore, L -2 standards are met. In addition, the app 'cant has proposed to plant 92 caliper inches in mitigation. FINDING: Tigard Triangle standards are not fully met. CONDITION: Prior to site /building permits, the applicant shall indicate any rooftop equipment on the site plan and show that it is adeqquately screened or that its exposure from the adjacent public streets is minimized (18.620.040A6). Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. E. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM Oil -'ICE BUILDING PAGE 22 OF 30 • Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights -of -Way and Street Widths: Section 18.620.080.A, Tigard Triangle Street and Accessway Standards, requires a local street to have a 60 foot right -of -way width and paved section. Other improvements required may include on -street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Clinton Street, which is classified as a local street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 25 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 30 feet from centerline and the additional ROW at the corner for the appropriate radius. SW Clinton Street is currentlypartially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct halt - street improvements in accordance with the local street section shown on page 18.620 -15 of the '1DC. The paved width shall be no less than 24 feet from the face of the new curb. If the paved section is less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway. Additional paving may be required in the intersection to accommodate turning movements. The applicant's engineer shall submit a paving plan with turning templates to the City Engineenng Department for review and approval. This site lies adjacent to SW 70th Avenue, which is classified as a local street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW east of centerline and no ROW west of centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate 30 feet of ROW along the entire length of their 70th Avenue frontage plus the additional ROW for the corner radius. SW 70th Avenue is currently unimproved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct half- street improvements in accordance with the local street section shown on page 18.620 -15 of the 'IIG The paved width shall be no less than 24 feet from the west curb. If the paved section is less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barners such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre- existing developments, lease provisions, easements covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide re uired extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. This development is located at the intersection of two local streets. There is no requirement to provide future street alignments or connections through this property. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15 °I) for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. The applicant's engineer has submitted preliminary engineering plans for the improvements to both SW Clinton Street and SW 70th Avenue. The plans indicate the maximum grade on SW Clinton Street will be 9.75% and the maximum grade on SW 70th Avenue will be 5.02 %, thereby meeting this criterion. NOTICE OF TYPE H DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 23 OF 30 • Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant's plans indicate they will construct an 8 -foot sidewalk with a 4 -foot planter strip along both the SW Chilton Street and SW 70 Avenue frontages, thereby meeting this criterion. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over - sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant's plans show they will extend the public sanitary sewer from the south end of their SW 70th Avenue frontage to the intersection of SW 70th Avenue and SW Clinton Street, thereby meeting this criterion. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream drainage ways that impact the site. The upstream runoff in the public ROW will be collected in the public storm sewer system in SW Clinton Street. The applicant's plans show an existing storm line in SW Clinton Street along their frontage and terminating at the intersection with SW 70th Avenue. The City maps do not show this line and the applicant will be responsible to construct this line if it is not in place. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainae facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention /effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25 -year event. The City will require that all new developments resultin in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant's plans provide for on -site detention via an underground pipe, thereby meeting the requirement for detention. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian /bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right -of -way. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 24 OF 30 • • SW Clinton Street and SW 70th Avenue are not designated as bicycle facilities. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electnc lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under - Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in -lieu of under - grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under - grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under - grounding in conjunction with the development The determination shall be on a case -by -case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under - grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above - ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right -of -way from the applicant's property shall pay a tee in -lieu of under - grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Clinton Street, on the opposite side of the street as the development. If the fee in -lieu is nroposed, it is equal ' o L $35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage ns the overhead , The troiva a __ �� �� 1...... = near feet; therefore the fee would be $6,566.00. ADDITIONAL CITY AND /OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: Charbonneau Engineenng, LLC prepared a traffic impact report for this development, dated February 14, 2008. Charbonneau Engineering analyzed two key intersections: • SW 72n Avenue /SW Dartmouth Street • SW 68 Parkway /SW Dartmouth Street The two critical intersections have been identified as needing traffic signals. As development has occurred in the Tigard Triangle, and where a development introduces additional trips to these intersections, funds have been collected from the developers that will contribute to the future signal installation. The first project to contribute funds to the intersections was the Babies R Us project. A simple formula was established based upon the impact from that development. That project had an impact of 1.1% at SW 72nd Avenue /SW Dartmouth Street during the PM peak hour. For that impact, the City Council required the developer to pay funds in the amount of $20,000.00. At the intersection of SW 68th Avenue /SAY/ Dartmouth Street, the act from that project was estimated to be 0.75 %. For this impact, the developer was required to pay $10,000. Using this same rationale, a proportionate share has been calculated for other projects in the Triangle, and can be calculated for this project. In order to provide the most fair comparison to the Babies R Us project, it is necessary to use the same anticipated total entering volumes (TEV) estimated as a part of the Babies R Us traffic report. That report anticipated more build -out of the triangle area, including the Tri County site at 72nd /Dartmouth. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RC2vI OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 25 OF 30 • • Charbonneau Engineering report shows that this project will generate approximately 13 PM peak hour trips to the intersection Of SW 72nd .Avenue /SW Dartmouth Street. With a total entering volume (TEV) of 2,555 vehicles, the project impact is approximately 0.51 %. Therefore, based on simple proportions, the project contribution to this intersection is $9,251.00. Likewise, the Charbonneau Engineering report shows that the project will generate approximately 4 PM peak hour trips at the intersection o SW 68th Avenue /SW Dartmouth Street. With a "Ih of approximately 2,660 vehicles, the impact from this development is approximately 0.15 %. Therefore, based on the same proportion used in the Babies R Us development, the project contribution to this intersection is $2,005.00. Funds for both intersections must be paid to the City prior to a final building inspection. Fire and Life Safety: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R)has provided the following requirements (in bold) and comments: FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 26 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. (IFC 503.2.1) TVF&R has commented that they do not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. The Engineering epartment has required the applicant to obtain TVF&R approval prior to issuance of a Public Facilities Improvement (PFI) permit. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS - - FIT= ; j .; �f yAN'i S: W`h�: ,� fire h l - ,�drant .s ,oc atcd • • - •• • - Lfte minimum road width shall be 26 feet. (IFC D103.1) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 allons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is -lless as calculated using IFC, • •endix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's • 'ice. (IFC B105.2) TVF&R has commented that fire flow demand calculations must be submitted and approved before they will endorse the issuance of any site development permits. As discussed previously, the Engineering Department has required the applicant to obtain TVF&R approval prior to issuance of a PFI permit. REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly. (IFC 508.5.4) FIRE HYDRANT /FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. FDC's shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. (IFC 912.2) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RQvI OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 26 OF 30 • • KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. (IFC 506) Public Water System: The Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant shall submit plans to TVWD for review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00 -7) which require the construction of on -site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The proposed unit from Stormwater Management is acceptable provided the property owner agrees to hire the manufacturer (or approved equal) to provide the required maintenance of the unit. Pnor to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing., and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required -to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and /or building permit. The applicant provided a geotechnical report, prepared by PBS Engineering and Environmental, dated September 26, 2007. The recommendations of the report will need to be incorporated into the final grading plan and a final construction supervision report must be filed with the Building Department prior to issuance of building permits. The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan with their PFI Permit application. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB)'. An addressing fee in the amount of $50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of permits. For multi -tenant buildings, one address number is asst ned to the building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The City is responsible for assigning the main address and suite numbers. This information is needed so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system Based - upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi -tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map so suite numbers can be assigned. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of suites that must be addressed. In multi -level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "1 ", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "2 ", etc. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RCM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 27 OF 30 • • F. IMPACT STUDY Section 18.360.090 states, "The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The applicant has submitted an impact study, which shows that there will be adequate facilities to serve the proposed partition, as indicated below: Sewer: The applicant will connect to an 8 -inch sewer line in SW 70 Avenue. Water: There is a 4 -inch water line in SW Clinton Street and an 8 -inch water line in SW 70 Avenue. The applicant indicates that these water lines will serve the existing fire hydrant as well as the new building. Storm Drainage: The applicant indicates that stormwater from the site will be collected and conveyed to a stormwater management catch basin to treat water quality. Once the stormwater has been collected and treated, it will discharge into the existing_stormwater system. The existing stormwater, which collects on SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue, will continue to flow into the existing stormwater infrastructure. The proposed catch basins will be designed to handle the increase in peak time and velocity from the new impervious surface area formed by the proposed development. The stormwater system will meet City of Tigard and CWS standards. Parks: A parks system development charge will be paid prior to building permits. Transportation: The proposed site is located at the comer of SW 70 Avenue and SW Clinton Street, both local streets, and within a network of existing streets. SW 70 Avenue is unimproved. The proposed site is about 400 feet away from SW 72n Avenue, an arterial and about 200 feet from SW Dartmouth Street and SW 68 Parkway, both collectors. The applicant will mitigate traffic impacts by dedicating right -of -way, constructing half - street improvements and paying into sign aii7ation funds for the two major intersections in the vicinity. In addition, the applicant will be paying a Washington County Traffic Impact Fee. The TIF will be paid at the time of building permits and is a mitigation measure required for new development. Based on Washington County figures, TIF's are expected to recapture 20 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The TIF for the proposed development at this time is $63,210. The TIF will increase 6% this July 1S`. Based on the estimate that TIF fees cover 20% of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100% of this project's traffic impact is $316 050 ($63,210 ± 0.20). The difference between the TIF paid and the full impact is considered the unmitigated impact on the streets tem. The unmiti aced impact of this project on the transportation system is $252,848 ($316,210 - $63,210) The applicant be required to mitigate some impacts as shown below: Mitigated Costs (Estimate) Dedicate Additional Right -of -Way (7,027 sq ft)... ..... ... ... ... .... ... ....$105,405 Half Street Improvements ($225 x 400 lineal ft)... ... ... ... ... ... .... ..... ...90,000 Si nahzation Fund 72n ......... ..............................9 251 Signali Fund 68th/Dartmouth)... ............ ..........................2,005 Total Mitigated Costs... ... ... ... NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RcM OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 28 OF 30 • • Based on the analysis below, the mitigated costs do not exceed the estimated value of the impacts. Therefore, the required improvements meet the rough proportionality test. Rough Proportionality Fullm ...................................... ............................... 6,0 pp 31 50 Less 1'll� Assessment... ... ......... ............ 63,210 LessMitigated Costs ...... ............................... ........................206,661 Estimated Value of Unmitigated Impacts $46,179 SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal has no objections. The City of Tigard Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal. Comments are included in the Access, Egress and Circulation section and Streets and Utility Improvements section of this decision. Engineering requirements are included in the conditions of approval. Full comments are in the land use file. The City of Tigard Arborist has reviewed the proposal. Comments are included in the Landscaping and Screening section and Tree Removal section of this decision. The City Arborist's requirements have been included in the conditions of approval. Full comments are in the land use file. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objections. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF &R) has reviewed the proposal. Comments are included in the "Fire, Life and _Safety" section of this decision. The Engineering Department has conditioned the applicant to receive TVF&R approval prior to site /building permits. Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) has reviewed the proposal and has no objections. Qwest has reviewed the proposal and notes that the proposed site falls outside their service area; therefore, they have no objections or comments. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 17, 2008 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MAY 2, 2008 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. peal The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Tye II Administrative Appeal or Type III Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee sha be filed with the Director within ten (10) lousiness days of the date the nonce of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW HallBoulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. NOTICE OF TYPE II DEQSION SDR2007- 00010 /RQvI OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 29 OF 30 • • Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS AT 5:00 PM ON MAY 1, 2008. �estions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Current Planning Division at (503) 639 -4171 or visit the Permit Center at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. //Cs>— PD B� F - 4/17/2008. �� Assist - T - 1 - 1i AI „AO:, 4.-- RE EWED B : Richard H. Be ""e i s 0 4/17/2008 Planning Man :er NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2007- 00010 /RQvI OFFICE BUILDING PAGE 30 OF 30 \ CITY of TIGARD 1 , , , ' 1 ! ; ' • ! V . \ \ I • GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM ' ..•••'' i I I I , ...") i \> > i_ . 11 VICINITY MAP \ \ , -1 i I i • i I \ 1 i 1 ! ‘ 1 .) \ \ --- ,...• ...../ / / i I Li I I — 1 I I \ v. „-- I i z — . --- I ---- Li SDR2007-00010 \ i , 1 --_--r..[:-NTA._ . ST , I i ---,------, \, I t ) 1 fti ____. I ' . 1 I T -----1 i i , ,_ , 1 RCIVI OFFIcE - ----1 i 1 i , 1 i 1 _, , r --1 1----1 1 I w 1 i ff BUILDING 1 , 1 1 1 , ----- , I I 1 L_l___i LI,- L._ j<LL j i 0 r _______ . i I i >1.1 w > >-- <1 < 1 , _--1, to ° . 0 Z o S.W ri . C \I ,. SUBJECT I r-i____ i 4 1. -- =I a . „, L , sin ST ." L kii r o I I IIII co .... is ,,,. ,....., „*"... .5 -----.................. C) P.... -.....-- I . E '' , l'., • . ,: e 1 1 —..) 1 • . . i . .L',i M1I•HrTA 1:1 1 • DARTMOUTH ST ( I . I s% 1. II.:E 0E00 RI1 ' ,...,:,, ‘,„ . ,, , 2' 1 • 11 .1 • • • _ .., <, 1 Tigard Area MaP • N 0 80 160 240 320 400 Feel 'Lli■,..1.1,' I illai ELMHURST 1 id II O ST 2 • cto i ; , • , , ,.. 1 1 1-. 310 feel 0 . ' , , , .• . P . C (— CO ED < El = ' i . 2. sh r --- a ,, ,_ iiHiERAkoso Lu I > WA Y L 13125 SW Hall Blvd Nte L _I I Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639.4171 ' .- ini 7 ‘z- TeeNKLIN .... _ ST __ .____ httplAvww.ci,ligard.or.us ommunity Development Plot date: Mar 4, 2008; C:\madic\MAGICO3.APR Lf ARCHITECTS NOT FOR • r wo-a w .r r �s..m wal.mno SW CLINTON STREET - _ 00.010011101 II i r iiic�1i paulrrFrx .lMOlN �� I S 1 :.,,,....... L.6 B1' .. ..::.... r;..r: ©F FIC fi iBUICDWG': i Ef) >' " "! I I - ^� �?.��i = Li • 11_ _ w i ���I.: i • 1 81 ■.i r._ am.: r :::� ^•aa: . 3::: :::. : . mil o B O rlilula�o , h. ai l'.: :F�i:. Ci _:_':.'':M1.:,ei;i"'!;' , I 8 j 1 111 . ®8 / G :;:' •t?i ::=:i: ;5 : : :2 ' ; ; � i : : -,.. . : 1, ;: '. i r RCM OFFICE !1_9 '= _ :: <:' Tow s Toro :. :... _1111=1.9i I ' , SW CLINTON ST. 8 6 1 111!1.1.1.1 l��■.I aaE■ TIGARO. OREGON al 1 B ...? iu•it�: i= I 1 8 11 0 B U ® m m m CO m m O 1 pp in. a I I I G B 1 B s ' - CO m m® m 0® O® m „ I I • TR , � „ I I I i I SITE PLAN P M GUAR ,2.140, • N • 10. SITE PLAN N • ,. A101 a 1 • • • II • ATTACHMENT 2 APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS • Cray of Tigard Permit Center 13125 SW Hall Bhd, Tigard, OR 97223 . . Phone. 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate in local government. Tigard's Land Use Code, therefore, sets out specific requirements for filing appeals on certain land use decisions. The following form has been developed to assist you in filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what filing fees will be required or to answer any questions you have regarding the appeal process, please contact the Planning Division or the City Recorder at the phone /fax listed at the top of this form. GENERAL INFORMATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY • Property Address /Location(s) and Name(s) of the Application r r �,�, �? / /� Case No.(s): cjj)�,7Y� elG 1V Being Appealed: s DV_ moo? _. b)O I Case Name(s): c? 814 '' 1 l k-f-k' I Receipt No.: v �' c G Z � How Do You Qualify As A Parry?: 4� \ i `M` T AA Application Accepted By: Date: 5 1 2 A t i J A pproved As To Form By. Appellant's Name: I/V� L Date: Appellant's Address: (� Q �T (� l/��! Y1 Denied As To Form By Cary/State: p..-c OIL Zip: 03S Date: Day Phone Where You Can Be Reached:6 3) �9 g — 7$ L Rev. 7/1/07 i\ctrpin \ masters \land use applications \ appeal_land we app.doc Scheduled Date Decision Is To Be Final: - ( U Date Notice of Final Decision Was Given: u' y// ! 2' / v REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Specific Grounds For Appeal or Review: d 27L / C.,CD(�i� �5 i'1 l � � ()a-J l `t= y ` �1�� Application Elements Submitted: A ) ' Appeal Filing Form (completed) / �� � ` l — �� ��' S� ( Filing Fee (based on criteria below) __I i )\\_.{ . - - W a y ) "W \ �QC.�S ` - b .o . Director's Decision to Hearings Officer /Planning Commission $ 250.00 �} / ;. Expedited Review (deposit) 5 300.00 (j f ' p ( J Ii � / �- �� / � f / ➢ Hearing Referee 5 500.E ( , ���J y , 1, Planning Commssion/Hearings Officer to Gry Council l l l l (+ Transaipt) e ( C1 ' - ( ti�-t�s e - ( v\ ( / 1" /-r i7�. s' f Signature(s) of Appellant(s): • • APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS (Cont'd.) tl l (iv) 6 i y us ( UrZ SS(2_61S 5 ., a ,, ' 0 .(41 M rd r 1. Patty Lunsford S From: Jeff Caines [jeffc @srdllc.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 1:32 PM To: Patty Lunsford Subject: RCM Office Bldg. /SDR2007 -00010 Appeal Form Attachments: AR- BC320_20080506_134909.pdf Patty, Here is a copy of the signed appeal form for the RCM Office Building. We will work on the findings for the specific approval criterion next week. Please let me know if you need anything else. Jeff Jeff Caines, AICP Land Use Planner SR Design LLC 8196 SW Hall Blvd. Suite 232 Beaverton, OR 97008 503 - 469 -1213 (x104) - Phone 503 - 469 -8553 - Fax • • i � y, , :44:.. „9� i APPEAL FILING FORM,' OR ; .. VPI /:A /l:, ' •,.;. 1 0 06 ) . FOR LAND USE DE CLSIOT 5 /�, /, . -,t /M , i yii city of 'Italy ?emit Center 13125 SW Hall Blzrl, 7 OR .97223 : ,� /p Phone. 503.639.4171 Fax; 503.598,1960 • : /, • The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate in local go*niment. Tigard's Land Use Code, therefore, sets out specific requirements for filing appeals on certain land use decisions. • The•.following form has been develolied to assist you in filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form., To determine what tiling fees will be required or to answer any questions you. have regarding the appeal process,,please contact the Planning Division orthe city Recorder at the phone /fax listed at the' top of this form. • GENERAL .INFORMATION FOR STAFF US$ ONLY Property Address /Location(s) and Name(s) of the Application • ' .. • " Case No.(s): c ' ' A/ I ..... 010/0 - Being Appealed: __.- " i `O Case Nazrte (s);10±6 1 • ____ . __ -- Receipt No.: D 9•: 0'' 0'0 � '7 l 4 t ' / • How Do You Qualify As A Patty ?: _}pl t ��� ,Application Accepted By: I I • Date: 6 1 t 0 7 .... [` jh � � Approved As To Appellant's Name: C v v\ } r j (,°_,1 • I Date: Appellant's Address: 40 PI.l1l✓ . e„e v -t#(Yl '' _ -- aenieci As'I City /5tate:1414,_a{p/.0 OP.... Zip:_ • p" ' Date: Day Phone Where You Can Be Reached:6 4. i I `" . • Rev. 7/1/07 y I: \cuip1n \maatero \land use npplicatio,u \appeal 4incl use app.doc • • . Schedules) Date-Decision Is To Be Final:.' .''I ! - 0 ■ " _ Date Notice of Final Decision Was Given: A 17 1 k frP . - .. ... S .. 1 / � REQUU ED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Specific Grounds For Appeal or Review: . . . . - /.4/ . . ei„,/,,.,6,,,A r •✓ Application Elements Submitted: ' • Ti . - r .1 1.N - -. / Appeal Filing Form (comp1Ztetl) Filing Fee (based on criteria below) ")�-(� – 0 111 — (-t) / V `�S `)'a ---- • > D x ctozY Decision co Hearing, Officer/Planning g Con nmsinn 5 250.00 6 a � �/yy ��,/�//�')� t •.D Expedise* Review (deposit) S 300.00 • 'l' .? `�- _VT C.t'i p e. yl-SC'.N4 ) Heating Referee ry S '400.00 �I ` 3 (1 ) rimming Cnmmi,,ion/He a olfiwr to ei CowuJ $ 2,513.00 (t 75anrcn a) (� (QL _14—____,.1 ski ( • . • i .. s r -- = - -- e -Q uei ; °t (r'- 3 _.._ u) n, • / �f - 0 _Lae's, - - e i • Si nature(s) of Appellant(s): . T C Pi Nc,i( r?ivs Ice CITY OF TIGARD 1111 5/2/2m8 10:4�,:2iAN1 1 3125 SW flail Itivd. ' Tigard, OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt #: 27200800000000001481 Date: 0.5/02/2008 Line Items: Case No 'Fran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2007 - 00010 [LANDUS] Appeal DD to HO 100 0000 - 438000 250.00 Line Item Total: $250.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct. /Check No. Approval No. Flow Received Amount Paid • Check RCM DEVELOPMENT LLC ST 11237 In Person 250.00 Payment Total: $250.00 • cltcccipa.rp■ 1'ac I of I 1 r "— A N . ,— .. 4 ,... , , .. .„ 4 N., , , .. . . .-„ f - , , ,-,..-. 6 ,A i . . .—, • • . . . . . ,-. &,—. . . . A i c —. -. . .- : -As , -y- - . : . . .,., :—.._ . ..- s k _....„A r y , 1/4 .—," . .. . . . ., 2.1s kl Ih ATTA ENT 3 III H I' u �I i + f,w Ala APPLICANT'S APPLICATION � 1 111 0 ii �4 MATERIALS 0 C ill � I ,I "Appeal" of RCM Office Building k II jl SDR2007 00010 II 1 .t 111 #II r II/ Pr> '< li ,II l < ll r> C I II I i p �I� I '<''' > tII "il III A I II ii; I 11 .h 'II I b $ 111 . I k ;:i 4 I 1 1 I II • • Land Use Application for a Site Development Review Submitted to Tigard, Oregon / J\ s - i ..J : r , i ,,, nl �,,, f i � � 1 L ilL _I.JCI . Ila _ .! 1I 11 Srii _ 7.111Th . ' er _ .f� _ _,..�S � ` :` 2 .. a. r�+r 4.1∎ rr. r9.�r..r.V V- t. - l i B 4.4..i.ig....A. -s !ai n 1: i a .'.� 34 4#!l�: Lea., ' RCM Office Building Project No. 206330 December 14, 2007 Revised: February 22, 2008 Applicant: Myers Family, LLC Five Centerpointe Dr., Suite 280 Lake Oswego, Or 97035 Applicant's Representative: LRS Architects, Inc. 720 NW Davis, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97209 503.221.1121 9 0 • ....„. , - _ - , ., iii •-,,.. i , 1 11111111 OF_ `,- 1, i _,,,': t :,..iiz. ;: - 11 11 1 , 1 . i 2 1 ,.. -4.,.- - l i l t t ."-- ,,- l' t to - ' 1- .* ' f • '..'''''1--, Sr; - •!1„-f:-% , - 'I ,, • Aill' ' ' 5' a ' : ,,,, , 4 .‘ ,,,,,,,, ,.„;,„ ---'' :,,, .., , ';'„-- •,- — '''••• .,--- -- 7 .:',7 7 5. 74r . .„ . ., . -- -1.. _ r-, 0 .. : _ ..., .4t. t , . • I I - CO 111 , .., I • - 1 il l ' ''' - 4,,, ..,, :1 -4 ; 4... - - * . - aVV4-131A„ItTIMOUlicti, 7 81r, ::-,-•' 7 4 '.": _ _ , I i --- ..„. ,,,,,,,, 1. 4,,,,,,,,,,,, , , e--,,,t44-wimisa . .4 ;-;•—,, ' „ , ;..., „,_,..,.. __ .„ , - - ,- ,--, -_-- ,---- - ,._ .. .. 1 ' 4, . fa. A N SITE PLAN - PARCEL MAP N.T.S. 0 • • Project Team Applicant/Owner: Myers Family, LLC Five Centerpointe Dr. Suite 280 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 T: 503.598.7565 F: 503.620.9965 Contact: Randy Myers Architect: LRS Architects, Inc. 720 NW Davis Suite 300 Portland, OR 97209 T: 503.221.1121 F: 503.221.2077 • Contact: Paul Boundy Civil/Landscape: SR Design, LLC 8196 SW Hall Blvd. Suite 232 Beaverton, OR 97008 T: 503.469.1213 F: 503.469.8553 Contact: Steve Roper - Civil Troy Mears - Landscape • • . Proposal Summary • • The proposed development consists of a two -story office building with surface parking on a site with a gross area of .829 acres (36,130 sq ft.). With the dedication of 5' for widening the Clinton right -of -way and the dedication of 30' for widening the 70` Ave right -of -way, the remaining site area will be 29,103 (net area). The building is designed and located at the site to create an attractive and welcoming streetscape at the southwest corner of the Clinton / 70` Avenue intersection. The building will have a floor area of 14,400 square feet and have a street - facing entry facing 70` Avenue. The entry at the opposite side of the building is associated with a plaza and parking area that will accommodate 42 vehicles. Light standards for the parking area and building wall sconces for the perimeter sidewalk will be provided for safety within the interior of the site. Sidewalks run along the perimeter of the building and serve to connect the parking area with the public sidewalks along Clinton and 70` Avenue. More than 15% of the site will be landscaped and required mitigation will be done for existing trees slated to be removed. The property is zoned Mixed Use Employment (MUE) and is part of the Tigard Triangle Area. In addition to addressing how this proposal meets the base zone standards, this narrative addresses the Site Development Review standards, as well as the Tigard Triangle standards that supercede the base zone and site development standards. • Building Design The office building wall facades facing streets are primarily brick and glass with numerous wall off -sets that are evenly distributed along the lengths of the walls. The office building facade consists of high quality, low maintenance materials with a timeless quality. Materials are brick, wood lap siding, wood shingles and glass. Brick is used to accentuate some window sills and lintels to add an extra level of detail. The building base will consist of scored concrete complementing the brick exterior wall elements. Canopies will be provided at each of the main entries on the East and West sides of the building. Canopies are also provided at the outermost walls of each building facade helping to provide intermittent protection for pedestrians walking along the public and private walkways. Streets and Utilities One -half street improvements including roadway widening, and curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements will be constructed along both Clinton and 70` Avenue. The public sidewalks will be 8' wide with a 4' wide planter strip to include street trees. Public street lighting, street striping, signage and utilities will be constructed or improved as necessary and required. • • • • Table of Contents Project Team Proposal Summary Code Compliance Narrative Page Chapter 18.360 Site Development Review 1. Chapter 18.360.020 Applicability of Provisions Chapter 18.360.030 Approval Process Chapter 18.360.040 Bonding & Assurances Chapter 18.360.090 Approval Criteria Chapter 18.390 Decision Making Procedure 6. Chapter 18. 390.040 Type II Procedure Chapter 18.520 Commercial Zoning District 9 Chapter 18.520.030 Uses Chapter 18.520.040 Development Standards Chapter 18.520.050 Special Limitations on Uses Chapter 18.620 Tigard Triangle Design Standards 11. Chapter 18.620.010 Purpose & Applicability Chapter 18.620.020 Street Connectivity • Chapter 18.620.030 Site Design Standards Chapter 18.620.040 Building Design Standards Chapter 18.620.050 Signs Chapter 18.620.060 Entry Portals Chapter 18.620.070 Landscaping & Screening Chapter 18.620.080 Street & Accessibility Standards Chapter 18.620.090 Design Evaluation Chapter 18.705 Access, Egress, & Circulation ..16. Chapter 18.705.030 General Provisions Chapter 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 20. Chapter 18.725.030 General Provisions Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening .21. Chapter 18.745.040 Street Trees Chapter 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening Chapter 18.745.060 Re- vegetation Chapter 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage 28. Chapter 18.755.010 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.755.030 Materials Accepted Chapter 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance Chapter 18.755.050 Location, Design & Access Standards for Storage Areas • • • Table of Contents, Continued Page • Chapter 18.765 Off - Street Parking & Loading Requirements 33 Chapter 18.765.030 General Provisions Chapter 18.765.040 General Design Standards Chapter 18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards Chapter 18.765.060 Parking Structure Design Standards Chapter 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off - Street Parking Chapter 18.765.080 Off - Street Loading Requirements Chapter 18.780 Signs ...44. Chapter 18.780.20 Permits Required Chapter 18.790 Tree Removal 44. Chapter 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement Chapter 18.790.040 Incentives for Tree Retention Chapter 18.790.050 Permit Applicability Chapter 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas 46. Chapter 18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements Chapter 18.810 Street& Utility Improvement Standards .48. Chapter 18.810.020 General Provisions Chapter 18.810.040 Blocks Chapter 18.810.050 Easements Chapter 18.810.060 Lots Chapter 18.810.070 Sidewalks • Chapter 18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers Chapter 18.810.100 Storm Drainage Chapter 18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways Chapter 18.810.120 Utilities Chapter 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required Chapter 18.810.140 Monuments Chapter 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite • • • Exhibits • Exhibit Land Use Application A • Completed Land Use Permit Application Form • Land Partition and Development Patterns for adjoining property Development Plan Sheets B • CS - Cover Sheet • C1 - Existing Conditions • C2 - Grading Plan • C3 - Utility Plan • L1 — Landscape Plan • A101 -Site Plan • A201 -First Floor of Building Floor Plans • A202- Second Floor of Building Floor Plans • A401 -North and West Building Elevations • A402- South and East Building Elevations • E1.1 Site Photometric Analysis Property Title Information C Pre - Application Meeting Information D • Neighborhood Meeting Information E Building Materials F Soils Report .G Tree Assessment H Sensitive Area Screening I Stormwater Analysis J Traffic Information .K Sight Distance Certification • RCM Tigard Office Building • • • COMPLIANCE WITH TIGARD CITY DEVELOPMENT CODE Chapter 18.360 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 18.360.020 Applicability of Provisions A. Applicability and exemptions. Site development review shall be applicable to all new developments and major modification of existing developments, as provided in Section 18.360.050, except it shall not apply to: • Response: The proposed development is a new office building with surface parking. A Site Development review process is required. The applicant respectfully requests approval of the application based on compliance with City Community Development Code standards and criteria demonstrated in this narrative. 18.360.030 Approval Process A. New developments and major modifications. Site development review for a new development or major modification of an approved plan or existing development, as defined in Section 18.360.030A, shall be processed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.360.090. Response: This Application is meeting the standards and criteria required of a Type 1I procedure as shown in the following narrative. The approval criteria contained in Section 18.360.090 is met as demonstrated in the following narrative. • 18.360.040 Bonding and Assurances A. Performance bonds for public improvements. On all projects where public improvements are required the Director shall require a bond in an amount not greater than 100% or other adequate assurances as a condition of approval of the site development plan in order to ensure the completed project is in conformance with the approved plan; and B. Release of performance bonds. The bond shall be released when the Director finds the complete project conforms to the approved site development plan and all conditions of approval are satisfied. C. Completion of landscape installation. Landscaping shall be installed prior to issuance of occupancy permits, unless security equal to the cost of the landscaping as determined by the Director is filed with the City Recorder assuring such installation within six months after occupancy: Response: The developer intends to install landscaping prior to occupancy of the building. • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 1 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildii • 18.360.090 Approval Criteria • ` A. Approval criteria. The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions, or denying an application: 1. Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards; Response: This narrative demonstrates how the proposed development is in compliance with all the applicable requirements of this title. Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards is addressed in the later part of this narrative. 2. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: a. Buildings shall be: (1) Located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; Response: The site has moderate slope. Due to the re- grading required to make the project feasible, preserving all the existing trees is not possible. (2) Located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; Response: The subject site has an overall slope rate of no more than 10 %. As such, there is very little probability that any ground slumping or sliding can occur. (3) Located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire- fighting; • and Response: Because the site is at the corner of Clinton Street and SW 70 Ave and the building will also be at that corner of the lot, the proposed building shadows will be cast on its adjoining parking lot, Clinton Street and 70 Ave, and not on any nearby buildings. The building will be readily accessible to fire and rescue vehicles. (4) Oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Response: Based on the conditions of the site and the following factors, this guideline could not be met. The following are major factors that cause the proposed building's long axis to be oriented in a north/south direction: 1) Office buildings function most efficiently in a rectangular shape; 2) The long side of the site runs on the north/south axis; 3) The site is at the corner of two major streets where the building is appropriately located, and; 4) The need for access off Clinton and 70th Ave. b. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. • Response: The site has moderate slope. Due to the re- grading required to make the project feasible, preserving all the existing trees is not possible. Mitigation for trees to be removed is planned based in conformance with Chapter 18.790. A written explanation of how mitigation will be accomplished is on pages 44 and 45 of this narrative. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 2 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • • 3. Exterior elevations: a. Along the vertical face of single- family attached and multiple - family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet by providing any two of the following: Response: The proposed development does not include residential uses; therefore, this criterion does not apply to this proposal. 4. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: a. Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, for example, between single- family and multiple - family residential, and residential and commercial uses, and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer: b. On site screening from view from adjoining properties of such things as service areas, storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops, i.e., air cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: (1) What needs to be screened; • (2) The direction from which it is needed; (3) How dense the screen needs to be; (4) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; and (5) Whether the screening needs to be year around. Response: The parcels surrounding the proposed development are all zoned MUE except the property south of the development site. This property is a large parcel that is presently vacant and zoned General Commercial (C -G). To the 'east and north of the site are existing residential properties; however Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue separate these residential units from the site. The only adjoining residential dwelling affected by the proposed development is west of the site. An 8' 0" wide landscape buffer (trees and shrubs) with a 5' high sight obscuring fence will be provided between the parking area and the property line of the adjoining single family dwelling. Mechanical units will be located on the building roof and be screened from sight. The trash bin location will be located 30' east of the adjoining single - family dwelling lot and the bins will be enclosed with a permanent structure to obscure any view of them. The parking lot will be nicely landscaped with trees in the perimeter planters in addition to the required shade trees in the interior of the parking lot in landscape bays. The western perimeter will be screened as specified for the required buffer. • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 3 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 • RCM Tigard Office Buildiril, • •` 9. Demarcation of public, semi - public and private spaces for crime prevention: a. The structures and site improvements shall be designed so that public areas such as streets or public gathering places, semi - public areas and private outdoor areas are clearly defined to establish persons having a right to be in the space, to provide for crime prevention and to establish maintenance responsibility; and b. These areas may be defined by, but not limited to: (1) A deck, patio, low wall, hedge, or draping vine; (2) A trellis or arbor; (3) A change in elevation or grade; (4) A change in the texture of the path material; (5) Sign; or (6) Landscaping. Response: The building's main interface with the public street is at its east facade entry facing the street sidewalk. This entryway is inset from the building facade with awnings. The inset and awning elements define the transition from the semi- public space to the private building space. It is very clear that the plaza and building entry at the west wall of the building is private, as they are oriented to the private parking area. • 10. Crime prevention and safety: a. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; Response: The building has windows on all sides and will be highly visible from the two streets. The two surface parking areas will be open and highly visible from each of the streets. The plaza between the parking area and the office building entry, which could be vulnerable to criminal activities, is again very visible from the building interior through ample window and glass door area in the three walls surrounding the plaza. b. Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; Response: There are no laundry or service areas in this proposed commercial building. This criterion does not apply. c. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; Response: Mail boxes will be located at the inside of the building in the lobby. d. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 4 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • • Response: The parking lots and especially the plaza on the west wall will be well lit. Exterior lights • on the building have been selected to enhance the architecture as well as provide safe entry and exiting. Lights will be carefully situated to not spill light onto adjoining parcels. e. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Response: The parking lot will be well lit with safety as a priority. Pedestrian paths will meet the IBC requirements for foot - candle illumination levels where the paths are required to connect to the public street sidewalks. Stairs and ramps will be lit to eliminate dark spots or shadows that could cause tripping hazards. Pole lights will be established at some parking area perimeter locations (away from the building) to provide a relatively even dispersal of light throughout the parking area. 11. Public transit: • a. Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to or within 500 feet of existing or proposed transit route; b. The requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: • (1) The location of other transit facilities in the area; and (2) The size and type of the proposal. c. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri -Met review: (1) Bus stop shelters; (2) Turnouts for buses; and (3) Connecting paths to the shelters. Response: There is an existing bus stop for the #78 bus line at the SW corner of 68` and Clinton. This bus stop will remain. 12. Landscaping: a. All landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745; b. In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 5 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Build, . c. A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. • Response: The development is planned to be landscaped in accordance with Chapter 18.745. Items 5 & 6 listed in section b. reference multi - family developments. This is a commercial development. As currently designed, the site will have 6,070 sq ft of landscaped area, which constitutes approximately 21 % of the "net" site area (29,103.ft.). In discussions with City staff, they agreed that making this calculation based 15% of the "gross" site area would be overly burdensome considering there is such a disparity between the gross and net site area because of the 70 Ave. 30' dedication. 13. Drainage: All drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; Response: The proposed building site and the parking garage site will include provision for detention of storm runoff quantity and for storm water quality treatment in conformance with criteria adopted in the City of Tigard 1981 Master Plan. 14. Provision for the disabled: All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447; and Response: The project will be in full compliance with the International Building Code as adopted by the state of Oregon and meet ADA. Two handicapped parking spaces are provided. Both of these spaces will be located in close proximity of the building entry adjoining the parking area. One of these spaces is an accessible van space. An accessible sidewalk will be constructed along the south side of the building. This sidewalk will connect the grade level entry plaza to the 70 Ave public sidewalk. 15. All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. Response: The base zone is MUE — Mixed Use Employment Distirct. The site is also in the Tigard Triangle Design Standards area. The project conforms to the MUE and Tigard Triangle Design standards as required. Chapter 18.390 DECISION - MAKING PROCEDURES 18.390.040 Type II Procedure A. Pre - application conference. A pre - application conference is required for Type II actions. Pre - application conference requirements and procedures are set forth in section 18.390.080C. Response: The pre- application conference was held on January 16, 2007. This requirement is met. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 6 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02 /22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • • B. Application requirements. • 1. Application Forms. Type II applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director as provided by Section 18.390.080 El; 2. Submittal Information. The application shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; Response: The complete application can be found in Exhibit A. This requirement is met. b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; Response: The relevant criteria are addressed in sufficient detail in this narrative. c. Be accompanied by the required fee; Response: The fee required includes $6,087.00 for the Site Development. The SDR fee is based on a building valuation of $1,507,367.17. A check for $6,087.00 is included in this application package. This requirement is met. d. Include two sets of pre- stamped and pre- addressed envelopes for all property owners of record as specified in Section 18.390.040C. The records of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation are the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the notice list; Response: Two sets of pre- stamped and pre- addressed envelopes are included with this application. • e. Include an impact study. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Response: After evaluating this proposed project and the future impact this project may have on the surrounding area and infrastructure, it can be stated that this project will not cause an impact to the public facilities and services that current City standards cannot adequately accommodate. Since this property is located within the Tigard Triangle, there are special site development requirements that need to be met. The Applicant is proposing to develop the site with a commercial building that will meet all the standards, as described by Tigard's Development Code and the Tigard Triangle section. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 7 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildin• • It can be reasonably stated that by developing the site to meet the code standard(s) that ,\ . the impact of the proposed building will not have a negative effect on the site including • the surroundings proposed and current developments. There will also be a reduction of noise since less people will be living in the area and therefore the associated noise will not be exported to add to the noise already present. The Applicant will dedicate the appropriate amount of right -of -way in order to allow for any future road construction. The Applicant has obtained application forms from the City (as provided by the Director). Below is a more detailed breakdown of the public facilities and services this project will affect. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM: The proposed commercial building development fronts both SW Clinton Street to the north and SW 70` Avenue to the east. Since the site is located on a corner, street dedications as well as the construction of a curb and 12 -foot sidewalk will occur. The project will follow the Tigard Triangle Typical Street Section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -12. Once this and the surrounding properties develop, SW 70 Avenue will be able to handle the added traffic impact. However, the additional traffic added to the street system will be at a level in which the local street standards are still applicable. DRAINAGE SYSTEM: Stormwater run -off from the site will be collected and conveyed to a Stormwater Management catch basin to treat water quality. Once the stormwater has been collected and treated, then it will discharge into the existing stormwater system. The existing stormwater, which collects on SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue, will continue to flow in to the existing storm water infrastructure. The proposed catch basins will be designed and located to handle the increase in peak time and velocity from the proposed III impervious area form the developed site. This stormwater system will meet City of Tigard standards and requirements. PARK SYSTEM: This development is not proposing to donate any land to the City of Tigard for open space and parks. SEWER SYSTEM: There is an 8 -inch sewer line located in 70 Avenue. This line will terminate at the intersection of SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. This sewer line is large enough to serve the proposed building via gravity flow. WATER SYSTEM: A 4 -inch waterline is located in SW Clinton Street and an 8 -inch water line is located in SW 70` Avenue. These water lines will be used to connect the existing fire hydrant as well as the proposed building. The size of pipe to serve the proposed building will be determined once the building design has received final approval. NOISE IMPACTS: This development is for a proposed commercial / office building which will not generate any extraordinary noise impacts to the surrounding neighbors. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 8 December 14, 2007 III Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • 411 Chapter 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 18.520.030 Uses A. Types of uses. For the purposes of this chapter, there are four kinds of use: B. Use table. A list of permitted, limited, conditional and prohibited uses in commercial zones is presented in Table 18.520.1. Response: Table 18.520.1 lists Office buildings as a permitted use in the MUE zone. 18.520.040 Development Standards . A. Compliance required. All development must comply with: 1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapters 18.310 and18.320; 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. Response: The proposed development complies with all the applicable standards in the MUE zone. Standards from the Tigard Triangle Design Standards have been used for the basis of development when they differ from the base zone standards. B. Development standards. Development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.520.2 below • Dimensions /Setbacks Summary — Mixed Use Employment STANDARD MUE Proposed Office Bldg. Site Minimum Lot Size None N/A Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 200' Minimum Setbacks Front yard (1) (70` 0 ft. Varies 0'- 3' Side facing street — 0 ft. Varies Clinton Street 0' -9'9" Interior Side yard - where 0/20 ft. N/A site abuts residential zone. (1) Where site abuts other 0' 75' more restrictive zoning districts Rear yard: opposite 70 0' 60' -82' St.- rear yard boundary doesn't abut residential zone RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 9 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildi• • • Maximum Height 45 ft. 39'6" (4) Maximum Site Coverage 85 % 79% (3) Minimum Landscape 15 % 21 % Requirement Minimum FAR 1.25 Bldg sq footage is Maximum FAR (5) .40 14,400sf, equaling: .3985 FAR (1) Superseded by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards (2)The provisions of Chapter 18.795 (Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. (3) Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. (4) Measured at highest grade. (5) Superseded by 18.520.050 (C)— FAR limited to .40 of for commercial projects. As per June 28` 2007 E -mail from Tigard staff, area of this site for FAR calculation is square footage before dedication of street rights -of -way- 36,130 square feet. •! 18.520.050 Special Limitations on Uses C. In the MUE zone, Special limitations in the MUE zoning district are as follows: 1. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for all commercial and industrial use types and mixed -use developments shall not exceed 0.40. Residential use types, including transient lodging shall not be subject to this requirement. Response: The FAR for the proposed development is .3985 based on the floor area of 14,400 SF and a gross site area of 36,130 square feet. The proposed development conforms to this requirement. 2. On lots greater than three acres, general retail sales uses are limited to 30,000 square feet of gross leaseable area plus one additional square foot of gross leaseable area of general retail sales use for each additional four square feet of non - general retail sales use. Response: The subject site is less than 3 acres in size. Thus, this limitation is not applicable. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 10 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • Chapter 18.620 TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS • 18.620.010 Purpose and Applicability C. Conflicting Standards. The following design standards apply to all development located with the Tigard Triangle within both the C -G and the MUE zones. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. (Ord. 99 -22) Response: The proposed development complies with all the applicable standards in the MUE zone. Tigard Triangle Design Standards have been considered applicable to this development proposal when they differ from the base zone standards. 18.620.020 Street Connectivity A. Demonstration of standards. All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Response: No new street right of way alignments are proposed or needed with this development. The site is at the corner of Clinton and 70 Ave where connectivity will be established through the development of the project. Added right -of -way will be dedicated for the construction of 70` Ave. and Clinton Street. The two streets will be constructed to intersect with one another and provide better street connectivity. This standard is not applicable. 18.620.030 Site Design Standards A. Compliance. All development must meet the following site design standards. If a 11111 parcel is one acre or larger a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, governing criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials - Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Response: Both Clinton Street and 70` Ave. are local streets, thus this standard is not applicable. However, the proposed building has been located at the corner of the lot immediately abutting the intersection of the two streets. Also, more than 60% of the frontage along both streets will be enclosed by the north and east building walls respectively. 2. Building setback - The minimum building setback from public street rights - of -way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. Response: The proposed office building's east facing wall location varies from 0' to 3' off of the east property line (front boundary) along 70`h Ave. This standard is met along the front boundary of the site. As seen on the site plan ( Sheet A101 of Exhibit B), the majority of the north facing building wall along Clinton street is 10' or less from the street -side, side boundary. The westernmost end of this building wall (only 15' of bldg frontage) is 6" from the street right -of -way boundary. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 11 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildinn • 3. Front yard setback design - Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard - surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and 1 a pubic street or access way. If a building abuts more than one street, the • required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L -1 standard on public streets and an L -2 standard on access ways. Hard - surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. Response: The building front facing SW 70`" has an architecturally prominent building entrance that is very close to the street sidewalk. As seen on the Sheet A402 of Exhibit B, a walkway will be constructed from the plaza and entry on the west side of the building to the Clinton Street walkway. Landscaping will also be established in the plaza. The interior walkways will have scored concrete as seen on Sheet A101 of Exhibit B. 4. Walkway connection to building entrances '- A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a pubic street or access way. This walkway must be at least six feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18520.2. Response: A 6' wide concrete stairway connects the East entry to the public sidewalk along SW 70`". The west entry opens to a plaza that connects to an 8' 0" wide concrete walk. This walk connects to the public sidewalk along SW Clinton Street north of the site. The development complies with this standard. • 5. Parking location and landscape design - Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights -of -way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L -1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L -1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to an L -2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L -1 Landscape Standard. Response: The proposed site is at the corner of 70`" Ave. and Clinton Street with the building immediately abutting the street corner rights -of -way. The front of the building faces 70`" Ave. Looking at the site from the Clinton Street vantage point, parking is located at the side and rear of the building. From the 70 Ave vantage point, the parking area is at the side and rear of the building. Along Clinton, the parking facilities only constitute 31% of the street frontage. Along 170 Ave, the parking area only constitutes 30% of the street frontage. Landscaping will be provided along both the west and south boundaries that are rear and interior side yards between the parking area and the adjoining properties. Though the property west of the site is in the MUE zone, the existing residential dwelling on the lot is provided protection for compatibility by the Tigard Community Development Code. In addition to an 8' 0" wide landscape buffer (trees and shrubs), a 5' high sight obscuring RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 12 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • fence will be provided. Landscaping meeting the L -2 standard for perimeter landscaping • is along the southern boundary as well as the west boundary. See the Landscape Plan on Sheet L1 of Exhibit B for more information. 18.620.040 Building Design Standards A. Non - residential buildings. All non - residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2 criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Ground floor windows -All street - facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along pubic streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street - facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. Response: This standard applies to the north and east office building facades. Ground floor windows or openings are required along Clinton and 70 based on the proposed building location. The window /door opening area within 3 feet to 9 feet from grade at the • building wall facing 70 Ave constitutes 56% of the that area. The wall area is 632 sf and the opening area is 357 SF. The window /door opening area within 3 feet to 9 feet from grade at the building wall facing Clinton Street is 59 %. The wall area is 544sf and the opening area 321 sf . 2. Building facades - 'Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off -set of at least 1 foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. Response: The architectural style of the proposed office building is "Traditional American" with brick accent and a residential motif. The wall facades facing streets are primarily brick, wood lap siding, wood shingle and glass. The wall off -sets are evenly distributed along the total length of the wall plains. The building wall along Clinton is 90'8" long. The two gabled ends are off -set from the main building by 6' extending toward the street and creating a bookend affect. This, in effect, creates the perception of three smaller building units facing Clinton. The 70` Avenue wall facade is 105'4 "long and the two gabled building ends are offset by at least 4', extending toward the street. The wall plain between the two end elements 11111 RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 13 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildir110 • is 61' long and it is again articulated horizontally by one dormer highlighting the central entry. • Both street facing facades conform to this standard. See Sheets A401, A402, and A101 of Exhibit B. 3. Weather protection - Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard - surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. Response: Awnings will be provided at each of the main entries on the East and West sides of the building as seen on Sheets A401 and A402 of Exhibit B. Awnings are also provided at the outermost walls of each building facade helping to provide intermittent protection for • pedestrians walking along the public, as well as, private walkways. The awnings will not be back -lit. This standard is met. 4. Building Materials - Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. Response: The office building facade consists of high quality, low maintenance materials with a timeless quality. Materials are brick, wood lap siding, wood shingles and glass. Brick is used to accentuate some of the sills and lintels to add an extra level of detail. The • building base will consist of scored concrete complementing the brick exterior wall elements. This standard is met. 5. Roofs and roof lines - Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. Response: The building mainly has dormered roofs in keeping with its "Traditional American" style. The roof will be dark composition to complement the brick facade material and colors. None of the roof will have false elements. 6. Roof - mounted equipment - All roof - mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. Response: Mechanical equipment will be mounted on the roof, but will be screened as necessary. This standard is met. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 14 December 14, 2007 • Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • 1. Zoning district regulations - Non - residential development within the MUE • zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C -P zone, 18.780.130D. 2. Sign area limits - The maximum sign area limits found in 18.780.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. 3. Height limits - The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. 4.. Sign location - Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L -1 landscape areas. Response: No signs are proposed with this application, as such, this standard does not apply. 18.620.060 Entry Portals A. Required locations: 1. Location - Entry portals shall be located at the intersections of 99 and Dartmouth; 99W and 72nd; I -5 and Dartmouth; Hwy. 217 and 72nd; and at the Hwy. 217 Over crossing and Dartmouth. Response: This standard is not applicable to this proposal. 2. Design - The overall design of entry portals shall relate in scale and detail to • both the automobile and the pedestrian. A triangle motif shall be incorporated into the design of entry portals. Response: This standard is not applicable to this proposal. 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening A. Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub - sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. 1. L -1 Low Screen - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots and along local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L -1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 3 -1/2 inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for fully mitigation credit. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 15 • December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildii • Response: Because both Clinton Street and 70 Avenue are local streets, landscaping along these , streets and in the office building parking area will meet the L -2 landscape standards. •j below. 2. L -2 General Landscaping - for general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 2 -1/2 inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 -inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. Response: The landscape plan, as submitted, shows that screening will be provided between the proposed parking areas and the public right of way along Clinton Street and 70 Avenue. Onsite landscaping that abuts the local streets will only consist of a landscape strip between curb and sidewalk. Two and one -half inch caliper street trees will be planted within the landscape strip along with turf as groundcover. Where parking is adjacent to the site entrances, a five foot minimum planter island is located in order to screen vehicles. For further details see Sheet L1 of Exhibit B. 18.620.080 Street and Access way Standards A. Tables and diagrams. The following tables and diagrams show street and pedestrian access way standards for the Tigard Triangle. Landscape and street design details are also included in this section. Response: The developer will obtain a public works permit and provide a performance bond to meet all the criteria listed within the table for the streets adjacent to the project. 18.620.090 Design Evaluation • A. Purpose. Request adjustments from the Triangle design standards and submit design plans for review and recommendation by a City Design Evaluation Team. Response: This provision is not applicable to this proposal, as no adjustment to the Triangle' designs have been requested. Chapter 18.705 ACCESS, EGRESS, AND CIRCULATION 18.705.030 General Provisions A. Continuing obligation of property owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in this title are continuing requirements for the use of any • structure or parcel of real property in the City. Response: The Applicant shall maintain the access and egress stipulated in this title. B. Access plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 16 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • Response: The proposed Site Plan demonstrates how access, egress, and circulation provisions are • to be met. See Sheet A101 of Exhibit B. C. Joint access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: 1. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and 2. Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City. Response: The subject site is owned solely by the applicant. This provision does not apply. D. Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.03011 and 18.705.030I shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. Response: Vehicular access and egress from the site connects directly to SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. The driveways for the site will be maintained to meet City standards. This provision is met. E. Curb cuts. Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N. Response: Curb cuts are designed in accordance with Section 18.810.030N. This provision is met. F. Required walkway location. On -site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the • following standards: 1. Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi - building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; Response: The building has two entries. The entry on the east side of the building connects directly up to a public walk to be constructed along 70 Avenue. The connection will be by way of a stairway landing at 265.25' elevation from the doorway threshold up by 3' to the sidewalk at street level which as a 268.77' elevation. The other entry faces west and connects to an outdoor plaza area which is then connected to SW Clinton Street by an 8' wide walkway along the backside of the building. A public sidewalk will be constructed along both SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue providing the opportunity for pedestrian connections to adjacent development. 2. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi- family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 17 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office BuildiS • Response: This is a commercial development with no residential uses; therefore the provision does not apply. 1 3. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6 -inch vertical separation (curbed) or a , minimum 3 -foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; Response: All the onsite walkways are proposed to run along the perimeter of the building. Where the proposed driveways are crossed by the public sidewalks, the width of the driveways is shorter than 36 feet. The total length of the onsite walkways is at Least 6 feet wide, is free of obstructions, and is in compliance with ADA standards. This provision has been met. 4. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft - surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. Response: All pedestrian walkways will be scored concrete. Walkways will be adequately lit and • signed as required by the International Building Code or the City of Tigard. G. Inadequate or hazardous access. 1. Applications for building permits shall be referred to the Commission for review when in the opinion of the Director, the access proposed: a. Would cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or b. Would provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles Response: The development of this site will initiate the construction of 70` Parkway and will allow Clinton Street to connect to the east, thus increasing street connectivity for the neighborhood. This will facilitate better distribution of vehicle trips generated by land uses presently on Clinton, as well as, those generated by the proposed office building which will be some 172 ADT. As seen on the site plan, this development has been designed for safe circulation and flow for both passenger vehicles, as well as emergency vehicles. The west and south of the building are easily accessible for emergency vehicles by way of the parking lot aisles. Those vehicles will be able to enter either parking area access points and head out the other Markin area without need for maneuvering. 3. In no case shall the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward movement or other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 18 December 14, 2007 • Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • Response: As indicated above, the parking area has two access points to streets and driveways for • the proposed development are designed so that no backup movement is required within a street. This provision has been met. H. Access Management 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility.) 2. Driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right -of -way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from city Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has Less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. 3. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 411 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. 4. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. Response: Driveways for this development are not proposed onto collectors or arterials. The driveway from the site onto SW 70` is more than 200 feet north of SW Dartmouth and outside of the Dartmouth influence area. No new streets that would complement the existing street grid are proposed. The above provisions are met. J. Minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial use. 1. Vehicle access, egress and circulation for commercial and industrial use shall not be less than 21 as provided in Table 18.705.3; 2. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; 3. Additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. Response: Vehicle access, egress, and circulation are provided at the subject site. All drives and circulation aisles are a minimum of 24 feet. Short -term and ADA vehicular parking stalls are within 50 feet of the building entrance. These provisions are met. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 19 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building) • VEHICULAR ACCESS /EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: ` 0 , COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES Required Parking Minimum Number of Minimum Access Minimum Pavement Spaces Driveways Required Width 0 -99 1 30 -feet 24 -feet curbs required 100+ 2 30 -feet 24 -feet curbs required or 1 50 -feet 40 -feet curbs required Response: The site will have 42 parking stalls. Both driveways have a width of at Least 24 feet. The applicable standards above are met. Chapter 18.725 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 18.725.030 Performance Standards A. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Response: The proposed development consists of a typical office building, surface parking lot, and parking garage. It will not produce any excess noise. B. Visible emissions. Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the omission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property • line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340- 21 -015 and 340 -28 -070) apply. Response: The proposed development consists of a typical office building and a surface parking lot. The only emissions expected are from cars in the parking area. No freight or other causes of emissions beyond that are expected. This criterion is met. C. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Response: The proposed development consists of a typical office building and a surface parking lot. No vibrations from the proposed use will occur. This criterion is met. D. Odors. The emission of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340- 028 -090) apply Response: The proposed development consists of a typical office building and a surface parking lot. No odorous gases are associated with the proposed use. E. Glare and heat. No direct or sky- reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 20 December 14, 2007 • Revised: 02/22/08 • RCM Tigard Office Building • • 1. There shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is • discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2. These regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Response: The proposed development consists of a typical office building and a surface parking lot. No direct or sky reflected glare shall occur and all lighting will be directed downward. F. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. Response: The proposed development consists of a typical office building, surface parking lots, and a parking garage. No materials which would attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents are associated with the proposed use. Garbage and waste will be stored and maintained per the Code standards in Chapter 18.755. Chapter 18.745 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 18.745.040 Street Trees • C. Size and spacing of street trees. 1. Landscaping in the front and exterior side yards shall include trees with a minimum caliper of two inches at four feet in height as specified in the requirements stated in Section 18.745.040.C.2 below; 2. The specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: a. Small or narrow- stature trees under 25 feet tall and less than 16 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet apart; Response: Street trees will be planted in the public right -of -way as part of the overall development the specific type of trees to be used is undetermined at this time, however, the type of tree that will be planted will meet the above listed specifications. The development will work with the City arborist to determine to appropriate type and spacing of the trees to be planted. b. Medium -sized trees 25 feet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart; Response: Street trees will be planted in the public right -of -way as part of the overall development the specific type of trees to be used is undetermined at this time, however, the type of tree that will be planted will meet the above listed specifications. The development will work with the City arborist to determine to appropriate type and spacing of the trees to be planted. • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 21 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office BuildinS • c. Large trees over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart; 0; Response: Street trees will be planted in the public right -of -way as part of the overall development the specific type of trees to be used is undetermined at this time, however, the type of tree that will be planted will meet the above listed specifications. The development will work with the City arborist to determine to appropriate type and spacing of the trees to be planted. Except for signalized intersections as provided in Section 18.745.040.11, trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet from a street intersection, nor closer than two feet from private driveways (measured at the back edge of the sidewalk), fire hydrants or utility poles to maintain visual clearance; Response: As described above, no trees will be planted closer than 20 -feet from the intersection of SW Clinton Street and SW 70' Avenue. The development will work with the City arborist to determine to appropriate type and spacing of the trees to be planted. d. No new utility pole location shall be established closer than five feet to any existing street tree; Response: There are no existing street trees to remain as the site. This provision does not apply, as all street trees will be newly established with the construction of the site and building. e. Tree pits shall be located so as not to include utilities (e.g., water and gas meters) in the tree well; Response: Trees will be placed in locations that avoid utilities within the tree well. f. On- premises utilities (e.g., water and gas meters) shall not be installed • within existing tree well areas; Response: There are no existing tree wells. This provision does not apply. g. Street trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards; Response: Trees will not be placed within 20 feet of light h. New light standards shall not be positioned closer than 20 feet to existing street trees except when public safety dictates, then they may be positioned no closer than 10 feet; Response: There are no existing street trees at the site. This provision does not apply. i. Where there are overhead power lines, the street tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines; Response: Power lines will be placed underground where allowed by the City and utility companies. During the construction phase of the project, final determination of the utility lines will be determined. It is anticipated that utility lines will be placed underground and will not interfere with overhead lines that lead to the dwelling units across the street of SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. j. Trees shall not be planted within two feet from the face of the curb; and Response: Street trees will be planted at the center of a four -foot (4') wide planter strip between the curb and sidewalk. Therefore the trees will be just two feet from the curb at the closest. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 22 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • k. Trees shall not be planted within two feet from the face of the curb; and • Response: Street trees will be planted at the center of a four -foot (4') wide planter strip between the curb and sidewalk. Therefore the trees will be just two feet from the curb at the closest. 1. Trees shall not be planted within two feet of any permanent hard surface paving or walkway: (1) Space between the tree and the hard surface may be covered by a nonpermanent hard surface such as grates, bricks on sand, paver blocks and cobblestones; and (2) Sidewalk cuts in concrete for tree planting shall be at least four by four feet to allow for air and water into the root area. Response: Street trees will be planted at the center of a four (4') foot wide planter strip between the curb and sidewalk. Therefore the trees will be just two feet from the walkway at the closest. D. Pruning requirements. Trees, as they grow, shall be pruned to provide at least eight feet of clearance above sidewalks and 13 feet above local street, 15 feet above collector street, and 18 feet above arterial street roadway surfaces. Response: The Applicant understands this provision and shall comply with the City's pruning requirements. E. Cut and fill around existing trees. Existing trees may be used as street trees if no cutting or filling takes place within the drip -line of the tree unless an adjustment is approved by the Director by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section • 18.390.030, using approval criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.4.a. Response: There are no existing trees to remain as street trees. The provision does not apply. F. Replacement of street trees. Existing street trees removed by development projects or other construction shall be replaced by the developer with those types of trees approved by the Director. The replacement trees shall be of a size and species similar to the trees that are being removed unless lesser sized alternatives are approved by the Director. Response: No street trees currently exist on the property. New street trees will be installed as part of the overall development. G. Granting of adjustments. Adjustments to the street tree requirements may be granted by the Director by means of a Type I procedure, as regulated in Section 18.390.030, using approval criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.4.b. Response: The Applicant is not requesting an adjustment to the street tree requirements. This provision does not apply. H. Location of trees near signalized intersections. The Director may allow trees closer to specified intersections which are signalized, provided the provisions of Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance, are satisfied. Response: There are no signalized intersections adjacent to the project. The provision does not apply. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 23 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildirl • 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening B. Buffering and screening requirements. 40 1. A buffer consists of an area within a required setback adjacent to a property line and having a depth equal to the amount specified in the buffering and screening matrix and containing a length equal to the length of the property line of the abutting use or uses; Response: The buffering required along the western boundary (8' wide set back, trees, shrubs, and 5' fence) is provided and is depicted on the landscape plan. 2. A buffer area may only be occupied by utilities, screening, sidewalks and bikeways, and landscaping. No buildings, access ways or parking areas shall be allowed in a buffer area except where an access way has been approved by the City. Response: The buffer area will only include landscaping and the required 5' fence. 3. A fence, hedge or wall, or any combination of such elements, which are located in any yard, is subject to the conditions and requirements of Sections 18.745.050.B.8 and 18.745.050.D; Response: The proposed hedges will be maintained at the height required within each yard. 4. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of combinations for landscaping and screening as specified in Table 18.745.1. In addition, improvements shall meet the following specifications: a. At least one row of trees shall be planted. They shall have a minimum caliper of two inches at four feet in height above grade for • deciduous trees and a minimum height of five feet high for evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing for trees shall be as follows: (1) Small or narrow - stature trees, under 25 feet tall or less than 16 feet wide at maturity shall be spaced no further than 15 feet apart. (2) Medium -sized trees between 25 feet to 40 feet tall and with 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart. (3) Large trees, over 40 feet tall and with more than 35 feet wide branching at maturity, shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart. b. In addition, at least 10 five- gallon shrubs or 20 one- gallon shrubs • shall be planted for each 1,000 square feet of required buffer area. c. The remaining area shall be planted in lawn or other living ground cover. Response: At the western boundary, trees, shrubs and a 5' high fence will meet the C -2 standard as per Code Section 18.745.2, as well as the specifications above. See Sheet L1 of Exhibit B. 5. Where screening is required the following standards shall apply in addition to those required for buffering: RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. 111111 Site Development Review 24 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building4111 • a. A hedge of narrow or broad leaf evergreen shrubs shall be planted 411 which will form a four -foot continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two years of planting; or b. An earthen beam planted with evergreen plant materials shall be provided which will form a continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two years. The unplanted portion of the berm shall be planted in lawn or other living ground cover; or c. A fence or wall of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. Response: A five foot fence will be placed where buffering is required between the parking area and residential uses. 6. Buffering and screening provisions shall be superseded by the vision clearance requirements as set forth in Chapter 18.975; Response: The buffer /screening fence and vegetation will not protrude into the clear vision area. 7. When the use to be screened is downhill from the adjoining zone or use, the prescribed heights of required fences, walls or landscape screening shall be measured from the actual grade of the adjoining property. In this case, fences and walls may exceed the permitted six foot height at the discretion of the director as a condition of approval. When the grades are so steep so as to make the installation of walls, fences or landscaping to the required height impractical, a detailed landscape /screening plan shall be submitted for approval; . Response: The subject site is at a higher elevation than the property required to be screened west of the site; therefore the vegetation and 5 foot fence will be adequate. 8. Fences and walls a. Fences and walls shall be constructed of any materials commonly seen in the construction of fences and walls such as wood, stone, rock or brick or otherwise acceptable by the Director. b. Such fence or wall construction shall be in compliance with other City regulations; c. Walls shall be a minimum of six inches thick. Response: A cedar board fence will be built to augment the buffer at the west boundary and a masonry wall will be built as an enclosure around the garbage/recycling bin areas. C. Setbacks for fences or walls. 1. No fence or wall shall be constructed which exceeds the standards in Sections 18.745.050.C.2 except when the approval authority, as a condition of approval, allows that a fence or wall be constructed to a height greater than otherwise permitted to mitigate against potential adverse effects; Response: Fences and walls associated with this project will not exceed the standards of Code Section 18.745.050.C.2. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 25 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildinill 1• 2. Fences or walls: a. May not exceed three feet in height in a required front yard along • local streets or eight feet in all other locations and, in all other cases, shall meet vision clearance area requirements in Chapter 18.795: b. Are permitted up to six feet in height in front yards adjacent to any designated arterial or collector street. For any fence over three feet in height in the required front yard area, permission shall be subject to administrative review of the . location of the fence or wall. Response: Fences and walls are not constructed for buffering purposes. Proposed walls are retaining walls only. 3. All fences or walls shall meet vision clearance area requirements in Chapter 18.795; Response: There are no walls proposed that interfere with the vision clearance area. 4. All fences or walls greater than six feet in height shall be subject to building permit approval. Response: Approval of building plans will be requested if any fences or walls are proposed greater than 6'. D. Height restrictions. 1. The prescribed heights of required fences, walls or landscaping shall be measured from the actual adjoining level of finished grade, except that 110 where parking, loading, storage or similar areas are located above finished grade, the height of fences, walls or landscaping required to screen such areas or space shall be measured from the level of such improvements; Response: Buffering required for parking is measured from the parking pavement level as seen on Landscape Plan L 1. 2. An earthen berm and fence or wall combination shall not exceed the six -foot height limitation for screening. Response: Berms, fences or walls are not proposed for screening with this application. E. Screening special provisions. 1. Screening and landscaping of parking and loading areas: a. Screening of parking and loading areas is required. The specifications for this screening area as follows: (1) Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscape berms, decorative walls and raised planters; (2) Landscape planters may be used to define or screen the appearance of off - street parking areas from the public right - of -way; RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. 411 Site Development Review 26 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • (3) Materials to be installed should. achieve a balance between • low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees; (4) Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed and on the basis of one tree for each seven parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect; and (5) The minimum dimension of the landscape islands shall be three feet and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. Response: The parking areas are being screened with plant material and according to the L2 landscape standard as required in the Tigard Triangle code section. Parking islands are being planted with trees, shrubs, and ground cover material to provide enhancement to the parking areas. The number of trees to be planted in landscape islands in the parking areas will be at least 1 for every 7 parking spaces. 2. Screening of service facilities. Except for one - family and two- family dwellings, any refuse container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area; Response: The only service facility that may be seen from the neighboring residential area or street is the refuse container. The refuse container will be screened with a masonry enclosure. 1111 3. Screening of refuse containers. Except for one and two- family dwellings, any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. Response: The refuse container will be enclosed within a walled structure. 18.745.060 Re- vegetation A. When re- vegetation is required. Where natural vegetation has been removed through grading in areas not affected by the landscaping requirements and that are not to be occupied by structures, such areas are to be replanted as set forth in this . section to prevent erosion after construction activities are completed. Response: All of the site requiring re- vegetation are affected by the landscaping requirements and will meet the provisions as set forth in section 18.745. B. Preparation for re- vegetation. Topsoil removed from the surface in preparation for grading and construction is to be stored on or near the sites and protected from erosion while grading operations are underway; and RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 27 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildin1 • 1. Such storage may not be located where it would cause suffocation of root systems of trees intended to be preserved; and • Response: Top soil as a result of site grading will be stored on or near the site. Three existing trees to be retained are located on the site. The displaced top soil will not be stored near those trees and moreover near the existing trees across the southern boundary of the site. 2. After completion of such grading, the topsoil is to be restored to exposed cut and fill embankments or building pads to provide a suitable base for seeding and planting. Response: Appropriate topsoil will be reused on site to provide a fertile growing medium for proposed planting. Where required additional soil amendment material will be added. C. Methods of re- vegetation 1. Acceptable methods of re- vegetation include hydro - mulching or the planning of rye grass, barley, or other seed with equivalent germination rates, and: a. Where lawn or turf grass is to be established, lawn grass seed or other appropriate landscape cover is to be sown at not less than four pounds to each 1,000 square feet of land area; b. Other re- vegetation methods offering equivalent protection may be approved by the approval authority; c. Plant materials are to e watered at intervals sufficient to ensure survival and growth; and d. The use of native plant materials is encouraged to reduce irrigation and • maintenance demands. Response: Any lawn areas will be established with at least 4 lbs of seeds for each 1000 square feet of lawn area. Typically 7 lbs are specified. Ground cover and shrub areas will be planted at spacing that promotes coverage without excessive crowding in the future. All proposed plant material will be irrigated with an underground automatic irrigation system to insure plant survival. Where possible native and drought tolerant plant material will be incorporated into the planting plan. Chapter 18.755 MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE STORAGE 18.755.010 Purpose and Applicability A. Applicability. The mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi -unit residential buildings containing five or more units and non - residential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for such uses. Response: The proposed development is required to meet the standards and criteria in this section. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 28 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office. Building • • 18.755.030 Materials Accepted • A. Materials accepted. Except as provided for in 18.755.040 G and I, the storage area must be able to accept at least all "principle recyclable materials" designated by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other source - separated recyclable the local government identifies by regulation. Response: The proposed development will provide a recycle storage area that accepts all principle recyclable materials and other source - separated recyclables identified by the local government. The proposed development will contract Pride Disposal, which will handle the recyclables. 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance • A. Alternative methods of compliance. An applicant shall choose one of the following four methods to demonstrate compliance: 1. Minimum standards; 2. Waste assessment; 3. Comprehensive recycling plan; or 4. Franchised hauler review and sign -off. Response: The development is using the minimum standards method of compliance. B. Provisions. The following provisions apply to all four methods of demonstrating compliance: 1. Section 18.755.050, Location, Design and Access Standards, except as • provided in 18.755.040 G; Response: The applicant understands these provisions and will comply. 2. The floor area of an interior or exterior storage area required by this chapter shall be excluded from the calculation of lot coverage and from the calculation of building floor area for purposes of determining minimum storage requirements. Response: The storage capacity requirement for the development is based on the building area alone. The trash enclosure square footage is not included. C. Minimum standards method. 1. Description of method: This method specifies a minimum storage area requirement based on the size and general use category of the new construction; Response: This method has been selected by the applicant based on the general office use of the building. 2. Typical application of method: This method is most appropriate when the specific use of a new building is not known. It provides specific dimensions for the minimum size of storage areas by general use category; RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 29 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building/ • Response: The development will have general office use but specific users have not yet been ' �l identified therefore this method is most appropriate. The trash enclosure is shown on the site plan. See Sheet A101 of Exhibit B. 3. Application requirements and review procedure: The size and location of the storage area(s) shall be indicated on the site plan of any construction subject to this ordinance. Through the site plan review process, compliance with the general and specific requirements set forth below is verified; Response: The site plan shows the location and specific dimensions of the trash enclosure. 4. General requirements: a. The storage area requirement is based on the predominant use(s) of the building, (i.e. residential, office, retail, wholesale /warehouse/ - manufacturing, educational/institutional, or other). If a building has more than one of the uses listed herein and that use occupies 20 percent or less of the floor area of the building, the floor area occupied by that use shall be counted toward the floor area of the predominant use(s). If a building has more than one of the uses listed herein and that use occupies more than 20% of the floor area of the building, then the storage area requirement for the whole building shall be the sum of the requirement for the area of each use. Response: The building has one use, commercial office. The storage area meets size requirement of 4/1000 square feet of gross floor area + 10 square feet. The building area is 14,400 square feet. The minimum area required based the above equation is 68 square feet. The storage area that is proposed is 267 sf. b. Storage areas for multiple uses on a single site may be combined and shared. Response: There are no shared storage areas for the proposed development. c. The specific requirements are based on an assumed storage height of 4 feet for solid waste /recyclable. Vertical storage higher than 4 feet but no higher than 7 feet may be used to accommodate the same volume of storage in a reduced floor space (potential reduction of 43% of specific requirements). Where vertical or stacked storage is proposed, the site plan shall include drawings to illustrate the layout of the storage area and dimensions of containers. Response: The applicant is proposing a masonry wall enclosure with a 6' 0" high wall with no proposal to reduce the horizontal square footage area. 5. Specific requirements: a. Non - residential buildings shall provide a minimum storage area of 10 square feet, plus: RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 30 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • (1) Office: 4 square feet/1,000 square feet gross floor area • (GFA). (2) Retail: 10 square feet /1,000 square feet GFA. (3) Industrial: 6 square feet/1,000 square feet GFA. (4) Institutional: 4 square feet /1,000 square feet GFA. (5) Other: 4 square feet/1,000 square feet GFA. Response: The proposed development will be used as office space. The total square feet within the building is 14,400 SF. Therefore, a trash enclosure providing 68 square feet of storage area is required. A trash enclosure with a 6' 0" high wall is proposed instead of the minimum required 4' 0" high wall. A square foot area of 267 sf will be provided which is ample. 18.755.050 Location, Design and Access Standards for Storage Areas A. Applicable standards. The following location, design and access standards for storage areas are applicable to all four methods of compliance, described in 18.755.040 above. B. Location standards. 1. To encourage its use, the storage area for source - separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; Response: The storage area proposed with the development will combine space for both source - separated recyclables and residual mixed solid waste. • 2. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; Response: The storage area enclosure proposed with the development will comply with all International Building and Fire Code requirements. 3. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can . combine both interior and exterior locations; Response: Storage area requirements are being met in a single location outside the building. 4. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Response: The proposed storage area enclosure is not located within a required front or street side yard setback. 5. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; Response: The storage area is located in the southwest corner of the site in a location visible from the driveway curb cuts off the two streets. Thus, it will be visible to police vehicles doing surveillance. The area will be well lit to also enhance security for users. This standard is met. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 31 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildili 0 6. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after • deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; Response: The storage area is located in the southwest corner of the site at the end of the parking area. It has a dedicated location, outside of any site area required for parking. Minimum parking space requirements are met without using the space allocated for the trash enclosure. The standard is met. 7. The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. Response: The storage area is accessible for collection vehicles and located so that it doesn't obstruct any pedestrian movement on the site. Collection vehicles can maneuver within the parking area to easily collect the trash bins. This maneuvering can be done totally on site without obstructing traffic movement on public streets adjacent to the site. C. Design standards. 1. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Response: The storage area is proportioned so that standard collection containers can be used. This standard is met. 2. Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; • Response: The storage containers will meet International Fire Code standards and be made of waterproof materials with lids. This standard is met. 3. Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight- obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Response: The storage area will be enclosed by a 6' 0" high masonry enclosure. Metal gates will be at least 10' wide and will be capable of being secured in either the closed or open position. The standard is met. 4. Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. Response: Storage area containers will be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. D. Access standards. 1. Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons. However, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service; RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review • 32 December 14, 2007 Ilk Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • Response: The storage area will be locked except at the scheduled time for the collection service • personnel. Scheduled times will be arranged with the building's tenants to allow easy disposal of trash and recyclables. The janitorial service will be given a key so that they can access the area to dispose of waste. 2. Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment, considering paving, grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered; Response: The storage area has over 267 sf of horizontal clearance and is located with nothing overhead. The surface in front of the enclosure is asphalt and has a gradual slope. 3. Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. Response: As seen on the site plan, Sheet A101 of Exhibit B, maneuvering ability for collection vehicles to approach and pick up bins is optimal. The storage area is easily accessible to collection vehicles moving in a forward motion into and out of the parking area. The vehicles have plenty of room to back up in a hammerhead motion if they so choose. Otherwise, the vehicle may just approach the storage area in a forward position and depart from the second driveway to the intersecting street without a backing -out movement. • Chapter 18.765 OFF - STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS 18.765.030 General Provisions B. Location of vehicle parking. The location of off - street parking will be as follows: 1. Off - street parking spaces for single - family and duplex dwellings and single - family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwelling(s); Response: The proposed development does not include residential homes; therefore, this criterion does not apply. 2. Off - street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located no further than 500 feet from the property line that they are required to serve, measured along the most direct, publicly accessible pedestrian route from the property line with the following exceptions: a. Commercial and industrial uses which require more than 40 parking spaces may provide for the spaces in excess of the required first 40 spaces up to a distance of 500 feet from the primary site; Response: The proposed development includes one parking area for 42 cars on the same site as the proposed building. As such, this standard is not applicable. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 33 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildin • b. The 40 parking spaces which remain on the primary site must be available for users in the following order of priority: 1) Disabled - accessible spaces; 2) Short -term spaces; 3) Long -term preferential carpool and vanpool spaces; 4) Long -term spaces. Response: The proposed 42 -space parking lot is on the same site as the building, thus all the above spaces will be in close proximity of the building. As such, this standard is met. C. Joint parking. Owners of two or more uses, structures or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same parking and loading spaces when the peak hours of operation do not overlay, subject to the following: 1. The size of the joint parking facility shall be at least as large as the number of vehicle parking spaces required by the larger(est) use per Section 18.765.070; 2. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the Director in the form of deeds, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; 3. If a joint use arrangement is subsequently terminated, or if the uses change, the requirements of this title thereafter apply to each separately. Response: The proposed development is under single ownership so the above provision does not apply. D. Parking in mixed -use projects. In mixed -use projects, the required minimum vehicle • parking shall be determined using the following formula. Response: The proposed development is not a mixed -use project; therefore, this Section does not apply. E. Visitor parking in multi - family residential developments. Multi- dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces above the minimum required for the use of guests of residents of the complex. These spaces shall be centrally located or distributed throughout the development. Required bicycle parking facilities shall also be centrally located within or evenly distributed throughout the development. Response: The proposed development does not contain residential uses; therefore, this section does not apply. F. Preferential long -term carpool/vanpool parking. Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long -term parking spaces shall provide preferential long -term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5% of total long -term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpooUvanpool use. Preferential parking for carpools /vanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated for use by the disabled. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 34 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full -sized per requirements in Section • 18.765.040.N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. Response: There are 42 parking spaces on the subject site. Five percent (5 %) or 2 stalls, are proposed as carpool /vanpool stalls for the project. These spaces will be located in close proximity to the entrance. G. Disabled- accessible parking. All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. Response: The total number of parking spaces is 42. The International Building Code and federal standards require two (2) stalls for 42 spaces. The first of these must be a van accessible space. These spaces are located near the building entry oriented to the parking area. As seen on the site plan, these spaces will be sized and signed with appropriate pavement markings in conformance with code requirements. H. DEO indirect source construction permit. All parking lots containing 250 spaces or parking structures containing two or more levels shall require review by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to: 1. Acquire an Indirect Source Construction Permit; 2. Investigate the feasibility of installing oil and grease separators. (Ord. 02 -13) Response: DEQ only requires an indirect source permit if more than 1000 parking stalls are proposed. With only 42 spaces, this requirement is not applicable. • 18.765.040' General Design Standards A. Maintenance of parking areas. All parking lots shall be kept clean and in good repair at all times. Breaks in paved surfaces shall be repaired promptly and broken or splintered wheel stops shall be replaced so that their function will not be impaired. Response: It is in the best interest of the Applicant to keep all parking areas in good condition and well maintained. The Applicant understands this standard and will abide by it. B. Access drives. With regard to access to public streets from off - street parking: 1. Access drives from the street to off - street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; Response: Both access drives are designed and will be constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrians and vehicles on the site. Drives are located to allow for all maneuvering out of the public right -of -way. All drives are wide enough to easily accommodate two -way traffic. Primary pedestrian access starts at the public sidewalk and enters the site either on the east or north side, separated from any vehicle access drives by grade. Based on the above facts, this standard is met. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 35 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildir 40 2. The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the • -1 requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; Response: The subject site has two drives to be constructed in accordance with Chapter 18.705 as addressed on pages 18 and 19 of this report. 3. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; Response: All access drives are clearly identified by curbs and landscaping. 4. Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; Response: The two proposed driveways are on non - arterial streets. The clearance standard for drives in these locations is 30 feet on either side of the drive and 30 feet back from the right of way line. The standard is met. See the site plan (LI of Exhibit B) for locations. 5. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and Response: Access drives for the site will be asphalt. This standard is met. 6. Excluding single - family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right -of -way will be required. Response: Entry drives for the site are designed to allow vehicles to park away from the street rights -of -way. All maneuvering including backup can take place on site, and out of the • public way. This standard is met. C. Loading/unloading driveways. A driveway designed for continuous forward flow of passenger vehicles for the purpose of loading and unloading passengers shall be located on the site of any school or other meeting place which is designed to accommodate more than 25 people at one time. Response: The proposed development does not involve, nor is it adjacent to a school or meeting place; therefore, this standard does not apply. D. On -site vehicle stacking for drive -in use. 1. All uses providing drive -in services as defined by this title shall provide on the same site a stacking lane for inbound vehicles as noted in Table 18.765.1. Response: The proposed development does not provide drive -in services; therefore, this standard does not apply. E. Curb cuts. Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030.N. Response: The proposed development shall develop its curb cuts in accordance with Section 18.810.030.N. Please refer to that Section of this Narrative for more information. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 36 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • F. Pedestrian access. Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in • accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop -off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow - moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop -off edges. Response: Pedestrian walkways are designed in accordance with Section 18.705.030F. There will be retaining walls along the south and west sides of the site to help make the parking area level. No sidewalks will be adjoining those sides of the site; however, a combination of landscaping, wheel stops and extruded curbing will be used to keep vehicles from escaping the paved area along those boundaries with drop -off grades . G. Parking lot landscaping. Parking lots shall be landscaped in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 18.745. Response: Parking lot landscaping will meet the requirements of Chapter 18.745, as seen on the Landscape Plan (L1 of in Exhibit B). H. Parking space surfacing. 1. Except for single- family and duplex residences, and for temporary uses or fleet storage areas as authorized in 18.765.040.H.3 and 4 below, all areas used for the parking or storage or maneuvering of any vehicle, boat or trailer shall be improved with asphalt or concrete surfaces; 2. Off - street parking spaces for single and two- family residences shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; • 3. Parking areas to be used primarily for the storage of fleet vehicles or construction equipment may be surfaced in gravel... 4. Parking areas to be used in conjunction with a temporary use may be surfaced in gravel when authorized by the approval authority at the time the permit is approved. The approval authority shall consider the following in determining whether or not the gravel - surfaced parking is warranted: Response: The proposed development's parking areas shall not be used in conjunction with a temporary use; therefore, this provision does not apply. I. Parking lot striping. 1. Except for single- family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off - street parking requirements as contained in this chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and 2. All interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. Response: All parking spaces, interior drives, and access aisles within the proposed development parking lot shall be clearly marked. • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 37 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office BuildinS J. Wheel stops. Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least .` four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. Response: Wheel stops will be provided for each stall that is adjacent to either a landscape area or a retaining wall. Spaces adjacent to sidewalks that run along the building will also have wheel stops. This standard is met. K. Drainage. Off - street parking and loading areas shall be drained in accordance with specifications approved by the City Engineer to ensure that ponds do not occur except for single - family and duplex residences; off - street parking and loading facilities shall be drained to avoid flow of water across public sidewalks. Response: The applicant understands this standard and the project complies. See Grading Plan (Sheet C2 of Exhibit B) for slopes and catch basin locations. L. Lighting. A lights providing to illuminate any public or private parking area or vehicle sales area shall be arranged to direct the light away from any adjacent residential district. Response: The Parking area will mainly be lit by pole mounted light fixtures. These are designed and located to ensure that light is directed away from any adjacent residential developments. See Site Lighting plan E1.1 of Exhibit B and Exhibit F for fixture cut sheets. M. Signs. Signs which are placed on parking lots shall be designed and installed in • accordance with Chapter 18.780, Signs. Response: There are no signs proposed with this development at this time. This provision does not apply. Signs that may be proposed will be submitted for planning and building dept review through a separate permit. N. Space and aisle dimensions. (Figure 18.765.1) 1. , Except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2, the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: a. 8.5' x 18.5' for a standard space; b. 7.5' x 16.5' for a compact space; and c. As required by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards for designated disabled person parking spaces; d. The width of each parking space includes a stripe which separates each space. Response: The parking lot is designed with 8. -6" x 18' -6" standard size spaces. Compact spaces provided are 7 -6" x 16' -6 ". As mentioned earlier in this narrative, accessible parking spaces are sized and located to meet State of Oregon and federal standards. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 38 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • 2. Aisles accommodating two- direction traffic, or allowing access from both • ends, shall be 24 feet in width; Response: Aisles on the proposed development are all designed to accommodate two -way traffic and are at least 24'wide. 3. Minimum standards for a standard parking stall's length and width, aisle width, and maneuvering space shall be determined as noted in Figure 18.765.2. Response: Figure 18.765.2 addresses minimum widths for stalls in parking structures. This proposed parking area is a surface lot and the stalls and aisles conform to the above specifications addressed in item N. (1). 18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards A. Location and access. With regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: 1. Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; Response: Seven (7) bicycle parking spaces are required for this project. A bicycle rack for the majority of the bicycles will be located at the west side on the building in the plaza, in front of the entry. This is 50' within one of the building entry. 2. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; • Response: Bicycle parking is not located within parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways as seen in Sheet A101 Exhibit B. This standard is met. 3. Outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on -site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to locate the parking area; Response: Bicycle parking is located adjacent to the west entry of the building. It is easily visible from the building. Because it cannot be seen from the street, signage will be provided so that it is easy to locate. The standard is met. 4. Bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. Response: Bicycle parking is not proposed inside the building with this development. This provision does not apply. B. Covered parking spaces. 1. When possible, bicycle parking facilities should be provided under cover. Response: As seen on the site plan, bicycle parking will be at the north side of the plaza area. No shelter has been planned at this time. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 39 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02 /22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildinn • 2. Required bicycle parking for uses served by a parking structure must provide for covered bicycle parking unless the structure will be more than 100 feet from the primary entrance to the building, in which case, the uncovered bicycle parking may be provided closer to the building entrance. Response: No parking structure is proposed of this project. As such, this standard is not applicable. C. Design requirements. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: 1. The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long -term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; Response: Bicycle racks proposed allow for users to secure bicycles to them without undue inconvenience. Exhibit F includes a cut sheet of the proposed bicycle rack. 2. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; Response: Bicycle racks will be secured to the concrete slab. The requirement is met. 3. Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; Response: Bicycle racks are spaced so that a 2' -6" x 6 feet long space is provided for each bicycle. The racks will be outside with ample vertical clearance. This requirement is met. 4. Each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; Response: Bicycle racks are spaced to allow individual bicycles to be parked and removed without removing other bicycles. The requirement is met. 5. Required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At -cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; Response: Bicycle parking spaces are available free of charge to all building users. This requirement is met. 6. Areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Response: Bicycle parking spaces are in racks and are not able to be used by any other use. The requirement is met. D. Paving. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. Response: The bicycle parking is located in the entry plaza which is an extension of the pedestrian walk. It will be sloped slightly so that it drains away from the building and there is no ponding. The requirement is met. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 40 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • E. Minimum bicycle parking requirements. The total number of required bicycle • parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.768.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. Single - family residences and duplexes are excluded from the bicycle parking requirements. The Director may reduce the number of required bicycle parking spaces by means of an adjustment to be reviewed through a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.370.020.C.5.e. Response: Table 18.768.2 requires .5 /1000 bicycle parking spaces for office use. The building has 14,400 square feet of floor area. Per this requirement, 7 bicycle parking spaces are required. The applicant is providing 7 spaces. As such, this standard is met. 18.765.060 Parking Structure Design Standards A. Ground -floor windows /wall openings. All parking structures shall provide ground floor windows or wall openings along the street frontages. Blank walls are prohibited. Any wall facing the street shall contain windows, doors or display areas equal to at least 20% of the ground floor . wall area facing the street excluding those portions of the face(s) devoted to driveway entrances and exits, stairwells, elevators, and centralized payment booths. Required windows shall have a sill no more than four (4) feet above grade. Where the interior floor level prohibits such placement, the sill may be raised to allow it to be no more than two (2) feet above finished floor wall up to a maximum sill height of six (6) feet above grade. Response: No parking structure is proposed for this project. As such this standard is not applicable. • 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off - Street Parking Requirements C. Measurements. The following measurements shall be used in calculating the total minimum number of vehicle parking spaces required in Section 18.765.070.11: 1. Fractions. Fractional space requirements shall be counted as a whole space; 2. Employees. Where employees are specified for the purpose of determining the minimum vehicle parking spaces required, the employees counted are those who work on the premises during the largest shift at the peak season; 3. Students. When students are specified for the purpose of determining the minimum vehicle parking spaces required, the students counted are those who are on the campus during the peak period of the day during a typical school term; 4. Space. Unless otherwise specified, where square feet are specified, the area measured shall be gross floor area under the roof measured from the faces of the structure, excluding only space devoted to covered off - street parking or loading. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 41 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildin. Response: The off - street parking requirements for the development are calculated based on space per table 18.765.2. Office use minimums in zone A are 2.7/1000 square feet; maximums are 3.4/1000. The building is 14,400 square feet. The maximum number of spaces allowed is 48 stalls. The minimum spaces required are 39. Forty -two (42) spaces are proposed, thus meeting the minimum and maximum requirements. D. Exclusions to minimum vehicle parking requirements. The following shall not be counted towards the computation of the minimum parking spaces as required in Section 18.765.070.11: Response: The Applicant is not requesting exclusions to the minimum parking requirements. This provision does not apply. E. Exceptions to maximum parking standards. When calculating the maximum vehicle parking allowed as regulated by Section 18.765.080.H, the following exception shall apply: 1. The following types of parking shall not be included: a. Parking contained in a parking structure either incorporated into a building or free- standing; b. Market -rate paid parking; c. Designated carpool and/or vanpool spaces; d. Designated disabled- accessible parking spaces; e. Fleet parking. Response: The maximum number of allowed parking spaces for this development is 49. The total • number of spaces provided is 42. Because this proposal does not meet or exceed the maximum number of spaces allowed, the above exceptions for the calculation of the maximum allowed spaces is not necessary. The standard is not applicable. F. Reductions in minimum required vehicle parking. Reductions in the required number of vehicle parking spaces may be permitted as follows: Response: The Applicant is not requesting reductions to the minimum required vehicle parking; therefore, this provision does not apply. G. Increases in maximum required vehicle parking. The Director may increase the total maximum number of vehicle spaces allowed in Section 18.765.070.11 by means of a parking adjustment to be reviewed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in section 18.370.020.C.5.d. Response: The Applicant is not requesting an increase in the maximum required vehicle parking; therefore, this provision does not apply. H. Specific requirements. (See Table 18.765.2) Response: This requirement is met as seen below: RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 42 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • S Building Area Minimum Parking Maximum Parking Spaces Proposed Parking • Spaces 3.4 per 1,000 sq. ft. 2.7 per 1,000 sq. ft. 14,400SF 39 spaces 48 spaces 42 spaces* * See response to 18.765.070 E. 18.765.080 Off - Street Loading Requirements A. Off - street loading spaces. Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off - street loading and maneuvering space as follows: 1. A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; 2. A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. Response: The proposed office building is 14,400 square feet and this use falls under the commercial use category per Code section 18.130. Because office uses will not necessitate the delivery or distribution of material in bulk by large trucks at the site, an off - street loading vehicle space will not be needed. At most, a UPS truck will intermittently come to the site for delivery or pick up of packages. Because the site will have 3 more parking stalls than required, it will be likely that a standard vehicle parking stall will be available for intermittent package mail deliveries by small trucks. Based on • the above considerations, this requirement is met. B. Off- street loading dimensions. 1. Each loading berth shall be approved by the City Engineer as to design and location; 2. Each loading space shall have sufficient area for turning and maneuvering of vehicles on the site. At a minimum, the maneuvering length shall not be less than twice the overall length of the longest vehicle using the facility site; 3. Entrances and exits for the loading areas shall be provided at locations approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 18.710; 4. Screening for off - street loading facilities is required and shall be the same as screening for parking lots in accordance with Chapter 18.745. Response: The proposed development is an office building. The trucks expected to serve the building would be smaller in scale such as standard delivery trucks carrying small packages. The standard parking spaces are 8'6" wide by 18' 6" long. A standard UPS van is 7' wide by 18' long. Any of the vehicle parking stalls of standard size at the site will be sufficient for temporary parking for quick delivery or pick -up of packaged mail. Based on the above considerations, this requirement is met. • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 43 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildinn • Chapter 18.780 SIGNS ` 18.780.020 Permits Required 411 A. Compliance with regulations. No sign or sign structure shall hereafter be erected, re- erected, constructed, structurally altered or relocated within the City limits except as provided by this title, and a permit for the same sign or sign structure has been issued by the Director. Response: There are no proposed signs with this development. This Chapter does not apply. Chapter 18.790 TREE REMOVAL 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement A. Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. Response: Due to the extensive amount of re- grading required for this development, all of the existing trees on the subject site cannot be saved. Exhibit H contains a Tree Assessment from a certified arborist. Each tree is documented as to its type, size and condition. Many of the trees are dead or in poor condition. Sheet L1 of Exhibit B contains the proposed landscape plan. New trees are being planted within the development mitigating the loss of the existing tree canopy. B. Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: 111 1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; Response: Exhibit H contains a Tree Assessment from a certified arborist. Each tree is documented as to its type, size and condition. A plan of each parcel is included locating each tree. The requirement is met. 2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: a. Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees; b. Retention of from 25% to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; c. Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. 1111 Site Development Review 44 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • d. Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in • caliper requires no mitigation. Response: The site has numerous trees that need to be removed in order to develop the proposed office building. All trees 6- inches or greater have been identified. However, only trees greater than 12- inches are subject to this Section of the Tigard Development Code. The applicant's arborist has identified 16 trees greater than 12- inches in DBH. Of the 16 identified trees, eight (8) of the trees have been identified as hazardous, and not subject to mitigation as required by this section of the development code. Of the remaining trees subject to mitigation, eight (8) will be removed. Therefore, this site is subject to the mitigation requirement of Section 18.790.030.B.2.a, as stated above. With site development, approximately 184 caliper inches will be removed and 92 caliper inches of trees will be replanted. Therefore, the applicant may have to mitigate for an additional 92 caliper inches. It is most likely that the applicant will pay the mitigation fee, as allowed by Chapter 18.790.060.E. The current mitigation fee is $125.00 per caliper inch, which brings the mitigate fee to approximately $17,940. The applicant requests that the trees located within the parking islands and street trees be counted toward tree mitigation in order to bring the mitigation fee to a more reasonable amount. 3. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; Response: Exhibit I contains a Tree Assessment from a certified arborist. Each tree is documented as to its type, size and condition. The requirement is met. 4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. Response: Due to the site design and grading requirements for this development all existing trees • will be removed. C. Subsequent tree removal. Trees removed within the period of one year prior to a development application listed above will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060D. Response: No trees have been removed within one year of the submittal of this development proposal. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 18.790.040 Incentives for Tree Retention A. Incentives. To assist in the preservation and retention of existing trees, the Director may apply one or more of the following incentives as part of development review approval and the provisions of a tree plan according to Section 18.790.030: Response: Due to the site design and grading requirements for this development all existing trees will be removed. B. Subsequent removal of a tree. Any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 45 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by this section to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The • deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director. Response: Due to the site design and grading requirements for this development all existing trees will be removed. C. Site development modifications granted as incentives. A modification to development requirements granted under this section shall not conflict with any other restriction on the use of the property, including but not limited to easements and conditions of development approval. Response: Due to the site design and grading requirements for this development all existing trees will be removed. • D. Design modifications of public improvements. The City Engineer may adjust design specifications of public improvements to accommodate tree retention where possible and where it would not interfere with safety or increase maintenance costs. Response: Design specifications of public improvements do not affect the removal or retention of the existing trees on the site. The requirement does not apply. 18.790.050 Permit Applicability A. Removal permit required. Tree removal permits shall be required only for the removal of any tree which is located on or in a sensitive land area as defined by • Chapter 18.775. The permit for removal of a tree shall be processed as a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, using the following approval criteria: Response: The site under review do not exist in a sensitive land area (as defined by Chapter 18.755); therefore, this provision does not apply. Chapter 18.795 VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS 18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements A. At corners. Except within the CBD zoning district a visual clearance area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to the intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street. Response: The proposed development is not within the CBD zoning district, therefore the requirement does not apply. B. Obstructions prohibited. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 46 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • Response: Unobstructed areas for clear vision are provided on each side of both driveways and at • the street comer of the site. These areas are not obstructed by vehicles, plantings, walls, or other structures. Exhibit B includes a site plan and landscape plan that provide more information as to how this requirement is met. C. Additional topographical constraints. Where the crest of a bill or vertical curve conditions contribute to the obstruction of clear vision areas at a street or driveway intersection, hedges, plantings, fences, walls, wall structures and temporary or permanent obstructions shall be further reduced in height or eliminated to comply with the intent of the required clear vision area. Response: Grade changes within the development are such that driveways are within 5% of the street elevations so that hill and vertical curve conditions do not obstruct clear vision. The requirement is met. 18.795.040 Computations A. Arterial streets. On all designated arterial streets the visual clearance area shall not be less than 35 feet on each side of the intersection. Response: Both Clinton and 70 are considered local streets. As such, this standard does not apply. B. Non - arterial streets. 1. Non - arterial streets 24 feet or more in width. At all intersections of two non - arterial streets, a non - arterial street and a driveway, and a non - arterial street or driveway and railroad where at least one of the streets or driveways is 24 feet or more in width, a visual clearance area shall be a triangle formed by the right -of -way or property lines along such lots and a • straight line joining the right -of -way or property line at points which are 30 feet distance from the intersection of the right -of -way line and measured along such lines. See Figure 18.795.1: Response: The parcel can be entered from driveways off of 70 Avenue and Clinton. These streets do not have an arterial classification and will be 24' or more in width once required public improvements are complete. The two driveways will meet the required visual clearance areas. 2. Non - arterial streets less than 24 feet in width. At all intersections of two non - arterial streets, a non - arterial street and a driveway, and a non - arterial street or driveway and railroad where both streets and /or driveways are less than 24 feet in width, a visual clearance area shall be a triangle whose base extends 30 feet along the street right -of -way line in both directions from the centerline of the access way at the front setback line of a single family and two family residence, and 30 feet back from the property line on all other types of uses. Response: All of the streets that border the development are wider than 24 feet. This requirement does not apply. • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 47 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildin1 S Chapter 18.810 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS 18.810.020 General Provisions • A. When standards apply. Unless otherwise provided, construction, reconstruction or repair of streets, sidewalks, curbs and other public improvements shall occur in accordance with the standards of this title. No development may occur and no land use application may be approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the public facility requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available. Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. B. Standard specifications. The City Engineer shall establish standard specifications consistent with the application of engineering principles. C. Adjustments. Adjustments to the provisions in this chapter related to street improvements may be granted by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria in Section 18.370.030 C9. Response: The Applicant is not asking for an adjustment to the Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards. 18.810.030 Streets A. Improvements. 1. No development shall occur unless the development has frontage or • approved access to a public street. Response: The building site has frontage on SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. The current proposal shows access to both SW Clinton and SW 70 Avenue. Both of these street frontages are approved rights of way as shown on the County tax maps. Therefore, this site has approved frontages to public streets and this criterion is met. 2. No development shall occur unless streets within the development meet the standards of this chapter. Response: The proposed design has enough right -of -way once required dedications are made to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right -of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Therefore, this section has been met for approval. 3. No development shall occur unless the streets adjacent to the development meet the standards of this chapter, provided, however, that a development may be approved if the adjacent street does not meet the standards but half - street improvements meeting the standards of this title are constructed adjacent to the development. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 48 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building e • Response: • The proposed design has enough right -of -way, after the required dedications are made, to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right -of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Therefore, this section has been met for approval. 4. Any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall meet the standards of this chapter; Response: The proposed design has enough right -of -way, after dedication to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street section standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right -of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Therefore, this section has been met. 5. If the City could and would otherwise require the applicant to provide street improvements, the City Engineer may accept a future improvements guarantee in lieu of street, improvements if one or more of the following conditions exist: a. A partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards; b. A partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to 410 c. motorists or pedestrians; Due to the nature of existing development on adjacent properties it is unlikely that street improvements would be extended in the foreseeable future and the improvement associated with the project under review does not, by itself, provide a significant improvement to street safety or capacity; d. The improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan; e. The .improvement is associated with an approved land partition on property zoned residential and the proposed land partition does not create any new streets; or f. Additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the street and the application is for a project , which would contribute only a minor portion of the anticipated future traffic on the street. Response: No future improvement guarantee is requested. The proposed design has enough right -of- way, after dedication to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right -of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Therefore, this section has been met. • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 49 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building 6. The approval authority may approve adjustments to the standards of this chapter if compliance with the standards would result in an adverse impact • on natural features such as wetlands, steep slopes, or existing mature trees. The approval authority may also approve adjustments to the standards of this chapter if compliance with the standards would have a substantial adverse impact on existing development or would preclude development on the property where the development is proposed. In approving an adjustment to the standards, the approval authority shall balance the benefit of the adjustment with the impact on the public interest represented by the standards. In evaluating the impact on the public interest, the approval authority shall consider the criteria listed in Section 18.810.030 E.1. An adjustment to the standards may not be granted if the adjustment would risk public safety.. Response: The application is not requesting any adjustments to the development standards in Chapter 18.810. Therefore, this code provision is not applicable. B. Creation of rights -of -way for streets and related purposes. Rights -of -way shall be created through the approval of a final subdivision plat or major partition; however, the Council may approve the creation of a street by acceptance of a deed, provided that such street is deemed essential by the Council for the purpose of general traffic circulation: 2. With each application for approval of a road or street right -of -way not in full compliance with the regulations applicable to the standards, the • proposed dedication shall be made a condition of subdivision and major partition approval: 3. All deeds of dedication shall be in a form prescribed by the City and shall name "the public," as grantee. Response: The proposed project will dedicate enough right -of -way along the street frontage of SW Clinton Street and SW 70' Avenue in order to bring the local streets up to the current Tigard Triangle Design standards. The street section standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right -of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Specifically, SW Clinton Street has an existing half right -of -way width of 25 feet. The application is proposing to dedicate an additional 5 feet, creating a total of 30 -feet half right -of -way width along the frontage as required by the Community Development Code. The application is also proposing to dedicate additional right of way, if necessary, in order to have at least 30 -feet from center line along SW 70 Avenue. This is a similar right -of way dedication to the properties under development to the east. All proposed public improvements will meet City standards and be dedicated to the City once the project is complete. Therefore, this section has been met. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. 1111 Site Development Review 50 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • C. Street location, width and grade. Except as noted below, the location, width and • grade of all streets shall conform to an approved street plan and shall be considered in their relation to existing and planned streets, to topographic conditions, to public convenience and safety, and in their appropriate relation to the proposed use of the land to be served by such streets: 1. Street grades shall be approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Subsection M below; and 2. Where the location of a street is not shown in an approved street plan, the arrangement of streets in a development shall either: a. Provide for the continuation or appropriate projection of existing streets in the surrounding areas, or b. Conform to a plan adopted by the Commission, if it is impractical to conform to existing street patterns because of particular topographical or other existing conditions of the land. Such a plan shall be based on the type of land use to be served, the volume of traffic, the capacity of adjoining streets and the need for public convenience and safety. Response: The proposed design has enough right -of -way dedication to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right -of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Therefore, this section has been met. • E. Minimum rights -of -way and street widths. Unless otherwise indicated on an approved street plan, or as needed to continue an existing improved street, street right -of -way and roadway widths shall not be less than the minimum width described below. Where a range is indicated, the width shall be determined by the decision- making authority based upon anticipated average daily traffic (ADT) on the new street segment. The City Council may adopt by resolution, design standards for street construction and other public improvements. The design standards will provide guidance for determining improvement requirements within the specified ranges.) These are presented in Table 18.810.1. 1. The decision - making body shall make its decision about desired right -of- way width and pavement width of the various street types within the subdivision or development after consideration of the following: a. The type of road as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Chapter - Functional Street Classification; b. Anticipated traffic generation; c. On- street parking needs; d. Sidewalk and bikeway requirements; RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 51 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildini • e. Requirements for placement of utilities; f. Street lighting; 411 g. Drainage and slope impacts; h. Street tree location; i. Planting and landscape areas; j. Safety and comfort for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians; k. Access needs for emergency vehicles. Response: The proposed street designs have adequate right -of -way dedication to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right -of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Therefore, this section has been met. F. Future street plan and extension of streets. Response: No new streets are proposed with this development. The site is located on the corner of SW Clinton Street and 70` Avenue. The proposed project will not include the addition of future streets, only additional right -of -way along the site's frontage. This provision does not apply. 2. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed, and • a. These extended streets or street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul -de -sac since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. b. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners, which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. c. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul -de -sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub street in excess of 150 feet in length. Response: As stated above, no future streets are proposed with this development. The site is located on the corner of SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. No internal public streets are proposed with this development; therefore this provision does not apply. • G. Street spacing and access management. Refer to 18.705.030.H. 11. Street alignment and connections. 1. Full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre - existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 52 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 • RCM Tigard Office Building • • A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water • feature if regulations would not permit construction. Response: No new streets are proposed and existing streets meet the alignment and connection criteria. As stated above, the site is located on the corner of SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. No new internal public streets are proposed with this project. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 2. All local, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is considered precluded when it is not possible to redesign or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. Response: No internal public streets are proposed with this development; therefore this provision does not apply. As stated above, the site is located on the corner of SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. No new internal public streets are proposed with this project. The proposed design has enough right -of -way dedication to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right- • of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code 3. Proposed street or street extensions shall be located to provide direct access to existing or planned transit stops, commercial services, and other neighborhood facilities, such as schools, shopping areas and parks. Response: No internal public streets are proposed with this development; therefore this provision does not apply. 4. All developments should provide an internal network of connecting streets that provide short, direct travel routes and minimize travel distances within the development. Response: No internal public streets are proposed with this development; therefore this provision does not apply. As stated above, the site is located on the corner of SW Clinton Street and SW 70` Avenue. No new internal public streets are proposed with this project. The proposed design has enough right -of -way dedication to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right - of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Intersection angles. Streets shall be laid out so as to intersect at an angle as near to a right angle as practicable, except where topography requires a lesser angle, but in no case shall the angle be less than 75% unless there is special intersection design, and: RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 53 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • Response: Since the proposed project is located on a corner, the design of the project does take into i account the intersection angle. The angle of the intersection is as close to a right angle as • possible. The corner area does show a "bulb out" design to create parking along the frontage of SW Clinton Street, while creating a situation where traffic will be forced to slow down before tuning on to SW 70 Avenue. The angle of the intersection is greater than 75% to meet this code standard. The City Engineer will review the street design to ensure that the proposed design meets the provision of this criterion as well as the Engineering and development code. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. J. Existing rights -of -way. Whenever existing rights -of -way adjacent to or within a tract are of less than standard width, additional rights -of -way shall be provided at the time of subdivision or development. Response: The proposed project has dedicated enough right -of -way to create a public street along SW 70 Avenue, specifically; A dedication of approximately 30 -feet will be made with this development. In addition to the right -of -way dedication along SW loth Avenue, an additional 5 -foot of dedication will be made along the frontage of SW Clinton Street. By dedicating right -of -way along both street frontages, the site complies with the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. K. Partial street improvements. Partial street improvements resulting in a pavement width of less than 20 feet; while generally not acceptable, may be approved where essential to reasonable development when in conformity with the other requirements of these regulations, and when it will be practical to require the improvement of the other half when the adjoining property developed. Response: The proposed design has enough right -of -way dedication to meet the standards of the local street section, as shown in Chapter 18.620 -15 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The street standards will be reviewed by the City Engineer to ensure that enough street right -of -way has been dedicated to meet this section of the development code. Therefore, this section has been met. L. Cul -de -sacs. A cul -de -sac shall be no more than 200 feet long shall not provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and through circulation: Response: No cul -de -sacs are proposed in this development. This provision does not apply. M. Street names. No street name shall be used which will duplicate or be confused with the names of existing streets in Washington County, except for extensions of existing streets. Street names and numbers shall conform to the established pattern in the surrounding area and as approved by the City Engineer. Response: No new streets are being proposed with this development; therefore, there will be no new streets to name and this provision does not apply. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 54 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • • N. Grades and curves. • 1. Grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet), and 2. Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. Response: No new streets are being proposed with this development. All the existing platted streets will be improved to meet City standards for the Tigard Triangle Street Plan. Improvements will not exceed 15% for the street improvements along SW Clinton or SW 70 Avenue. Therefore, this criterion has been met. O. Curbs, curb cuts, ramps, and driveway approaches. Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair, bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080; and: 1. Concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required except 2. Where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City Engineer approval; and 3. Asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shall be built to City configuration standards. Response: The proposed design of the street, sidewalks, and internal movement area has been designed to meet all the engineering standards of Section 15.04.080. The proposed plans • will be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. All the proposed improvements have been designed and reviewed by the Applicant's engineer to meet Tigard's Curbs, curb cuts, ramps, and driveway approach standards. And the street designs, curb, curb cuts, ramps, and driveway approach requirements of the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. P. Streets adjacent to railroad right- of -way. Wherever the proposed development contains or is adjacent to a railroad right -of -way, provision shall be made for a street approximately parallel to and on each side of such right -of -way at a distance suitable for the appropriate use of the land. The distance shall be determined with due consideration at cross streets or the minimum distance required for approach grades and to provide sufficient depth to allow screen planting along the railroad right -of -way in non - industrial areas. Response: There are no streets proposed with this development that are adjacent to railroad right -of- way. This provision does not apply. Q. Access to arterials and collectors. Where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing or proposed arterial or collector street, the development design shall provide adequate protection for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic, or if separation is not feasible, the design shall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall include any of the following: • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 55 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildin1 • Response: This development is not a residential development. In addition, the proposed • project is adjacent to two local streets (i.e., SW Clinton Street and SW 70th Avenue) and will not take direct access to either a collector or arterial roadway. Therefore, this provision does not apply. R. Alleys, public or private. Response: No alleys are proposed with this development; therefore, this provision does not apply. S. Survey monuments. Upon completion of a street improvement and prior to acceptance by the City, it shall be the responsibility of the developer's registered professional land surveyor to provide certification to the City that all boundary and interior monuments shall be reestablished and protected. Response: Once the street improvements are complete, survey monuments will be installed by a registered surveyor and a certification will be provided to the City stating that all boundary and interior monuments are reestablished and protected. Therefore, this criterion has been met. T. Private streets. 1. Design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer; and 2. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a recorded maintenance agreement. • 3. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned developments, mobile home parks, and multi- family residential developments. Response: No internal private streets are proposed with this development; therefore this provision does not apply. U. Railroad crossings. Where an adjacent development results in a need to install or improve a railroad crossing, the cost for such improvements may be a condition of development approval, or another equitable means of cost distribution shall be determined by the public works Director and approved by the Commission. Response: The proposed project is not near a railroad or railroad crossing. As a result, the proposed development does not result in the need to install or improve railroad crossing facilities. Therefore, this provision does not apply. V. Street signs. The City shall install all street signs, relative to traffic control and street names, as specified by the City Engineer for any development. The cost of signs shall be the responsibility of the developer. Response: All street signs and traffic control signs will be installed at the cost of the development. The City will install the street and traffic control signs per the requirements of this code. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 56 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building , • W. Mailboxes. Joint mailbox facilities shall be provided in all residential developments, • with each joint mailbox serving at least two dwelling units. Response: No residential development is proposed with Application. However, the location of the mailboxes will be determined prior to building occupancy. The location of the mailboxes will be coordinated with the City and the United States Postal Service to ensure regular mail delivery. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. X. Traffic signals. The location of traffic signals shall be noted on approved street plans. Where a proposed street intersection will result in an immediate need for a traffic signal, a signal meeting approved specifications shall be installed. The cost shall be included as a condition of development. Response: The location of the proposed building does not warrant a new traffic signal. A traffic control sign may be located at the intersection of SW Clinton Street and SW 70` Avenue, at the determination of the City. If a sign is warranted, then the city will install the sign at the expense of the development. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval and the standard does not apply. Y. Street light standards. Street lights shall be installed in accordance with regulations adopted by the City's direction. Response: Street lights along the site's frontage will be installed in order to meet City standards. A photometric plan will be created to determine the ultimate number and location of the proposed street lights during the construction phase of the project. It should be noted that a development is currently underway south of this proposed development; therefore, their • streetlights should be taken into consideration when determining the number and location of street lights for this project. All street light designs and standards will comply with the requirements of the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. Z. Street name signs. Street name signs shall be installed at all street intersections. Stop signs and other signs may be required. Response: It is understood that there may be a street sign installed at the intersection of SW Clinton Street and SW 70` Avenue. The City engineer will determine if a street name sign will be installed. As stated above, under criteria V Street Signs, the city will install the street signs at the expense of the development. The City will make the ultimate decision; therefore, this criterion has been met. AA. Street cross - sections. The final lift of asphalt concrete pavement shall be placed on all new constructed public roadways prior to final City acceptance of the roadway and within one year of the conditional acceptance of the roadway unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The final lift shall also be placed no later than when 90% of the structures in the new development are completed or three years from the commencement of initial construction of the development, whichever is less. 1. Sub -base and leveling course shall be of select crushed rock; 2. Surface material shall be of Class C or B asphaltic concrete; 3. The final lift shall be placed on all new construction roadways prior to City final acceptance of the roadway; however, not before 90% of the structures • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 57 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building S in the new development are completed unless three years have elapsed since initiation of construction in the development; 4. The final lift shall be Class C asphaltic concrete as defined by A.P.W.A. standard specifications; and 5. No lift shall be less than 1 -1/2 inches in thickness. Response: The right -of -way improvements will be designed and build in accordance to the required code standards, as listed above. During the development process, construction documents will be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. The City will inspect the street improvements to ensure compliance. The proposed office building has been designed to meet the standards listed above as well as the standards listed in the Tigard Triangle. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. AB. Traffic calming. When, in the opinion of the City Engineer, the proposed development will create a negative traffic condition on existing neighborhood streets, such as excessive speeding, the developer may be required to provide traffic calming measures. These measures may be required within the development and/or offsite as deemed appropriate. As an alternative, the developer may be required to deposit funds with the City to help pay for traffic calming measures that become necessary once the development is occupied and the City Engineer determines that the additional traffic from the development has triggered the need for traffic calming measures. The City Engineer will determine the amount of funds required, and will collect said funds from the developer prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or in the case of subdivision, prior to the approval of the final plat. The funds will be held by the City for a period of five (5) years from the date of issuance of certificate of occupancy, or in the case of a subdivision, the date of final plat • approval. Any funds not used by the City within the five -year time period will be refunded to the developer. Response: The new development will not create any negative traffic conditions to the existing neighborhood. The design of the project will allow vehicles to enter and exit the site from both SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue, creating a more efficient traffic circulation pattern. The newly built 70 Street (presently not constructed near Clinton) will carry some of the 159 daily vehicular trips generated by the project south to Dartmouth. Moreover, with the generated flow on Clinton being split in east, as well as west directions, vehicular trip distribution from the project will be diverse, thus having little negative impact on the existing residential neighborhood. In addition, the project does not propose any traffic calming devises at this time. The City Engineer will have to determine if the proposed office building will cause a negative traffic condition on the neighborhood. If the City has determined that a negative effect has been created by this development, then discussion will take place as to the proper course of action to be taken to mitigate any negative impacts that have occurred. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 58 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 • RCM Tigard Office Building • • AC. Traffic study. • 1. A traffic study shall be required for all new or expanded uses or developments under any of the following circumstances: a. When they generate a 10% or greater increase in existing traffic to high collision intersections identified by Washington County. b. Trip generations from development onto the City street at the point of access and the existing ADT fall within the following ranges: Existing ADT ADT to be added by development 0 -3,000 vpd 2,000 vpd 2,001 -6,000 vpd 1,000 vpd >6,000 vpd 500 vpd or more c. If any of the following issues become evident to the City engineer: (1) High traffic volumes on the adjacent roadway that may affect movement into or out of the site ' (2) Lack of existing left -turn lanes onto the adjacent roadway at the proposed access drive(s) (3) Inadequate horizontal or vertical sight distance at access points • (4) The proximity of the proposed access to other existing drives or intersections is a potential hazard (5) The proposal requires a conditional use permit or involves a drive - through operation (6) The proposed development may result in excessive traffic volumes on adjacent local streets. • Response: According to ITE information, the weekday ADT vehicle trip generation rate per 1,000 square feet of office building (code no. 710) floor area is 11.01. The subject building will be 14,400 square feet and thus would generate approximately 159 average daily trips. This magnitude of newly generated trips per day is very small; especially considering the fact that those trips will be split between east/west and north/south bound traffic once Clinton is connected to 70 Ave. Presently Clinton Street is a paved two - way dead end that only serves 10 residential dwellings adjoining it. Because Clinton is not a through street, some 100 to 150 estimated residential trips per day presently occur on that street. The distribution of these present trips is only to and from 72n Ave, as Clinton only serves traffic running east and west to and from 72" • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 59 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building, • Because the estimated trips generated by this proposal is so small in magnitude, it will • not cause a 10% or greater increase in existing traffic to high collision intersections, if any occur in close proximity to the subject site. Clinton and the future70 Ave now or will fall within the 0 -3,000 vpd trip generation range. Trips generated from development onto Clinton Street or the future 70 Ave at the points of access will not add 2,000 vpd to the above low traffic volume streets. Based on the very light traffic on this street and moderate traffic on 72nd, vehicle movements off Clinton onto 72 Ave presently are safely executed. Because there will only be a portion of the added AM and PM peak trips (22 -23) on Clinton going to 72 Ave, this condition will continue for these turning movements. The same is the case regarding traffic turning movements from 72 Ave on to Clinton. 72 Ave has a third lane used as a shelter lane for left -turn movements to Clinton. 70 Ave. will be constructed as a one -half street improvement with the development of the subject project. The 70 Ave section will not be fully improved (full street width) until such time that adjoining property to the east is developed. The proposed project will only generate a portion of the estimated 159 added trips on to 70 Ave., as total trip distribution from Clinton will split either east to Interstate 5 or west to 72 "d Both points of access to the site on Clinton and on the future 70 Ave. will not cause any possible hazard on those streets. Clinton presently does not have extreme variations in vertical grade to cause any future sight distance problems looking west or east from the Clinton Street project driveway. This will also be the case once 70 Ave. is constructed. The access points at the subject site are not in close proximity to any other high volume •, existing drives or intersections, possibly causing a traffic hazard. There will not be a drive through window at the site. • Based on the above considerations, the proposed project does not warrant a traffic study. 2. In addition, a traffic study may be required for all new or expanded uses or developments under any of the following circumstances: a. when the site is within 500 feet of an ODOT facility and/or b. trip generation from a development adds 300 or more vehicle trips per day to an ODOT facility and/or c. trip generation from a development adds 50 or more peak hour trips to an ODOT facility. Response: The subject site is at least 600 feet from the Interstate 5 on -ramp. Once the project is developed it will only generate an estimated 159 vehicle trips per day as explained above. According to the ITE, the rate of peak hour trips is 1.55 -1.49, which equals approximately 23 -22 trips at either AM or PM peaks. The above facts are well under the above trip thresholds in relationship to the Interstate 5 freeway. As such, this proposal does not warrant a traffic study. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 60 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 • RCM Tigard Office Building • . 41) 18.810.040 Blocks A. Block design. The length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Response: The proposed building has taken in to account the block design standard. As the site plan demonstrates, access into and out of the site is taken form two locations. This will allow for adequate traffic circulation entering and exiting the site. In addition, the placement of the driveways is located at the western and southern reaches of the site allowing for • vehicle safety. It is standard practice to place driveways at the furthest point form a dedicated intersection. Once adjacent properties develop into commercial developments, their designs will integrate into the block standard. 18.810.050 Easements A. Easements. Easements for sewers, drainage, water mains, electric lines or other public utilities shall be either dedicated or provided for in the deed restrictions, and where a development traversed by a watercourse, or drainage way, there shall be provided a storm water easement or drainage right -of -way conforming substantially with the lines of the watercourse. Response: No public easements are proposed. B. Utility easements. A property owner proposing a development shall make • arrangements with the City, the applicable district and each utility franchise for the provision and dedication of utility easements necessary to provide full services to the development. The City's standard width for public main line utility easements shall be 15 feet unless otherwise specified by the utility company, applicable district, or City Engineer. Response: No public easements are proposed. 18.810.060 Lots A. Size and shape. Lot size, width, shape and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the development and for the type of use contemplated, and: • 1. No lot shall contain part of an existing or proposed public right -of -way within its dimensions; Response: The proposed project has removed all right -of -way that is to be dedicated to the public for public improvements. The site information shown on the site plans represent the actual lot dimensions that are to be used for the construction of the building. All public right -of -way will be dedicated to the city for public improvements. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. 2. The depth of all lots shall not exceed 2 -1/2 times the average width, unless the parcel is less than 1 -1/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district; 111) RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 61 December '14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 • RCM Tigard Office BuildinS • Response: The proposed development is for the most part square in shape. The lot does not exceed the lot dimensional requirements, as stated above. Therefore, this criterion has been me • for approval. 3. Depth and width of properties zoned for commercial and industrial purposes shall be adequate to provide for the off - street parking and service facilities required by the type of use proposed. Response: The design of the building has taken in to account the required number of off - street parking spaces required by the Tigard Development Code. The current proposal shows a total of 42 parking spaces, which includes 7 compact spaces and 2 handicap spaces. Both Planning Staff and Engineering staff will have an opportunity to review the parking design to ensure that the parking requirement has been met. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. B. Lot Frontage. Each lot shall abut upon a public or private street, other than an alley, for a width of at least 25 feet unless the lot is created through a minor land partition in which case Subsection 18.162.050 applies, or unless the lot is for an attached single - family unit, in which case the lot frontage shall be a least 15 feet. Response: The proposed office building has linear street frontage on both CSW Clinton Street and SW 70` Avenue in excess of 25 -feet. The submitted site plans shows the exact length of each of the street frontages. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. C. Through lots. Through lots shall be avoided except where they are essential to provide separation of residential development from major traffic arterials or to overcome specific disadvantages of topography and orientation, and: • 1. A planting buffer at least ten feet wide is required abutting the arterial rights -of -way; and 2. All through lots shall provide the required front yard setback on each street. Response: The proposed office building has not been designed to act as a through lot. This is a corner lot, having frontage on two adjacent sides, not opposite sites. Setbacks are based on the street frontage setback requirements for the Tigard Triangle sub - district. Therefore, this section of the development code does not apply. D. Lot side lines. The side lines of lots, as far as practicable, shall be at right angles to the street upon which the lots front. Response: The lot lines, as shown are at or as close as practicable to right angles to the public right - of -way. Therefore, this criterion has been met. E. Large lots. In dividing tracts into large lots or parcels which at some future time are likely to be re- divided, the Commission may require that the lots be of such size and shape, and be so divided into building sites, and contain such site restrictions as will provide for the extension and opening of streets at intervals which will permit a subsequent division of any tract into lots or parcels of smaller size. The land division shall be denied if the proposed large development lot does not provide for the future division of the lots and future extension of public facilities. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 62 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • Response: The proposed office building will utilize the entire lot and will not be subject to any `• further lot dividing. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable to this development. 18.810.070 Sidewalks A. Sidewalks. All industrial streets and private streets shall have sidewalks meeting City standards along at least one side of the street. All other streets shall have sidewalks meeting City standards along both sides of the street. A development may be approved if an adjoining street has sidewalks on the side adjoining the development, even if no sidewalk exists on the other side of the street. Response: The submitted site plan shows that a sidewalk is to be constructed along both frontages of the site, i.e.., SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. The sidewalk has been designed in accordance with the pre - applications notes and conditions. The design shows that an 8- foot sidewalk will be constructed around the site with a 4 -foot planter strip. According to the City's pre- application notes, this is an acceptable design for this location. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. B. Requirement of developers 1. As part of any development proposal, or change in use resulting in an additional 1,000 vehicle trips or more per day, an applicant shall be required to identify direct, safe (1.25 x the straight line distance) pedestrian routes within 1/2 mile of their site to all transit facilities and Neighborhood Activity Centers (schools, parks, libraries, etc.). In addition, the developer may be required to participate in the removal of any gaps in the pedestrian • system off -site if justified by the development. Response: The submitted site plan shows that a sidewalk is to be constructed along both frontages of the site, i.e., SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. The sidewalk has been designed in accordance with the pre- applications notes and conditions. The design shows that an 8- foot sidewalk will be constructed around the site with a 4 -foot planter strip. According to the City's pre- application notes, this is an acceptable design for this location. It is unclear where the nearest transit stop is located, in relation to the site. However, the sidewalks give pedestrians a direct route in and around the site along the site's frontage. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. 2. If there is an existing sidewalk, on the same side of the street as the development, within 300 feet of a development site in either direction, the sidewalk shall be extended from the site to meet the existing sidewalk, subject to rough proportionality (even if the sidewalk does not serve a neighborhood activity center). Response: The submitted site plan shows that a sidewalk is to be constructed along both frontages of the site, i.e., SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. The sidewalk has been designed in accordance with the pre - applications notes and conditions. The design shows that an 8- foot sidewalk will be constructed around the site with a 4 -foot planter strip. According to the City's pre - application notes, this is an acceptable design for this location. The sidewalk will extend to the south in anticipation of connecting with the project to the • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 63 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Buildin. • south. It is unclear f the two projects will connect sidewalks at this time in the development. • C. Planter strip requirements. A planter strip separation of at least five feet between the curb and the sidewalk shall be required in the design of streets, except where the following conditions exist: there is inadequate right -of -way; the curbside sidewalks already exist on predominant portions of the street; it would conflict with the utilities, there are significant natural features (large trees, water features, etc) that would be destroyed if the sidewalk were located as required, or where there are existing structures in close proximity to the street (15 feet or less)Additional consideration for exempting the planter strip requirement may be given on a case by case basis if a property abuts more than one street frontage. Response: The submitted site plan shows that a sidewalk is to be constructed along both frontages of the site, i.e., SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. The sidewalk has been designed in accordance with the pre- applications notes and conditions. The design shows that a 8- foot sidewalk will be constructed around the site with a 4 -foot planter strip. According to the City's pre- application notes, this is an acceptable design for this location. Therefore, this criterion has been met. D. Sidewalks in central business district. In the central business district, sidewalks shall be 10 feet in width, and: Response: The proposed development is not located in the central business district; therefore, this provision does not apply. E. Maintenance. Maintenance of sidewalks, curbs, and planter strips is the continuing obligation of the adjacent property owner. • Response: The Applicant understands this provision and shall maintain all sidewalks, curbs, and planter strips. 18.810.080 Public Use Areas A. Dedication requirements. 1. Where a proposed park, playground or other public use shown in a development plan adopted by the City is located in whole or in part in a subdivision, the Commission may require the dedication or reservation of such area within the subdivision, provided that the reservation or dedication is roughly proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the park system. Response: The proposed project is for an office building, not a subdivision. Therefore, this requirement for open space or park space is not applicable. This standard does not apply. 2. Where considered desirable by the Commission in accordance with adopted comprehensive plan policies, and where a development plan of the City does not indicate proposed public use areas, the Commission may require the dedication or reservation of areas within the subdivision or sites of a character, extent and location suitable for the development of parks or other public use, provided that the reservation or dedication is roughly proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the park system. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 64 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • Response: The proposed project is for an office building, not a subdivision. Therefore, this • requirement for public use areas is not applicable. This standard does not apply. 18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers A. Sewers required. Sanitary sewers shall be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Response: The proposal shows a public sanitary sewer along SW 70` Avenue to be constructed. This sewer extension will serve the site. The pipe has been sized and will have adequate capacity for this type of development. During the construction process, the City's Engineer will have an opportunity to review the plans to ensure compliance with this code. C. Over - sizing. Proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. Response: The public sanitary sewers will be designed for the proposed building. In addition the size of the pipe may allow for future development around this site. As stated above, the City's Engineer will have an opportunity to review the plans to ensure compliance with • this code. D. Permits denied. Development permits may be restricted by the Commission or Hearings Officer where a deficiency exists in the existing sewer system or portion thereof which cannot be rectified within the development and which if not rectified will result in a threat to public health or safety, surcharging of existing mains, or violations of state or federal standards pertaining to operation of the sewage treatment system. Response: Prior to submittal of this application it was determined that the existing sanitary and storm sewer system would be able to handle added capacity. There are no conflicts with this proposal and the potential threat to public health, safety or welfare. It is not anticipated that permits will be restricted during the course of construction of this project. • This standard does not apply. 18.810.100 Storm Drainage A. General provisions. The Director and City Engineer shall issue a development permit only where adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff have been made, and: 1. The storm water drainage system shall be separate and independent of any sanitary sewerage system; RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 65 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 • RCM Tigard Office Buildin1 • 2. Where possible, inlets shall be provided so surface water is not carried across any intersection or allowed to flood any street; and • 3. Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown on every development proposal plan. Response: The design of the project takes in to account the need for a separate storm drainage system. Stormwater Management catch basins have been incorporated in to the design of the project to collect and treat the storm water run -off from this site. The stormwater run- off will be collected and discharged at a pre - development rate. The storm drainage system has been designed by the applicant's civil engineer. In addition, the City's Engineer will have an opportunity to review the plans to ensure compliance with the proposed system. Please refer to the site's utility plans for further details and specific information. B. Easements. Where a development is traversed by a watercourse, drainage way, channel or stream, there shall be provided a storm water easement or drainage right -of -way conforming substantially with the lines of such watercourse and such further width as will be adequate for conveyance and maintenance. Response: No easements are proposed. C. Accommodation of upstream drainage. A culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development, and: 1. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and • Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). Response: An on -site analysis has been created to calculate the volume of site stormwater collection and discharge. The design of the stormwater system will collect the on -site run -off and discharge the stormwater at the existing (pre - developed) rate. It is not anticipated that this project will encounter any issues with regards to upsizing culverts or other drainage facilities. As part of the construction documentation, a more detailed analysis may be prepared to demonstrate that no issues are caused by this development. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. D. Effect on downstream drainage. Where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing - drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. 411 Site Development Review 66 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building • • Response: An on -site analysis has been created to calculate the volume of site stormwater collection and discharge. The design of the stormwater system will collect the on -site run -off and discharge the stormwater at the existing (pre - developed) rate. It is not anticipated that this project will encounter any issues with regards to upsizing culverts or other drainage • facilities. As part of the construction documentation, a more detailed analysis may be prepared to demonstrate that no issues are caused by this development. Therefore, this criterion has been met for approval. 18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways A. Bikeway extension. 1. As a standard, bike lanes shall be required along all Arterial and Collector routes and where identified on the City's adopted bicycle plan in the Transportation System Plan (TSP). Response: The project site is not located along an arterial or collector street. The project is located on the corner of two local streets. The Tigard Triangle Street Plan does not show the requirement of bicycle lanes. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable for approval. 2. Developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or rights -of -way, provided such dedication is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. • Response: The project is located on the corner of two local streets. The Tigard Triangle Street Plan does not show the requirement of bicycle lanes. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable for approval. 3. Any new street improvement project shall include bicycle lanes as required in this document and on the adopted bicycle plan. Response: The project is located on the corner of two local streets. The Tigard Triangle Street Plan does not show the requirement of bicycle lanes. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable for approval. B. Cost of construction. Development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions and other developments, which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements in an amount roughly proportional to the impact of the development. Response: The project is located on the corner of two local streets. The Tigard Triangle Street Plan does not show the requirement of bicycle lanes. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable for approval. C. Minimum width. 1. Minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. • Site Development Review 67 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 RCM Tigard Office Building. 2. Minimum width multi -use paths separated from the road is ten (10) feet. The width may be reduced to eight (8) feet if there are environmental or • other constraints. 3. The minimum width for pedestrian only off - street paths is five (5) feet. 4. Design standards for bike and pedestrian -ways shall be determined by the City Engineer. Response: The project is located on the corner of two local streets. The Tigard Triangle Street Plan does not show the requirement of bicycle lanes. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable for approval. 18.810.120 Utilities • A. Underground utilities. All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: 1. The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; 2. The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; 3. All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the • surfacing of the streets; and 4. Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Response: The project site will underground utilities where applicable. There is a utility pole with a transformer near the top. It is anticipated that the power lines may be under grounded form this point. The specifics of this under grounding requirement will be discussed in further detail with the City and the utility companies. This will be needed since the current dwelling units across the street are served by over hear power lines. B. Information on development plans. The applicant for a development shall show on the development plan or in the explanatory information, easements for all underground utility facilities, and: 1. Plans showing the location of all underground facilities as described herein shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval; and 2. Care shall be taken in all cases to ensure that above ground equipment does not obstruct vision clearance areas for vehicular traffic. Response: The project site will underground utilities where applicable. There is a utility pole with a transformer near the top. It is anticipated that the power lines may be under grounded • form this point. The specifics of this under grounding requirement will be discussed in further detail with the City and the utility companies. This will be needed since the current dwelling units across the street are served by over hear power lines. RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. 1111 Site Development Review 68 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 • RCM Tigard Office Building • • 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required • Response: The Applicant understands this provision. 18.810.140 Monuments Response: The Applicant understands this provision. 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite Response: The Applicant understands this provision. CONCLUSION • RCM Tigard Office Building LRS Architects Inc. Site Development Review 69 December 14, 2007 Revised: 02/22/08 EXHIBIT A: LAND USE APPLICATION • • • • • • PRE -APP. HELD BY: ( • CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION • 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223 -8189 y 1 1 1t 503.639.4171/503.684.7297 C OF TIGARD OREGON LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION • File # I ( Other Case # I I • Date 1 1 By I 1 Receipt # 1 1 City 1 1 Urb 1 1 Date Complete! TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance (I or 11) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development (III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑ Sensitive Lands Review (I, II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment (IV ❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) Erge Development Review (II) ❑ Home Occupation (II) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) LOCA I ION WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY WILL OCCUR (Address if available) 7O 1 5O ! c — 70 2_) s w �y� 1 AX MAP & f AX LW I NOS. �I I ✓� - -� 1 �eQfi TO i A S t SIZE " ( 3, DC, Ta - , - ,c L+ s hcoc E 3 (O 0 /�(L� - T - s t � eivealess ZONING CLASSIFICATIO ` rO, = 3691 (3D s z-9) 10 3 sF FY' M t x_d 1152. 4 19 (ME . WPPLICAN I ' L,I e S Ara► L_C --4 MAILI G ADDREESS7CITY7STATEZIP . � e p l , J '37 ■ 7 Ste/ by 15 St,�t I 3 ✓"� \ 1ARNO. 603 2- 1 — 1l 2-1 X03 2-2-1 -- 2 77 . C + v MItAt 2--e- u 1.1 5o3 2C, 5 -1 S 9D PROPERTY OWNERJDEEDNOLDER chlist d more than one) AAY K ; L Cit M et,�) MAILING AUURESS /UI I Y/S 1,A I E/ZIP 1 VC A reY4 *+ V v- J t t t � 2 - 0 . • . (s3) ) 573 --- 7 5 0 sq 7-- 25D C5 1 (2f -'� •Wh en t e owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be pap purchaser of record or a lessee possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. Theners must sign this application in tt space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL (Please be speak) iPP I D se_d_ $ - J o MEN (5 Two - 5}o r7 of-Ac-J2- b u.1 Idt VI . ( r. j. r Mara r _ ■ v - 2 ' J 1 ,- . e. . dm. t i • In (ox✓ 4v b ii 1- 7 si. , APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS / DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. • . THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: -\ • ♦ If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. • t k2_- -x--07 Owfl is - )gnat ,e Date .� t III Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date O ner's Signature Date ( - \,o-_ _, r■Ylais. Applicant /Agent/Representative's Signature Date Applicant /Agent/Representative's Signature Date ■ 1 MEM EXHIBIT B: DEVELOPMENT PLANS • • • • • e • . L rs ARCHITECTS 0 720 NW Davis 30 . 22 1. 207 C IB RCM OFFICE BUILDING State 3� 503 221.2077 [ P ortand OR 97209 lernedsardvitactsto. TI GA RD, OREGON CONSTRUCTION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBMITTAL DECEMBER 14, 2007 C ONSULTANT: . ' ., - -- - ,' : , , ; " ,' .5;;', :',.;:;;.3 , , A l- flr':e. .A 3 J. . . 3 .',.. ,'... ,;',-„,:,.;;.. • t i r;.b. /. .. ✓- ,- ,F,T"", [ : 30 (' �'- x� - ,. , 4.is-,zi.,,,,i,.., 0.,„•,.•.,.., :. ;:::.,--,:„... ,,.. . „.„,•,•••„:„.„„:„. , ,.: . . - .,_;/:lc-i:::-',. --- - - - - ' rkg.f-P1113 i i ..' 1, ' ,,': '.! , ..,,,,', , . ,. t ..% s - '4.=*',..1; ''' 4 : : i=:- . ,,,,,,,•,...,,,,,,!,,,. :7_ „.•,,,11....,,,,,-„,;,„,„:„.,,.:-.-,-„.„ .,..,•.::.„, . co. -,•,---,A:,-,:„.„.• , - � I 1 0 z1 r • I ; » J , - p 1 E� � i /I �i if PROJECT NUMBER: 20633 E ei f t B 's ; tai$ tlhar t> 3 z • a � .� RCM OFFIC " � _7. -- - .�-- -� � - � � BUILDING y- - 7050 8 7020 $W CLINTON ST. TIGARD, OREGON PROJECT DIRECTORY DRAWING INDEX OWNER Maws Family, (LC Ra My ndy ers COVER /7NFORMAT7O11 Flue C o0o po6M Dive. mnrers rearel - — _- ' - I : - CS 0O.'Ffi SHEET Sub 280 i i�_•1!tM yII , `�_ ; C _ '; s"� ,aya[ • Lake Oswego. OR 97035 r_nr . 'r a� _ CIVIL 59159B-75a Ph 503@69985 Fa . .. ', . ti � 2, C1 .- J - t 5 . '` a' '• -� , C2 FASTING RAN COttORgIb(TREE RELD:AI RAN / i ..- - 9 7i N I 9RAOPI ARCHITECT LRS ArtNtaoutlae Pad �z:i> _ .. _ . , _ i ` C3 unm RAN 120 NWOarh.5O 30D "J�' � r _ 1 CI airrtoNsuekr SECnW, SNE mutt Mn C5 ;% -- , f . C5 70TH 311EEr 5ECnp1 563• 122 -,OR1 e.. gg - �� . I 503.22, -20n Fax ^s ; t... -. 1 • ' zi f !'P'e+ LANDSCAPE f i s s rdi! a o,e,., R. 9rNG_da Si ttses i, 3 t�� ; Lt PLAN= ELM SRD.oJ , Stem ROM € r— —_' "= • - - -_-, .i .r \� 81985W Flat llor4e'ago Zit of mA I 51 I'. ! � ��eepV �_.. •r ii ; l ARCH2TECTURAL BeaNSUn OR 970W 1-- -NN_ -i- -- , -; 1 ` G 1 . - _-� � A101 SITE RAN 503469 -1213 Plr r ! E p, s 7' ^ \ 1' r A107 MST FLOOR MN SHEET IDLE: w^i.... Faa • y -S+ it f _ ? _ } _ '- is . � �::.: `f f A202 SECDIID FLOOR PUN COVERSHEET . _ 1 t.;` .,7 ,. `= .4 a ' `,.' y C " A4oF F3EVAr,6Ia ;' •. 1 11...—..-0.__I—P—, : >`Z'O - 3 : A402 ELEVATIONS Iy¢q LANDSCAPE SR TWAIN, Troy Wears $ -1-. _ "vij J i} i 4 S �' .' —D pa 'ii = �! n , t o: ,- I 8196 SW HO Ballard. Site 232 5op:gzrrltwr0 t -' 4 `' ` ° -=3 ^ �5. d Y Beaverton. 9R MB 531469-1213 � .. ! © - SA''- •• l ' � i i �� i a- ELECTRICAL ws469 ,zu Ph PaaECr s ;- g j ` .1,; C t ' a 1 � ` _ s 503- aE9-8563 0136 Sa (05 0tSr .;. �_ =n3° i€ .5 1 �' �- Ef01 UDHRG RAH - -- �% :: i ^: T 1 -�-- J ' - - 71 ; i N DRAWN BY: • DATE ISSUED: 12.14.07 REVISED 1 VICINITY MAP 02.2Z03 • VV NOT 70 SCREE j SHEET: C S A A i • • Ol'1� • • Ti .z 1,0 1 0 1 Ci)a T I , , I ) i c i _ j , = . z + � - -� 1 . t _________________ ...... , � . ---r —� - .z' _3,—\----,, � s- -t � - - :='� i _ ,_1 i l ���__ _ 4 s ome a'z,ao' m L OR i E IDE �� 4 N \ \ 1 a �..1 V t "rt \ t f � f iTN k : Mt 1 -I H _ Ap�f t'a�. Ad _ �.1�. �` J 1 i:•"j�-` a6 ,T, .. a _ )� DN h0 1 / / DN ■ v,ws,m - ► gt -- -2 ; „ ,- .re 0 1 LiLi f ` ( 0° ( TREE INVENTOR Y TABLE A ITIGATION .t v ` POINT COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME DEW C -RAD CO MMENTS AND CONDITION SIZE CONDITION M E Q DNS,` 1 7 � \ \ E (W.) (FT) CLASS REQUIRED 1 ! 7 ` , , \ ��x I 1 , 1 1 64S BIRDCHERRY PRUNU PRUNU S AVIUM AVIU 10 20 INVASIVE SPECIES ' ?17 1 NO L --- s \ 847 BIRDCHERRY S M 10 20 �NVASIVE SPECIES ?1Y NO LOS ,,, - ,, \ 650 BIRD CHERRY PRUNUS AVIUM 10 _ VERY POOR CONDITION ? 17 HID NO ASIIMLT Cf- f ' 713.. 1 ?1Y HD NO ' ` f�f -�, 651 SCOULER WILLOW SALM SCOULERIANA 3X10 VERY POOR CONDRgN ' - �� � - f , , f 662 HAWTHORN CRATAFGUS SP, 13 13 LEANING WEST.OECAY INCLUDED BARK >17 HID NO • - " -\ 1 x - 663 DOUGLAS-FIR PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII 32 25 CONDOMINANT TRUNK, VERY POOR CONDITION, POOR STRUCTURE >tY HID NO I COMM ION 1 �mm IOE 1 ` \ r^1 .-. ' = ' 729 PONDEROSA PINE PINUS PONDEROSA 8 VERY POOR CONDITION 7 17 HID NO + I 6 735 BIRDCHERRY PRUNUSAVIUM 12 12 INVASIVE SPECIES 717 NO / I .� 1 \ 1 746 SPRUCE PICEA SP, 10 8 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS ? 17 NO e a ! , /J / 1 1 750 OREGON WHITE OAK QUERCUS GARRYANA 32 35 BASAL DECAY .. >17 'HID NO IS I - 1 \ ` J .././ " , \ \ o' ' , 4 - z4 LEANING NORTH, CROWN IS ALL ON NORTH SIDE OF TREE" dd I i \ ` \ \) ` , 771 NORWAY MAPLE ACER PLATANOIDES 10 20 JNSTABL.E 717 HID NO _ 1 I 1 \ \ 1 , 779 APPLE MALUS SP. 14 10 BASAL DECAY >17 FIID NO \ 1 795 ENGLISH WALNUT JUGLANS REGIA 6 15 VERY POOR CONDITION 7 17 HAD NO I Lry�IM[1� 1 / I ) 1 1 I \ ` yq 796 FNGLISHWAI NUT JUGLANSREGW 8 15 VERY POORCONDRION 717 WD NO {� 0 t 1 1 41111 � \ 10 £_ N 1 f I � CHERRY PRUNUS I . 1 »< 8 806 05 BIRD CHERRY PRUNUS AVIUM VERY O POOR C O NDRION NE SPECIES; VERY POOR CONDRK)N 7 �2 NO L� IUD \ 1 \ \ 1 I I \ � , j I Vl 1 r �' 812 DOUGLAS-FIR PSEUDCTSUGA MENZIESII 11 6 11 N IDENTIFIED ED ON SITE TO SOUTH DEAD BRANCHES, CODOMINANT 7 12' NO fM \ \ t ( ` 1 ' 1 1 I 625 DOUGLAS-FIR PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII 38 20 TRUNK (fi1 IV, POOR STRUCTURE >17 NO F = • 1 _` 1 �✓ 846 BIRD CHERRY PRUNUS AMU 17 20 INVASIVE SPECIES , >77 YES 1 \ f " `, - Bab DOUGIAS-FIR PSEUOOTSUGA MENZIESII 46 30 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS (OUT OF PROPERTY) >12 YES \ \ ` \ ' - �.Jr..' 1 t Y 849 DOUGLAS.FIR PSEUDOTS MENZIESII 38 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS (OUT OF PROPERTY) , � II- 677 DOUGLAS-FIR P MENZIES 26 18 30 NO IOEIITIFIED LIMITATIONS (REMOVE BUT MITIGA >I2 YES >17 VES 1 , ~ \ \ \ � " \ \ / 1 A "L L 731 OREGON ASH FRAXINUS LA7IFOLIA 24 25 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS TOUT OF PROPERTY! >12 YES 1 \ "C 734 DOUGLAS-FIR PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII 18 16 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS (REMOVE BUT MITIGATE) \�� ` ` ` \ � / / -�� 747 SPRUCE PICEA SP. 32 28 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS (REMOVE BUT MITIGATE) >17 YES >17 YES / 11 / 762 WESTERN REDCEDAR THUJA PLICATA 24 12 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS REMOVE BUT MITIGATE) >17 YES \ \ N \ ' 1 / i+ i 763 BIRDCHERRY PRUNUSAVIUM 14 12 ) NVASIVE SPECIES (REMOVE BUT MITIGATE) >12 765940 l ` R 784 OREGON WHRE OAK OUERCUS GARRYANA 30 25 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS (REMOVE BUT MITIGATE) >17 YES / \� \ � 1 1 1 \ 1 `, 1 797 CYPRESS CUPRESSUS SP. 16 8 NO IDENTIFIED UMRATIONS (REMOVE BUT MITIGATE) >17 YES t} /) EUROPEAN SPECIES HIGHLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO BRONZE BIRCH BORER LOiB sy� 1 I 811 WHITE BIRCH BETULA PENOULA 16 12 sREMOVE BUT MITIGATE) >12 YES \ HIGHLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO \ ` 1 NN t� I \ 1 i 1 ( ' t 892 PORT ORFORD CEDAR 18 PORT ORFORD CEDAR ROOT DISEASE (REMOVE BUT MITIGA >17 YES _ to ` 1 ,' 1 1 893 BIRD 894 8010 CHERRY PSEUDOTSUGAMENZIESII 22 20 NO IDENTIFIED LIMITATIONS (REMOVE BUT MITIGATE) PRUNUS AVIUM >12 YES � 20 20 JNVASNE SPECIES (REMOVE BUT MITIGATE) >12 YES/NO //' R3100 D AEU \ \ \ , / z, I ' ;. ; . 1 r i l \ \ ` I \ ` \E XTG TREES TO BE REMOVED: 18 B TREES FOR CONSTRUCTION f 184 CALIPER INCHES) 18 TREES PER CONDITION sWt ` I - 171011 $ , \ \ \ ` / EMG TREES TO REMAIN: 1 0 I DIM IMOON Mt r : IF FAO \ ( ` " . — �. ■ fi , 1 . 3�r ,. ti v i 1 ���. I I. 18 0M1\ \ ' p�"' ` \ * 1 1 ( > { t — — I x lei �" Iaaar''il�°/un ua�xs °°°a li LEGEND Of CHM1 UN NICE I � 1 '``' ti 11 ^ 1 t1 j " -' r awi r` i 1W1T 1t 1�9 sl IIOf E g EBEES OpIY OwAES 1 �TIM1 1 ' \,,, � ( 1 i I t AL NIBS 1D E OWED SUL E 1O/ECED N CORM LINK a COME COMMON �' 1 ` ` I 1 1 l M /r NC E r i AT I� a *a RACED ND 1111 MI - Lilo stool LE \ 1 �` J 1 1 a DE 1 611 m w1C E1mS OF NE IBM NO 1H - M O LIE ® '� I I I 1 1 1 NENEENON„ _ - WY SNOW U E �i i 1 \ ' I 1 1 , • MEMOS NOM MIK � EOOI� OR MEND n EWE COPT _ - - — - - — ••• i \ 1 I L I 1 1 `L 5 nE NNW SOL NW LmE EnalLu a ENDOW OM s NO - --- - DONN NMI COMO 0 \ 211 111 1 • I�""Emr i MINI' ' >n i sr�_ s — —'6''— — — - Haab MCI a> n= n \ . 1 1 • ° n IN IV . *i E Y NM E OS! wawa llH MS CNA ION � - E>iMO wax 10 Ewan OF 1E NNW MOM ; x . a - MIND a101 INN DAZE 1 t/wce II =IA Z3 - DEMO MU WM CEJMEai s NOM • EMOIEEEI 3 NOM - WINO FIE MOM CIECS MEET TREE - MIND WOW MLIMOE COL COMMON • MEET IIL OENt • • •. • / 1 1 4.0.- — 1 I „..„, _-- ______________ ��a— i ,-------- I I , I 1 L____ • L> i / 1 114 \te Ir k �� i ; r ,, +�a I 1 r , r :`.! : c i 2 1; a s p 2 a ' / I i • --- r - --pL� � . --, -.mss. s rlra.r -. ■,, I� - . I- � ~ A I .. i A I p , ® ® i ce : ® 11., k � ` I , IA 1 A , . a ri N, it - - RI i I A g1 ; , i .,,ii a- „ 9,, 4 _ 400 , I 1 _ 1 -• -_a 1 E ' tR-- I --- ''. t = , w `. _ T � _ f _ l ij i a te$ . � - J. I ' 1 !r■ --f91 i f • ,'S GT — J PO or ____________,, g 11 Iti tit. --- ' „Lerid i1.1 . : t " 1 4 Eal4tnill . , / IN it! , ,.. ' # F . ' ..101 / '-- . 5 S i / J I I — "" � imp / a \ t►a SINS► sr •v � ��1b. _216........11. - _ ..._.. / ...-- ..._ ....- _..., "--- // ' igr : 4, A. --_, - -- r , - -- 7. -4. N,„. .."' V-' 7 ....-- ----,,,---- Inv ,,,,, ...,, ■ _ 4. _ li memnimmiii __ .----_ i , _711 ... %,........■.__,- "": - L,... ....... ...X........1„: ---- --- . ... 1 -*- _ 5 :,." ' \ .....4 .. - - -- '''' .k .. . �%'��- �— - ._..�~ . _ a tat/' - ` -' ■ 11 _ a _ `:c . / '■ �°q �, - ` _ _ — _� i • __ --------------- -- - - - - -- _�Ij 1 \ N 01455 1•E / / / / / / � p_ — — \I -"`az / _ �. .I - '` - fit , -- e- - - - --� 1 I - --' �/ . \ \ • _ ...._ .._.\. _� , -- Sty ,. \ N. veo .... • • • MI/ 1 /1i 1 1 • ... -•-.-. --.-- ----.r ••- N . 1 ` - " \ ^-760- --.. • \\ \ 6 i l l l 1 , 1 1 1 1 iM N1511 8 1 itill 1111 Q C� PRRI O / O..Q REV. DESCRIPTION t WE 4 , t PRat(. , GRADING cMOO I 1 e �J / 6196 SW Hall � D / \). CC r�Q 8 II OFFICE BUL.DINQ % .6z / _ - -1 - CASE FEE N. 1 1 Baav ( Oregon 97666 .._.. • " •� y, O, _, C 1 1 % fn, vh tax (50.3) 9694553 { X N 1 I SW CUNTON ST. AND SW 70TH t.� :- WWM.srdlic.aom p E S I G N 1 g I I TIGARD, OREGON RCM HOMES INC. LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035 C \ I EXPIRES 12 -31 -04" X01 t g b Sa va*g Loam"' waif"" • • • • � e 1 — 1 I a I I '1 I 1 � � I L , I • T 1.L I r - - - -- ± 1 e = =' 1 $_,- I , R''' \ H ; 61 1 c ������������ 10E C I g Ea NO igi I� a — _— , r II .� l • —__— . fi - x171.1 1 • a a . 115 if 48 CRP 0 S.0.25% .. 10111111111 ill 1 v _ I a I� ':s •.i. 1 ° p ja � ®� �� . rge a - - ti tim gr ecru - -.. --- - - ! e \''' • 4 , q� �p li Z .. 8 ' te .■ 8 a 5 1 )� \ 1 \I 9 \ I " ..7 NM :.■ - 11 ' I la • a \ \ \ in lei ee MI �� �� mmet t,llr■�i _ tbp It _______ _ ._. ............. � � _ ° --� .� . Rr25 t 1 1 rw i — +- _ °1m 11' 6103 5 SW 70111 AVENUE a I . - -•nom 4., — . .— . — °� v it p , 1 S VD ... to 12 z4-4/ • • a a sue— _... • 1 — gk 1 NO1'45'51.E /E. ; � ( ° b g • I II • I \ 4. g I I C • I / \� I 1 4 1 I • 1 • o 1 i ®®E I e •° ®■ e 0 ° 1 1 1 1 - - f f f . .. . l.. l.. l f lilliii:11!1;iii 2 g1 11 liAg 1 g 111 DESCRIPTION C� PROJECT N0 REV. , 1 DATE �Q p UTILITY PLANS ����/'� iO � ' ' • e Fir RE 6196 SW Hall Boulevard, 3 ' R VIYIW 6 1 t ARD BULDNG `'�� on 9 232 E '' ^\ qp _ _ CA SE RE NO. 1 I , arar•a av Beeverron, O�eOan 9700° \ l J M N N _ x I 1 3hana(503) 469.1213 _,,, � W "..dd ( SW CUNTON ST. AND SW 7011.1 ,, faz (503) 469.6553 .:'i g ) 1 11GARD, OREGON ` � r may, 1 • t RCM HOMES INC. LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035 EXPIRES 12 - 31 - • • • i 1 II 1 1 2409 8 L S s" 'i K i 1 6s ail. g 6 V ii FS Df Es l I t '{ a 1 � 1.63 ' ® 1 S1 +as i ' i i I Ti 2..; i e 1 I T 1 I i I 4.17 , -- - __ _ -- -- - -- --- ' - + aw l L � 1 e t mw 1 7{ t ' 1 __` 257 4 � ,� M � iE l29 5E - . • q : 197.23 � (! �: 115 If a aPos.a2sz ■ a `� s � 11 1 1 1 1 1101 �� M g 2 111& III il ��G1, ,,,,��.���;;r� � nxov ! A ' , . MN i ' o i, u , I l d i A \ ‘.1 ‘1 a ---- - - - - -- II le• ri,avatis 4 X91 i i s 1 , .W. il..- JEI.. -J . 7A W immiminumnimivrAi. 9 \ 13 . , \ ' ea�s IIHII — SW 70TH AVENU t; \R..2s; f 1%1 u t. = sb - -sva - -�—sa9 — sv� — VD � N01'45'S1' - ��� ¢ 27 32 - - - -- -------- - - - - -- 1 - + -- - 47�b3 1 I 0 a \// 1 I II i ' 2189,9' -- - i I I PPL 9 REV 1 OESCRIPIIOW , LL17E *J PROJECT N0. ' 1 cui 1 ON STREET UTILITY , A �• , P ' 09 SW Hall kulevarR m009 RCM006 ' 2 i \ _ - - - CASE PILE NO. 1 I , � �+ OFFICE BULD `��(� G <� . D Dtan.(503)469.1313 ;i N 1n S x 1 1 fax (503) 969-8553 . 1 • Mew O , SW CIJNTON ST. AND SW 70TH 5 d '', Zi 11GARD. OREGON wwwsrd8ccom p E S I G N ' RCM HOMES INC. LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035 mums 12 - �.m° +cmr �nrmr Z.�.w 4, bS +. • • 0 . N I I, Io • 1 X 22 1 ; $1? ; , fl $ n' 1 1 ;= N is Il Li 1 1 ; I • I X59 1 I B i 2+12 .- 1 ; i 28144 • ° 1 1 1 1 1 , v r 1 Ill 4 1 I •R SIRED' CONSTRUC11CN : l,i r ^ 2ea1 III 2 .770111 > � -a VCS: 2 +89 - L � . ® C8:7 op C8a co op ® � a • 280.17 • N _\. - - -- 1 1 a ••, --Q- . J S L 0 I �qgq N o a 1I 1 �� GQ I ' 287.24 _" _- I x N s a 1 " k 8 , Taszt /a 1 a E%CS 3 +3, g � ■ � a _wwra��H.., i BCE 287.85 - i 1 30, le ii 1 I g:;8 C 8 I b 9 268 8 I L . g � 5 1 280.08 - 1 1 p 2 :: 11 di 1 N 11�iii�1 : a 1liMIN k mallow - 28889 1 11 1 _ u�rsr-: m 1 1 • 1 BVC 4+28 1f1 111 s� BvCE 2e8e9 , gig - _ • riven �� H CO a / O , I��9. g 15 I• P ElEV � 27d09 - , • � l1 r-- _ �— 9 -- - - - - - -- a 91 a,H1nN __--._ \•8L - �5 �i„n� MS • su 4+87.10 7018 I - + -I 1 - �-�- r� �- A — — E1E 27aee ao+c , i' TAB 8 5+05.40 _ ,�` BVCE: 270.74 I • N 0 ' _ 1 9 I — ztr.4 1 1 EVES 5+4840 t 1 A 1 7�p EVCE: 271.04 1 I O 2 2'f1.17 -, -- _- RCS: 5+48.98 Il BYCE: 271.11 i 1 „ 1 Zli 1 _ T i . it P - >44 1 1 8 a s s 4 1 I 11 h C. .it 1 } 219 s8ffi 1 to 1 1 ' 1 1 1 I EVCS 8+38.98 - I _ _ — I EVCE 27091 1 t 1 141 T . p [. $ . PROJECT N0. REY' i DESCRIPTION 1 DATE SW 7011-1 STREEr , 1 V 17'11 9TV A ' � 1 P F 8196 SW Hall Boukvab, 4' — Sr / 11 R CM00 6 I BU 11 L LDI NO • 11 1 '. +J �j ` * S.�a732 0 _ - - 0 - OFFICE CASE FILE N0 f I TIGARp Beaverton, Oregon 97008 y phone (503) 469.1213 � In In X 1 1 fax (503) 469.1217 " /`/171 i I I SW CLINTON ST. AND SW 70TH N• g 1 1 TIGARD, OREGON C : , — t Manton s Longbow. 1 �,�yes,,. • SW 1 I RCM HOMES INC. LAKE OEGO, OR 97035 EXPIRES 12 - • III SW CLINTON STREET 0 10- Slender Hinoki Cypress _ - Plant Materials BOTANICAL M NAME y COMMON NAME 1 3 4 - Greenspire Linden SYM TREES OTT. SIZE CONDTTON REMARKS wT. Z / 0.: $ ® � �. �/� O Aeee aget.°tun• . _ e-Y B&B 3 TMW KM O " - Teri As S • ecified - T ical JIM& .me 4 �� 0 •Cam es.�° Rake" • 2 25" Cal. k 1 _ S • ®�``;��_ ` TAdmt 9 Y f -- �` and E Smtbd Yople 1 wit, • B&B 6 8 S o. 1 a °-;r. G' / i� 1 n , :�" r .1 -- 11:::.;.--....': ►1� a,«r. tA: T+ena tore, 1s _ , C� " O ` �; S A ' ^ o S., c ^.o. - g . ,,,, ..1,1-, �� 'ti t �` -�' { i �^ �` # � �yy:. >:�� �Ca^�i1-'t' . E:"^ ?_ •: Ginkgo eaeee ao.ews Sentry' roxa Z I► i .I \.t /i �� . f ` 2•r.. .x T � o o � Ivt o . o o t 1-1) ., .. . Q ' e z5 cd. eae 27-5 r. 8 ' ° N • g 4 ♦ \ o v oT a 1 i � � Princeton seven G,ntya sl 9 l 8 L # v:• '1: If St ♦ w e• +v: • . u ' Cal. aee / Vii;\• " ( ® t V \ 3� 2 -Vine Maple te Ar- �, 0 Pyres a«. tw P... s ` ' 9- Princeton Sentry Gingko x `'_' © �f /� ry 9 �� �` Ty ecordate ybe • 4 r Cd B&B a WI m i a I 1 . �� I 6- Trident Male ' 4 � DON TREES 777TH. PRO MITIGATION da¢s 92 �, im it II k T I GA R D OFF i rt - BAKAIES IRGA � MTIGATION TREE INVENTORY (EXISTNGIPROPOSED) 540 Cl L. j 5 ' - 0" Hi Wood Fence MI •' 111 "4 CSTING MITIGATION TREES TO BE REMOVED: 8 (184 CALIPER INCHES) r•+ 71407 A. NEARS I g9 BUILDING I PROPOSED NEW TREES: 54 (92 CALIPER INCHES) > OREGON ��11 ��. all .- � _ SYM SHRUBS OTY. SIZE CONDITION REMARKS � %.P le / : �� J �t ® Barbels ln� wrtt • c 2•N .o Wa v/ a cat. con 10-12• 04l°E AR •-;•��y l}trnwn P,gnr t7arEa.r ��F. 1 - Vine • Ma le � ^ O i. ° i °!ew . 2•r° e' " — 1 a ed. Cm 15-16 v A) P � O s..a. u.A:aaa e to ndr ' e r :- . ,G° (U �p��� tai / `C d �} O `Z Z,1"`"""'" .v2• 3 w. Can 10-12• '..` " -. ' seq .; •- . , o • F , , It • ��f o ela9° •Gen es • 6 C°t. Con Is-1r 2)-' ° °fJ °�Q .. PAernd tends 'lea Sprott G°I. Cm 12-15 - \� /{ �� 1 1 t Q .bar I R s —•- 1 ® Valley rd Plods 5 Gal. Cm 3 G 18-21' r 1 ( 2 -Coral • Bark Ma • le Aj t ar da a aam.ltea 2•E,. PwP,r d 12 -1s - can i " Li it ( "0-Y4% O'l ® Fire PoeUr Ne : ae ml7 Bamtoo �� i ! I O Nand6.a dordita • loon ea7/ 3 GM. can tz -15' "I I _ ( r — - I ! {-5-- t I , I . �' �� 4a m bar Nea rau r e.nt Z 0 f ' I _ • n. Z 1 ... AA,d,er.mon aa+,.ei,r 72 -15" BAH O d L j _ . E' . Bad. / I I > t t_ I W 0 Puendr°n=Kel>: 16-21' BAH / 3 Gat. Coo tx 15 ��111;1��11���1 •G/ <o) 1 - M : ; Q r 5 Co l c. 21 -u J \ t�� :: Pr�.a N:aa Aa . J ao 0 o ►•,�vv vl 1 m 1 i' sP•t e Wta an Z w ` . : ® D. t I\ ..<C R , � .ez SYM GRASSES QTY. SIZE CONDITION REMARKS 0 \ O w ,., \ Z �_ -I I 7 .{ O ® Ae mrtpnai+ene 1 Cal. Can 10-12 Z1 1 CL J i 1 p 1 Blue 0°t Cross E� LL ✓ ` < `` e hrtYerofa aYl4nslc° 'Thane 1 Cal. Con 10-12' r i Z ¢ CJ \� ( _ (0) 7•� \ _ J°Paieae Beal Z O O I, V i / leN 1•.•* • ' ® t Gd. Ca. to-tY z • ro 2•f I ` • (t4) _ ° mftaln G,a,. •Aaaetn• J Q W I i // c is _ . �/� ; d \I r/ ,- ° Cn SYM GROUND COVER oTV. SIZE CONDTION REMARKS J o a I . ^ , � -- 1 — T urf As S. ecified - T .low F Emerald v " c�,t Taiwa . a r eeeln 1 Gal. C.. < X �� L' 1 i� ,.• 1 EM, Pot. 0 5 i ! . 1 __ f� y - J_ F- S " A.w d,Calar Spat 4 Pat, - ; i - + ' H t � *1 I APPROXIMATE LANDSCAPE AREA: „`� _ APT TURF AREA (ROW): 1,465 S0. FT. ' / A- ,\ / .:. �:���Co,,^�`,__-: %f 00 S PLANTING AREA: 6.070 SQ. FT. T TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: 7.535 SQ. FT. I I ;• �' �ii,„_., - „ 1 ; S (" ' ! \� p _ t ` r !� � � /��_I ��,J��.�� r_ I � G , �,� J��.!(�(/ . /]13 PENETRATE Rm) I " �I ► , - `•! ( t �1 i i � -' CSI .,e: f..2• TREE TIES .:, NOSE W 12 GAUGE ii � 9 N a y lo r s Blue Leyland 2•5 I `� �, �. t:. cAl �. >✓ypress /, : � , / = :__ jj;7jj P - CRQ ND TO FIRST H \ . � ) 5' -0 Hi.h Wood Fence �a ��� •� * - s•► ` : - 01 1:14 I i `- 1���1:1 L TTOM a wmE 6A9CE7 ♦ , ! I S 1.- L� MINE FROM GIP . .; ' I ea 1 ! IO NG. TOP <1 i I n� —oi ' . AROtc Ar2 1►�) I ! �/ ,[ P ANnNC oR nnaF % \! x MULCH CIRCLE WATER BASIN i 1 /Y M�1. V o OEP (gill! + 2 MUL PE M o Y 6- Chanticleer Pear M A / M 24 :A S RK L O1 • _ m �; Ss - 2 WA •• B BAC V 1lFiLL SOL MIXTURE AS SPECKED. 0 / �' 1 AS D157R ' • SCARIFY WADS A BOTTOM Of PLANTING _ _ _ _ \ t i TREE ROOT BARRICADE MOD 1� -18 9- Scarlet Sentinal M le Ts I B 't, ' AMERICAN MANAGE PROWL L 1 �� 110UiED BY HORIZON INC. SET ROOTBAl1 CM DISTURBED SOIL BEST-PANS to o 7 r ao `I 1 , —\ ! \ In 1� AM AS SPEDnED. O O Z L'A'J-'' l id 1 �� °�"° 1 1 1 . I -` i `` SHRUBS iTP. C O �kilt ,.I _ I I 2 [ NA 6 ROOT BAIL TREES A s V G fv NJ � .� I 1.1 Existing Trees (a �� `. 4 EDGES - Mx e IENGT71S REOUR D 3 U N i � ! ��1 • 1�1 EACH SIDE GIP aK7e/sDEWAx < // /�. `, ^'.` . Site) Trge Prot on K /- ALONG A REFER E PLANS F L REI/SE d O x • ` �' �•,,♦ TRASH 1 1�:1 Iii _ ;/ �1� ♦ � � ! I ,......4 Re - See Sret �. 4 � A1 M I .� �$ ' TREE PLANTING DETAIL - SHRUB PLANTING SIMILAR DATE I 9/18/07 �,. -- ENCL. i ' =�- . M • • 1 ; el .. • , 1 vv T g 1 c"aI , �. NT5 DESIGNED r laT1�R5 �_� ' Illl �� ' I 1 ^� NOTES ENGINEER, ', ` . ^ `�� �-►, `., _ ��� / 112• AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION CHECKED , r wFARs ♦ •r ♦ •• ♦ '• ♦ 6041...-1 r • � ♦ ♦ ♦ .: �� f .I / c , � : � I 1. BAS SIM( MAY eE SUBSTITUTED qM CWTAXER STOCK OF EDUAL GRADE- III - -- ���. i : .. . ��..... �tj �'1 ( ♦�)������ ��J1 f M � � ( *ago 1 WILL BE PROVIDED i PLANT c�ora�o� e � Arm �n STOCK. A9 SHEET TITLE L l �tv..ivv�. %'v � �� .. CIA.. . �e , � .. v . . I � . . � .. A r41��� � ,�,`�a� � PLANTING PLAN Nillir NIIIIIppy � •AI-: � '•-" � ••` - �\ .. A7.60.1. L TRE ES BE BRANOffD. ° \ ° /\ SCALE: 1 = 10' s. MULOE Au Pirr ems 2•n+ 2 ". "TER oP TTEaFEI MACK SHEET NUMBER II 8. ° TIE EVE Qi A DRAWINGS SHALL OSERN I E P NT SPECIES 1 AND AND THE OFtAYDTCS. THE ERA1DlGS SIIAtL GOYF7a/ TIE PLANT SPEOES AID OUAfiITiES TEQ 7. L1 N M EWM OIEST70l1 OR LAO Cr CINLWDTGS W05CAPE CO, TRAC{W 6 OF TO C AL Ult05fJNE AROOTE TY ON DRA ELLFORE PROCEFIDIG 0 S 1Q 20 S. L0`T� CONTRACTOR IS TO NOISY EANDSD ARCHITECT FMOR 70 INSTALAOON OF PLANT MATERIAL / CREIN SIDE UP. • • Lrs ARCHITECTS 720 NW Davis 503.221.1121 C • Sude 300 503 221.2077 D Portland OR 97209 vnvw traarNYeUS.mm - / `� P NOT FO RY NOTFOR SW CLINTON STREET _ _-- — — ` .`, CONSTRUCTION 1 6f�������' �! 1 1 CONSULTANT: • fllfft : - - - � i�'�il�l .1t♦��� r '.= E `' - ' : I I 1 1 • , i . r i r ; 1 �� :: c�i � isi::�ri:: i,::} i":C:= i r: r� ::�, ; :��i: ?.:F.c. i s . i: r : ° %5ii; _ {: 1 i 8 111 OFFICE BUILDING:;::::: >:::;:y::;;y 1 1 1 I ; I 8' 111 1 1 � w a •1 > Di J, -- i 8 wAll '. pia.. J■■ I. II111d::: «::;: >:::: : :;::: ;::.:::, :::r: >;::: : :::::: i Q ! 4uCI ■ ■ ■ ■: ■r:;: > 3: :: .-: :. :: : : :: : : : _ :; : : ' : ' : : > :';: ; ` : :: : > > I il a t I� a 1 4-0' pill 1 :::.i:::: ?: , . . ■u . : : : ::.:.. ...: -::: :: ::: ::: : ::::: ::. ;. : ::: ::::.::::: :::�:' 1 PROJECT NUMBER: • e / � I 1 I III 1 1 RCM OFFICE I -; BUILDING • 6A" :� g � : ::;:;:::.:;::::::::: :: : :< r" ■ � I n . I 7050 & 7020 0 i 0 H �� H1limpf�m� rce .., ■1•■ SW CCINTON ST. ■ME � 1M= 16 •3iMMW • 11111♦1♦ ■■ , TIGARD, OREGON ♦ c O O ©. ® OO O O I f T� c= I 0 0 0 "4- L ,' - 1111111111 I I 6 �� o 0 0 0 __ CD 1 CD o ®o Cl. , 111111J. 11 1 TRASH ,, 1 I i ENCL. ® ®o '==° _! ® I°== m ® ®® al i . ' IN 1 I i SHEET TITLE: I ..i - i SITE PLAN fi r , r DRAWN 8Y: 170C DATE ISSUED: 170C 1 N a 10. SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/16Y1 0 i 1 SHEET: A 101 i I • • Lns ARCHITECTS 720 NW Davis 503.221.1121 s • Soda 300 503 2212077 C PmOand OR 97209 rnw.bsatdriteds.coro 7217' y 76-0' , 10d i 72 PRELIMINA } NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - CONSULTANT: OFFICE . 4.— ELEC k _1 .. ,‘,.. V i ` �` STAIR /' / y 1. I A I f� I J ® v U CII 4 • II) LOBBY PROJECT NUMBER 206330 RCM OFFICE lipI — BUILDING — CLOSET 7050 & 7020 MACH 1 SW CLINTON ST. Ru STAIR TIGARD, OREGON b 2 C d OFFICE h r te - , 1 SHEET TTILE: L t 1 J FIRST R 77.7 2 77.0. FLOOR PLAN it 71'' t DRAWN 9Y: TNX i DATE ISSUED. 1214.07 N 3 9 . FIRST FLOOR PLAN T . SCALE: 1/3 e i : A201 SHEET 1 • • LFS ARCHITECTS 120 N Darts 503.221.1121 a • • 1N Suite 300 5032212077 C Portland OR 41209 wr.heardotttbx Jm PRELIMINARY NOT FOR 91741 CONSTRUCTION BALCONY 9 CONSULTANT: H a -CE- OFFICE k [ I STAJR { MEN 1 - IA 1-- 1 I e u 0 T WOMEN; \ ,.---1.... j 0 14 . N PROJECT NUMBER: 200330 RCM OFFICE BUILDING A. 7050 & 7020 . t. r- -, _ SW CLINTON ST. 0 :EV 1 TIGARD, OREGON !" \ R ■ C 'j r OF FICE P SHEET TITLE: SECOND �� • • FLOOR PLAN 220 / 714• .1 27a 1P! DRAWN BY: 7NX DATE ISSUED 1214.07 N 9. SECOND FLOOR PLAN ED R SCALE: 118 • 1 5 1: A202 • 1 • • rs ARCHITECTS 720 NW Davos 503.221.1121 at • Suite 300 5037112077 D Portland OR 97209 rrrv.taa cndootf.mre TRELLIS. TYP. ASPHALT S@1GLE ROOF, TYP. BRICK LABEL. TYP. W000 SHINGLES. TYP. METAL AND GLASS GUARDRAIL TYP. BR ICX VENEER. TV. PRELIMINARY BA SILL TYP. NOT FOR • METAL FRAMED CANOPY. TYP. CONSTRUCTION INSULATED STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM. TYP. CIF LONCAETE BASE, TYP. . BUILDING SCONCE. TYP. 431;1° joggire:rth. Nkr .m' •Lr: CONSULTANT: µ..0.a. r.e. .d _ • . • .... I EL, v F A t p OZ 0, ,,,gmav • i p ."re'aamar e; gg,,... -::,ru -, 1 - - -- `.nee, , ,, mvrg yt a -- ■.a. ■■ �� 111■ 1 i na ••U •• - ■•U I • 1 111111 N �!! '1 ■111 1 1 111 : 1 � .._..'- - -•, 3= _i= __ =s 5_rt - = —. ..n r1 _� SECOND FLOOR -. - — _. Y ' - - - k['4Ian Et 114'0 :, ,r. E ti _ o,. ers , ...m.rr 'ff r u:. :1,, -1414{ — , .....0 ■■■ ••U■ ■u la.:.� . $ .. aa. ■ . i i , � ;�i : � 111 , �1 11 � 111 1 1 1 11 1 111111 FIRST FLOOR I / EL: /000 5. NORTH ELEVATION • SCALE V8 • PROJECT NUMBER: 206330 RCM OFFICE BUILDING ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF. TIP. 7050 & 7020 WOOD SHINGLES. TYP. SW CLINTON ST. WOOD LAP BOARD SLONIG, TYP. BRICK VENEER . TIGARD, OREGON BRICK LINTEL TYP. METAL FRAMED CANOPY, TIP. INSULATED STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM. TYP. BURONG SCONCE. TYP. Cw CONCRETE BASE. TYP. VARLES rat e: N,,„ " � _ a _ \ .� r .�µn°,.. ,�� �` E ROOF _•r• rte e Cbw:_ EL: . rnrr _ �a��a r .,. r ter:;$ .: Q:,_..� - ..ter �N�rr r, �....,r .�. 3111111 ° 11111= I a 11111 . ,° 1111 11: SECOND FLOOR _Far;a•__ '>3 '--tea - s•�.^•_-' *= ,., ^' �•r 1 9mwoi �M.r!92 ■ E 114.0•, SHEET TiTIE: $ 6 _ .tiff_ o e , l .r.r�- E ELEVATIONS E :v ----q, 1 Willi 1 11111 = hill! IIII L :., :_. - ; FIRST BOOR, .s.�iE � I3: 1074 • DRAWN BY: TNK DATE ISSUED 12.1A 07 J 9. WEST ELEVATION s SCALE fa=ro - 0 1 401 i F. I • • LFS ARCHITECTS 720 NW Davis 503.221.1121 IS • c.w• 300 503221.2077 C Portland OR 97209 rYw.6sartlMe,]s. TRELLL£ TYP. ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF, TYP. METAL AND GLASS GUARDRAIL TYP. WOOD SHORiES. TYP. WOOD LAP BOARD SIDING, TYP. BULLRING SCONCE. TYP. BRICK WS_ TYP. PRB.IYINARY BRICK VENEER TYP. NOT FOR MUTATED STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM, _____.... .. -_.___ �..___ CONSTRUCTION TYP. METAL FRAMED CANOPY, TYP. CIP CONCRETE BASE, TYP. Vilik i �ilw A Ca.:, a N ILK CONSULTANT: uM7.11. 1a' — . _ A'L^::g-gtJ' 'J _'S_t._S°.. =nu 111111 =� �►� r ' i�� ��_� � j %111 LW' -M C Z� ' � .- , SECOND FLOOR , ____ H) » »»ro» = YlnfiIEllYifYYifi YiLWiWWWiWYW1Y »Yr,S,»»•L.Tw.•,y, k F= = i -Z — f.-._r =.._ vet"" u' € _ S ■... ■■ 1.■I.„ 1111 mum t_ .. ■.._. __ ,,"" rt;__:1 "t "1 l I � A - FIRST R000. EL• t00YY 5. SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE 1/6'=1 =0• • PROJECT NUMBER: 206330 RCM OFFICE BUILDING 7050 & 7020 SW CLINTON ST. TIGARD, OREGON ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF, TYP. WOOD SHINGLES. TYP. BRICK WINDOW SELL TYP. BRICK VENEER TYP. BRICK LINTEL TYP. METAL FRAMED CANOPY, TYP. INSULATED STOREFRONT WNDOW SYSTEM, BUILDING SCONCE 11'P. TYP. CIP CONCRETE BASE. TP. F\ ' _ / \ _ JO\ 1 . d ..-»u ROOF, . ` _— r a „'•'.4\ EL' VARIES ' ' " - ` ' . . ; . v . ; ''" . _ - sf r .-- — r_ � : ""-- A ti. . . £ .. .rte.`« , z = == e_ a °_. w -- - vsF%. . § T e.,.nMV Eu+R� L:tt. W1v w ti "iv. "," " SHEET TITLE 3 .ore n wu. • ■ ■■ 11■ 1rnt •••■M■ _ttlIIRI 11 ' -•IA A ■ ■� ■ ■■ 1 n 3 111111 f 11 L 111111 111111 = 1 1 111111 a ELEVATIONS . »^a i -, : "- : r� -=ate =- --- ate- - # -f3 ---- - _ -- -- ;;fin* r za3 F_�v,Tziiiia:siw rxsr.:: —: -- EL_ LTa - - - -- --- -- ■1 as ° :fib= '_-a E r-- - _ ='s= .. � . 3`= == E=` - -3 Nee -'� ••••••••••••_ wresa itET,.4 E 1r , FiAas j�sGn 3n y E e4M' Niery ii - a.t` -,- 11 •,:»o - _ ` ■■�■■ ■ ' 11 , 111 • ■ fit lIl ■■■ = ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ rs� : -E A " - _ " L � 3 31 � ,i g n, MIll _'- ,,,,, DRAWN BY, rNx ® ��® ® °' FLOOR DATE ISSUED: 1 2 1I.07 1 1 Fl To04 � I FIRST 1 R 411 } 9. EAST ELEVATION A402 a' SCALE 1/0=1 SLEET: i . • • Lr-rs . ARCHITECTS 110 723 NW Davie 503221.1121 8 Suite 300 503 2212077 C Portland OR 97209 ennuttsechlbectscern - ..._,,, .... , •- , PRELIMINARY NOT FOR / ;#4 CONSTRUCTION ..--,.....1.013......4 .1=...ArilliMplaimmuna __., saggicarrri .‘,, rAtiELVIAi■ kaMMEINNE11. ' u ali he __ , i 9 ..:, -cr., --y---;. , •„,,.. ,. t., t. t.1 0 *1 i l in Pa / ' CONSULTANT: ._,..._______., „. „ ,, 2.5 11 1 : 1101. IN • 1.y;_ht , ,„ 1 Li 4 4 4 1 1 Hi 2.6 2.7 * •I a 2. ' ' . OFFICE BUILDING ,. . q ... ... .. ,, . r I .. .. s. , i i g i , 1. ..,, : Oa 1.0 la la . 7111110k . .. ). EN 1111.11111ffiNillk. 1 ili gl "': -, Ss la 1. t 47. 11 W • B i 1 . • i H 4 .8 b.t. =Alia 1. 1 ila 1 la 1 4 1 ! C k I / itam , u . 1 .. „ .. , , c: :.... 2 -v, .,.. .,,, i t"......0. II ,, . ,. ,..,...... 6 1112,6/Wa 1..1 NT.I.E WO 0.0 ........ OW 0,002 in004.0 : , tell os i i 1 : _ kti 1 I ums....00......, ,...... L.0., Cti. VA . , 206330 1 1 1 z , 1 1111 - PROJECT NUMBER ,1 ;a11 . .1111111PI IIIWEEMI , : 1£ ! 11 6.1.0...• mile re. la 6 lee 0 a RCM OFFICE BUILDING . Mal., AllIMINAIIIIMANIIIIIMIli • . . . , 602111 1■3.001 0 IRO 0 ...1 um:. 0 .n52 0 . ' .0 1.5 i * I , =OS 1.=122 Taco Iii TV=Ta i '62.=. as ,,1 ,,..4,.;., It.. Ha, 0 bio III , i \ I • • T. .1.11... 131.0.1 t0.101 Id 210 70506 7020 .1. %. 1,.. ti 0.1100nam 101/1.1 11.03/ MO t L au „ --- NIA. IScra ' SW CLINTON ST. 14 18 1 7 VO . % bit , .7 4 / , • ...5 Er, 1 LI.I. I.. baan a WM.* 2. 6.60 ... .3. 1.W .... TY./ 270 sa.... TIGARD, OREGON t.. .. ,... . , t s. ,, il , . 24 tym.0.0 00,40, 'nye v. 1 211 wts.....1 01.1111 ...1111 la . , 1 1 11 3.0 13 , 03 .. .0.7 . ...8■.....:0A A ‘0,000...0 IS2ASI 'WY . I 1 1...... • .11..... 0.2. .0.1 i . *1 011/ U. 1.0 ea 1.8 13 4 . 1.4 'IA . 12 1.3 1.3 •;.; ,•08 - OTTT I .. .43 11.11a1 se WY* T . .i • 2.5 18 15 it, ..9 . 2" • 12.1 --:--- - ..m. n I ; i .2. 10 . 2.8 ' NI 1.8 . 2 1 • . 28 sr 1 g . i I y ‘, s . ., to to 4 4 4 1. 4 4 • . g 4 4 4 UUUUUUU 4 1. 4 t. 4 4 4 to to 1. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1. t. 4,4.. 4 4 So 1.. SHEET TITLE: SITE PHOTOMETRIC 9. SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN N PLAN SCALE 1115,1,0 IED 1 ............._ DRAWN BY, - DATE ISSUED: 9.18.07 0 • I SHEET: E101 1 EXHIBIT C: PROPERTY TITLE INFO • • • • • . • °: � Fidelity National Title Company .� The Closing Company Prepared For: Prepared By: Information Services Department . 1001 SW Fifth Avenue Suite 400 - Portland, Oregon 97204 Phone: (503) 227 -LIST (5478) Fax: (503) 274 -5472 E -mail: csrequest @fnf.com OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Owner : Myers Family Llc Ref Parcel Number : 1 S136DC 03600 CoOwner T: O 1 S R: 01W S: 36 Q: 251 Site Address : 7020 SW Clinton St Tigard 97223 Parcel Number : R0285685 Mail Address : 12670 SW 68th Ave Portland Or 97223 Map Number . Telephone : Owner: Tenant: County : Washington (OR) SALES AND LOAN INFORMATION Transferred : 02/01/2005 Loan Amount: Document # : 10990 Lender . • Sale Price Loan Type . • Deed Type : Bargain & Sale Interest Rate . % Owned : 100 Vesting Type : Corporation PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATION , i Map Page & Grid : 655 G3 Mkt Land : $259,800 Census : Tract: 307.00 Block: 1 Mkt Structure : $21,160 Subdivision /Plat : Isaacs Sub Other . Neighborhood Cd : ZTGL Mkt Total : $280,960 • Land Use : 2012 Com,Improved % Improved : 8 Legal : ISAACS SUBDIVISION, LOT 7, ACRES 06 -07 Taxes : $2,066.54 :.50 Exempt Amount : . Exempt Type . Class Code : R14 Levy Code : 02381 Millage Rate : 15.7510 M50Assd Value : $131,200 PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS Bedrooms : 4 Lot Acres : .50 Year Built : 1962 Bathrooms : 2.00 Lot SqFt : 21,780 EffYearBlt : 1962 Heat Method : Forced Bsm Fin SqFt Floor Cover : Carpet Pool Bsm Unfin SqFt : Foundation : Concrete Ftg Appliances Bsm Low SqFt : 520 Roof Shape . Dishwasher Bldg SqFt : 1,606 RoofMatl : Comp Shingle Hood Fan 1st Fir SqFt : 1,086 InteriorMat : Drywall Deck Upper Fir SqFt : Paving Matt : Concrete Garage Type : Attached Porch SqFt Const Type : Wd Studlshtg Garage SF : 572 Attic SqFt Ext Finish : 253 Deck SqFt . • This tille information has been furnished, without charge, in conformance with the guidelines approved by the State of Oregon Insurance Commissioner. The insurance Division cautions intermediaries that this service is designed to benefit the ultimate insureds. hdiscriminate use only benefiting intermediaries will not be permitted. Said services may be discontinued. No liability is assumed for any errors in this report. • • • Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon • ( ' j ui " \ II Y P Y N Ai W E Map # 1S136DC 03600 s The drawing below is copied from the public records and is provided solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises. Fidelity National Title assumes no liability for variations, if any, in dimensions, area or location of the premises or the location of improvements ascertained by actual survey. . • l � — 1 11 I R ='� 7 0 1§,I Si T REE-C 1111-!, f 111 CO s 0 , r, \ \ .. \ �� ,�i I 27 25 '. • AP ,. \ / / \ \ / \ . (4 . / \ ) a 1,....v. \r '� ,- f / \ • \ /\ 1"' f �\ / i o A \ • \ / 1 7 i \L \ ) \ / \ / 3700 1.0 3600 CD .X 0 ,1, ` ' \ \ 6 ' r 0 /\ I \ / - .35 AC .50 sac 0 ,u\ I ~ ' \ / 1 . ` ,, \ / \ S JDj\J - t / \ '— . \ - \ \\\ ,\ \# ..\ ,, \ \ \ ,\ \ ti / \ / \ ... , Kc, 0 . . /151361 ----7wr--- III . ,• , In • I / / \. 42 A • _ t' 1 • • I Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon • N ee W E / Map # 1S136DC 03600 - s The drawing below is copied from the public records and is provided solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises. Fidelity National Title assumes no liability for variations, if any, in dimensions, area or location of the premises or the location of improvements ascertained by actual survey. zwel 1 1 tao ' ' '. t •41K' t.1 • SW , 2ND ST) BAYLOR (CR 1522) ST SW ■ .,,4 ras Ow >o• 'a >/► 66410 4 • L, r-• I . N (� I r� j " . � �L 1 <' ` • < I l � ; l ` i rf d r it t•.fle Pi a aim: ' 4' ; 'Or", < 1' 1 FOR ADDJTSONAL MAPS a 3100 3000 a' ,i4 :3 4 I ;I'.II gyp ¢ yyyna.co.washi :n 7 8 A , P; Psi 4 2900 2800 6. 2700 a< 2701 t , 2800 w • ` - . -,. < ^+ < ` , +> 6 n 4 .L 3 R 2 A t = �f'' .'L =1 ' fl,I /, ,c'• ; '`c *�' < ": ,o.et ep, .43 AC .67 AC .43 AC ,44 AC .44 AC Z � . ` • ' : � ` r .< .: - too: .r , � '' 1 ` "+ ;<^ r, ' > � " " " 3200 Q - . e9 J < < � S < , < ; >, . 1 r re r ' a i i ra sr J , , :; 15 .' � ✓ <(, At, ' ° 's < ~ ` < , 1 P ;, ; <,�J< 8 9 0 3500 !B —,-;:- 1 • t'' .3�` I , < >`< Y >; ••<< <`: " 33 AC .33 AC n" ' r { I < � ? rates " >, a 7ssrP I �'. � ?� : x' `R 1 -� - -'>' 1 .<'>ct <. % 3508 q 3507 8 3609 8 k 3400 8 3610 ( l' : 2 .' 1 ' < <, • i 10 R 12 13 t4 "p 16 16 .r . • . AC 34 AC ,34 AC .34 AC r I - `1 . ...:., • 3608 = I. ,4'- '°'s °kI.'< axIo For. .31 AC 1— i .f` ` z2 6 s-,1 6 26, / T 1 Cancelled T ; 3sa6,3511 502.3503,3504,440,, - 3 8 Q ; �� : � ��' . f aoa,aaa 1100 1200,13 00,14000 .,�.,40a, / . ¢r 11 r.....,,,;, " .'t i ` I 1500.1700,1800.00,2100, .i iS .33 AC 2800.2400,2401.600 3600 2 S ¢- .ej 'eta, a` 76r _ x• 's• a 7t y ,:2zY - - 4700. E SW (3RD ST) CLINTON STRE 1 ii SW E o 1 � y., a1 " - ts' P; I' s d ' s J ` ' 't eaa ee. eo.o . R rr r .ea >; '>; �,�,,' ,, ` , I • - ' i n - 4100 . J rS � \ ' i. i �` t I ' �I 1 n <i ]�X ' ) ‘4,„1,..,1: 1 - 4 000 3900 I 3800 3700 ° " 4:,z;4 'p _ ' I .36 Ac 36 AC .36 AC $ .36 Ac - 60AC 3600 d . I • - ' ^� ::,,‘:. ` ._A i ilti • �s • - 2 ,50 r.n r-, ; 4200 8 I , > wr �rstEr. I_ l 1 a3 At J J ; 17 {ir J Y J J J �y �.,t== A-$. _, -- ��. T a s ue ~ % 7. 33 ` :-.1 " ; 3T; 4300 30 _ ' . — .1 ~ , at '` I PLOT DATE: Ji FOR ASSESSME . `-- t= ONLY -DO NC .r �} —`� — — ��� — —_� ts `' - ° �� FOROTN ZOO .• Meoaimsc lCnestedbyeithergre 31 1i ' , ,,. - — pattern y6AC' `'1 an titrreferancconlya*H N • . `_ ` .! mint cpertytwmWmlba. Pieta saran 8 ' <, 13 , "'— ^5 - tor the maat 4402 % y, v r ' Lnlr,J __? 21'09 ,.x '24 ? a,e411 1 S 1 36DC i 1 1 • . FORM No. 723 - BARGAIN AND 9AL (IndMd aI or Carpo $t *). O re 9Pre99 5TE W all C0YR1Y, Or�dR 2005-010990 1 10:10:28 AM EA NO PART OF A STEVENS -NESS FORM MAY BE REPRODUCED IN ANY F D Cr 1 Stn. t6 0 HOFFMAN NY 04)1511 83.00 88.00 811.00. Total • 122.00 Randall C. My_ers _ - _ Cc I IIII H 0015 • _ I. Any Hanlon, Director d An.ument endh,Rton st N. IMO OaCount/ Creator's Near end Address e E,lo Count/ Clere forYMUNnsten County, A??:: r Myers Family LLC rccen oeion.doM.by that en•unnMtru o• ,, F . � Mena ru received and r.wNed In the boot d ,-. A' G __ records of mad county. 1 bOOkf Jerry R. Huron. dream \ bFA C sees em.reand Tultlon, �' ../ Grantee's More end MMus E,Omcto County OM S PACE RESERVED and�01 ..- ._- ....- ................... ....- ...........- ....,....... ItO Ater recontng, 'owns to (Name. Address' AP)- FOR No. , Records of said County. M ers Family LLC - - RECORDERS USE > L0 SW 68th Pkwy. , X 200 Witness my hand and seal of County affixed. fort1and 97223 V ` Ueda requested omendes. rend, l to strums to (NMne, Admen, 21p): - -- -- - _ - -SAME AS ABOVE NAME TITLE By - --. , Deputy. BARGAIN AND SALE DEED KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS that 1 ____— RARDALIt._C I , I hereinafter called grantor, for the consideration hereinafter stated, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto _ __ —_ MYFRS FAMTLY_.,L AN OREGON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY — I hereinafter called grantee, and unto grantee's heirs, successors and assigns, all of that certain real property, with the tenements, hered- itaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in any way appertaining, situated in Washington County, State of Oregon, described as follows, to-wit: Z` I -SI Lot 7, ISAACS SUBDIVISION, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oreogn. I n fx 7 r • 1 W 6 • C O H a A, O O U (IF SPACE INSUFFICIENT. CONTINUE DESCRIPTION CM REVERSE) To Have and to Hold the same unto grantee and grantee's heirs. successors and assigns forever. The (rue and actual consideration paid for this transfer, stated in terms of dollars, is $ 0.00 - o However, the actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is ❑ part of the fl the whole (indicate which) consideration .0 (The sentence between the symbols m, if not applicable. should be deleted. See ORS 93.030.) In construing this deed, where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural, and all grammatical changes shall be made so that this deed shall apply equally to corporations and to individ als. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor has executed this instal, 'ton Januarx 28, 2005 -; if grantor is a corporation, it has caused its name to be signed and its seal,' f any, affixed by an officer or other person duly authorized to do so by order of its board of directors. , THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN _ -- THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPUCABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGU- ic,..yers LATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACOUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPRO- __ ------------------ PRIATE CRY 011 COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. STATE OF OREGON, County of ____HasbiUgtsLi._______ —_) ss. . ,.; This instrument was acknowledged before me on January_ L d_, 2005 ____ ----- ___, - by — Randa1LC__My.ers__ — - -__ -_. This instrument was acknowledged before me on -- , by — — — — — — -- - -- as -- • of - - - - -- — T � — — i I''tc OFFICIAL SEAL r` LAURA W FLYNN . �� I — — OP': NOTARY PUBLIC- OREGON Notary Public for Oregon COMMISSION N0. 373410 My commission expires ___J Q_:f�fr_ C__ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT. 23, 2007 • • s. l in Fidelity National Title Company run The Closing Company Prepared For: Prepared By: Information Services Department 1001 SW Fifth Avenue Suite 400 - Portland, Oregon 97204 Phone: (503) 227 -LIST (5478) Fax: (503) 274 -5472 E -mail: csrequest @fnfcom • OWNERSHIP INFORMATION . Owner : Myers Family LIc Ref Parcel Number : 1S136DC 03700 CoOwner : Five Centerpointe Dr T: O1S R: 01W S: 36 Q: 251 Site Address : 7050 SW Clinton St Tigard 97223 Parcel Number : R0285694 Mail Address : 7050 SW Clinton St Tigard Or 97223 Map Number . Telephone : Owner: Tenant: County : Washington (OR) SALES AND LOAN INFORMATION Transferred : 05/26/2006 Loan Amount: $257,011 Document # : 63696 Lender : Sterling Savings Bank Sale Price : $315,000 Loan Type : Conventional Deed Type : Warranty Interest Rate : Fixed % Owned : 100 Vesting Type : Corporation 4i PROPERT DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATION Map page & Grid :655 G3 Mkt Land : $182,940 Census : Tract: 307.00 Block: 1 Mkt Structure : $22,160 Subdivision /Plat : Isaacs Sub Other Neighborhood Cd : ZTGL Mkt Total : $205,100 Land Use : 2012 Com,Improved % Improved : 11 Legal : ISAACS SUBDIVISION, LOT 6, ACRES 06 -07 Taxes : $2,110.78 :.35 Exempt Amount : Exempt Type . Class Code : RI Levy Code : 02381 Millage Rate : 15.7510 • M50Assd Value : $134,010 PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS Bedrooms : 4 Lot Acres : .35 Year Built : 1963 Bathrooms : 2.00 Lot SqFt : 15,246 EffYearBlt : 1963 Heat Method : Forced Bsm Fin SqFt Floor Cover : Carpet Pool Bsm Unftn SqFt : Foundation : Concrete Ftg Appliances Bsm Low SqFt : 572 Roof Shape . Dishwasher Bldg SqFt : 1,804 Roof Mall : Comp Shingle Hood Fan 1st Fir SqFt : 1,232 InteriorMat : Drywall. Deck : Yes Upper Fir SqFt : Paving Marl : Concrete Garage Type : Attached Porch SqFt Const Type : Wd Studlshtg Garage SF : 460 Attic SqFt Ext Finish : 251 Deck SqFt : 200 • _ . This title information has been furnished, without charge, in conformance with the guidelines approved by the State of Oregon Insurance Commissioner. The Insurance Division cautions intermediaries that this service is designed to benefit the ultimate insureds. Indiscriminate use only benefiting intermediaries will not be permitted. Said services may be discontinued. No liability is assumed for any errors in this report. • • Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon N • IIIII Y P Y S� W E • Map # 1S136DC 03700 s The drawing below is copied from the public records and is provided solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises. Fidelity National Title assures no liability for variations, if any, in dimensions, area or location ofthe premises or the location of improvements ascertained by actual survey. LUI'JILJI'J I MC. '• ; .., w A. . 2 . 1 11. F 80.0 80.0 ao 7/ .69 r . eita o W ,46 Nr \ r ... 3800 3600 5 7 .35 AC .35 AC .5O AC V ] n. „.....,, _I 0 N :.. \ • , ,„„ak, ,,,, 8$ • . II 4\ ; \\ \\ . \ \"\ .,\ ,\ \\ \ \.\\ ,..\ ID 1 e . r • • • • 11111 Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon N • D0 W E Map # 1S136DC 03700 s The drawing below is copied from the public records and is provided solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises. Fidelity National 'Title assumes no liability for tariations. if any, in dimensions, area or location of the premises or the location of improvements ascertained by actual survey. • 1 4. - .o 4 ' 1 „tpr4I r • rE/n mows 1 tt✓It/ . 55 3100 3000 a. " ` , a 1 4 ;,�' ” ,t ,.. Is wW 7 6 0 < y 5 ; a 2900 A 2800 „ 2700 t, 2701 2800 , w . ' � • " ;.) ' ' ' . ',' 5 A 5 4 3 Sr 2 1 gl ' � ---' -- �. -. 3 , `> t,•< i sae' • is Ac .67 AC 49 AC .44 40 .44 AC Z , -, ` ; ; to 0° W -" < . 37 . • 320 ,, , '•13': 6� v, �', , `, .33 AC CE teosa s � 7r u eo e 110 , <`` �= "o :� x'3300 r 1 j { ' > !) ` s ;: 9 3500 „ 1 0 , :r„2,C'./..:7.: .23 AC .33 Ac ; , ;:,,,,,;&,,,,:, ,/,,,,,,-;, 4 `- 5 ` , MAO . 0 w t " r11 S ' -,!'4 iR 3400 3508 ° m , 3807 ; 3509 ; 3510 3 4 fiy - 1('" 4:' ;` .". <r1 .• i 0 R 13 l ,° 14 Y as AC a .s n c .34 AC a 4 AC `" .34 15 !e tB ^ ' ( >, 1- ^ r . ^ ' ` ; • ` ti fr. % ,/,,‘...,',,X.: . / � tn.za 3508 S 't • , -„ ),; �r, -:1 Cancelled Taxi e 3601 0 .97 AC O F ` , 61 14dJ ‘,••••,/ 29 127.. 9001000 �ttoo.l2t • w � • •' .93 AC 11 g n ` ' ✓I l ' f 1600.1700.1800.1$ • a a „, 7:. 11 - - 240 6( a: •ei 0:.,' �\ 101.a1 Al. �, o i 2 4700 zi .2x00. 1, • i 76 .. = R.77 1 i� R -,7 i SW 6' 11 ; (3RD ST) CLINTON STREET g SW 1 .... ". • • 1,.11 • �. JJ ae " qv B , 1 j al i v ..' 1 f ' s.r, r 04 A is c o 4000 S 3900 8 3800 3700 3000 3 , ON .36 AC J6 C A a6 AC .35 C .60 AC lr. ` r ; � ' ` ;, �' {• F -41✓I:. 4200 n ., j t � i��t g J i 43140 S8 13 D.1 V J 4 i J 1�1 : . � • .. . �. ° T �� , � ' 3s., PLOT [ 1 a3flo 8 30 ^ ' a , .t3r�a,. 31� FOR AS$. .40 AC 0 -` ^< < ONLY jw: r � ____ 1107.7 1 1 , ° 4400 • - AC 31 1.81 AC ,_yam .S .,-` 28, nlrrenrpmPelalbau °- s47.n '14+' - < `.�.. , - --1 for' e ' zr g 23 '24 2 .6 w .. •• 0080171CY 1 S 1 36DC • . •• , • Wall"County, Oregon 20 _063696 05/26/2006 03:0940 PM 31 1 DOW Crt :1 Stna72 1 REED 05.00 ✓ 0000 511.00 6315.00 • Total • 6337.00 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED THIS sPE 8IIII HIIIfl 1 III lIIplll 1111 II • Grantor: Sharon Beatrice St. Claire fir,. � I, Jerry H Director of An end Taxation .:•gib and E 1, d hereby Cl for * Vin ins rument , Oregon, omby nrtlymat th.wrRNnhatrun•rq of � ��. .:� r Grantee: Myers Family LLC wndng wu receiver" and recorded info, book of menu of ad d county. S 1 1+ r 7 1 , Until a change is requested, all tax statements shall be sent to the Jwrr R Hanson, Oo-e eor ueeammt and Taxation, ' on, " �,,;�; ` following address: exofnnd County Clerk Myers Family LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company Five Centerpointe Drive #280 Lake Oswego OR 97035 After Recording retum to: Myers Family LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company Five Centerpointe Drive #280 r " • Lake Oswego OR 97035 ! ` ; Wp$I?IN�T C T h Y • fl_rlh.r y.�y Y � REAL t r.,�PCt T A S`ER TAX Escrow No. 867729 KAF I ?�,' -z.' FEE AI CAT E Title No. 867729 ti = ` ' 0 SHARON BEATRICE ST. CLAIRE (formerly known also as sharon Beatrice Pottmeyer) ( also known as Sharon B. p Pottmeyer), Grantor, conveys and warrants to MYERS FAMILY LLC, AN OREGON LIMITED LIABILITY . ,.. COMPANY, Grantee, the following described real property free of encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein m situated in Washington County, Oregon, to wit: 12 Lot 6, ISAACS SUBDIVISION, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon. The said property is free from encumbrances except: COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS, SET BACK IX LINES, POWERS OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS. AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, IF ANY. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER CHAPTER 1, OREGON LAWS 2005 (BALLOT MEASURE 37 (2004)). THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO ID (� VERIFY APPROVED USES, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930 AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER CHAPTER 1, OREGON LAWS 2005 (BALLOT MEASURE 37 (2004)). N The true consideration for this conveyance is $315,000.00. Which is paid by a Qualified Intermediary as part of a 1031 deferred 0 exchange. (Here comply with the requirements of ORS 93.030). . Dated this a4 _ day of rry.) t , 2006. S . ron Bea rice t. laire State: OR County: Washington 1�,� The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this CALk day of t t: i 111, , 20Q1 . by: Sharon Beatrice St. Claire • J �� Notary Pu lic 4110 on� My Commission Expires: • ._� >, OFFICIAL SEAL KAREN L FABIO N OTARY PUBLIC-OREGON `r � COMMISSION NO. 405222 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 27, 2010 IP TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED (coin PAGE 1 EXHIBIT D: PRE -APP MTG NOTES • • • . . Z / TITY OF TIGARD Alt . PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES com Shaping Better Community (Pre- Appl Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) nnc of I 14- .2 WA FAE, KSV-t to lB NON- RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: M`f Er i ccwi l AGENT: 1"c Puma Phone: ( 503 ) .5 ) - I S C 5 Phone: (Soso 1 11'� 1 PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS /GENERAL LOCATION: 1 050 7 v Ze7 SLo, TAX MAP(S) /LOT #(S): I S 1 ( D L Ta k l �t s I C NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: S b TZ. -- S c-• rvI + e t ew PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: l 1 - S tz r Of-- ;1 d,'re (II L - 1 �s e;� � sr • '~GY¢.+t C��n A� ' GGO SF,l Ynk JJ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: b ■ x` : . . . ri. , ,.,,\ iQorA._ Tr■ctri / ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: i^'1 'U. E. ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18. Solo 1 MINIMUM LOT SIZE: D sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: 50 ft. Max. building height: WA ft. Setbacks: Front ft. Side n ft. Rear O ft. Comer ft. from tsm reet. . MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: RS % Minimum or natural vegetation area: iR e- - c s' f NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout czvy cs� THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED F- PARTIES, AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. • * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address- building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. ITY OF TIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 1 ■4- Residen Application/Planning Division Section , NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Biter 18.390) The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. 2 IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. .O ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.105 and 18.765) Minimum number of accesses: 1 Minimum access width:. 3 0 {cr r. Minimum pavement width: 3 cr- h r.e d All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive -in use queuing areas: w j4t E" WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.705.030) WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi - building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. ; -v ❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) - , �� > STREETS: feet from the centerline of > LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. > FLAG LOT: 10 -FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. ❑ SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Section 18.130.010.BJ BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non- residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: • A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; > All actual building setbacks will be at least half ( %) of the building's height; and > The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. IN BUFFERING AND SCREENING Meier to Code Chapter 18.745) In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if • not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. 'GARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 ..II Appficatio&Planning Division Section The ESTIMATED REQLD BUFFER WIDTHS applicable to Or proposal area are: C.) feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. to feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: r c i re t -e A- C • c, .� �r . ' 11,A9 ar�cq ( s Q LANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapters 18 .145,18.765 and 18.705) STREET TREES ARE • REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right -of -way or on private pr erty within six (6) feet of the rig.h.L9f- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2- inches when measured four eabove grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. ., Sti:Cl, n•te,„ t — jt; A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. fid RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7551 Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. C. all -(-� • e rv ie P te ; ; ;; ; je_i-kr 0..,1 �"r- rtes e v� i.za �tz s-iz� "t e'— "t d..zsA C 5�3�i 5 - (r jgi PARKING (Refer to Code Section 18.765.040) REQUIRED parking for this type of use: & -V e �-t ° t h �` �' ( t '' ' • Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): • SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): L% NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND /OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. z� r ; K fcc:.v-1 Inc, : I r,,.r_ik - -a Cc t' t<L PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: > Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. > Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3) feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. HANDICAPPED PARKING: All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. • BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI - FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas p rotected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. tm �� . r�eVA ■re .+ •� . O.S/ I , °cv .S F. LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.765.080) Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. CITY OF TIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 NON - Residential AppEca•oNPlanning Division Section • ' . BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Culrection 18.7651 • BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI - FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. OD SENSITIVE LANDS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7151 The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100 -YEAR . FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre - application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. ❑ STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Code Section 18.715.080.C) When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. E CLEARWATER SERVICES (CWS) BUFFER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96-44 /USA Regulations - Chapter 3) LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: • TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAURESOLUTION & ORDER 96-44 SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION • SLOPE ADJACENT a - WIDTH . OF VEGETATED TO SENSITIVE AREA CORRIDOR PER SIDE : • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 1 10 to <50 acres 15 feet 1 >50 to <100 acres 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers, streams, and springs with year -round flow • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres . • Natural lakes and ponds • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% 0 10 to <50 acres 30 feet + >50 to <100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50 -200 feet. Measure • Rivers, streams, and springs with year -round flow in 25 -foot increments from the starting • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in • Natural lakes and ponds <25% slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine' 4 Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams /rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for fakes or ponds. whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 • feet within the river /stream or wetland vegetated corridor, shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. 5 Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. ' 6 The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet, if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. CITY OF TIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 NON - Residential Appkation/Planning Division Section • Restrictions in the Vegelp Corridor: NO structures, develop ent, construction activities, garden , lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the CWS Design and Construction Standards. • Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a• subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Lette P . - PRIOR [0 SUBMIT FAL of ny land use applications, the applicant must obtain a - CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the R &O 96 -44 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive. areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.180) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. X Q( TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.190.030.CJ A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; • ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two- thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. ig MITIGATION (Refer to Code Section 18.190.0601) REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. • ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. CITY OF TIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 HON- Residential AppEcation/Planning Division Section • • ➢ If a replacementie of the size cut is not reasonably ilable on the local market or would not be viable, the irector shall require replacement wi more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: 0 The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated • caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN -LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. ZI CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.795) The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road /driveway, road /railroad, and road /road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. . ' ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15- foot -wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the • parcel is Tess than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. • CODE CHAPTERS _ 18.330 (Conditional Use) 18.620 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 18.765 (Off- Street Parking/Loading Requirements) - 18.340 (Directors Interpretation) 18.630 (Washington Square Regional Center) _ 18.775 (Sensitive Lands Review) - 18.350 (Planned Development) _ . 18.705 (Access/Egress/Circulation) 18.780 (signs) 18.360 (Site Development Review) 18.710 (Accessory Residential Units) _ 18.785 (Temporary Use Permits) - 18.370 (Variances/Adjustments) 18.715 (Density Computations) _X._ 18.790 (Tree Removal) - 18.380 (Zoning Map/Text Amendments) _ 18.720 (Design Compatibility Standards) ; 18.795 (Visual Clearance Areas) - 18.385 (Miscellaneous Permits) 18.725 (Environmental Performance Standards) _ 18.798 (Wireless Communication Facilities) 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) 18.730 (Exceptions To Development Standards) ...; . 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards) _ 18.410 (Lot Line Adjustments) 18.740 (Historic Overlay) - 18.420 (Land Partitions) 18.742 (Home Occupation Permits) - 18.430 (Subdivisions) _1_ 18.745 (Landscaping & Screening Standards) _ 18.510 (Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) X_ 18.520 (Commercial zoning Districts) 18.755 (Mixed sad Waste/Recycling Storage) - 18.530 (industrial zoning Districts) 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations) 411 CITY OF TIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 NON - Residential Application/Planning Division Section • • • - ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMES: • • _ tv .t l c );,nP ; oyvt r (. ( r:I:�l.r: �-- ! fs pri'c r • `/ _ ' C . f l l: i Nt f "(L : 2 ( J J, LL 1�: ; ' �1't f ; S F r' It : t- . E n rs 1 1 Y4 f S 1 1 Ci �l � S c:1 t ,-; Gr-t C filJt r? .)u r C1 IA) ms I/i t Yt . j-c :^ VY 1 te, d. ,,, tr S-tcu, n `• `'i 1-r 0i j fl;.; c, Sc Cikaf-i-eA. \i. J J J t T i rv,e Fat-tnk r CV c - l c IP ' i. ■g A _r re vise_ L.. . a — WeC r X QvG d -+-- C. - t vv c� E c — d- iT. . o .ndr c c..,., G v rL is I- • PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. • APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. The Planning counter closes at 5:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2" x 11 ". One 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project shall be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Applications with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the . application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 NON - Residential ApprcationiPlanning Division Section The administrative decistor public hearing will typically occur�roximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as eing complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public • hearing. A 10 -day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard I-1(-.a r► n a- ; c ( Le. r A b fl c h a rt which illustrates the review process is available ftom the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on -site by the applicant no Tess than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre - application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). 4 LEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to ite planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE - APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN • APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: E t-vi e CITY OF TIGARD PIAtt DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE -APP. MEETING PHONE: 5o3-- 16 FAX: 503 - 684 -1297 EMAIL E rK ;1 C) ti- Gr'1 — Or- l z •.r TITLE 18 (QTY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (ODE) INTERNET ADDRESS: www.ci.tigard.or.us H:\pattylmasters1Pre-App Notes Commercial -doc Updated: 15- Dec -04 Engineering section: preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 NON - Residential ApplcationiPlanning Division Section • • • PRE- APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ENGINEERING: SECTION : :::. ^ : seoao • C De = - S(ucpimA Better Community PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Mantel: 1S136DC Tax Lolls]: 3600 a 3100 Use Type: SUR The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right -of -way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights -of -way to the ultimate functional street classification right -of -way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. • Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: q 9 Y ® SW 70 Avenue to 60 feet (Requires a 30 foot dedication from tax lot 3600) ® SW Clinton Street to 30 feet from centerline (currently 25 feet of ROW from centerline). Provide ROW dedication for corner radius at Clinton/70 Avenue. ❑ SW to feet ❑ SW to feet Street improvements: ® Half street improvements will be necessary along SW 70 Avenue, to include: • 18 feet of pavement. from new face of curb to centerline, but in no case less than 24 feet of paving total. ® concrete curb M storm sewers and other underground utilities - • ® 12 -foot concrete sidewalk with 4' x 4' tree wells - ® street trees sized and spaced per TDC/Triangle standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two -year streetlight fee. CITY OFTIMARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Paget of 6 Engineering Department Sectlon • ❑ Other: • ® Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Clinton Street, to include: • ®18 feet of pavement from centerline to curb, 24 foot minimum improved section ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 12 -foot concrete sidewalk with 4' x 4' tree wells ® street trees sized and spaced per TDC/Triangle standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two -year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two -year streetlight fee. • ❑ Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two -year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb • ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees CITY OFTIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 Engineering Department Section ❑ street signs, traffi,ntrol devices, streetlights and a tear streetlight fee. ❑ Other: • Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1.) (2.) Overhead Utility Lines: ® Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in -lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in -lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW Clinton Street (opposite side of street). Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in -lieu described above. • Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is located in 70 Avenue. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to extend the public sewer main to the intersection of 70 and Clinton. The sewer main may also have to be extended west in Clinton Street to the applicant's west property line. The sewer main needs to be designed deep enough to be extended north to Atlanta Street in the future. Water Supply: The Tualatin Valley Water District (Phone:(503) 642 -1511) provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: John Dalby, (503) 356 -4723] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for • information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. CRY OFTIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 Engineering Department Section Storm Sewer Improvement. • All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub -basin drainage analysis to ensure • that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. On -site detention is required. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00 -7) which requires the construction of on -site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in -lieu of constructing an on- site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in -lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ® Construction of an on -site water quality facility. ❑ Payment of the fee in -lieu. • Water quality treatment must be provided for all impervious surface area runoff. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. 1) 18.705.030.H.1 Provide an access report. See 18.810.030.AC for specifics. Provide preliminary sight distance certification with a list of improvements required to achieve sight distance. 2) Applicant's engineer must provide p.m. peak trip contribution data for the following intersections: 72" /Dartmouth, 72" 217 and 68 • TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county -wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of • the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy CITY OF TIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 Engineering Department Section permit. Deferral of the pent until occupancy is permissiblenly when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. • Pay the TIF PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning /Engineering counter in City. Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for any final design - related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. • Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer /Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: Han PFI Permit is required, the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503 -639 -4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi- family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on -site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued • after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi - family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub - trades (excludes grading, etc.). This CRY OF T16ARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section permit can not be /hued in a subdivision until the p� improvements are substantially complete and a mylcopy of the recorded plat has been l gturned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. • Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which Tots have natural slopes between 10% and 20 %, as well as Tots that have natural slopes in excess of 20 %. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the Tots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. • PREPARED BY: ; c2-►, k_D - € r.) J ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF DATE Phone: [503] 639 -4171 Fax 15031624 -0752 document3 Revised: September 2, 2003 • CITY OFTIGARD Pre - Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section EXHIBIT E: NEIGHBORHOOD MTG • • • • • AFFII RVIT OF MAILING /POSING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICF. ORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE QTY OF TIGARD A COPY OF HE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME ROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE, TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 -8189 IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT & COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: 22ao • I, CARS tN 1 S ze,"v S Y.4 , being duly sworn, depose and say that on the • • ' day of AAA et k,S V , 20 O 7 , I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the fttached lis a notice of a mee ' : to discuss a proposed developthent at (ornca,j r7 OLO 7O 5Q . ' J G11K 6 . N S I vL d ) f - , a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. J I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at ak♦ 0 to A . A c21, p .. i IL A • 1 with postage prepaid thereon. Q 7 2.0S r. / i . -.A. / IL .- 'gnat= (In e presence of a Notary ) blic) POSTING: . 5 e.ti MAIM v- t Na 1 szt.A. t3-c P , do aff that I am a ent ) per' the uu� nterest P P osetia i in a ro lication _. d land use application !A ,—.. r_ .. C� Cu.1 affe the land located at to on s IFnoa... .( . • ., ., .. . _ . L a - 70 U OS -.. kJ 1 " , and did on tae 222 day of A t t. IA 6 1 .--- , 20_7 personally . ost notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a S 1 ± e V ie.. 0044 — lan use app cation, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. 1 e.,� The sign was posted at ci k o ye- G — 70 2_0k SD S t.1/4) C. 1 t N 51J s", T'y &r J--- - (state location you posted notice on prope / • Signature (I the presence of a No Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE /NOTARIZE) STATE OF ) County of ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affumed before me on the oZol■ day of CC C-1 , 20 O !=� OFFICIAL - SEAL �`'f = SHIRLEY L TREAT '. ,k NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON " / L� • COMA COMMISSION NO. 410777 f •/ �N 2011 NOTARY P IC OF OREGON My Commission Expires: NtiL ' ; 30 1/ t\curpin \Wasters \neighborhood meetings \affidavit of mailingpnsting neighborhood meeting-400 Page 5 R , • ,. August 22, 2007 • RE: Proposed Tigard Triangle Office Bldg. Dear Interested Party, LRS Architects represents Myer Family LLC, owners of the property located at 7050 and 7020 SW Clinton Street. We are planning for an office building to be constructed at the above address that will involve a land use review by the City of Tigard. Our proposed building and site design will be considered by the Tigard Planning Department under the Site Development Review standards, Tigard Triangle Design Standards, and the MUE Zone District standards respectively found in the Tigard Community Development Code Sections 18.360, 18.620, and 18.520. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approval, we would like to discuss this proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: ti Thursday, September 6, 2007 Landmark Ford 12300 SW 68 Parkway Parts & Service Building See receptionist for directions to 2 " Floor Stairway ti • 6:30 PM Please be aware that this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the city. We look forward to discussing this proposal with you. Please call me at (503) 265 -1590 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LRS Architects, Inc. /44 ,1 ‘ A.m4)2 _ ,4, ,,g Gary Miniszewski, AIC Senior Planner b ti • y IS 44- vu) 1-Pt^ /Pi v b\hi p\Atr OK I Voirol °D*61 butpdaw uosi,17701 • 1 , G��� Guff- N its �vc�� 1O /C S' LO 0 S -L13 -11 O - f z3 - - - C / --n, , CL_c- V c). -7 .7 S c-3 G L.: vv, ' •‘ ,' -- 6 mil - `�- f . • - __84-2` -� i_ gecti 1 / 21 '7a -6 .. .. S. 3_ _63y - F3 . pt. a k Bc -ci ((=? 3 c 5I./ 72 ,.„,/ .4.., ; .r v3 - 60 - c7 6 g'z.:. fKen' Aladlr, ' / /90 5 t-,) [04 t AV-e..__ 503 --7wq -05 d�A2zi SA\,arUc //9 S .t-.1 . 6 `( fih � V2 � ' ° -7��( -230) ._ .L--- _e f - �ei eLL5 % " . 7�'`i - al Arm ,,,- j ` 2`' �:' ��� i _(_<_-_-,e___L. ‘x. -_ )_ _ _ <-1 ! 1 -- - - - - -- - - -- - 1 - _. . _i i i E 1 i • I -- ,e147 ,esaislx,/,/ y6/0 7 d 4 4 �r Seven to ten persons attended the meeting. The attendance list is attached. Gary Miniszewski read the attached statement of purpose the meeting. 11111 Paul Boundy with LRS architects described the project. Y P J The following are questions asked by the attendees. 1. What kind of businesses will occupy the proposed building? A representative of RCM Homes LLC answered. He stated that RCM Homes, a home builder, another home building firm and possibly an engineering firm. 2. Where will water come from to serve the new building? Steve Roper, the Civil Engineer, answered that City water pipes are in the adjoining streets. 3. Will the building be sprinkled? Paul Boundy answered that this has not been determined yet. 4. How will Clinton street and 70th Ave be improved? Steve Roper answered that a 5' dedication will be made along Clinton and a 30' dedication along 70th. Some minor improvements will be made along the Clinton r /w, moreover, a 22' wide 1/2 street will be constructed from scratch mainly on the west 1/2 of 70th. Clinton Street will be connect with 70th to make a new intersection. 5. Will sewerage need to be pumped? Steve Ro answered that it would not. • 6. Will an LID be involved with this project? Steve answered no. 7. When will the application be submitted and when will construction start? Paul Boundy answered that an application will be submitted in the next month and it will take 3 to 4 months for a decision on the project. Construction will start Winter of 08 or Spring and building completion and occupancy will be Fall of 08. 8. Where will storm water be disposed? Steve answered that there are storm water pipes in both Clinton and 70th Ave. that they can connect to. 9. Will the building be built with Green features? The owner's representative was not sure they would include any major green features. LRS staff indicated that the stormwater will be filtered before it goes into the storm system and some existing trees will be retained. Gary Miniszewski, AICP Senior Planner LRS Architects 720 NW Davis Suite 300 Portland, Oregon 97209 503.265.1590 DIRECT 503.221.1121 OFFICE 503.221.2077 FAX • httpl/www.lrsarchitects.com • • N 1111-11 . '. :: N 9 1 S 2:1 0 . • . • H S . • . .. : . _.......... ...... - ._--.. g ; . i . I f ,I : j .'''; '•!:::; 1-1 .:. :if :'.. .. • . ---- ,::::::•:•••:i.••,,,, :,:i.gi':.•:--:::"•!,.. :.,,i4,:::•:!.:::.:1'..::.::',„ .,,,,,,::•:•i'.:::...::::......„ il -, . ..0 .' ' ' ' .:....:.::t, 1:1 11.... .. .. N, .A.f 221i. ............._ •41:!::::............22.;.: „::•,:. f.: t w .• A ,, s'•••.2,............2 • . *I • • •iir.::: 2 _ . . ... Nis.;.:...: .:,:..;„ 2 .......:....e... 2 : 2 : J • 2 0 : f.. , .. : ......;:7::::: .. j.............: . : . -.2kro i ..,.::. ,, ,: , ..'....1.,. :::„ : :•••4.1:1! .:.• . - L:........„2.21.-- • -2 -•••• • l (.3 Ail k ' l. i • iiii • iii? 4 2 I t.; 44 .44 4' 444 ..• . • . 4 4 4 48 8888 444 8 . . 44,4::•!IfIT:i4.448••. *4:: . 8 4 8 4 ...4 • 4.4: • • • • I . • si . ii::: ,...: ''..' ...., • , — • . .'!„. . i.....:. — 1 : . : :: iii :: •::. : .• I ii . ,,Ii i.... ii ill:::::,..:•:•,,,. ••••••••„...1 , . . .: „„ ... .. • : !: . :::: . r..11 . :11. . . N.. i . iggiiiiiiti , : .. • ' ..: t ., 0 , •:.., I • .:. * • . . .. . . • .. . •• • ...: :. • ..„ . •• . . . ' , . i,:.... . • ‘.... : . . ....,,,,,,:: ..iii. • . • • • • ••:, .: ...,,,.."1.•silk, q:::14.1. .iii ii . •'•11••: • I•i•:f;iiilki .... •• • . Ali.% .. .. . iii:.' • .: .., ' .. ....... I. :::•"! ..):*;.i...1..C......ii'■■•■.. i ....: ***;... ..' • . ,..0 ••••:•:.44';•1..E.:41:4,1. .0. .;:::• •:'49'.:4::4 '' .•• .•':• • iii. S % :::: li 1:;fig.)(i•X :.*:. .......1;7::::. ...... '• .. .....7....... .. n..,,' . . . . . .1i:i1 ( •• : ' gi.i.. i '':;:::::.: • , • i • i I 'II 1 I 1 . I 1 • 14 • : . . . i . • 1 ' • . ....: .' . ' •.*:•'.; :•' :, :,..,..,. I . . , 1 . 0 ' • i • . 0 EXHIBIT F: MATERIALS INFO • • • • • v— ►— L U M I N I S Wall mount SYRIOS Specification W1282 U il © 3 All exposed cast aluminum components are made of non corrosive III pure aluminum copper free (Aluminum is less than .1% copper content. #356 alloy.) Finish: All polyester powder baked coatings preceded with a 5 baths preparation process. Meets military grade MIL- C781706 with a 2000 hours salt spray test. r.,■ / - Pulse rated porcelain socket or 75W/600V thermoplastic compact fluorescent socket. - One -piece molded silicone gasket with memory retention. High power factor CWA ballast. Or 98% P.F.electronic smart ,' �_� ballast with end of life detection for compact fluorescent. - All stainless steel hardware. ., ∎ -. All Moving and removable parts are sealed with a J .., ;..:: memory retention silicone gasket. :; 1- Cast aluminum ballast housing. • 2- Cast aluminum modular optical light chamber. It 3- Semi - specular aluminum reflector. 4- #12 Ga, Galvanized wall pressure mounting plate. 5- Up -light clear tempered glass. Flush mount installation to avoid accumulation of debris. 6- Clear tempered lens. 7- Cast aluminum sealed lens frame. 11 LI Mounting Photometry 4 1/2" 7 3 /4" —I ' Separate updated technical specification sheets with related 11•111111 1 4 " 4" -� - 04 . v � fv , models and light sources with ` ♦ � rf � �� l ►��� ��� I.E.S formatted photometry are L18" 1 • � 1 51/2" ' . �� `� 1 � U � = available in is.com. �/I /l \ \���� /� \ 91/2" ��1 1 witiniVw so ■ van L i t Certification Mounting UL. Wet Location. Max. weight: 27 lbs. Installation: Mounts over a standard 4" octagonal electrical box with 3 1/2" Gc mounting holes. (by others). Additional separate Please refer to page mounting holes are provided with wall plate.. 128 for additional details. Model# Light source selection Voltage Finish Options 1E,X ,] 120 V Standard facto ry (Refer to color chart) Accessories prewired Standard selection ❑ L: Set of 3 cast aluminum MH (ED17) CF (Gx24q) (If no voltage is specified) louver rin s. For other voltages, please ❑ WHT:Snow white g ❑ M70 Sing lamp specify with catalog number. ❑ BKT: J bl Electrical ❑ M100 ❑ BZT: Bronze ❑ EM42S: 1 lamp (26/32/42W) ❑ F142 HID EM battery. O M150 ❑ F157 ❑ GRT: Ti tanium gray ❑ FS: Fuse. ❑ W1282 ❑ M175 ❑ 208 V ❑ DGT: Gun metal ❑ PH1: 120/277V photo cell. ❑ 240 V ❑ CHT: Champagne ❑ PH2: 347V photo cell. HPS (ED17) CF (Gx24q) 0 QS: Quartz lamp socket ❑ 277 V for extemal emergency ❑ H70 Two lamp ❑ 347 V ❑ GNT: Forest green power. ❑ H100 Optional colors ❑ QRS: Quartz restrike ❑ H150 ID F226 Compact fluorescent ❑ CS: Custom color standby relay. ❑ F232 smart ballast 120/277 ❑ RAL RAL# color EM optional battery test switch and pilot lamp are installed remotely. ❑ 347 V (To specify) (See page 103) L (Lamps by others) LA, may be altered for improvements or discontinued without prior notice. • inaries LUMINIS [ USA ] - 3555 NW 53rd Court, Fort Lauderdale, FL.33309 Tel: 954 .717 .4155 Fax: 954. 717.4157 Web: www.luminis.com LUMINIS [ Canada J - 87 C Brunswick D.D.O. Q.C. Canada H9B 2J5 Toll free: 888 .401 .6999 Sept. 2006 Rev. Feb.2007 Page 122 __► —T_ LUMINIS Wall mount TEMPO Specification TP200 CI All exposed cast aluminum components are made of non corrosive • r © pure aluminum copper free (Aluminum is less than .1% copper content. #356 alloy.) Finish: All polyester powder baked coatings preceded with LI a 5 baths preparation process. Meets military grade MIL- C781706 with a 2000 hours salt spray test. 1 - Pulse rated medium base porcelain socket. g - 75W /600V thermoplastic compact fluorescent socket. / - One -piece molded silicone gasket with memory retention. - High power factor CWA ballast. Or 98% P.F.electronic smart / 1 y , ballast with end of life detection for compact fluorescent. / I / - All stainless steel hardware. r - All Moving and removable parts are sealed with a memory retention silicone gasket. - 1 Isolated dust proof mounting chamber with #11 ga. galvanized pressure mounting plate allowing luminaire tilt up for ease of installation and wiring connection. 2- One piece closed shell cast aluminum optical lighting chamber. © 3- Ballast mounting tray with quick disconnect terminals. 4- HID: Standard type III multifaced, computer generated high 6 performance reflector. (Optional forward throw type IV reflector. Specify RF4) CFL: Standard type IV (forward throw) 5- One -piece cast aluminum precision fit lens frame , with integral cast hinge swing -out mechanism. 6- Clear tempered lens, Built in cast hinge it< ....... -- mechanism to ensure maximum strength and durability: 10" I Photometry " I 8 1 /2" �:i:.tiffi�.W: Separate updated technical III 14 1 P ours sp ecification sheets with related k . 1 1I �.. models and light sources with g., / All I.E.S formatted photometry are 6 7/8 3 1/2" bale," , A available on O ,,�; — 11111041 •� 90 www.luminis.com. tr / :fie L 12 3/4" J Bottom view L_ ___J �� 1 0 j �I�� o 1 , 11 ∎∎∎ o, • Certification Mounting & E.P.A. ik. ∎AllV UL. Wet Location. Max. weight: 26 lbs Plane view Cross view Installation: Mounts over a standard 4" octagonal box For options details and with 3 1/2" c/c mounting holes.additional mounting holes specifications, please refer to are •rovided with wall .late. pages 42 & 72 Model# Light source selection Voltage Finish Options MH (ED17) CF (Gx24q) 120 V Standard factory (Refer to color chart) Accessories rewired p Standard selection ❑ RF4: Type IV Multifaceted O M70 Single lamp (If no voltage is specified) specular reflector. ❑ M100 For other voltages, please ❑ WHT:Snow white (H.I.D. Sources) y ❑ F157 specify with catalog number. ❑ BKT: Jet black - ❑ M150 Electrical V El F170 ❑ B ZT: B ronze o❑ M175 El F185 H.I.D. ❑ EM42S: 1 lamp (26/32/42W) ❑ TP200 — 2G8 -1 base ❑ GRT: Titanium gray ❑ FS: Fuse I HPS (ED17) (120V) ❑ 208 V El DGT: Gun metal ❑ PH1: 120/277V photo cell. ❑ 240 V ❑ PH2: 347V photo cell. d] '1 ; ❑ H70 ❑ CHT: Champagne ❑ QS: Standby lamp socket. CF (Gx24q) ❑ 277 V ❑ MST: Matte silver ❑ QRS: H.I.D. lamp restrike IUD IA, ❑ H100 Two lamp ❑ 347 V a - ❑ H150 El GNT: Forest green w ❑ F242 Optional colors TA COMP. FLUO. ❑ CS: Custom color c Smart ballast 120/277 El RAL RAL# color ❑ 347 V (To specify) L. (Lamps by others) L L • luminaires may be altered for design improvements or discontinued without prior notice. LAD LUMINIS [USA I - 3555 NW 53rd Court, Fort Lauderdale, FL.33309 Tel: 954 .717 .4155 Fax: 954. 717.4157 Web: www.luminis.com LUMINIS [ Canada I - 87 C Brunswick D.D.O. Q.C. Canada H9B 2J5 Toll free: 888 .401 .6999 Sept. 2006 Rev. Feb.2007 Page 129 • PATRIOT (Various reflectors are protected.S. Patent No. 6,464,378.) • HOUSING - One- piece, die -cast aluminum in a multi- radiused, rectangular shape ,< with mounting arm cast in as an integral part of the housing. All hardware is 0 stainless steel or electro -zinc plated steel. DOOR FRAME - The Patriot's one - piece, die -cast aluminum door frame secures to the housing with a stainless steel hinge bracket. An integral over - center - i' _ � latch allows easy tool -less access. Door frame may then be easily removed from housing. Door is provided with a catch mechanism that limits door h swing. A one -piece extruded silicone gasket seals the door frame against the housing. The standard housing/door seal design prevents external € contaminants from entering the Patriot, resulting in an IP65 rating in all versions. Flat l ensed fomin LENS /GASKET - The Patriot is available with a tempered flat clear glass lens. A 1!]1 meet IESNA p g 11�IfiN full cutoff / one -piece extruded silicone gasket seals the lens to the die -cast aluminum door ��\ / classification. frame. DIMENSIONS SOCKETS - Porcelain mogul -base sockets. All sockets are factory prewired with a disconnect plug for the ballast. All sockets are pulse- rated. r (208mm) LIGHT SOURCES - Pulse -Start Metal Halide, Super Metal Halide, Super Metal Mil 8.19° Halide Reduced Envelope, Metal Halide, Metal Halide Reduced Envelope, or 1 High Pressure Sodium. Clear lamp is supplied as standard. (768mm) BALLAST - High -power factor ballast. Pulse -Start Metal Halide, Super Metal 30.25° Halide, Metal Halide, and High Pressure Sodium fixtures feature a CWA type ......"1." ballast, designed for -20° F operation. Optional Quick Connect package includes supply wiring plus modular plugs for easy ballast wiring and a removable ballast tray. (as9mm ) REFLECTORS/DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS - The Patriot is available with a wide �� 19.25° variety of reflectors, including Type!! (2), Type III (3), Type V (5), Forward Throw (Fr), and Automotive Forward Throw (FA). All reflectors are field- • • rotatable, enabling generous flexibility in distribution patterns, without fixture movement. Photometric data is tested in accordance with IESNA guidelines. BRACKETS - The Patriot's integral cast mounting arm is flat for square pole applications. The fixture may also be mounted to round poles using the ail round pole adaptor accessory (RPPC), which must be ordered separately. An (457mm) 4 extruded 6" arm extension is available (but not required) for D90 °, 090 °, T90° 18° and TN 120° fixture configurations. A locking nut secures two through bolts • / Radius Arm Bracket and a reinforcing plate to the pole, stabilizing it for easy fixture mounting. < BKA BO RA 8 Weight (3kg) 7lbs. E.P.A. = 0.7 SHIELDING - External House Side Shields are available for field installation with Types 2, 3, and FT distributions. Internal Louver available for field installation Upsweep Bracket - BKU BO - - 19 . with Types 3 and FT distributions on 400 watt and below fixtures. Weight (7kg)15lbs. E.P.A. = 0.4 FINISHES - Each fixture is finished with LSI's DuraGrip polyester powder coat • finishing process. The DuraGrip finish withstands extreme weather changes Fi without cracking or peeling, and is guaranteed for five full years. Standard BKA BO EC 6 CLR Extension Arm colors include bronze, black, platinum plus, buff, white, satin verde green, . Weight (2kg) 5lbs. E.P.A. = 0.3 metallic silver, and graphite. PHOTOMETRICS - Please visit our web site at www.Isi- industries.com for LUMINAIRE EPA CHART detailed photometric data. Patriot Flat Glass Single 1.5 f 41 D180° 3.0 IP. D90° 2.3 c us p u9TEn p6 �� TN120° 4.0 T90° 3.8 wet location rv' * O90° 4.5 SHIPPING WEIGHTS Patriot • Catalog Moat; Est weight (kg/16s.) WOO (to n.) MOM( n.) Height (maim.) Note: External House Side Shield adds to fixture EPA. PTH 34174 863/34 559/22 305/12 Consult factory. k Project Name I Fixture Type 1 2007 r<, LSI INDUSTRIES INC. .co°w,°... s...rv..: Catalog # I PATRIOT • 0 LUMINAIRE ORDERING INFORMATION Luminaire Lamp Line Luminaire • Prefix Watta e Light Source Lens Voltage Finish Horizontal Burn 2-Type ii Distribution 250 PSMH— Pulse Start Metal Halide F — Flat Clear 480 BRZ Bronze PTH 3 -Type III 320 320, 750 Watt Tempered MT - Multi Taa BLK - Black FT- Forward Throw 400 SMH - Super Metal Halide Glass TT - Tri -Tap PLP- Platinum Plus FA — Automotive 750 250 Watt BUF - Buff Forward Throws SMHR — Super Metal Halide WHT - White 5 - Type V Reduced Envelope 400 Watt SVG - Satin Verde MU - Metal Halide Green 250 Watt GPT - Graphite MHR — Metal Halide MSV - Metallic Silver Reduced Envelope 400 Watt HPS - High Pressure Sodium 250, 400 Watt I I f I PTH 5 400 MHR F MT MSV PCR Options EXAMPLE OF A TYPICAL ORDER PCR - Photoelectric Control Receptacle QC - Quick Connect Package? LL - Less Lamp FOOTNOTES: 1 - Available with 750 PSMH only 5- Tri -Tap is shipped standard for Canadian applications. Tri -Tap consists of 120V, 277V, and 2- 750 PSMH available in distribution types: 3, 5, FT, & FA. 347V. Tri- Tap is pre -wired for highest voltage. Alternate voltages will require field re- wiring. 3 For international voltages, consult factory. 6- Factory installed PCR requires field wiring to proper voltage. On DC version, PCR is pre -wired to highest voltage. Alternate voltages will require field re- wiring. Photocell 4- MT — Multi Tap is shipped standard unless otherwise specified. Multi Tap consists of must be ordered seperately - see Accessories 120V, 208V, 240V, and 277V. Multi Tap is pre -wired for highest voltage. Alternate 7- Quick Connect option includes removable ballast tray and modular plugs. voltages will require field re- wiring. • ACCESSORY ORDERING INFORMATION (Accessories are field installed) Description Order Number Description Order Number PC120 — Photocell 122514+ PTH 2/3 /FT HSS RM — External House Side Shield - Rear Mounted 182009BLK + ++ PC208 -277 — Photocell for 208V, 240V or 277V 122515+ PTH 2/3/FT HSS SM — External House Side Shield - Side Mounted 182011 BLK + ++ PC347 — Photocell 159516+ PTH 3 /FT IL — Internal Louver 213020BLK + + ++ PC480 — Photocell 1225180+ RPPC — Round Pole Plate 141940CLR FK120 - Single Fusing FK120++ BKS- BO -WM -" -CLR Wall Mount Plate 123111CLR FK277 - Single Fusing FK277 ++ BKA- B0 -EC -6 -CLR Extension Arm 142862CLR OFK208, 240 - Double Fusing DFK208, 240 ++ BKA- BO -RA -8 -CLR Radius Arm 169010CLR DFK480 - Double Fusing DFK480 ++ BKU- BO- S- 19-CLR Upsweep Bracket for round and square poles 144191CLR FK347 - Single Fusing FK347 ++ +Factory Installed PCR option required. PTH PLS - Polycarbonate Sheild 92730 + +Fusing must be located in the hand -hole of the pole, not in the fixture. ++ +Black only. + + ++ Only available with 250 - 400 Watt fixtures. Black only. STANDARD POLE MOUNT EC 6 EXTENSION ARM RADIUS ARM • HOUSE SIDE SHIELDS E M NTE ROE MOUNT ED INTERNAL {18 SID2011 OU BLK) D R O8200 U BLK) LOUVER 1 ° (213020BLK) (102mm) 4" (102mm) 4" • 1(162mm) (213mmd 6 -3/8° 8 -3/8" (171mm) 6-3/4" • Project Name I Fixture Type I © 2007 by s- LSI INDUSTRIES INC. A comoanvw,th. 5..,.,-Y Catalog # 1 II • „, :; v:::= - '�- , _1 HOOP RACK 9 11111 _ he Hoop Rack is a proven design that provides ' 1 h ig h security a nd easy bike parking. Hoop . Racks come in a variety of installation options: In ground, foot mount, and a free standing rail mounted . option. The Hoop Rack uses thick pipe construction and the full radius of the bend makes the Hoop an attractive and functional bike rack The Hoop Rack supports the bicycle at two points and allows for the wheel and frame to be secured using a u -style bike lock. Each Hoop Rack parks two bikes. FEATURES • High security • Superior bike support • The Hoop Rack provide a high level of In ground or surface mounted security and excellent bike support • One unit parks 2 bikes • Free standing rail mount available 41) } K d 5' �.;� %-...' / . ▪ 5` : + tip . ' r tia. Y ' 4 � z3 ` ' II 4t " 1 T - ii i 2 ,ji - ' Z ` 5 13iC I `.1� V + . ! _ - 1 -t i b a � ! f i -- fi t ' fx 11 1: (�: il. - r t- i • � � : < <. a a Vii' [[ m kt , : Y 2. i 7_4? .. ,,. ... 1 ;fi ! i ∎, 1 '! ( . j • Vii. 1, ;i 1. 114 ' - 1 � - -.r % t !:� � f •, . ! - -C2 r•."3 rt t !, ! u f •� •N :- r• r �z @ (=-. 1' - I i �. -1 . - f - . i; ; ;, 4 • , , _ : c.FC• i i ' - fi6 _ l ` 5 ,„ -z. _ �a 1, , V' h -I-14 c S ,4,�, .f _ V,i I . . \ ;: _ , ,.. :"...".. - ::',5. - t:41- :_ t - ;- 4.:4L • ■ ! R it! i -- %! • -- - .�-ar 5 - " �,j j 7. sa .- '� F a ,,,....---,,, �.. - Y� 21 Z;"';':- . -. --41 •- t...,. "'v:- .'= .. - _ .. tom.; _ M . s ' '- .. -.4%; `, : :: :',4 � I() 1 2657 32ND AVENUE S MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55106 TEL 888 337 6729 1 B I K E R A C K C O M P A N Y DERO @DERO.COMI WWW.DERO.COM FAX 612 331 2731 I • • 0 HOOP RACK - Specifications and Space Use Product Name • Dero Hoop Rack As manufactured by Dero Bike Racks Bikes Parked per Unit: 2 1.9" Materials: 1.5" schedule 40 pipe (1.9" OD) 35" Finishes An after fabrication hot dipped galvanized finish is standard. 250 TGIC powder coat colors and a stainless steel option are also available. Our powder coat finish assures a high level of adhesion and durability by following these steps: ``-- I. Sandblast \ 2. Iron phosphate pretreatment 24" 3. Epoxy primer electrostatically applied 4. Final thick TGIC polyester powder coat ''• ' Stainless Steel: 304 grade stainless steel material finished Freestanding in either a high polished shine or a satin finish. In Ground (IG) Surface (FT) (Rail Mount)(FS) A rubbery PVC Dip is also available Installation Methods • In ground mount is embedded into concrete base. fl fl ) ,) 0 ._ • Specify in ground mount for this option. • Foot Mount has two 2.5 "x6 "x.25" feet with two anchors per foot. Specify foot mount for this option. 83" -- 31"— - • Rail Mounted Hoops are bolted to two parallel rails which can be left freestanding or anchored to the ground. Rails 't `' jam' -.op j —" 1 I are heavy duty 3 "x I.4"x3/16" thick galvanized mounting VIN `S ' rails. Specify rail mount for this option. �� ,1 �-� � ^� 1 \ 41 1 4.0 i SETBACKS �' �� 111t �� Wall Setbacks: For racks set parallel to a wall: 28•— 60• ---36• -- Minimum: 24" mi Recommended: 36" Wall ATM � i �1� N For racks set perpendicular to a wall: \� Minimum" 28" Li �: �!'�,`- Recommended: 36" � ✓ Street • Distance Between Racks: ! 24" ---24" - ---36• Minimum: 24" t Recommended: 36" wall lim MI All Street Setbacks: m Minimum: 24" - NA Recommended: 36" A'.. Street 64._.11::;c.-:3. 2657 32ND AVENUE S MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55406 TEL 888 337 6729 B I K E R A C K C O M P A N Y DERO @DERO.COMI WWWDERO.COM FAX 612 331 2731 • • HOOP RACK - Installation Instructions - Foot Mount O • FOOT MOUNT O O The foot mounted Hoop Rack has 2.5 "x6 "x.25" mounting brackets welded to each end. Each bracket is anchored to the ground with two anchors. Stainless steel anchoring hardware is also available and should be considered where snow and ice are regular conditions. Recommended Base Materials: Solid concrete is the best base material for installation. To ensure the proper anchors are shipped with your Otio rack, ask your Dero Rack representative which anchor is appropriate for your application. Installation: 3/8" anchors are shipped with the rack. Place the rack ?•00000.0 ® in the desired location. Use a marker or pencil to outline the holes of the flange onto the base material. Concrete Spike Wedge Anchor Drill the holes in accordance with the specifications shipped with the anchors. Make sure the holes are at least 3" away from any cracks in the base material. Tamper Resistant Fasteners The concrete spike is a permanent anchor. The top of the wedge anchor can also be pounded sideways after • installation so that it cannot be removed. Other tamper • resistant fasteners are also available for purchase. When using the special tamper resistant nuts, always set and first tighten the anchors. Once the rack is . installed, replace two nuts from the bracket (opposite sides from each other) with the tamper resistant fastener. DO NOT OVERTIGHTEN the tamper resistant nut. If you have any questions about installation or other features of the Hoop Rack, please call Derovations at 888 - DERO -RAX (888- 337 - 6729). Tools Needed for Installation Tape Measure Marker or Pencil Masonry Drill Bit Drill (Hammer drill recommended) Hammer Wrench Level 4 27 2ND AVENUES MINNEAPO 65 3 . MN 55406 • TEL 888 337 6729 B I K E R A C K C O M P A N Y DEROODERO.COMI WWW.DERO.COM FAX 612 331 2731 EXHIBIT G: SOILS REPORT • • • • • • • Engineering + PBS Environmental • Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Tigard Office Building 2020 -2050 SW Clinton Street Tigard, Oregon • Prepared for: RCM Homes • September 26, 2007 Project No. 72595.000 • 1310 Main Street, Vancouver, WA 98660 360.690.4331 Main 360.696.9064 Fax www.pbsenv.com Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon TABLE OF CONTENTS `'1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 • 1.1 General 1 1.2 Project Understanding 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 1 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2 3.1 Surface 2 3.2 Geologic 2 3.3 Subsurface 2 3.3.1 Field Explorations 2 3.3.2 Soil Conditions 3 3.4 Groundwater 3 4.0 DISCUSSION 3 5.0 PERTINENT GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 3 5.1 Foundation Design 3 5.2 Floor Slabs 4 5.3 Retaining Structures 4 5.4 Seismic Design Criteria 5 5.5 Pavement Design 6 6.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS 7 7.0 LIMITATIONS 7 8.0 RESTRICTIONS 8 September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon • SUPPORTING DATA Appendix A — Figures Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Site Exploration Plan Appendix B — Summary Logs Key to Test Pit and Boring Log Symbols Logs for Test Pits TP -1 thru TP -6 Appendix C — Field and Laboratory Testing Appendix D — General Construction Information • • September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental II Geotechnical Investigation Report, • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General • This report presents the results of the PBS Engineering + Environmental (PBS's) geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed commercial development located at 2020 to 2050 SW Clinton Street in Tigard, Oregon. A site location map is provided on Figure 1 of Appendix A. A site exploration plan is provided on Figure 2 of Appendix A. 1.2 Project Understanding The property consists of two developed single - family residential lots. Based on information provided by Mr. Steve Roper, P.E. of SR Design, we understand that the residential buildings and associated structures will be demolished and a new, two- to three- story commercial office building and associated parking will be constructed. Although no structural information was given, we are assuming the construction will be typical spread footing with wood framed construction. Associated driveways, pavements and utilities are also included as part of the project. Building loads are not known at this time. We have assumed maximum column and perimeter footing loads of 150 kips and 6 kips per linear foot. From the grading plan provided by Mr. Roper (sheet C.2, dated 9/18/07), it appears that fill will be on the order of about 8 to 10 feet over the southwestern portion of the site, with minimal cuts of less than 2 to 3 feet over the northeast portion of the site. It appears that up to a 10 foot tall retaining wall will be constructed along the southern and western edges of the site to retain the newly constructed fill. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES Our scope of work for this project included the following: • • Subsurface Exploration: Six test pits were excavated to a depth of 10 feet using a track hoe provided by a local contractor. The test pits were logged and representative soil samples were collected by a PBS engineering geologist. Pocket Penetrometer readings were conducted where appropriate to assist in quantifying soil strength. • Soils Testing: All samples were returned to our laboratory and classified according to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) manual - visual procedure. Laboratory tests included natural moisture contents on all collected samples and Atterberg Limits testing on representative samples. • Geologic Map Review: Geologic maps of the site area were reviewed for information regarding geologic conditions and hazards at the site. • Geotechnical Engineering Studies: All data collected during the investigation, literature research and testing was analyzed to develop site and project - specific geotechnical design and construction guidelines. Report Preparation: This report contains the results of our work including information related to: • Test pit logs • Laboratory test results • Groundwater considerations • Spread Foundation design parameters September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental 1 PBS Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon • • IBC 2006 Seismic Design Recommendations • • Pavement Design • Retaining Wall Design Recommendations • Earthwork and grading • Slab and pavement subgrade preparation • Surface and subsurface drainage requirements 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The site consists of two single - family residential lots containing two story, single - family residences and associated structures and utilities. The site is bounded on the north by SW Clinton Street; to the east by SW 70 Avenue, which is currently a gravel covered drive; to the south by another commercial development currently under construction; and to the west by another single - family residential lot. Access to the site is from SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. The site is gently sloping to the southwest, with site grades ranging from about 270 feet MSL at the northeast corner, to 249 feet at the southwest corner. It appears some minor terracing was performed, likely during home construction, to provide more usable lots. Terracing appears to consist of cuts and fills of less than a few feet. Vegetation consists of low growing grasses with scattered trees of various ages across the site. A row of tall evergreen trees provides a screen along the eastern property boundary. 3.2 Geologic The site is located on the western slope of the Tualatin Mountains, locally referred to as the Portland Hills, within the. Tualatin Basin physiographic province. The basin is bounded by the Tualatin Mountains on the east and the Coast Range Mountains to the west. According to Madin the site is mapped as underlain by fine- grained alluvial deposits associated with Pleistocene -aged catastrophic flooding. The site is shown near the lateral contact with Quaternary-aged basaltic rock associated with the Boring Lava formation, locally erupted from nearby Mt. Sylvania, whose vent is mapped approximately 1 mile east of the site. Based on the mapped proximity to the nearby Boring Lava basalt and review of publicly available water well logs, we anticipate that the thickness of the fine- grained alluvial deposits on the site is no more than about 20 feet. The underlying basalt and associated pyroclastic flows likely extend to a few hundred feet. 3.3 Subsurface 3.3.1 Field Explorations A total of six (6) Test Pits were excavated to depths of approximately 9 to 10.5 feet below ground surface. A plan of the approximate Test Pit locations is shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A of this report. The Test Pits were completed by Western States Soil Conservation Service, Inc. of Aurora, Oregon on September 5, 2007. The subsurface materials encountered were logged and field classified in accordance with the Manual - Visual Classification Method (ASTM D2488). Disturbed soil samples were collected at selected intervals and packaged in moisture -tight bags. The test pits were backfilled with excavated soils following completion of soil logging. The soil samples were re- examined in the laboratory to verify field • ' Madin, I.P., 1990, "Earthquake Hazard Geology Maps of the Portland Metropolitan Area, Oregon ", Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Open File Report 0-90 -2 September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental 2 Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon classifications. Laboratory testing including moisture content and Atterberg Limits were completed. Test pit logs are presented in Appendix B. Laboratory test results • are presented in Appendix C. 3.3.2 Soil Conditions The subsurface stratigraphy consists of very stiff to Hard, clayey SILT, silty CLAY and CLAY for the full depth of our test pits. The material was typically overlain by a variable thickness of loose to medium stiff organic silt topsoil that varied from a few inches to one foot in depth. Fill up to a depth of 1.5 feet was also encountered in TP- 3 and TP -5 in the southeast corner of the site. Penetrometer values on the stratum ranged from a minimum of 3.5 tons per square foot to more than 5 tons per square foot. Moisture contents varied from a minimum of 12% to a maximum of 30 %. 3.4 Groundwater Groundwater was not observed in any of the six test pits during our investigation. According to well logs maintained by the Oregon Water Resources Department, static water levels are encountered within about 20 to 25 feet of the surface and likely represent a local perched aquifer overlying the underlying Boring Lava basalt. We do not anticipate that this groundwater will be a significant issue during construction. However, given the fine- grained nature of the soils encountered, we anticipate that these soils will be slowly permeable and should therefore be treated as such during site work. 4.0 DISCUSSION Development of the site into the proposed commercial development is feasible provided the work is conducted according to our recommendations below. Primary geotechnical areas of concern on this • site include the removal of the existing buildings and the presence of fine- grained soils within the depth of proposed construction. We understand that due to the presence of boulders and shallow bedrock, utility excavation was an issue for the nearby site. We did not encounter bedrock to the depth explored in our test pits (10.5 feet bgs). If the utilities are kept shallower than this depth, we do not anticipate this to be a concern. The following report sections address these specific geotechnical concerns and also provide general geotechnical recommendations. 5.0 PERTINENT GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Foundation Design Based on our investigation and experience with similar soils, it is our opinion that the proposed building can be supported on conventional spread footings. All footings should be supported on firm, undisturbed native soils or structural fill bearing on the native soil stratum. Continuous wall and isolated spread footings should be at least 18 and 24 inches wide respectively. The bottom of exterior footings should be at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent exterior grade. The bottom of interior footings should be established at least 18 inches below the base of the floor slab. Footings bearing on firm native subgrade or structural fill should be sized for an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot. This is a net bearing pressure. The weight of the footing and overlying backfill can be ignored in calculating footing sizes. The recommended allowable bearing pressure applies to the total of dead plus long -term live loads and may be doubled for short-term loads such as those resulting from wind or seismic forces. • September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental 3 Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon Based on our analysis, the total post- construction settlement is calculated to be less than 1 • inch, with post - construction differential settlement of less than '/2 inch over a 50 -foot span for maximum column and perimeter footing loads of less than 150 kips and 6 kips per lineal foot. Lateral loads on footings can be resisted by passive earth pressure on the sides of the structures and by friction at the base of the footings. An allowable passive earth pressure of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used for footings confined by native soils and new structural fills. Adjacent floor slabs, pavements or the upper 12 -inch depth of adjacent, unpaved areas should not be considered when calculating passive resistance. For footings in contact with native soils, a coefficient of friction equal to 0.35 may be used when calculating resistance to sliding. A geotechnical engineer from PBS or their representative should evaluate all footing subgrades and confirm suitable bearing conditions. Observations should also confirm that loose or soft material, organics, unsuitable fill and old topsoil zones have been removed. Localized deepening of footing excavations may be required to penetrate any deleterious materials. If construction is undertaken during wet weather, we recommend a thin layer of compacted, crushed rock be placed over the footing subgrades to help protect them from disturbance due to the elements and foot traffic. Footings should be founded below an imaginary line projecting at a 1:1 slope from the base of any adjacent, parallel utility trenches. The footings must also be embedded so there is a • minimum of 10 feet of horizontal distance between the face of the footings and any adjacent parallel slope. 5.2 Floor Slabs Satisfactory subgrade support for concrete slabs can be obtained from the native subgrade prepared in accordance with our recommendations presented in Appendix D. A 6 -inch layer of imported granular material should be placed and compacted over the prepared subgrade. Imported granular material should be crushed rock or crushed gravel that is fairly well graded between coarse and fine, contains no deleterious materials, has a maximum particle size of 1 inch, and has less than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve. 5.3 Retaining Structures Our retaining wall design recommendations are based on the following assumptions: (1) the walls consist of conventional, cantilevered retaining walls; (2) the walls are less than 10 feet in height; (3) the backfill is drained; and (4) the backfill has a slope flatter than 4H:1 V. Evaluation of our recommendations will be required if the retaining wall design criteria for the project varies from these assumptions. Unrestrained site walls that retain native soils should be designed to resist active equivalent earth pressures of 35 pcf where supporting slopes are flatter than 4H: 1V. If retaining walls are restrained from rotation prior to being backfilled, the active earth pressure shall be increased to 55 pcf. For embedded building walls, a superimposed seismic lateral force should be calculated based on a dynamic force of 6H pounds per lineal foot of wall, where • H is the height of the wall in feet and applied at 0.6H from the base of the wall. September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental 4 PBS Geotechnical Investigation Report, • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon If other surcharges (e.g., slopes steeper than 4H:1V, foundations, vehicles, etc.) are located within a horizontal distance from the back of a wall equal to twice the height of the wall, then additional pressures will need to be accounted for in the wall design. Our office should be contacted for appropriate wall surcharges based upon actual magnitude and configuration of the applied loads. The wall footings should be designed in accordance with the guidelines provided in the "Foundation Design" section of this report. These design parameters have been provided assuming that back -of -wall drains will be installed to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures behind all walls. If a drainage system is not installed, then our office should be contacted for revised design forces. The backfill material placed behind the walls and extending a horizontal distance equal to at least half of the height of the retaining wall should consist of granular retaining wall backfill as specified in the "Structural Fill" section of Appendix D. A minimum 12- inch -wide zone of drain rock extending from the base of the wall to within 6- inches of finished grade should be placed against the back of all retaining wall. Perforated collector pipes should be embedded at the base of the drain rock. The drain rock should meet the requirements provided in Appendix D of this report. The perforated collector pipes should discharge at an appropriate location -away from the base of the wall. The discharge pipe(s) should not be tied directly into storm water drain systems unless measures are taken to prevent backflow into the wall's drainage system. Settlements of up to 1 percent of the wall height commonly occur immediately adjacent to • the wall as the wall rotates and develops active lateral earth pressures. Consequently, we recommend that construction of flat work adjacent to retaining walls be postponed at least four weeks after backfilling of the wall unless survey data indicates that settlement is complete prior to that time. 5.4 Seismic Design Criteria We understand that the seismic design criteria for this project is based on the 2003 IBC, Section 1615. The seismic design criteria, in accordance with the 2006 IBC, are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: IBC 2006 Seismic Design Parameters Short Period 1 Second Maximum Credible Earthquake Spectral Ss = 0.95 g S1 = 0.34 g Acceleration Site Class D Site Coefficient Fa = 1.12 Fv = 1.72 Adjusted Spectral Acceleration SMS = 1.10 g SM1 = 0.59 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration SDS = 0.73 g SD1 = 0.40 g Parameters Design Spectral Peak Ground Acceleration 0.29 g September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental 5 Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard. Oregon 5.5 Pavement Design • Our pavement recommendations are based on the following assumptions: • A resilient modulus of 4,500 pounds per squre inch (psi) was assumed for the native site soils. • A resilient modulus of 20,000 psi was estimated for the base rock. • Initial and terminal serviceability index of 4.2 and 2.5, respectively. • Reliability and standard deviation of 85 percent and 0.45, respectively. • Structural coefficient of 0.42 and 0.10 for the asphalt and base rock, respectively. • We have assumed the following equivalent single axle load (ESAL) values apply to the two proposed streets at the site: - Parking Lots - 10,000 ESALs - Driveways - 50,000 ESALs If any of these assumptions are incorrect, our office should be contacted with the appropriate information so that the pavement designs can be revised. Our pavement design recommendations are summarized in Table 2. The following pavement design was completed in accordance with the 2006 Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Pavement Design Guide, Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 1993) and the AASHTO Darwin 3.0 Pavement Design Program. • Table 2: Minimum Pavement Sections Traffic Loading AC Base Rock (ESALs) (Inches) (inches) 10,000 3.0 6.0 50,000 4.0 8.0 The pavement thickness shown in Table 2 is intended to be minimum acceptable values. The asphalt and cement binder should be PG 70 -22 Performance Grade Asphalt Cement according to Oregon Structural Specialty Code, 2004 (OSSC) 00744.11 - Asphalt and Cement Additives. The asphalt concrete (AC) should consist of /z -inch hot mix asphalt. The minimum lift thickness should be 2.0 inches. The AC should conform to OSSC 00744.13 and be compacted to 91 percent of the Rice Density of the mix, as determined in accordance with ASTM D2041. The pavement subgrade should be prepared in accordance with Appendix D of this report. Construction traffic should be limited to non - building, unpaved portions of the project site or haul roads. Construction traffic should not be allowed on new pavements. If construction traffic is to be allowed on newly constructed road sections, an allowance for this additional traffic will need to be made in the design pavement section. • • September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental 6 Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon 6.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS Satisfactory pavement and earthwork performance depends on the quality of construction. • Sufficient monitoring of the contractors activities is a key part of determining that the work is completed in accordance with the construction drawings and specifications. We recommend that a geotechnical engineer from PBS be retained to observe general excavation, stripping, fill placement, footing subgrades, and subgrades and base rock for floor slabs and pavements. Subsurface conditions observed during construction should be compared with those encountered during the subsurface explorations. Recognition of changed conditions requires experience; therefore, qualified personnel should visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect whether subsurface conditions change significantly from those anticipated. • 7.0 LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the addressee, and their architects and engineers for aiding in the design and construction of the proposed development. It is the addressee's responsibility to provide this report to the appropriate design professionals, building officials, and contractors to ensure correct implementation of the recommendations. The opinions, comments and conclusions presented in this report were based upon information derived from our literature review, field investigation, and laboratory testing. Conditions between, or beyond, our exploratory test pits may vary from those encountered. Unanticipated soil conditions and seasonal soil moisture variations are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by merely taking soil samples or soil borings. Such variations may result in changes to our recommendations and may require that additional expenditures be made to attain a properly constructed project. Therefore, some contingency fund is recommended to accommodate such • potential extra costs. If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and the start of work at the site; if conditions have changed due to natural causes or construction operations at, or adjacent to, the site; or if the basic project scheme is significantly modified from that assumed, it is recommended this report be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations. September 26. 2007 • Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental 7 Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard Ore. on • 8.0 RESTRICTIONS This report is for the exclusive use of the client for design of the development as described in our proposal for this particular project and is not to be relied upon by other parties. It is not to be photographed, photocopied, or similarly reproduced in total or in part without the expressed written consent of the client and PBS Engineering + Environmental. Sincerely, /c& C4.\---Fl P fe4e 4 • E GON, ��° �� 58591 $ � `ANDREW VAL; fl OODELL qi 6/0 ("d,►'.. OREGON E1783 111r4.. RING GA �Xt� IRES Glsolos • Andrew V. Goodell, C.E.G. Rajiv Ali, P.E., G.E. Engineering Geologist Senior Geotechnical Engineer • 1111 September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project No. 72595.000 P BS Environmental 8 APPENDIX A Figures • • w b W • s S I ` „, 1 .. t i\I P\ J W iJ 1 +” f3 4 �T t .p: a y+ , x �.. } h , I '', - , 1 — w ye- ` 1 i' .,1' r J•'9kli .� 4 t \\ r ,yr . tr w s ! i'7 , •r h ' :7„-,7,,,/,,T. .. •„ •1 � ;•r N �: r i i II r V l + ®q d rI .« • ? �4 t a 7 v i t 1'r .ia .t� r " t,, fq f'. >ti« (� , l Y• , 1 e �s,r f � Y7 ,� P t ` � � ' a i i �1 ` , r 1 } �1, F �w 2 ' •, - # _ _ ; . .. ` ,.. -- � . �;� , P • f ! • / i,4 r - 1 .ii, ",f fi "� "Q( '.,rte �. \ . �I�Y; -.c + r�, 13''�' .+.� .r':. !. J v ( � .�� W t -r E . 1 y ,,.� « ,t\ • y , n .'"!. 'b1 1 i 1' i i 7 2 Y� . „ 1 \ ,. 1 , t r fi , ,t) . „,,,;1, e ,`.� ,,� r .r , ; .1 i I ' j • y t j ' 1 i l t ` p V k � ' i '-.. , , ! 'ti i l '^ "a� r r . ' i '� ,+ Y} 1 • < ' " 3'" c . , t .i { r " Y • r . . .J •. .�i , • 'r ,. " . �+ 1 :: ice. a a' 1 < ` �� I R �f 1` � 4. t r ♦}M ' �." v . ,/ r � ci . i`1 < \ �i � 1 a' r.1' [\j Tit }.. ,, 1 Zd . t , +� \•� '2 \, •'. . t , + t •ry• I • r' J {:. ' C` - ,td . 1 Y, y. : �,.. a O •p - t �„ r r M N • + , ,� { u 4 ? a t' ' - 4+. ,}'J t [t r Ii'' ,AID: 2 {yr 1 1 , O • � ` � ,• O N p d , i'•", .. r '. ti , �` .+, 1,. 4 ({� f,?'6 ^ Yl •, '^ °'`'`: +i.c q y4 ' fr I! ' ,• � + t' r' t f • ' � * I' P - "‘i\ '�z t '"`" �, I) N d ^: `� p W � i � ' l� t , k' } , / 1 `.. 'r .r` ° � ' `}: �al . _..;. .'"�5 - ' ^, k , , ,• r` t " • 1 '�� r 1 I •+ M � 1, ,' 0 12 rev. r , r .�..,;.,.u- "" � . •. f . ,a' . .{..`,^ i+ » ,r " ItI .L� ..�. µyn ^ "' G.' "•_.{ 1 1 ' �� ;�, �r k\ k‘ ;IR �-7'. . ; A � il ;.x, ' 1 C :' ;'f • -" , .t l • ,s e ..1.1 , } ;l ,v ..- ,I '1.,0.:. r ' ' , ( , : 1_ t O o to 0. v. Y. • •, � 11. • • .....".".-,C•1 Al 0`. ' S i !!t' r . • d a . , a : C : _...,,, ":"1"..'...V••'' , /,, , ,,. -,�• 1 � 4/ • � O. 0 % 4 rf 4 ` kt x ' ' y ° ' +', '� i 1 . : F + } I ry } S ` v,•,, '�, J ." t 1 ' • 0 n • co ,, �tt i j . •r � 11 l + \ �i) ,` + c„ , U • , . • ! � . ,a1,7 l ".':• \r '-' 4• ' ,�j� � ^.\ . J 1 , •.; ' t• O— Q W ++{ 1 11 t ,. , Y .W t `"k7 ; :•• .... '� O =1 +ih • , -;,, . 7- r • a, %''. '.'-' ' , '._..,Y' *'Vn r f •0 d W FII 1 1 �. '+ Ri ..�a� • b M . k' ,, •'• •• ∎4 J -4 s .•. •. 1 f •� ke �s - .1 J" '' ' <r .' ` f . a U 2 1- 10 t� €'1, ` 4 """ 1'1,1 jl b ~ ♦ Y' Y • p 1 1 1. 1, K (I) Z ' ��fr ii.C, � It . +til Rite'' J U r,�l F r , � t s,rr . a II ' •• �r tLt �+ ,t4I� f t tt, •+.. r. � + . ,_ • �' kt . _ . I , 4.,' t a O Z O . d, t ., , i, '• k x�4i a.. • 4 1-1---.- ; a •. ,, 4 —' r .r3. • ".uid • L � O O U' 1` 1 . •: ` *- 1 .,, • . '1 t , l r t '� Fir*--•.' S " r n"- - ~, ' i F- W �� , ta ' `,,� ` � ° 'w'+, ` - y\ "� �, ~ . Z • �L' i k ...J • ( w fi 1-,‘11. i ! I W V R!, • : 4. r �' ;� � a: F ' r ' ,4Y V`r ' A 1• ■ ' t •, - • .. r•' < ••„,�',, t / H , ... , I:i j 51� fi t, '\ _' ' (i1'• '_+ !'� ' _._ 6� : ' . �" %L * J} ;• I O (n Q 11 a k i , , 't" tS \ ` , l� lW \. . '''• "S` ' � �� , `•'+ ` r 1 a �S -mss..: �-_ �2v t: = :r 0 O_ . 'j '(',I• I i v' � , 1, � ' 4 t..„- ' r • r ,:•,,,1/4. y , .4, • 1 1 , a it i I�' . � • ,.144,,,.11:, � , I W ~ CNI i � ♦ • t `4°` , i' hf , M . ,+; �_ , %p.M1 QI∎I • MS t \ �� 1 r� 1 J ° .--- y.r_. + 3 ,/ ' •v A ` N Is, ! , i - . 1 ,.. r , l i t i v . , t , t •' ' 1a, • r « ^'W _ .'. r l. * . Z, ' Y� i � = tiji' . s +• . Y . � +�, N • + � { 1 ! yy. _ r? I<,Q` • I ,r.�� C".. .✓ ` 1 j t4• %.4.:: , S } , < f ' f' t 4 1 ` 4'' p it 4 �. 1 V ,'Y , 1 . z0 1,b.-7'4r ,,- ,Q` v + fP '•• % r G. a+t.-„y • . •+ % ' � ,. � it.'' , 1 • � � A 1� 1 i p 1 1 >} ::..:• g 4 • -.. * 1 v •` ^- f .::� ry { 1 J r �I . .� .1 � �,' " � � '� , ' . � :.,�_ a w� r ' t., g ''S',"- ,_,., ; > }' r� 1t �i ; r . , n ,"- • . A �` +(7� $ JN , 4 i � r ` •j t, • ,,' . a 4. • , 1V ' , ... a y r '''''' . , . � s 4 , �11A� I., �._ S 1 � r y "+L. t ./ 1 t yS • , ? • !1 :;::,,/ r (� T Q 0 • \ • • '`a. r e 3' .. ;1t, " . .. N , r .y, J6, - +� t."' ° '« . ' � �''�y� � y y4• y � # o O • ' 'I 4Y` , I `1' t •s*,*'' o• y , 1 1 1 .4A- T h ' , 1 .p ' 1 " "` , + . : . 14 I I Z ()- 0 lLJ N k •t` • : t fi , � I. }qtr r� .... � r + •!'. .� 7. '' • � l'• ,1. Y.: O W ui Q • 1 t 1 o r b ,�. ' 'i % \ `rq W C7 • i H" •''4. Y .i , 44 � i ty ' • f 1 =� • rr • •; de. " ` . ' • � � � 1 ! '. t , . '1 'YV S'...7' �N O W N O W ! 111•.' ':' 't' ' N,`a , r t •t. 4: t ,,. , , fi r . : vl •` 'sP 9 ( ... , 4.i.•,% i s.'.) (n '.Z . .., a , 1 41, ';:4." t - 1 ' - '\ b; {,� • 'T• '+" '�'i PR � ; i r, co N o 2 w v S 4 , , .r L . • 1,' 0 , y ..' ,. . ' � i'r I ' • \< .v \ ..ila •• � I t , . RI Y , • ' q ` - r t • 1; _ •l0 t +;* • t. .t. . � y ' = % a��4 1 y ! wit '• � � • ✓ �.' • � 4 in " .4 I ; � , f f i k, ;Y F V' 4 t om '' a,.. 'J �1 ,_ CL • • '.udF.h h(/ L!1 ,1:, h7 (I,g faq, ` 5hciL 6, 1J`, 0 01.•1,1 ,,, , AIL d'0,: '..• , • !i'! '. !. \ 0 • - - , I I - \ 1 I — . ......_ __, ____ —)c 's \ --. ----- ;7_____ ,. =...r. _ .,..._ \ ---/, t ------- ,. ) ‘6 ,0,73 T._ , , ,k, 1 . . , 1 . , ,,... I ) / ;., / i __________/ , I - I' , 3 '.-.' 1 ! ''''' • v /,' _ ( I 1 • \ — ------- I , e: • , _ .„ . i , ,... -;,.. ,,,... -,... 1! IT • -,..: -1.--- . _., • ,,,,:- ....•., • (w) I ------4. ‘411rIliff - 7 - 1 +"1", I ''''' 1 \ i A - - - - - PA I - • ;:7 •. . " ' 1 IIMIII:Hi SigiiiiiM I el IP V i 1 i ''S• ' 1 I 1 I I - - .' i Fl I J:t• - - a IFWMMVEli niMaggij , 7 , :;• ,..1 ' . /FP,,,T, --,,.. . 1 ..., \.. , —_.,—. ,L_—__.7'. _—_ ,-- — . 0- ..?... .,.•,;,;, , . • ' ■ 1\i) 1 I 1 $-' I Ili i _.....- . S I •••S § ' • dl--• i 1 1 1 T4 - \ - , • ' 1 1 4 , , 1 .4 . 1 1 Ap ■/•xiAr \ . _.....4.:y • ' 47/ --`,..... ; ; T • % ! 1 / Z ' r i. . 1' : 1 '?• ' I / -- j I I. . I I I :-:•-- • EXIST NO0SE , ' . EXTSTDIG NENISE TP-6 ,:l.', • 8 kl ii ! - ■ I , . . L. .1,prt. ,.....i._2 1. • . -- ' •.' :-. • i T 7 •• = ic 1 • i • ! i ___K : 11 , A:./ ./ X, i -.7 - i • -,..,.. --, -J i : ki,,i1/*////// 1 , • I- • ..-: .II ::1.: i9 - - .1 . ii I- _ 'T,I m 1 1 'C .'-'," ' • k 15. \ \ . III r ._.,....._ \_,,... ‘,..,,,, . -j et ii "; _,;_ 1 1_,„1„17 I ' . ._ , ; . - 1 I • ‘ _Ii 71 .--- '1 -• -, • f__1:011_:— ,_,& 6 t ---, , • / ( .-- ..—. ' __,,, / I , ,c14 L _., _ , \ ';•., ; 1 — — • ,----------- , --... , a••• ,41 rx••• -, : j . , , 1 1 '.; 'I I•i) \ '‘ ' ‘--. ' ...:. .-::_..: .4.. -1 , I L ! / / \ _ .___/ ! i -- . 4 S -------- --- \ \ -.\•/:•• • •• 1--1 ,, / .! :, •,-.) \ ,. ' 1' • / .• / / • _'... - A - 2 4 ' I 1 1 ' } I Ill ' '•' II • ' I . ,- , - I 1 ..1.-- • --• r `,,, . cl 11 -; s, "- 1 . ;, . \ ''• - , 1 , _ ,.. Iv s, 4 ,,,r,' , ,, , , , , , ,,. , ;;, . , - \\ ,,,,.' ' .---- _ss :-._.- _i ,.\ \ i1,4.-'-------- -,-_.-.: .„....,___.,_..,_,,... , , - ,, --___ -- g... ., :_ , _. - , -- .:. ,. ....,/' ... '-.■ " ; ---; - .. Y , ..; \ • :, .-' i :j_ _,:.., _._ -.., \ ., -,-;,, - .- • - : ;---,---,-, , --,;---,,,,--- ' ---.----- - 'CI '._. u ,...- .i ; :,-,` \. \ i N:-,1 .. '-- . '''' - '''-'• ,1 ',,---='-' \ -T,' ' ---A--.!,--.=--- 1-1--- ‘--. i / 1 9 — \ • i .:_ , : , -......); _,:.. ,I _;_1/1 • .:ir. ! - 7 - 1 - 2( .74:: <.'kl ', ',.• 1. ' 1 \ \ ',1 , \ ' I , . -I I / N I 41111 . ,., ii s • _ •„, `-' L ------- \ .... - -,., r ,;-.- •: :, \ - \ \ ' I ,,.,‘ X.\ ..:- _.,\ . .. ",...<-2-- 1 - \ TP- .- . 1 , 1 , I \ , -, \ \ \ \\*'-'‘ \ 1 I ..e. \ ---7 --. 75'; : .. . EXISTING OU1BURDING . _ , . i ' .; •-•••. .- I li\ \\ ' ! I ‘ 1 '. ; t j •, r I . ' s !I ? ''A" ' --- :I ‘ ■'. !_4 . -,-\ . ,-. . ,:: '?:.'-- 1 ', :- :'. ''. -- 1 ._ i i ' -) > \ ‘, 'I\ --... , ---.,0 L ,—,—.,,, ,.. _.• , i, ,..., _ : .......,•,_.....,,. .. _ ,..,_ ....„ ., ..i._._ , _ .._,.--,... ____. : . L -..._ .:_.. . \ \ :. ..--- •- --) i - NW 0-1•171 um fENCE ), \ • .. ON 7 CC LL - 1. _ • ' • -..X. .-_,...-- .-----,- ---- --\ \ 1 • - e ., . \ \ . , / , I --, 1 - 1 )1 " ' - ii. "•.:- '4., '''g ''!-:' V• '•-'•:. :!.. ^. , -__. j '. ial, " Il " 1 / ' 1 t -, if; 1 I '-'•■ \ : 1 I "... • ; I I . . • , P.; I , • 1 1 . I • 1 ' : , •-7 r 4 .?...... trN LEGEND ■■ :.„ .:, 445. TEST PIT LOCATION AND ' TP-1 NUMBER 0' 20' 40' 80 ,-.; • SCALE: 1" = 40' -5. ...,... Prepared for: RCM HOMES if; ......— PROJECT # 72595.000 SITE EXPLORATION PLAN FIGU .::. . .• S DATE 2020-2050 SW CLINTON STREET 2 SEPT 2007 TIGARD, OREGON • • • 0 . APPENDIX B • Summary Logs 1110 _____ • • PBS Key To Test Pit and Boring Log Symbols Engineering a • ID Environmental SAMPLING DESCRIPTIONS' co cz) m ,- Q. co g c p h .p to a V ap ( Q c : I o .. /. H O C O N i R � 0 v 0 ,� Q ,\ m 'O O C o V � y t C � t ,, • Q a �O U rU V Q p - O w 4 . � o o Ill 11 II N N 1 _ SZ 31C LOG GRAPHICS Soil and Rock Sampling Symbols Instrumentation Detail r ,: Observed contact - - - • Ground Surface . '.'__, : • between soil or rock Well Cap • a`) Y. ' , l units (at depths Sample > - indicated) Recovery Sample Well Seal ,, Interval Well Pipe • o Inferred contact . Piezometer iY between soil or rock 411 `p ►l units .o = _ _ _ — - (at approximate ` r =* Well Screen _ - -_ -_ depths indicated) Sampler _ Piezometer - - - ' —Bottom of Hole Geotechnical Testing Explanations PP Pocket Penetrometer LL Liquid Limit DCP Dynamic Cone Penetrometer SIEV Sieve Gradation TOR Torvane DD Dry Density CON Consolidation ATT Atterberg Limits DS Direct Shear CBR California Bearing Ratio P200 Percent Passing U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve OC Organic Content HYD Hydrometer Gradation RES Resilient Modulus UC Unconfined Compressive Strength VS Vane Shear PL Plasticity Limit kPa kiloPascal PI Plasticity Index Environmental Testing Explanations CA Sample Submitted for Chemical Analysis NS No Sheen PID Photoionization Detector Headspace Analysis SS Slight Sheen PPM Parts Per Million MS Moderate Sheen 41 ! ND Not Detected HS High Sheen 'Note: Details of soil and rock classification systems are available on request. Rev. 8/10/07 -- • 7020/7050 SW CLINTON STRIP TEST PIT TP - 1310 Main St. TIGARD, OREGON PBS Vancouver, WA 98660 J ` Phone: (360) 690 -4331 Fax: (360) 696 -9064 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: SEPTEMBER 2007 • Engineering . 72595.000 Environmenbl U = 0 W O DYNAMIC CONE DEPTH Z o � I - Z PENETROMETER FEET a MATERIAL DESCRIPTION W • MOISTURE COMMENTS W 0 W CONTENT 0 50 100 0.0 , : ,: Loose, brown, clayey SILT; dry, abundant 0.0 rootlets (Topsoil) : .... -/ 0.5 Hard, light brown SILT with some clay; dry, trace rootlets, massive PP .: PP= >5.0tsf Very stiff, brown with orange and gray 1.5 mottles, silty CLAY; damp, homogeneous • N i 2.5 PP PP = 3.5 tsf ATT • j LL . • • . . . LL= 44% PI PL PI = 20% • PL = 24% 5.0 Z Very stiff, brown clayey SILT; moist, 5.0 .. • massive, porous • • ...- • III • . . . • . . . • • . • . . . . .. • : 7.5— N ... o . • • • . • ... U • . . . a . o • ... Co • N 0,, • < 10.0 — a " • n a ~ to s No groundwater seepage observed to the Final depth 10.5 feet b total reach of depth explored. trackhoe, test pit backfilled with excavated • No caving observed to the depth explored. o material • . (7 . • a 2 F- r . a a ' 12.5— • 0 E F- u, • a, n ti, - 0 a 0. S o: UI 0. . 6 15 0 J r' 0 50 100 a ai EXCAVATION METHOD: Tradchoe F EXCAVATED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY: A. Goodell • COMPLETED: 9105107 • 7020/7050 SW CLINTON STr TEST PIT TP - 1310 Main St. TIGARD, OREGON P ` S Vancouver, WA 98660 L Phone: (360) 690 -4331 Fax: (360) 696 -9064 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: SEPTEMBER 2007 Engineering • 72595.000 Aft— Environmental = C9 W O DYNAMIC CONE > F- Z J PENETROMETER DEPTH a ° o MATERIA DESCRIPTION W MOIST COMMENTS FEET J W W CONTENT 0 50 100 0.0 • Medium stiff, dark brown SILT with some 0.0 clay; dry, abundant rootlets up to 3 /4 -inch • - - diameter (depths vary) (Topsoil) Hard, dark brown silty CLAY; dry, some 1.0 roots up to 1 -inch diameter (up to 2 feet PP PP = >5 tsf deep) Becomes light brown and homogeneous • :: 2.5 PP PP = >5 tsf 5.0 PP PP = 3.5 tsf Becomes very stiff, blocky, damp and porous 7.5 • • ❑ No groundwater seepage observed to the Final depth 9.0 feet bgs, test pit back 90 depth explored. 0 with excavated material No caving observed to the depth explored. • 10.0 a • ❑ 12.5 • a C, N • • 0 a. C w • a • 15.0 0 0 50 100 w • EXCAVATION METHOD: Trackhoe t•- EXCAVATED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY A. Goodell COMPLETED: 9/05/07 • • 7020/7050 SW CLINTON STR• TEST PIT TP - 1310 Main St. TIGARD, OREGON PBS Vancouver, WA 98660 Phone: (360) 690 -4331 Fax: (360) 696 -9064 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: SEPTEMBER 2007 • Engineering a 72595.000 Environmental U = 0 W O DYNAMIC CONE DEPTH a o M DESCRIPTION Ja. H D- PENETROMETER FEET c w o) •MOISTURE COMMENTS CD w 0 H CONTENT% 0.0 0 50 100 IO SILT with some debris (such as bricks and - ii gravel) (Fill) . . ■ • • Hard, brown CLAY with silt; dry, 1.5 homogeneous PP PP = >5 tsf • • 2.5 . Becomes damp; encountered a • : 1-foot-thick french drain with 2-inch-diameter drain rock in west end of test pit (dry) PP : . PP = >51sf • 5.0 Becomes very stiff and moist with gray mottles • ... • ATT Pi N • LL = 48% 7.5 • PL PI = 25% PL =23% / . I / a 10 0 o No groundwater seepage observed to the o Final depth 10.0 feet bgs, test pit backfilled depth explored. z with excavated materi No caving observed to the depth explored. CL • F- 0 a- F a Q CL 12.5 - L9 vi E.. 03 m m H ut • (5 Q a 4110 w o 15.0 - 0 t- 0 50 loo a- to EXCAVATION METHOD: Trackhoe to • EXCAVATED BY: Western States Soil Conservation. Inc. LOGGED BY: A. Goodell COMPLETED: 9105!07 • 7020/7050 SW CLINTON S•T TEST PIT TP 1310 Main St. TIGARD, OREGON PBS Vancouver, WA 98660 Phone: (360) 690 -4331 Fax: (360) 696 -9064 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: SEPTEMBER 2007 Engineering 4 72595.000 Environmental > H 0 W O DYNAMIC CONE • Z " PENETROMETER DEPTH a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIO J w •MOISTURE COMMENTS FEET W Q w CONTENT % 0 50 100 0.0 u Medium stiff, dark brown SILT with some as %'"'„" clay; dry, abundant rootlets and roots up to 3 -inch diameter (Topsoil) • Hard, brown silty CLAY; dry, ° . homogeneous, blocky, porous, occasional orange and gray streaks 2.5 Becomes damp PP 40. PP = 4.5 tsf PP PP= 3.5tsf 5.0 / Becomes very stiff • • • 7.5 ❑ w No groundwater seepage observed to the 10.o Final depth 10.0 feet bgs, test pit backfilled ' °° depth explored. with excavated material No caving observed to the depth explored. r 0 -I CL 2 0 12.5 • 0 • a H W 0 0 15.0 0 0 50 1 00 co EXCAVATION METHOD: Trackhoe EXCAVATED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY: A. Goodell COMPLETED: 9/05/07 —...— • 7020/7050 SW CLINTON STR• TEST PIT TP - 1310 Main St. TIGARD, OREGON PBS Vancouver, WA 98660 Phone: (360) 690 -4331 • Fax: (360) 696 -9064 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: SEPTEMBER 2007 Engineering 72595.000 • Environmental o = 0 W O DYNAMIC CONE DEPTH T L9 > I– Z --J,.., PENETROMETER o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION . a ►= COMMENTS FEET 9 w w to 2_ • M 17 W CONTENT % 0.0 0 50 100 'S ' Dense, brown GRAVEL and SILT; dry o.o • .■ 4 heterogeneous (Fill) • ■ •4 Hard, light brown CLAY; dry, 1.5 homogeneous 2.5 Becomes damp PP N • Difficult excavation throughout • PP = >5 tsf • 5.0 ATT • P N LL =51% PL PI = 26% PL =25% • • / • .• : : - . . N • . • - 7.5 0 . Ei • : • CC o csi . a 10. 0 / Final depth 10.0 feet bgs, test it backfilled 100 No groundwater seepage observed to the Q P 9 pit depth explored. z with excavated material No caving observed to the depth explored. a r . o - 0 - . . 1 a 2 r d 12.5 0 . a i— a - m • er N . n to - 0 Q a iEr • 0 15.0 o - 1 F-- 0 50 100 a CO ~ EXCAVATION METHOD: Trackhoe r EXCAVATED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY: A. Goodell COMPLETED: 9/05/07 —'—' 7020/7050 SW CLINTON ST TEST PIT TP - 1310 Main St. TIGARD, OREGON Ott Vancouver, WA 98660 Phone: (360) 690 -4331 Fax: (360) 696 -9064 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: SEPTEMBER 2007 Engineering + 72595.000 • Environmental U = C9 W O DYNAMIC CONE > H z - PENETROMETER DEPTH a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION M O ISTURE COMMENTS FEET g J W Q W CONTENT % so too o.o L Loose to medium stiff, dark brown SILT; 0.0 " dry, abundant rootlets (Topsoil) Hard, brown to light brown silty CLAY; dry, 08 homogeneous, crumbly /blocky, becomes siltier with depth • 2.5 Becomes damp and not crumbly /bloc X I . • 5.0 • • • 7.5 _ • ❑ ATT P� • : LL = 36% I PL PI =14% PL = 22% `4. 10.0 • loo No groundwater seepage observed to the Final depth 10.0 feet bgs, test pit backfilled depth explored. with excavated material No caving observed to the depth explored. a t- ❑ t7 a_ o_ ❑ 12.5 ❑ a rn cv W 0 cr a w a 15.0 0 0 50 100 a ui EXCAVATION METHOD: Trackhoe r EXCAVATED BY: Western States Soil Conservation. Inc. LOGGED BY: A. Goodell COMPLETED: 9/05/07 • • • APPENDIX C • Field and Laboratory Testing • --- Engineering + • PBS Environmental Soil Classification Graph Project Name: SW Clinton St Date: 9/16/07 0 Project #: 72595 'Lab Tech: Randy Lab #: 38 — Atterberg Limits - ASTM D4318 70 ' 60 1. CH Or 50 — OH — ---- 40 . - r- — • TP-1 @ 4' x I I • TP-3 @ 7' a I • TP-5 @ 5' ..... >" 30 I— -4-- - • TP-6 @9' :tt - CL in or a CO OL a. MH II 20 •- or OH • 10 - fv1 - ---"-- 1- 111Maillir 1 OL 1 . 0 ' I. — 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit (%) Sample ID Soil Description* Natural LL PL PI USCS W.C. (%) TP-1 @ 4' CL 30.3 44 24 20 , TP-3 @ 7' CL 30.2 48 23 25 TP-5 @ 5' CH 21.1 51 25 26 TP-6 @ 9' CL 19.3 36 22 14 * Soil Type and Soil Description reported for the fraction of the sample passing the No. 40 seive. III • • • • APPENDIX D General Construction Information • Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon APPENDIX D - GENERAL CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION . i D -1.0 SITE PREPARATION Site preparation will include removal of the existing buildings on the site. Underground utility lines, vaults, basement walls, or tanks associated with these existing buildings should be removed or grouted full if left in place. The voids resulting from removal of footings, buried tanks, etc. or loose soil in utility lines should be backfilled with compacted structural fill. The base of these excavations should be excavated to firm subgrade before filling with sides sloped at a minimum of 1 H:1 V to allow for uniform compaction. Materials generated during demolition of existing improvements should be transported off site or stockpiled in areas designated by the owner. Asphalt, concrete and base rock materials may be crushed and recycled for use as general fill. Such recycled materials should. meet the criteria described in the "Structural Fill" section of this report. D -1.1 Stripping and Grubbing The existing topsoil zone should be stripped and removed from all proposed structural fill, pavement, and improvement areas and for a 5 -foot margin around such areas. Based on our explorations, the average depth of stripping will be approximately 4 to 6 inches, although greater stripping depths may be required to remove localized zones of loose or organic soil. Greater stripping depths (approaching 12 inches) may be anticipated in areas with thicker vegetation and shrubs. The actual stripping depth should be based on field observations at the time of construction. Stripped material should be transported offsite for disposal or used in landscaped areas. Fill was also encountered in two of the test pits. The fill should be removed and re- compacted before any improvements are placed on top of the fill. • Trees and shrubs should be removed from all pavement and improvement areas. In addition, root balls should be grubbed out to the depth of the roots, which could exceed 3 feet bgs. Depending on the methods used to remove the root balls, considerable disturbance and loosening of the subgrade could occur during site grubbing. We recommend that soil disturbed during grubbing operations be removed to expose firm undisturbed subgrade. The resulting excavations should be backfilled with structural fill. D -1.2 Proof Rolling Following stripping and prior to placing fill, pavement, or building improvements, the exposed subgrade should be evaluated by proof rolling. The subgrade should be proof rolled with a fully loaded dump truck or similar heavy rubber -tire construction equipment to identify soft, loose, or unsuitable areas. A member of our geotechnical staff should observe the proof rolling. Soft or loose zones identified during the field evaluation should be compacted to an unyielding condition or be excavated and replaced with structural fill, as discussed in the "Structural Fill" section of this Appendix. D -1.3 Wet Weather Conditions Trafficability on the near - surface soils may be difficult during or after extended wet periods or when the moisture content of the surface soil is more than a few percentage points above optimum. Soils that have been disturbed during site preparation activities, or soft or loose zones identified during probing or proof rolling, should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. • September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS i Environmental Appendix D - page 1 Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon • Track - mounted excavating equipment may be required during wet - weather. The thickness of the granular material for haul roads and staging areas will depend on the amount and type of construction traffic. A 12- to 18- inch -thick mat of imported granular material is sufficient for light staging areas. The granular mat for haul roads and areas with repeated heavy construction traffic typically needs to be increased to between 18- to 24- inches. The actual thickness of haul roads and staging areas should be based on the contractor's approach to site development and the amount and type of construction traffic. The imported granular material should be placed in one lift over the prepared, undisturbed subgrade and compacted using a smooth -drum, non - vibratory roller. Additionally, a geotextile fabric should be placed as a barrier between the subgrade and imported granular material in areas of repeated construction traffic. As an alternative to placing thick rock sections to support construction traffic, the subgrade can be stabilized using cement amendment. The depth of treatment and percentage of cement required depends on the site conditions at the time of construction. Additional recommendations will be provided during construction, if this approach is used. D -2.0 STRUCTURAL FILL Fills should be placed over subgrade that has been prepared in conformance with the "Site Preparation" and "Wet Weather/Wet Soil Considerations" sections of this report. A wide range of material may be used as structural fill; however, all material used should be free of organic matter or other unsuitable materials and should meet the specifications provided in the Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction, Oregon Department of Transportation, 2006 (OSSC) depending on the application. A brief characterization of some of the acceptable materials and our • recommendations for their use as structural fill is provided below. D -2.1 Native Soils The native sand and silt deposits at the site are suitable for use as structural fill, provided they meet the requirements set forth in OSSC 00330.14 and 00330.15 — Borrow Material. In order to adequately compact the soil, moisture conditioning (drying) of the soil to within a few percentage points of the optimum moisture content will be required. This is significant drying and, depending on construction weather, may prove problematic. Drying may prove infeasible due to rainy weather. Soil amendments (e.g., portland cement) or the use of imported granular material may be necessary if the native soils can not be properly moisture conditioned. When used as structural fill, native soils should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 6 to 8 inches and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. D -2.2 Imported Granular Material Imported granular material used during periods of wet weather or for haul roads, building pad subgrades, staging areas, etc. should be pit or quarry run rock, crushed rock, or crushed gravel and sand and should meet the specifications provided in OSSC 00330.12 — Borrow Material, and OSSC 00330.13 — Selected General Backfill. • September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project No. 72595.000 PBS I Environmental Appendix D - page 2 Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon Imported granular material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 8 to 12 inches and be compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density • as determined by ASTM D 1557. During the wet season or when wet subgrade conditions exist, the initial lift should be approximately 18 inches in uncompacted thickness and should be compacted by rolling with a smooth -drum roller without using vibratory action. Where imported granular material is placed over soft soil subgrades, we recommend a geotextile be placed as a barrier between the subgrade and imported granular material. Depending on site conditions, the geotextile should meet OSSC 2320.10 for soil separation or stabilization. The geotextile should be installed in conformance with OSSC 0350.40 — Geosynthetic Construction. D -2.3 Trench Backfill Trench backfill placed beneath, adjacent to, and for at least 2 feet above utility lines (i.e., the pipe zone) should consist of well - graded granular material with a maximum particle size of 1'/2 inches and less than 10 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve, and should meet the standards prescribed by OSSC 405.12 — Pipe Zone Bedding. The pipe zone backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557, or as required by the pipe manufacturer or local building department. Within roadway alignments or beneath building pads, the remainder of the trench backfill should consist of well - graded granular material with a maximum particle size of 2'/2 inches, less than 10 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve, and should meet standards prescribed by OSSC 405.14 — Trench Backfill, Class A or B. This material should be compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D • 1557, or as required by the pipe manufacturer or local building department. The upper 2 feet of the trench backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. Outside of structural improvement areas (e.g. roadway alignments or building pads), trench backfill placed above the pipe zone may consist of general fill materials that are free of organics and materials over 6 inches in diameter, and meet OSSC 00330.12 — Borrow Material and OSSC 405.14 — Trench Backfill, Class C, D, or E. This general trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557, or as required by the pipe manufacturer or local building department. D -2.4 Stabilization Material Stabilization rock should consist of imported granular material that is well - graded, angular, crushed rock consisting of 4- or 6- inch -minus material with less than 2 percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 Sieve. The material should be free of organic matter and other deleterious material. D -2.5 Soil Amendment with Cement As an alternative to the use of imported granular material for wet - weather structural fill, an experienced contractor may be able to amend the on -site soils with Portland cement or with limekiln dust and cement to obtain suitable support properties. Successful use of amendments depends on the use of correct mixing techniques, soil moisture content, and amendment quantities. Specific recommendations, based upon exposed site conditions, for soil amending can be provided if necessary. • September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental Appendix D — page 3 • Geotechnical Investigation Report • • Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon Portland cement - amended soils are hard and have low permeability. Therefore, these soils • do not drain well, nor are they suitable for planting. Future planted areas should not be cement amended, if practical, or accommodations should be planned for drainage and planting. D -2.6 Retaining Wall Backfill Backfill material placed behind retaining walls and extending a horizontal distance of where H is the height of the retaining wall, should consist of select granular material meeting OSSC 510.12. We recommend the select granular wall backfill be separated from general fill, native soil and /or topsoil using a geotextile fabric which meets the requirements provided in OSSC 2320.10. The geotextile should be installed in conformance with OSSC 00350.40 — Geosynthetic Construction. The wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. However, backfill located within a horizontal distance of 3 feet from the retaining walls should only be compacted to approximately 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. Backfill placed within 3 feet of the wall should be compacted in lifts less than 6 inches thick using hand - operated tamping equipment (such as jumping jack or vibratory plate compactors). If flat work (sidewalks or pavements) will be placed atop the wall backfill, we recommend that the upper 2 feet of material be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. D -2.7 Trench and Retaining Wall Drain Backfill Backfill in a 2 -foot zone against the back of retaining walls and for subsurface trench drains 111/ should consist of drain rock meeting the specifications provided in OSSC 00430.11 — Granular Drain Backfill Material. The drain rock should be wrapped in a geotextile fabric that , meets the specifications provided in OSSC 2320.10 for soil separation and /or stabilization. The geotextile should be installed in conformance with OSSC 00350.40 — Geosynthetic Construction. D -2.8 Pavement Base Aggregate Imported granular material used as base aggregate (base rock) along roadway alignments should be clean, crushed rock or crushed gravel and sand that is fairly well graded between coarse and fine. The base aggregate should meet the gradation defined in OSSC 02630.10 — Dense Graded Aggregate 1 " -0 ", depending upon application, with the exception that the aggregate has less than 5 percent passing a U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. The base aggregate should be compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. D -2.9 Recycled Concrete, Asphalt and Base Rock Asphalt pavement, concrete and base rock from the existing site improvements can be used in general structural fills, provided no particles greater than 6 inches are present. It also must be thoroughly mixed with soil, sand, or gravel such that there are no voids between the fragments. The recycled materials should meet the requirements set forth in OSSC 00744.03 — Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) Material. • September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental Appendix D - page 4 PBS Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard, Oregon D -3.0 PERMANENT SLOPES ) Permanent cut and fill slopes up to 15 feet tall may be built to a gradient as steep as 2H:1 V. • However, cut slopes over 15 feet tall should be limited to a gradient of 2.5H:1V or should be partially retained by a retaining wall. Slopes that will be maintained by mowing should not be constructed steeper than 3H:1 V. Newly constructed fill slopes should be over -built by at least 12 inches and then trimmed back to the required slope to maintain a firm face. Access roads and pavements should be located at least 5 feet from the top of cut and fill slopes. The setback should be increased to 10 feet for buildings, unless special foundation considerations are implemented. Slopes should be planted with appropriate vegetation to provide protection against erosion as soon as possible after grading. Surface water runoff should be collected and directed away from slopes to prevent water from running down the face of the slope. D -4.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS D -4.1 Surface and Subsurface Drainage Requirements The Contractor shall be made responsible for temporary drainage of surface water and groundwater as necessary to prevent standing water and /or erosion at the working surface. We recommend removing only the foliage necessary for construction to help minimize erosion. The ground surface around the structures should be sloped to create a minimum gradient of 2% away from the building foundations for a distance of at least 5 feet. Surface water should be directed away from all buildings into drainage swales or into a storm drainage system. "Trapped" planting areas should not be created next to any building without providing means for drainage. The roof downspouts should discharge onto splash blocks or paving that direct • water away from the buildings, or into smooth- walled underground drain lines that carry the water to appropriate discharge locations at least 10 feet away from any buildings. D -4.2 Foundation Drains We recommend foundation drains around the perimeter foundations of all structures. The foundation drains should be at least 12 inches below the base of the slab. The foundation drain should consist of perforated collector pipes embedded in a minimum 2- foot -wide zone of angular drain rock. The drain rock should meet specifications provided in the "Structural Fill" section of this report. The drain rock should be wrapped in a geotextile fabric. The collector pipes should discharge at an appropriate location away from the base of the footings. Unless measures are taken to prevent backflow into the wall's drainage system, the discharge pipe should not be tied directly into storm water drain system. D -5.0 EXCAVATION Subsurface conditions at the project site show predominately silty soils to the depths explored. Groundwater was not encountered at the time of our exploration. Excavations in these soils may be readily accomplished with conventional earthwork equipment for the shallow trenches. We understand that difficult excavation conditions due to presence of boulder and bedrock were encountered on neighboring sites. We did not encounter rock to the depth explored. However, geologic mapping indicates bedrock at a depth of approximately 20 feet so difficult excavation conditions may be encountered especially if the trenches are deeper than 20 feet. • September 26, 2007 Eng + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental Appendix D — page 5 Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Tigard Office Building Tigard. Oregon • Trench cuts should stand vertical to a depth of approximately 4 feet, provided no groundwater seepage is present in the trench walls. Use of a trench shield or approved temporary shoring is recommended for cuts that extend below groundwater seepage or if vertical walls are desired for cuts deeper than 4 feet. If shoring or dewatering is used, we recommend that the type and design of the shoring and dewatering systems be the responsibility of the contractor, who is in the best position to choose systems that fit the overall plan of operation. Groundwater should be maintained at least 2 feet below the ,bottom of the trenches during construction. All excavations should be made in accordance with applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and state regulations. • • • • September 26, 2007 Engineering + Project: No. 72595.000 PBS Environmental Appendix D — page 6 EXHIBIT H: TREE ASSESMENT • • • • • • . . • Walter H. Knapp & Associates, LLC C onsultants in Silviculture, Arboriculture and Urban Forestry July 19, 2007 Revised January 29, 2008 CLINTON STREET OFFICE BUILDING ARBORIST REPORT AND TREE PROTECTION PLAN Site Description The residential properties at 7050 and 7020 Clinton Street in Tigard have a variety of trees. Fifteen species are represented across the site and immediately adjacent areas (table 1). Bird cherry, an invasive species, is the most common tree. Douglas -fir is also common, with five trees on the site and three on neighboring property close to the site boundary. A complete description of all trees is included in the enclosed tree inventory. Table 1. Tree Species, 7050 and 7020 Clinton Street and adjacent property. Common Name Total apple Malus sp. 1 • bird cherry Prunus aviwn 9 cypress Cupressus sp. 1 Douglas - fir Pseudotsuga inenziesii 8 English walnut Juglans regia 2 European white birch Betula pendula 1 hawthorn Crataegus sp. 1 Norway maple Acer platanoides 1 Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia 1 Oregon white oak Quercus garryana 2 ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa 1 Port Orford cedar Chamaecyparis lawsoniana 1 Scouler willow Salix scouleriana 1 spruce Picea sp. 2 western redcedar Thuja plicata 1 Total. 33 • 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane, Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone: (503) 646 -4349 Fax: (503) 265 -8117 • • Page 2 0744 Clinton Street Trees - Arborist Report 1- 29- 0S.doc Tree Protection: Adjacent Properties • Four of the 33 trees are on neighboring properties, including tree numbers 625, 648, 649 and 784. Any construction activity within the protection area of these trees will need to follow the tree protection requirements listed in this plan. Tree Mitigation Excluding the four trees to be protected on neighboring property, 16 trees exceed 12- inches in diameter. Eight of these trees will be removed for construction, and eight for condition (table 2). Tree #731, a 24 -inch diameter Oregon ash, is located within the planned improvement area for SW 70 Ave. and will be removed. Since this tree is within the right -of -way, it will not be subject to mitigation. Table 2. Prescription summary for Clinton Street Size Class Prescription Data Total >12" Remove- Construction Count of Size Class 8 Sum of DBH (in.) 184 Remove- Condition Count of Size Class 8 Sum of DBH (in.) 160 Retain - off site Count of Size Class 4 Sum of DBH (in.) 146 >12" Count of Size Class • 20 >12" Sum of DBH (in.) 490 < 12" Remove- Construction Count of Size Class 2 Sum of DBH (in.) 21 Remove - Condition Count of Size Class 10 Sum of DBH (in.) 80 Retain - off site Count of Size Class 1 Sum of DBH (in.) 10 < 12" Count of Size Class 13 < 12" Sum of DBH (in.) 1 l l Total Count of Size Class 33 Total Sum of DBH (in.) 601 All of the trees on the site greater than 12 inches in diameter will be removed. According to Section 18.790.030B.2.b of the City of Tigard tree ordinance, • this will result in the need to mitigate 184 diameter inches. The ordinance provides the option of replanting of suitable trees on site or in an approved 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane, Beaverton, OR 97007 1111 Phone: (503) 646 -4349 Fax: (503) 265 -8117 • • Page 3 0744 Clinton Street Trees - Arborist Report l- 29- 08.doc • location in the city, or payment in lieu. The specific mitigation option will be decided later. The replacement option would require planting of 92 2 -inch caliper trees. Payment in lieu would be approximately $23,000, based on a cost of $125 per inch removed. Tree Protection Requirements. The following requirements apply to the four trees on adjacent property. Before Construction: 1. Tree Protection Zone. The project arborist shall designate the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ). Where feasible, the TPZ shall be established at the dripline of the tree. If infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, and utilities) must be installed closer to the tree(s), the TPZ may be established within the dripline area if the project arborist determines that the tree(s) will not be unduly damaged. The location of the TPZ shall be shown on construction drawings. 2. Design Considerations. The fill material within the dripline of the four trees will be rock. This will allow the fill material to be permeable to water and air. Drainage adjacent to the wall is designed • to eliminate ponding over the root system and to maintain a favorable environment for the roots. 3. Protection Fencing. All trees to be retained shall be protected by chain link or orange construction fencing. Protection fencing shall be secured to steel posts placed no further than 15 feet apart and shall be installed at the edge of the TPZ. 4. Preconstruction Conference. The project arborist shall be on site to discuss methods of tree removal and tree protection prior to any construction. During Construction: 1. Tree Protection Zone Maintenance. The protection fencing shall not be moved, removed, or entered by equipment except under direction of the project arborist. The arborist will be on site to provide technical guidance during construction of the fill within the root zone. 2. Storage of Material or Equipment. The contractor shall not store materials or equipment within the TPZ. 3. Excavation within the TPZ. • Excavation with the TPZ shall be avoided if alternatives are available. • - 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane, Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone: (503) 646 -4349 Fax: (503) 265 -8117 • Page 4 0744 Clinton Street Trees - Arborist Report t- 29- 08.doc • If excavation within the TPZ in unavoidable, the project arborist • shall evaluate the proposed excavation to determine methods to minimize impacts to trees. This can include tunneling, hand digging, or other approaches. • All construction within the TPZ shall be under the on -site technical supervision of the project arborist. 4. Tree Protection Inspection. The project arborist shall monitor construction activities and progress, and provide written reports to the developer and the City biweekly during periods of active construction. After construction has been completed over the root zones of the protected trees, it will be no longer necessary to continue the inspections. 5. Final Report. After the project has been completed, the project arborist shall provide a final report confirms that tree protection measures were followed. Summary None of the 29 trees on the site will be retained. Of the trees larger than 12 inches in diameter, eight will be removed for condition, and eight for construction. Four trees on adjacent property will be protected during construction. Mitigation will be required for 184 diameter inches, or the equivalent of 92 2 -inch caliper trees. • / Walter H. Knapp Certified Forester, SAF 406 Certified Arborist, ISA PN -0497 Enclosure: Tree Inventory 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane, Beaverton, OR 97007 • Phone: (503) 646 -4349 Fax: (503) 265 -8117 0 • • • Page 1meu74*o/mmna�e�n�es.mo Tree Inventory 1/29/2008 Walter H. Knapp and Assoc. LLC Point Common Name Botanical Name 'DBB C'Rud Size Prescription Mitigation | i / {Required ' . �`_ � _ _ __ _ �g,) ___ _ _ ' _-- - -'- -_-_ Class �i'___--__�--___' �d- 625 ouQ|us-fi, Psoxuhmgvmoxzkesii 38 | 20 1Located onsitcmoouth.Deud6mocheo,00dominun »12" Retain - off site. See No �uok poor o�uome protection | I -- -_'___ _ --'-'--___-_-- . -_-_� -_-�xe�u*� 645 ch«r[Y� � _ i p�n/�a�um ._ ) 0_ ��O Invasive .. ___ _____ _____���l�, __�N� - / !7 2O Invasive species >12" No 646/t�rdd�nr Prunus i _ _ n«w»«o�p�� \/v m�|md"a�Ty Prunus ay�?L --_ -x} 2O/lnv�ive species _ '----------� ' --- �fir Pseudotsuga m 46 / 30 No identified limitations >12" Retain - off site. See No / ' protection ��� i 649|Dovg|a� -- - -''----� — — '' ��'- - -�8 30 -'--'� No limitations �'-------�'- ---'----�D� Retain site. |�o ��r Pseudotsuga � o identified o/ mmumno | | protection . — . �2�������i __'_--� - _'----_ 65O| bird c n� Pnm/ou,�o | 10 Vo�poor uoudihon 5. 12" Retain a'�fad� See No � . . / protection � - . ' - '_ J_ �[�����non� 6511Scouler willow ' Salix scolderiana 3x10 condition } 2" y io� Remove-Condition No - ' ' - _ -' C�,�eg»«§� 13 - Leaning west, _ - _ >1 J��o _'__�_ ] /�o��*'�u�ooz��� 32 25 Condom�m�trunk, poor poor >12" No »»� rxm ,~� condition, Remove-Condition -_- ''' - ....... _ . . - _'---- --_--_' 677 menz��i 26 | _ 0- - ---_ >12" Remove- Construction Yes --- 729 ponderosa 1P u_ __ 0 `_�eryDoor condi/ion _-- __ . 2 4 25 �oid�n identified >12" Remove in8n�70� No 73|0�8on�� /�o�x/��@��u � - �' _Ave. 734'.g ^ ' i- ' ' 18 identified ---- - �--- ---' - ----------��� �N� ' | i o- ���y bird cherry , --- --' 10 � 8 No / `=' pm'syu�o /rm««g _ _ i - - �r��'~�.u"/��e����_�- '- ' - - �-�- ~~'��������--�=� T47 32 28 No identified limitations >12" Remove- Construction Yes 75O mouk | 32 _35 _ Basal decay . _ >12" Remove-Condition [No '�-=_�-- ~ ' ' 762 24 763|bind ch 14 12 lInvasive_species >12" Remove-Condition :No • g � __Prunus /+vyx��u . 771'Norwxymople ' Acorplamxnk&x 10 20 No -r �l2" �� 779unn� ��/���� _ --' i �* /o _______'-___----_-_��'"'`^z�e����-__- -_'-- ^ --' - �;0 2j ! identified >12" Remove- Yes ._ _ � — 79 / |� wxh� �y�������_� 6 -'-__- -_'_—_--_-- 5 1� No _____. «J' � - -- 8 | 15 Very condition �}2" on No 7""�Enp\iuhvm\nu� Jo��xxn�� . poor ooroonu on um=.=`�"."" . Page umuor**Qmmno�ee 7moxmu Tree Inventory Street Walter H. Knapp and Assoc LLC Point , Common &nmn��/Num« I DBH I C-Rad !Comments and Condition I Size Prescription IMitigation --} — ------ 8�� i� limitations � |�umo C i Class 1 797 cypress ��L U |m identified ��� m' 805 bird cherry `/rmmv,k�' 12 / /�c�dedbark, invasive opou�o very poor condition � 12" Remove-Condition [ . ...._ - - -__' 80& bit 1 Pnmxxmim/ h [Very ���' /�v ' _. — --- '-- ---- - '-----�--------- ---- - ml/Europcmnwhim: Bcolapoodxla 16 i 12 Species highly susceptible to bronze birch borer >12" !Remove- Construction Yes --,—__` ��u �� )l � ll _ Nojdouhhed|ipd��o� �l � d ��� -�� Highly susceptible to Port Orford ceda root disease. >12^ No --- IChamaecyparis lawsoniana I . ' - 8 9 3 ---___-22- 20'' �» �/z' 894|hirdohnnv I/ruoxxv"ium 20 I 20 !Invasive species >12r |No • ��N� ��� • . • I • — 4111 - �.� EXHIBIT I: SENSITIVE AREA SCRN • • • • • 0•)tP. LU. LVV1)il I: L ( Kryk 092212077 LRS ARCHITECTS. INC. • No. 3202 P. 1 001 • • C1eanWate e SServices Our commitment i► clear. CWS FIN Number Sensitive Area Pre - Screening I 07 I /� Site Assessment N Jurisdiction :, C III O "Ilia i-d. Property Information: (example 1S234A801400) Owner Information: �v,�\' A/ - lA 1, ' Taxlot ID(s): `r iS i;\ Sec-36 DC . _ Name: LLa — t — 1 oi 3C,C •CD I. 37o Company: IMMIL - L—LL Address: FL t/e/ CAP ' • !Owl 0 . cl, l i' 80 site address: / A, 70 ZD 5W . . ° CjIN To U 1. t Phone/Fax: �O� S� ''• ... r . Nearest Cross Street - 72- kL E -mail: U . . - QO I airklA - Development Activity: Check all that app gpplioant I formation• Addition to Single Family Residence (rooms, deck, garage) t Ai _ • Name: er .1 ‘1 I N IS SI4 Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Minor Land Partition ❑ Company: Lg.. S t�t�l t l e....1" 1 Residential Condominium ❑ Commercial Condominium ❑ Address: 7 20 MW I?AV S 64, i l 400 Residential Subdivision LI Commercial Subdivision ❑ ph A d er._ 4 t '7 2a� Single Lot Co mercial ❑ Multi Lot Commercial—, 4-6%,--_,_ ❑. Phone /Fax: 105b3 2 GS--J 5 Other 5 i 1.-.3 r�u+✓ ( -mall: � l� Y1V e S 7�P t ./S �r 0 - rr !! a In e_� .0.C.c't co__ t la i 4.44 MI,(eps i i �R. A lac ,,-._,....--1-5-, + o Will the project involve any off-site work: YES V� NO ❑ Unknown III Looatton and description of off -site work: 6)-4/1 tat i n., . _ - • .► . ent - C' t � . D `fit A . i Additional comme Is or Info etion thpt m be ne - • to underetand your project: 1 C I r • ,5 `V , . d a - 've.I - 4 - ar C) te.e. - e st. i" a CDAb L a Th s appiloatlon does NOT rep ace th e need for Grading and Erosion Control Permits, Connection Permits, Building Permits, Site Development Permits, DEO 12004 Permit or other permits as issued by the Department of Environmental Quality, Department of Stele Lands and/or Department of the Army COE, All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed under applicable local, State, end federal law. By signing this form. the Owner or Owners authorized agent or represental ve, ecknowfedgee end ogreea that employees of Clean Water Services have authority to enter the project site at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting project site cotdldone end gathering Information related to the project site. I certify that I em familiar with the information contained in this document, and to the pest of my knowledge and belief, this Information is True, complete, and accurate. Print/Type Nam; . ; p A RY % M f< SZ..EL�OS —I Print/Type Title: .r tO Y p l L tom-• Signature: , t ` - = • Date: 0 . Z 0 F o, R DISTRICT USE ONLY • ❑ Sensitive areas potentially exist on site or within 200' of the site. THE APPLICANT MUST PERFORM A SiTE ASSESSMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER. If Sensitive Areas exist on the site or within 200 feet on adjacent properties, a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required. r g Based on review of the submitted materials and best available information Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or within 200' of the site. This Sensitive Area Pre -Sc eenlna Site Assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water gtlal(ty sensitive areas If they are subsequently discovered. This document will serve as your Service Provider letter as required by Resolution and Order 07 -20, Section 3.02.1. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed under applicable local, State, end federal law. ❑ Eased on review of the submitted materials and best available information the above referenced project will not significantly • impact the existing potentially sensitive area(s) found near the site. This Sensitive Area Prescreening Site Assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect additional water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently • discovered. This document will serve as your Service Provider letter as required by Resolution and Order 07 -20, Section 3.02.1. All required permits end approvals must be and completed under applicable local, state, end federal law. ❑ This Service Provider Letter I9 not valid unless CWS approved site plan(s) are attached. ❑ The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development or the lot was platted after 9/8/96 ORS 92.040(2). NO SITE ASSESSMENT R SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. • Reviewed By: B Date: 7/2-570 2550 SW H6lsboro Highway • Hillsboro, Oregon 7123 Phone: (503) 601 -5100 • Fax (503) 6B1-o4 9 • me" cicenwcrer uavhcs nw, no..& May 8. ZIG7 • EXHIBIT J: STORMWATER ANALYSIS I • • • • • • • September 18, 2007 Preliminary Drainage Report RCM Office Building Tigard, Oregon S Prepared For: RCM Homes Inc. E Centerpiece Dr. Suite 280 • Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Prepared By: SR Design LLC 8196 SW Hall Blvd, Suite 232 Beaverton, OR 97008 • RCM Office Building • • Preliminary Drainage Report Tigard, Oregon September 18, 2007 Aik) RCM Office Building Preliminary Drainage Report September 18, 2007 Purpose: The purpose of this report is to evaluate the proposed site conditions, determine water quality and water quantity for the proposed development. Pre - Development Conditions: The existing condition is for the proposed office building on TL 3600 and TL 3700 from Tax Map 1S136DC. The property is located on the southwest corner of SW Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue in Tigard, Oregon. The subject property occupies 0.83 acres. Currently there are two houses, trees and grass on the partition. The existing property slopes from the northeast to the southwest. Stonmvater runoff was calculated using the SCS Type 1 A, 24 hour storm event methodology. The 2 -yr, 10 -yr, and 25 -year storm events were analyzed. Storm Cad, version 6.6.6.8 was used to model the hydrologic scenario on the site. Existing Runoff: Impervious Area: 0.12 acres (CN =98) • Pervious Area: 0.71 acres (CN =80) Q2= 0.18 cfs Qio = 0.33 cfs Q25 = 0.40 cfs Runoff Calculations are located in Appendix A. Onsite soils consist of are HSG Class C soils (37B, Quatama Loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes and 45C Woodburn Silt Loam 7 to l2percent slopes). The hydrologic soils grouping are C. See Appendix B for Soils information. Post - Development Conditions: The proposed development will consist of an office building, hardscape, a parking lot, and landscaping. Onsite drainage will be collected via private storm lines and conveyed to a 48" CMP detention facility. A flow control manhole will meter the flows to match existing site runoff rates. A stormwater management water quality manhole will provide water quality treatment for the site runoff. The water quality manhole has been sized to also treat newly created impervious area along the frontage of SW Clinton Street. Runoff will be conveyed to the existing downstream system located on the south side of SW Clinton Street. Newly created sidewalk and pavement along SW 70 Avenue will be collected and treated in a stormwater management catch basin located just north of the site access on SW 70 Avenue. • RCM Office Building • • Preliminary Drainage Report Tigard, Oregon September 18, 2007 • Runoff will be conveyed to the existing drainage system to the south of the project site on SW 70 Avenue. Proposed Runoff: Impervious Area: 0.71 acres (CN =98) Pervious Area: 0.12 acres (CN =86) Q2 = 0.42 cfs Q = 0.60 cfs Q25 = 0.69 cfs Runoff Calculations are located in Appendix A. Water Quality: Onsite water quality will be accomplished with a Stormwater Management manhole. The determined water quality volume is 795.39 cubic feet. The water quality flow rate is 0.06 cfs. The newly created hardscape and roadway improvements along the frontage of SW 70 Avenue will be accomplished with a Stormwater Management catch basin. The determined water quality volume is 150 cubic feet. The water quality flow rate is 0.01 cfs. • See Appendix A for water quality calculations. See Appendix B for water quality structure details. Detention Calculations: Onsite Water Quantity will be accomplished with 115 lineal feet of 48" CMP and a multiple - orifice flow control structure. Storm Shed, version 6.1.6.8 was used to route pre- existing flows vs. post - development flows. The base elevation for the detention pipe was set to 100.00 for calculation purposes. • 2 -yr Pre: 0.18 cfs 2 -yr Post: 0.21 cfs Peak Stage: 102.20 feet Active Vol: 751 of 10 -yr Pre: 0.33 cfs 10 -yr Post: 0.31 cfs Peak Stage: 103.16 feet Active Vol: 1,166 of 25 -yr Pre: 0.40 cfs 25 -yr Post: 0.41 cfs Peak Stage: 103.61 feet Active Vol: 1,327 cf A flow control manhole will include an 8" standpipe with orifices to control the detention. A 2" diameter orifice was sized for the 2 -yr event. The orifice will be set at elevation 100.00 on the standpipe. A 2.25" diameter orifice was sized for the 10 -yr storm event. The orifice will be set at elevation 102.00. The 25 -yr peak flow will be accommodated by a combination of the low4er orifices and the 8" diameter horizontal orifice set at elevation 103.52. See Appendix A for Level Pool Routing Calculations. See Appendix B for the flow control structure detail. Conclusion: Water quality and quantity will be accomplished onsite with a water quality manhole, detention 41110 pipe, and a flow control structure. Runoff will exit the site at pre - development flow rates. RCM Office Building Preliminary Drainage Report • Tigard, Oregon September 18, 2007 •/ APPENDIX A WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS EXISTING DRAINAGE BASIN DATA PROPOSED DRAINAGE BASIN DATA LEVEL POOL ROUTING CALCULATIONS CONTROL STRUCTURE DATA • 111 t� >> o • • - x _ =i D E S I G N° Planning I Engineering I Surveying I Landscape Architecture Subject: By: 'Ill- D C A 1 1 iynq-- Project No: R CM - 11G Pc O P F vC, . Sheet: I of 1.- -- t :T • W: AT- .- .cue -c.� r'f ; .( . �Lu.t,_-n p N. .. ¢ =— . • f= • ,f. t 3 . - I -___.. .. ._. - -- .. _ - --- ._.. • • - - _ .. ... _ _- . 7 X 1 , —_- -f — •_C?U � , . 1 _.� _. : .l� "!K t ^P.. _. 1 t . _.r I - - -- - i — -- 7 , I - _ — T .... �. , - „ 5, 1 ir�. - - —_ a -- ". ry S � 1 - E _ 5 __ - _... -.. 1 1 1 -1 — .._ s • $ © ..: � i r%1.Qr: :v.�O�J 1 ! � _.._E � _1'_ " I --- - . A : F R " -:_ : e ...:. ! • .. !.f.._ _— . • - - __!.. . ..-._.-_._._ ." -1- - _ ' • : 9 1 , , Y ' i. , i. S � . `2 C j : • ; , :. . i - :.: , 44 } • 0 �� • : - - - i : 9 g ; i !. 1 • ,}�;� P � o , i 7t — fir $ . _�f _... — : --- ' i - : '.! i • : . i_____ , : • , 1 _ - • _ _ _. e i • I i _ - - -_ —_ • ; - ______ Ir - ...,____. r • ' - . . : _____ -:---.1 - • .t_---._. - I. - • - _ : ,...,:_. : :: _ • = _�- :1 :1 • 8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232 • Beaverton, OR 97008 • tel (503) 469 -1213 • fax (503) 469 -8553 ••=n.:0 3i3 •' -i--- A' ''' ' -.F.: *- 1F4.$ - • ' , - • • 41.:;., -- " ,7- ..: 5 - ,- V; r-=•-P ' - _ift-i S -..- - *. tr-"i! - • - = ::-,: - •-•;k::. ;4-4 r •t, ' h. i ff::: ': E :S: I - G N. Planning Engineering I Surveying I Landscape Architecture 110 '• Subject: By: P Date: clil tvo Project No: RCM T i T G A f-6 OF ICE Sheet: Z-- of 2_ . ...._ . : ...-,-;--... . . HI L I L T ; 1 . 1 " ! i . i t i : s i • : • , . 1 . . , W. cr 1 . y , i . : _: 1.. .---------;- : .. ! - . . a . 17 - 7 - 1 ;....: ___:_t___■ : i -• i / T i ; r . i 1 _;_ • 1 . 1 :. ;; ; • . • :.--- 4 1 .... [ . ." ' - n4 i 'i ; ' • r • -:: .i - vel\JU 0 •L:. a 1.21 : ; : - : : 1 : i : ; :L - i : : - ! i ; _ , . ' . ; :: . 1 • :..;__ _ : : i • : i . 1 : ! : ; ....: :. 1 : : : :..!..___L__.... ' , i I • • • .1-. . : :. ; ;....: . •::. , :. . .:„.4. ___...... ,. t .1 ,____:,.. : • :_____ ...,_ X i . . . .......: . ..:"R•0?6.1-4,---, : ..--- 0 -73 ,----1--0 i s I- . . , .,, , _ •., • , • • -: i : • . , 1 11 - i i ' : : : i , , - - • : , : q I j - : : : 1 - ' ' ' 1 • All -----;----- • _ t - g -- • 't- . ' 1 1 --- i.-- A;4 1 4 - 12_13tC - C - A -- PC.: . ' 4 .-- i - 8 - 4 . • • - s -1-;•- - , z . . : ; -3 : • : : 4 . . . . . j. - - . , • 1 ■ 11 : ! . 5 ' ; ; : I , • I • • : . ' _ 1 : . : . • ; : G ......" : , t t_... . • . : itktv '..-- :• :17.. ' 1 4+ i C r"- -19 -C1.7 ; i , ; i • ! ti• • i • : : -; : f , : i . • . 6_._ . • . ; l' . __ ______ 4 .. . : = "; •: .... . I. ..."____ __.. . . . . . . ____ ... :. i :. 1 ! ; . ::. _ • .. : I ; I : • 1 : - - :: i E 6 ' I I : 1 : : - 6 1; 1 i : 1 - - ; • ; • : - 4 " • • 5 V.0.‘..wy isr±: 3.,(, ( , • c, cA 4- - _...c•-' - ": '.• ' 1 • .... , - - - - - ,--- • ,-• - • . .,..,... g rt - ,--:?! •-• ..4....,, : . - ____,... . : • !, ),_,_... 1 . i . r : i '• ----. - • • , . . . - 1 - " -. 1... Ir. t ' . •, ' - t ? , ' .: -;• f ) „__.! 1 . : . - ; 1 o 1 ; : ' • . 4_ - 1 ; - !.. i • ' • : 4 4 t ; . : . i o_. ; i ! • ... , . : I - - : : • ; . :• . :- : .. .... .._....... :. :. : 1 ; i ........ : . . : : - F . . . . i 1 : " - :-"--- - - : 5 ! : 1 : • 1 ; . i . . i wri) v; . . - 56 L F i....4...._.___.. . . : 1 , ... • ....-______•.: : ; i i : 1 : : : : : If i • ! , 1 : - : : . : g . i i t - ; • -• • • : , . ! • . . • 1 - ; . 1 • : I : g I • . 1 _.'....... . ;‘1,,, e,.:..._ • ,.,-, L __•-• ; - i : 1 i ; :. !.. 1. !, ' ; ' !; ...1_1 . 1 : • 1 1 . . 7' "". . • . i 1...- • ' t - ; : • I i - - ., ! ''. 1 . ; _ t_ : • : :, :_i,;: . • • • • , • : ' 1 ; • : : 1 . . • . . . . , • • : 1 - - • ; - 1 ; . : - !• 1 : : : • 1 . .; ' . . . . • : 1 ! : ! ' • - i : . - - ...._.,. 3 " / ' 1 i i : ! ' ! I / : • • • r , •, It 1H ;----;-;,.! • A. , :1: • . :1 _.., Li , : , • i _ ; , . - 1 : : i : -: - :::., , • , : , . . , i . , • . . . , • .. . . . .. : : 1 ; . ; : • { , • : ; - : : 1 . . . • . . -. - • . . • ::---4---.-- 1--- - 5 • ; 7 . . .. i ; .1 ---[— — ! 1 1 1 I ' 1 I ; ! 1' • : i ! 5 ' I • r 7 : : • ' . : ' ,, . . . . : : . . • , • : . • • : 1 - • • • ; I • 1--i • , . : . — — .- : - • , _.... .. ____ . . . , ' • : 1 : - : --:' - i ; 7 : i i 1 ------4— • i : ! 1 ', . r 1 ,. : 1 . . • • i :. 1 . i ' ' . ", ' . '. - . I : :.. .._____-...... • .! '.. . • i 1 . 1 ' , . . ! t : - ■ • : i : . , , I - _./, : . . . . ■ . r_.---- . . : •" : 1 . ....; ' • • • . . ". • ' 1 ! ! . . - i 1 : • . , : -- 1 --. — . . , :: . . .. ; . . . . •. . . . . • • . •• ". ' — . ---- ' --- i • i . ' ' ' -. — s ; :.. ' • ' -----!------:- ' I . - • - • . . ' '.- -• :. • ' 1 i , ' _ -• --. . :. 3 I 1 . L.._ ..._-_-___.! / . 3 ! • • 1 • • ' . • . . . • L . : - , 1 : , : . . • • • ...___ : „ : . ..1: ;..:-;•1: ___±.i. .1 1 ; 1 - il--4 I- '•-• i • 1 ' : : : • . : -• : . ! g . ': 1 , s 1 ; - : . 1; ; 1 . / :._________:_.; ; . . _ • . 1 : , • . . -; . , • I . . . t I ' f • , . : " • 1 1 ' ! i 0 - - • 8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232 • Beaverton, OR 97008 . tel (503) 469-1213 . fax (503) 469-8553 • • Existing Event Summary: • BasinID Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype Event (cfs) (hrs) (ac -ft) ac /Loss Existing 0.18 8.00 0.0748 0.83 SCS /SCS TYPE1A 2 yr Existing 0.33 8.00 0.1258 0.83 SCS /SCS TYPE1A 10 yr Existing 0.40 8.00 0:1516 0.83 SCS /SCS TYPE1A 25 yr Drainage Area: Existing Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 0.7100 ac 80.00 0.24 hrs • Impervious 0.1200 ac 98.00 0.26 hrs Total 0.8300 ac Supporting Data: Pervious CN Data: Lawn 80.00 0.7100 ac Impervious CN Data: Roof & Driveway 98.00 0.1200 ac Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet Grass Lawn 271.00 ft 7.40% 0.1500 15.91 min Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed Roofs and Driveway 0.00 ft 0.00% 15.9000 15.90 min II Proposed Event Summary: BasinID Peak Q Peak T Peak Vol Area Method Raintype Event (cfs) (hrs) (ac -ft) ac /Loss Proposed 0.42 8.00 0.1458 0.83 SCS /SCS TYPE1A 2 yr Proposed 0.60 8.00 0.2095 0.83 SCS /SCS TYPE1A 10 yr Proposed 0.69 8.00 0.2399 0.83 SCS /SCS TYPE1A 25 yr Drainage Area: Proposed Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20 Storm Dur: 24.00 hrs Intv: 10.00 min Area CN TC Pervious 0.1200 ac 86.00 0.17 hrs Impervious 0.7100 ac 98.00 0.26 hrs Total 0.8300 ac Supporting Data: Pervious CN Data: Landscape & Lawn 86.00 0.1200 ac Impervious CN Data: Building, Hardscape, Roadway, Parking Lot 98.00 0.7100 ac Pervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Fixed None Entered 0.00 ft 0.00% 10.0000 10.00 min . Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time IP Fixed Roofs and Driveway 0.00 ft 0.00% 15.9000 15.90 min • • • RLPCOMPUTE fRLP1 SUMMARY 2 -YR Storm Event Match Q: 0.1758 cfs Peak Out Q: 0.2194 cfs Peak Stage: 102.18 ft Active Volume: 740.98 cf Pipe length: 115.00 ft 10 -YR Storm Event Match Q: 0.3269 cfs Peak Out Q: 0.3294 cfs Peak Stage: 103.04 ft Active Volume: 1,119.50 cf Pipe length: 115.00 ft 25 -YR Storm Event Match Q: 0.4047 cfs Peak Out Q: 0.3728 cfs Peak Stage: 103.59 ft Active Volume: 1,322.73 cf Pipe length: 115.00 ft Node ID: RLP Desc: Manhole structure Start El: 100.0000 ft Max El: 104.0040 ft • Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd: Storage Id: DETENTION PIPE Discharge Id: STAND PIPE Control Structure ID: STAND PIPE - Multiple Orifice Structure Descrip: Multiple Orifice Start El Max El Increment 100.0000 ft 104.0000 ft 0.10 Orif Coeff: 0.62 Bottom El: 100.00 ft Lowest Diam: 2.0000 in out to 2nd: 2.0000 ft Diam: 2.2500 in 2nd to 3rd: 1.5200 ft Diam: 8.0000 in • RCM Office Building • Preliminary Drainage Report Tigard, Oregon September 18, 2007 • APPENDIX B WATER QUALITY STRUCTURE DETAILS FLOW CONTROL STRUCUTRE DETAIL SOILS DATA • 1111 • • BALLAST (SEE NOTE 8) 48' 0 %i /:,.,, : 1I I�II it INLET PIPE (SEE NOTES 5 6) 57 12'0 HOPE OUTLET STUB (SEE NOTES 5 * 6) MANHOLE STORMFILTER - PLAN VIEW 30 "0 FRAME AND COVER (5TD) CONCRETE (5EE NOTE 4) GRADE RING STEP ( = SIM TYf') INLET PIPE HDPE OUTLET (SEE NOTES 5 4. 6) RISER WITH SCUM BAFFLE 'lI'I■, 4' -6° MIN (5EE NOTE 7) STORMFILTER CARTPJDGE —" '_ — (11'F') (SEE NOTE 2) \. BALLAST I �� 1� � ` � I (SEE NOTE 8) i !._ •\ �• OBE I IIB HEIGHT �– H WIDTH UNDERDRAIN SEE DETAIL 2/2 MANIFOLD MANHOLE STORMFILTER - SECTION VIEW A 1 THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT StormnIker® U.5. PATENT No. 5,322,629, No. 5,707,527, No. 6,027.639 No. 6,649,048, No. 5,624,57 AND OTHER U.S. AND PORE! 02006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions PATENTS PENDING A U�'I`A 'LJ* PRECAST 48" MANHOLE STORMFILTER DRAWING 1i 0 -9— i SAO VA STORMWATER PLAN AND SECTION VIEWS 1 �� cni LTInnic STANDARD DETAIL , • • . B all 0 . Vir .- Ill, OUTLET STUB (SEE NOTES 445) 10" 6" OVERLAP • ♦ is • " WEIR WALL ° — �..� . • •• �_� , _ OMVOIMICIM WAN TYP SCUM BAFFLE \� 0� • ;i • • • , L J T • 1' . 6 " —•.- -•-- REINFORCING BARS INLET STUE (SEE NOTE 6) (OPTIONAL) (SEE NOTES 445) • 1- CARTRIDGE CATCHBASIN - PLAN VIEW 0 • . 4'0 ACCESS COVER ' INLET GRATE OPENING 2 1/2" 6" EN miles; , _ . i CONCRETE COLLAR OUTLET STUB • ` (SEE NOTE 6) (SEE NOTES 445) / \ p I i ___ ___ STORMFILTER . No IMMINI±UM111 CARTRIDGE (TYP) CLEANOUT ACCESS (SEE NOTE 2) PLUG ON WEIR WALL ME UNDERDRAIN MANIFOLD 2 - 4" 2' INSIDE 3 INSIDE . 4' -4 /4" OUTSIDE THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 1- CARTRIDGE CATCHBASIN - SECTION VIEW A Storrnraer0 U.S. PATENT No. 5,322,629, 1 No. 5,707.527, No. 6,027,639 No. 6,649,048, No. 5,624,576, AND OTHER U.S. AND FOREIGN 02006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions PATENTS PENDING . ID �Iwi'e'/�1.�° STEEL CATCHBASIN STORMFILTER DRAWING PLAN AND SECTION VIEWS 1 STORMWATER STANDARD DETAIL - 1 CARTRIDGE UNIT SOLUTIONS. 113 oonlecllstofrnwatef com DATE WOWS I SCALE NONE FILE NAME: CBSF1S -oTl" DRAWN: MA( I CHECKED: ARG • • • RIM: 105.52 - CALCULATIONS 253. -PLANS HANDHOLD 0" MIN 16" MAX LIFT HANDLE ATTACH * • - •' WITH GALVANIZE CHAIN 8"� STAND P1PE- PRIMARY SPILLWAY 1 12" MIN IE: 103.52 (257.7- PLANS) 6 i 25 -YR EVENT TEPS OR LADDER > SEE NOTE 3: PIPE (,y8 GALVANIZED '_ SUPPORT(S) DEFORMED REBAR . *• 0 3 "x.075" ALUM. OR STEEL REINFORCED POLYPROPYLENE STEPS) ..'° • 2.25" 0 -- IE: 102.00 (256.18 - PLANS) CLEANOUT /SHEAR GATE: 12" ; 10 -YR EVENT 8" DIAMETER MIN . 0 J '• . :� 12" MIN SEE NOTE 5 ii 1-"1 1 _ ! • JZ" INLET r---1 L 8., (OUTLET;N 8" PVC • I '` •, f _ IE: 100.00- CALCUL, 8" PVC -0" 8" MIN MIN METAL PIPE 0 0 2' IE: 254.18 -PLANS 1E: 100.00 - CALCULATIONS • IE: 254.18 -PLANS 0 0 2'--0" MIN RESTRICTOR PLA 1 6 IN •+r•' 48" MIN. ..' WITH 2 "0 ORIFICE '' { DIAMETER - -% 12" MIN. 3/4" MINUS f ) •. o.. p.. o .. 0 '• 6•. 0'• P•.p..a•.p.• • AGGRAGATE BASE MATERIAL 1 •O. °•:O. °•:O. °0.:0.•9•:0. 1)•:O.• °•:0 . . 9 . : 0 * ° COMPACTED NATIVE MATERIAL - - SECTION A -A FLOW CONTROL MANHOLE SCALE: NTS • S . V EXHIBIT K: VEHICLE INFO • • • • • • • CHARBONNEAU ENGINEERING LLC • 9370 SW Greenburg Rd., Suite 411, Portland, OR 97223 Phone (503) 293 -1118 • Fax (503) 293 -1119 MEMORANDUM DATE February 14, 2008 TO Jeff Peck SR Design, LLC 8196 SW Hall Blvd., Ste. 232 Beaverton, OR 97008 FROM Mary Kate Otto, EIT Traffic Analyst SUBJECT Randy Myers Office Building (Project #08 -09) Peak Hour Trip Distribution and Assignment As requested by City of Tigard staff peak hour trip distribution and trip assignments have been prepared for the Randy Myers Office Building to be located at the southeast corner of Clinton Street and SW 70 Avenue. As identified in the project's pre - application conferences notes trip distribution and trip assignment have been identified at the SW 68 Avenue and Dartmouth Street, SW 72 " • Avenue and Dartmouth Street, and SW 72n Avenue and Highway 217 intersections. The peak hour distribution is illustrated in Figure 1. The corresponding trip assignments are illustrated in Figure 2. • Trip distribution and assignment at other intersections near the site and in the surrounding area are also included on the figures. Trip generation for the office building was calculated using trip rates presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition. The trip generation table for the site is presented below. Units Weekday ITE Land Use (sq.ft.) ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit General Office ( #710) 15,600 Generation Rate 11.01 1.55 88% 12% 1.49 17% 83% Site Trips _ 172 24 21 3 23 4 19 Source: Trip Generation, 7th Edition, ITE, 2003, average rates. Please contact Mary Kate Otto or Frank Charbonneau if you have any questions or comments. • • • • • PLOT DATE: 02.14.08 FILE: 0809fIow.dwq 2 99W ic— 0% ATLANTA <-207. ) ( Hawn 5% t�PS �� 0 0 r 20 %/ STREET 5 %-i 1 STREET 00 K S %� K 11 Ko N W L k- 15% 20% J eArL0R 5cp, a T 10 %-4 , I r 20 %. STREET 0 o ul O " '1 SITE d W W n � -- _t -g ^ o n,35R� b t07. 4 14 55% J �CLNTON = CLINTON v OqR N00 0 7 0% - ,, STREET 3 STREET \ %o 15% 5 1\7...._.-...../ STREE r ) L __ 15% 15 % - 1 10 %_a T 15% --> \5% i • in et - � M ¢ ELMHURST 2 '� yy S TREET , a 0 In NO SCALE J FRANKLIN STREET � F ROAD p SEVELAND N STREET N . , S 9 W W b b z V o 3 3 J o ¢ ¢ • HAMPTON STREET 217 ON <N 1 - 9 ��r� 15% i T Q • o ti H 0 g , ,\(j .10 t 15 %' 0 'n s9 5 T . . , S9 N y CHARBONNEAU NOTES: Trip distribution based on engineering TRIP DISTRIBUTION FIGURE e ENGINEERING LLC judgement. AM PEAK HOUR AND PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT:' 08-09 ,) RANDY MYERS OFFICE BUILDING • • • PLOT DATE: 02.14.08 FILE: 0809fIow.dwq 99 W Ic 4 A 4 H AINES E 1 99W 14 1 ATLANTA 1 HAINES 0 -- L ,O 7T 1 y STREET ) L 0� rSTREEf L , � 4—› STREET � 3� � STRfET INN `� f � �l �, L , 3 ,t J a BAYLOR \ 0 y 0 W 4 it BAYLOR p N 2 I 1 �I STREET 0 -,1 4 STREET I`\ 0 Lo 0 — N .- r...� M. `SE IT t-- J • > L 14- 2 JJ iCUNNN ` SITE t- - = � ,_ O ¢ 3 ¢ y 14 1 L] : C(INiO ¢ CLINTON v Q A CLINTON 15 _0 STREET o STREET 3 STREET o STREET • M F' 1 �� c0 M M / v 1 Fi ST F f � UTF1 3 / 3 1—y STR E W - ' , r 4 , rz 1 3 --> 3 -N 2 - T 1-> - co • .?_ >- Q ELMHURST Y r ity. � ELM HURST 2 E 7, STREET a STREET &-,, Bf J NO SCALE FRANKLIN �/ FRANKLIN Q �/ STREET Bf t2LANO Q RQAO ROAD • STREET BEVELAND _ BEVELANO 01 0 STREET ^ STREET cy 1. Z V) F ai b� / b Z eZ y 3 > 3 > �' �¢ �Q VI Q VI Q HAMPTON STREET HAMPTON STREET 217 Iss O . 0 �si MM 4 L k W sR R_0 b b • b ../ ^ v CD \ N 'N TRIPS; I a TRIPS: II II .\ 0 IN = 21 y 1--y IN = 4 W y N 2-y M OUT = 3 T OUT = 19 T 'I' TOTAL = 24 j T TOTAL = 23 0 a I 5 T I T M l 2 AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR CHARBONNEAU NOTES: Trip generation based on General TRIP ASSIGNMENT FIGURE ENGINEERING LLC Office (ITE #710) trip rates. RANDY MYERS OFFICE BUILDING 2 PROJECT: 08 -09 EXHIBIT L: SIGHT DISTANCE CERT • • • • • • • • • • PRELIMINARY INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE CERTIFICATION September 17, 2007 City of Tigard CD - Development Engineering 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503 -639 -4171 Fax: 503 - 624 -0752 http: / /www.tioard- or.00v Attn: Kim McMillan, P.E. RE: Myers Office Building -- SW 70 Avenue Sight Distance Certification Case Number: The access point, internal of this project, is located at the ffrontage of SW 70 Avenue. The speed limit along SW 70 Avenue is 25 M.P.H., based in the City's local street standard, requiring 250 feet of sight distance in both directions, in accord with Tigard Development Code Section 18.705.030.H.1. • As required by Code Sections 18.705.030.H.1, sight distance along SW 70 Avenue was measured to be 250 feet to the north of the access and 250 feet to the south. The Code Section requires that measurements be based on an eye height of 3.5 feet and an object height of 4.25 feet above the road; and be assumed to be 10 feet from the near edge of pavement to the front of a stopped vehicle. It should be noted that vegetation is currently growing along the site street frontage. This vegetation will be removed in order to ensure sight distance from the access to SW 70 Avenue. In conclusion, I hereby certify that the intersection sight distance at the proposed access for the Myers Office Building will conform to the requirements for sight distance as set forth in the Tigard Development Code. �� FI¢� �s 61,452 '•- Steve Roper, P.E. OREGON 4P), spa 14, ,te V fN C v • EXPIRES: 12 31 -G - • • ATTACHMENT 4 Emily Eng From: Emily Eng Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 11:24 AM To: Kim McMillan Subject: RE: RCM thanks for letting me know. I won't return the SR or LRS emails until I hear from you. -Emily From: Kim McMillan Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 10:36 AM To: Emily Eng Cc: 'Jeff Caines' Subject: RCM Emily, I left a message for Jeff Peck, SR Design, requesting the p.m. peak trip contributions. What Charbonneau gave us was the total number of trips, not the distribution to the intersections of 68th /Dartmouth and 72nd /Dartmouth. I need those numbers in order to calculate the signal fund assessments. Once I have that information the engineering items are complete. Kim Kim McMillan Development Review Engineer 503 - 718 -2642 Fax 503 - 624 -0752 • 1 • Emily Eng From: Emily Eng Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:18 PM To: Kim McMillan Subject: RE: RCM ok, I'll let him know. From: Kim McMillan Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:18 PM To: Emily Eng Subject: RE: RCM No - he left a message and I wasn't sure what his name was...just Ron something From: Emily Eng Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:17 PM To: Kim McMillan Subject: RE: RCM Did you just speak to him? The person I spoke to today was Ron Leitner. From: Kim McMillan Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:15 PM To: Emily Eng Subject: RCM Signal fund fees are approximately $711.62/p.m. peak trip @ 72nd /Dartmouth and $501.25/p.m. peak trip @ 68th /Dartmouth Do you want to pass that on to the RCM applicant so he can calculate his fees /TIF credits? Kim Kim McMillan Development Review Engineer 503- 718 -2642 Fax 503 - 624 -0752 1 . • Emily Eng From: Emily Eng Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:53 PM To: Maris Buxton Subject: RE: RCM Office Project- TIF Credit Question yes, they know they have to pay the signal fees first. by the way, I wrote his email wrong, so I will have to call him. From: Maris Buxton Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:50 PM To: Emily Eng Subject: RE: RCM Office Project - TIF Credit Question Do they understand they have to pay the fee for the signals first? Yes, it would be credited at the time they pay their TIF. From: Emily Eng Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:46 PM To: Maris Buxton Cc: 'rleightner @rcmhomes.net' Subject: RCM Office Project - TIF Credit Question Maris, The RCM Office building would be eligible for TIF credits for the amount they are paying into the signalization funds for 72nd /Dartmouth and 68th /Dartmouth. When would the credits be applied? At the time they pay the TIF? I cc'd Ron Leightner, who is with RCM Homes. Thanks, Emily Emily Eng Assistant Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 P: (503) 718 -2712 F: (503) 718 -2748 www.tigard- or.gov 1 • I Emily Eng From: Emily Eng Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:58 PM To: Maris Buxton Subject: RE: Attachments: image001.png thanks. I just talked to him. nice clip art! From: Maris Buxton Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 4:55 PM To: Emily Eng Subject: 'rlightner @rcmhomes.net' Maris Buxton City of Tigard Planning Division, Permit Coordinator P: 503 - 718 -2453 F: 503- 718 -2748 marisPtiRard- or.gov • yss 1