Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Hearings Officer Packet - 04/07/2003
HEARINGS OFFICER MONDAY -APRIL 7, 2003 - 7:00 PM 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, Fxd. 2438 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (rDD - 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. Hearings are held in Town Hall at the City of Tigard at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Staff Reports are available to the public 7 days prior to the hearing date CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003-00001 ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00009 ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00020 The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,000 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking Sensitive Lands Review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an Adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls on site, and to the street spacing standards of the Tigard Development Code Section 18.705.030(H)(3). LOCATION: The project site is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map No. 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT All Information is Subject to Change J I Alk Ah 4 AGENDA ITEM NO, 2.1 e~ a ~aC u°~ i a' ~u 91 01 4a ova ~4~ P~, 0 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1 (PAGE 1 OF 0 DATE: APRIL 7, 2003 PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND INCLUDE YOUR ZIP CODE Proponent - (Speaking In Favor) Opponent - (Speaking Against) Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 5ve 13~-et I Ic¢- fo3~ '`3S Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. L Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. • • COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)684-0360 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising *City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd. *Tigard, Oregon 97223 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Accounts Payable AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) I, Kathy Snyder being first duly sworn, depose and say that 1 am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of theTigard-Tualatin Tjmes a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard in he aforesaid county and state; that the Public Hearing/ CUP2003-00001,5 nsit'v ands R.yiPw a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and consecutive in the following issues: March 20,2003 Subscribed and sworn this20th clay of Uarch, 2003 Public for Oregon Legal Notice TT 10197 O OFFICIAL SEAL ROSIN A BURGESS tdOTAY PUBLIOREGON COMMISSION NO. 344589 MY CO"J M!SFION EXPIR2S PLAY 16, 2005 AFFIDAVIT My Commission Expires: CITY OF TIGARD OREGON The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer on Monday April 7, 2003 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code and the rules of procedure adopted- by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set : forth in, Chapter 18.390: Testimony may be submitted in writing;,: prior to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost. A copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Brad Kilby) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: "RESCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE" CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003- 00001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003-00001/ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00009/ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00020 > CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY < REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,500 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking sensitive lands review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls on site. THE HEARING FOR THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN POSTPONED UNTIL THE DATE AND TIME INDICATED ABOVE TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE APPLICATION AND TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE STREET SPACING STANDARDS OF THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 18.705.030(H)(3) WHICH MUST BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS PROPOSAL. THE LAYOUT OF THE SITE AND ORIGINAL PROPOSAL HAS NOT CHANGED. LOCATION: The project site is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is described as: WCTM 2S I02DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. TT 10197 - Publish March 20, 2003. 9 0 COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)684-0360 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. gfigard,Or_egon 97223 Accounts Payable 0 ❑ Tearsheet Notice • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Legal Notice TT 10190 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) I, Kathy Snyder being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of th~igard-Tualatin Times a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard in the aforesaid countyy and state; that the Public Hearing/ CUP2003-7001,Public Library a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for OldH successive and consecutive in the following issues: March 6,2003 Subscribed and sworn to~efore me this _6th day of March, 2 0 0 3 OFFICIAL SEAL .i ZZ i ROBIN A BURGESS l . NO y Public for Oregon rJ; NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ~n7 COMMISSION NO. 344589 My Commission Expires: Y CO' ""SSION G PIRSS r^ 1,;, 2C'_'5 AFFIDAVIT CITY OF TIGARD OREGON The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer on Monday March 24, 2003 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code and the rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Chapter 18.390. Testimony may be submitted in writing prior i to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearingaonly. Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community. Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable 'criteria • are available for inspection at no cost. A copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at,a reasonable cost. Further information may be obtained from the Planning division (staff contact: Brad Kilby) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003- 00001/ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00009 0 CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY ? REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,500 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking sensitive lands review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls on site. LOCATION: The project site is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is described as: WCTM 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional, uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.5.10, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. 0 7. - - - \ CUP2003 OD001 \ SUU003-00001 , VAR2003.00009 CITY Of TIWZ PUBLIC UBWY _._T._.a ` ITT 10190 - Publish March 6, 2003. • . t::. NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. "RESCHEDULED PUBLIC NEARING DATE" CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development S6apingA Better Community CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD. HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY APRIL 7. 2003 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER AT 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NOS.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003-00001 ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00009 ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00020 FILE TITLE: CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY APPLICANT City of Tigard APPLICANT'S Group Mackenzie, OWNER: Attn: Gus Duenas REPRESENTATIVE: Attn: Geraldene Moyle 13125 SW Hall Boulevard 0690 SW Bancroft Tigard, OR 97223 PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,500 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking sensitive lands review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested. an adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls on site. THE HEARING FOR THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN POSTPONED UNTIL THE DATE AND TIME INDICATED ABOVE TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE APPLICATION AND TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE STREET SPACING STANDARDS OF THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 18.705.030(H)(3) WHICH MUST BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS PROPOSAL. THE LAYOUT OF THE SITE AND ORIGINAL PROPOSAL HAS NOT CHANGED. LOCATION: The project site is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is described as: WCTM 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370; 18.390, 18.510, CRITERIA: 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURES ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESO WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS 10OPOSED ACTION 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 CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION LESS THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING.- IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 19.7.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AN OPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25G) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25G) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER BRAD KILBY AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 OR BY E-MAIL AT bradley@ci.tigard.or.us. A r, e P 9P%nR G~~y ,c sr sr VICINITY MAP CUP2003.0000I SLR2003.00001 VAR2003-00009 VAR2003-00020 CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY TMMn..4q N N o :ao .oo .ao n.i Sao w. RA_ City of Tigard Yll..n....n m•. p nr p.«rM 4utl«...i nr 11M D«tl,.m.m 6.M«. DM.4n. uu] sw 4.. ena T444 OR .i]]] ,SD]117H171 MIp:Ihrww,tl.llyiE.a.,.. • 0 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development ShapingA Better Community NOTICE-IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY MARCH 24, 2003 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER AT 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON-97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NOS.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003-00001 ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00009 FILE TITLE: CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY APPLICANT City of Tigard APPLICANT'S Group Mackenzie OWNER: Attn: Gus Duenas REPRESENTATIVE: Attn:. Geraldene Moyle 13125 SW Hall Boulevard 0690 SW Bancroft Tigard, OR 97223 PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,500 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking sensitive lands review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls on site. LOCATION: The project site is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is described as: WCTM 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURES ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS POSED ACTION 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 CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION LESS THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AN OPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25~) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25G) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER BRAD KILBY AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 OR BY E-MAIL AT bradley@ci.tigard.or.us. • 0 BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding applications by the City of Tigard for a conditional) F I N A L O R D E R use permit for a new city library, a sensitive lands review for ) CUP 2003-001 work in the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek and ) SLR 2003-001 adjustments to bicycle parking and street spacing standards ) VAR 2003-009 and -020 at 13500 SW Hall Boulevard in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Tigard Library) A. SUMMARY 1. The City of Tigard (the "applicant") requests approval of a conditional use permit, a sensitive lands review, and two adjustments to build a 47,500-square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres in the R-12 zone at 13500 SW Hall Boulevard; also known as tax lots 100, 200 and 600, WCTM 2S102DD (the "site"). The conditional use permit is required to comply with the use regulations of the R-12 zone. The sensitive lands review is required for sewer and stormwater improvements that are needed for the new library. One adjustment will reduce bicycle parking from the required 48 spaces to the proposed 35 spaces. A second adjustment will reduce access (driveway) spacing from the required 600 feet along an arterial such as Hall Boulevard to the proposed 340 feet. The proposed access is situated so that it can be used for Wall Street if that street is extended along the south edge of the site and for access to the Fanno Pointe condominium project south of the site in the future if authorized in other forums. A few structures now on the site will be removed. 2. Tigard Land Use Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") conducted a duly noticed public hearing to receive testimony and evidence in the matter. At the public hearing, City staff recommended conditional approval of all of the applications. The applicant accepted the findings and recommended conditions in the Staff Report, with certain exceptions, and responded to public testimony. One person testified orally and in writing against the proposal, principally because of concerns the building location precludes extending Wall Street directly east from O'Mara Street and will result in greater impacts to Pinebrook Creek and ponds and to the Western pond turtle, a listed species. The hearings officer held open the public record at the end of the hearing so the applicant could file a closing written argument. The principal disputed issue in this case include the following: a. Whether the site characteristics, including its location next to Fanno Creek and less than 600 feet south of the intersection of O'Mara Street and Hall Boulevard, are suitable and adequate to accommodate the library and to mitigate its impacts, and whether additional conditions of approval are warranted to ensure adverse impacts are minimized and mitigated; b. Whether the requested adjustments should be granted; c. Whether adequate landscaping is proposed on the south edge of the site; d. Whether the bicycle parking area can have a crushed gravel surface; and e. How the applicant can comply with provisions requiring development of a trail along Fanno Creek. 3. The hearings officer concludes that the applicant sustained the burden of proof that the proposed use does or can comply with the applicable standards for a conditional use permit, sensitive lands review and two adjustments, based on the findings and conclusions included and incorporated herein and subject to conditions at the end of this final order. B. HEARING AND RECORD 1. The hearings officer received testimony at the public hearing about this application on April 7, 2003. 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 offered at the public hearing in this matter. 2. City planner Brad Kilby summarized the Staff Report to the Hearings Officer dated March 31, 2003 (the "Staff Report"). He noted the house on the north part of the site could be preserved. He introduced a copy of the site plan for the Fanno Pointe condominium project and letter from the Oregon Department of Transportation ("ODOT") and from the Mackenzie Group. 3. Charlie Bauman, Skip Stanaway, Geraldine Moyle, Brian Wethington and Margaret Barnes testified for the applicant. a. Mr. Bauman introduced the members of the applicant's consulting team who attended the hearing and discussed some history for the library. b. Mr. Stanaway testified about the proposed plan for the library and noted it may be possible to expand the building to the northeast when warranted. c. Ms. Moyle corrected two findings in the Staff Report, noting the last sentence of the top paragraph on page 14 should say the ultimate location of the driveway is 340 feet from O'Mara Street, and the fifth paragraph on page 29 should say that the range in 420 to 475 feet. She also modified the requested adjustment to the bicycle parking standard to propose that the applicant provide only 35 bicycle parking spaces, and discussed how this number exceeds demand for spaces based on use of bicycles at the existing library. She also responded to conditions of approval. She objected to condition 4, arguing the code only requires screening from adjacent properties, not roads; the applicant proposes to provide adequate landscaping to meet the standard, given the distance between the parking lot and the south property line; and, the area between the parking lot and future road is a swale that will not function with hedge material. She testified the applicant will comply with condition 5 by installing slats in the chain link portion of the enclosure. Regarding condition 6, she testified the applicant will arrange the temporary storage area for solid waste in a vertical configuration, so that there will be 192 cubic feet of storage. Regarding condition 7, she argued the applicant proposes to use crushed gravel beneath the bicycle parking area, which should suffice to comply with standards requiring it to be well-drained, and introduced photographs showing where the material is being used for this purpose elsewhere. Regarding condition 8, she testified the applicant will provide 2 loading spaces as required by the CDC: one in front of the solid waste storage area. She testified the applicant will operate the facility to avoid conflicts at the loading space. She objected to conditions 10 and 21. Condition 10 requires the applicant to submit a plan for a trail along and above the average annual flood elevation of Fanno Creek before the city issues a building permit for the project. Condition 21 requires the trail to be built before occupancy of the library or within 18 months. She argued that the timing for the alignment and construction of the trail is not certain, and objected to having the building and occupancy permits tied to these uncertain events. Regarding condition 11, she testified the applicant will obtain required approval from the Oregon Division of State Lands ("ODSL") for a stormwater outfall to Fanno Creek or will design the stormwater system to avoid the need for such approval. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 2 • • d. Mr. Wethington testified that the swale south of the parking lot is designed to accommodate wetland plants with some woody and deciduous plants. It is not suitable for a hedge. The larger-than-minimum-required size trees the applicant proposes to plant make up for the lack of a dense hedge at the south edge of the site. He also testified the proposed one-eighth minus gravel can be compacted for use for bicycle parking, and it has less adverse impact on the roots of adjoining trees than does concrete or macadam. e. Ms. Barnes is the director of the Tigard Library. She testified that, on Saturdays and Sundays when the library has the largest attendance, it is typical to see only a dozen bicycles parked outside. The proposed 35 bicycle spaces will be more than adequate. 4. Sue Bielke testified with objections and concerns and introduced a letter. In her oral and written testimony, she objected to the proposed library location, arguing access to the library should be aligned with O'Mara Street, as it was in at least one preliminary plan. This would avoid the need to create a stub for Wall Street and would reduce impacts to Pinebrook Creek and ponds. She expressed concern about the relationship of the library project to the Wall Street extension and access to the Fanno Pointe condominium project, and requested clarification. She requested a copy of the ODOT permit for the library access. She raised concerns about trail and utility construction in the Fanno Creek area, because of its use by Western Pond Turtles, a state-listed species. She recommended work in the area of the creek be limited to mid-July through October when the turtles are not as sensitive to impacts to their habitat. 5. In response to Ms. Bielke, Mr. Kilby testified that the city is actively pursuing a project to extend Wall Street 460 feet east of Hall Boulevard. This will require a sensitive lands review. Among other things, this would allow Fanno Pointe condominiums to have access by means of that extension rather than to Hall Boulevard. To extend Wall Street further would require a comprehensive plan amendment and sensitive lands review. City engineer Brian Rager summarized his understanding of the city's intentions. 6. Mr. Kilby also responded to the changes in conditions of approval requested by the applicant. Regarding condition 4, CDC 18.745.050.E.I and 2 dictate what landscaping is required along the south edge of the site and allow the applicant to propose an alternative to the prescriptive standards. The condition could be amended to acknowledge that. Regarding condition 5, he testified CDC 18.745.050.E.1 and 2 say it is okay for solid waste facilities to be screened by landscaping, but not utilities. Regarding condition 6, he opined the applicant can comply with the minimum solid waste storage requirements. Regarding condition 7, he testified the relevant standard is CDC 18.765.050.D. He expressed concern that gravel is not a hard surface and could be dispersed onto areas adjoining the bicycle parking area. Also he expressed concern about city liability for use of an alternative material. Regarding condition 8, Mr. Kilby and Mr. Rager testified the proposed loading spaces would be acceptable. Mr. Kilby agreed to the proposed change to condition 11. He discussed the standards relevant to conditions 10 and 21 CDC 18.330.030.B.13 and 18.775.070.B.5. He opined that the issue is whether the conditions of approval guarantee timely construction as required by the code. 7. Ms. Moyle requested the hearings officer hold open the record for one week to give the applicant an opportunity to work with the city attorney to draft a condition that is acceptable to the applicant and city. 8. At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearings officer held open the record for one week for the applicant to introduce a closing arguments and the results of consultations with the city regarding conditions 10 and 21. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 3 0 C. DISCUSSION 1. The Staff Report identified the applicable approval criteria for the application and applied them to the record in the case. a. The hearings officer concurs in the identification of applicable criteria in the Staff Report and largely concurs in the analysis and conclusions of City staff in that report. That is, substantial evidence in the record shows that the proposed use does or can comply with the applicable approval standards and criteria for a CUP, adjustments and sensitive lands review, and adoption of recommended conditions of approval as amended will ensure final plans are submitted and implemented as approved consistent with those criteria and standards and will prevent, reduce or mitigate potential adverse impacts of the development consistent with the requirements of the CDC. b. The hearings officer adopts the findings and conclusions in the Staff Report as his own except to the extent inconsistent with the findings and conclusions in this final order. c. The City must base its decision on "substantial evidence," which is evidence on which a reasonably prudent person would rely in the conduct of a serious matter. It is more than a scintilla but less than a preponderance of the evidence. If, based on such evidence, a proposed use can comply with applicable approval standards using conditions of approval, then the City must approve the use subject to those conditions.' d. The relevant approval standards for the application are the standards in CDC, and, other than constitutional issues, the decision cannot be based on any other consideration.2 2. Ms. Bielke raises the most significant objections to the application. Ms. Bielke did not argue that the proposed library location or the location of any proposed development associated with the library per se violates any applicable approval standard. She did not offer substantial evidence other than her observations. In essence, she argues that the library would better comply with applicable approval standards if access to the library was aligned with O'Mara Street. She testified that another design for the library showed such access could be provided. If the access to the library was aligned with O'Mara, the applicant would not need an adjustment to access spacing standards; it would comply. I ORS 197.522 provides as follows: A local government shall approve an application for a permit, authorization or other approval necessary for the subdivision or partitioning of, or construction on, any land that is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable land use regulations or shall impose reasonable conditions on the application to make the proposed activity consistent with the plan and applicable regulations. A local government may deny an application that is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable land use regulations and that cannot be made consistent through the imposition of reasonable conditions of approval. 2 ORS 227.173(1) provides as follows: Approval or denial of a discretionary permit application shall be based on standards and criteria, which shall be set forth in the development ordinance and which shall relate approval or denial of a discretionary permit application to the development ordinance and to the comprehensive plan for the area in which the development would occur and to the development ordinance and comprehensive plan for the city as a whole. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 4 • • a. This presents two problems for the hearings officer. First, there is no alternative library design in the record. Therefore the hearings officer cannot determine whether an alternative design is feasible and would be better in some ways relevant to the CDC than the proposed design. However, assuming for the sake of argument that it is possible to design a library with access aligned with O'Mara, the hearings officer finds that an adjustment to the access separation standard can be granted nevertheless, based on the findings at pp. 9 through 11 of the Staff Report and sources cited therein and the following findings:3 i. It is possible to share access with the Fanno Pointe condominium to the south, but that will require submission, review and approval of an application for that purpose. CDC 18.370.020.C.5.b(1) does not require the applicant to provide such joint use now. It merely requires the applicant to preserve the opportunity for joint use in the future. Joint use of the driveway may be required by ODOT, which controls access to Hall Boulevard. ODOT does not recommend the applicant be required to provide joint access now; merely to preserve the opportunity for such access. Access to Fanno Pointe condominium already exists, although ODOT approved it only as a temporary measure. If the library and condominium share access to Hall Boulevard, it is reasonable to defer implementation of that joint access until after review of the Wall Street extension project, because extension of Wall Street will be a much more significant constraint and rationale for such access. It is enough that the proposed plan preserves the potential for joint access when it is timely and after it is approved for such use in a separate proceeding. ii. The library site has the potential for access to Hall Boulevard opposite its intersection with O'Mara Street. However the library site does not function safely if that is where access is provided due to the size and shape of the site and the location of the 100-year flood plain and wetland buffers along Fanno Creek. That is, parking would be situated north of the drive, and building would be situated south of the drive. Patrons would have to cross the access drive, making pedestrian movements less safe. The hearings officer observes that there is not much wiggle room on the site. Development approaches or extends to right of way and to the edge of the wetland buffer or 100-year floodplain in most locations. Although it is physically possible to provide access opposite O'Mara Street, such access is not practicable because of the dimensional and natural constraints of the site. 3 CDC 18.370.020.C.5 provides as follows: a. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved, the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, as governed in Section 18.390.030, using approval criteria contained in Subsection 2b below. b. The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment from the access requirements contained in Chapter 18.705, based on the following criteria: (1) It is not possible to share access; (2) There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met; (4) The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and (6) The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 5 • • (A) CDC 18.370.020.C.5.b(2) is ambiguous about whether the applicant must take access to Hall Boulevard if it is possible. The hearings officer relies on the context of that section to find that an applicant is not required to use any possible access. For instance, in CDC 18.370.020.C.5.b(4), the concept of "adequacy" of access is considered. The code does not require the minimum adjustment to provide any access; it requires the minimum adjustment to provide adequate access. (B) What is adequate depends on the nature of the proposed use and the characteristics of the site. In this case, access is adequate only if it is inherently safe as a matter of design (or at least not inherently less safe by design). The concept of safety as an important consideration also is an explicit part of the context. CDC 18.370.020.C.5.b(5) requires access to be safe. Therefore it would be inconsistent with CDC 18.370.020.C.5.b(5) to require the applicant to develop access that is less safe by design just because it is possible to do so. iii. If the access drive is not situated opposite O'Mara Street, the access separation requirements cannot be met, because the site does not extend 600 feet south of O'Mara Street. Although the separation requirements can be met if the access is situated across from O'Mara, such a location is not practicable for the reasons described above. To the extent CDC 18.370.020.C.5.b(3) is ambiguous about whether the applicant must take access to Hall Boulevard if it is possible, the hearings officer relies on the findings above regarding the context of the provision to find it is not required. iv. The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access. What is adequate is inherently vague. The hearings officer finds that access is adequate only if it is safe, based on its context in CDC 18.370.020.C.5.b, particularly subsection (5), and only if it is consistent with other required considerations under that section. In this case the only adequate access is one that can be situated so that patrons do not have to cross it, so that can be shared with Fanno Pointe condominiums in the future if Wall Street is not built, and so that it can be integrated with Wall Street if it is built. The proposed access is consistent with those considerations. v. The proposed access will be safe. It will be improved to city standards. There is substantial evidence in the record that the available sight distance at the proposed access point will comply with city standards. The traffic study does not indicate that the area where access is proposed is not subject to high accident rates. The applicant will be required to build a left-turn lane to accommodate the access point, but there is room for it, and ODOT can and has indicated it will approve such a turn lane pursuant to a timely application and submission of adequate plans and assurances. Therefore it is feasible to rely on conditions of approval to ensure the proposed access will be safe in fact. b. The hearings officer is not persuaded that an alternative location for the library access will function given the proposed design of the library. Changing the access would require a complete redesign of the library. Such a redesign is beyond the scope of the hearings officer authority. The issue for the hearings officer is whether the proposed design complies with applicable standards. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 6 c. The hearings officer understands Ms. Bielke is concerned about the potential for Wall Street to extend east of Hall Boulevard and across Fanno Creek, its tributaries and related ponds. However the hearings officer finds that the extension of Wall Street and access from that extension to the Fanno Pointe condominium project is not proposed in this application. The proposed library and its access is situated so that it will not require significant changes if Wall Street is extended and access is provided from there to Fanno Pointe condominiums. To that extent the proposed design is suitable, because it can accommodate readily the successful completion of the Wall Street extension and Fanno Pointe access if either or both occur. But, if Wall Street is never extended east of Hall Boulevard, the library will function fine as proposed. Ms. Bielke will have to participate in the Wall Street extension process and in the application process for the extension of access to Fanno Pointe condominiums using Wall Street to prosecute her concerns about such extensions. d. She identifies a species of amphibious wildlife that would benefit from limiting work in the creek. There is no substantial evidence in the record that the construction of a trail along Fanno Creek above the average annual flood elevation would adversely affect the turtle habitat if conducted consistent with applicable city, ODSL and Clean Water Services ("CWS") standards. Her suggestion to build trails and undertake other work in the vicinity of the creek during the period from mid-July to October appears to be a good one to minimize the potential for impacts to adjoining habitat areas. City staff recommend the same condition at p. 24 of the Staff Report. Assuming the applicant undertakes development in the 100-year floodplain for the sewer and/or storm drain outfall as proposed, the hearings officer concludes that work should be done between July 1 and October 15, unless otherwise provided by CWS or ODSL. Condition of approval 13 shall be amended accordingly. 3. The applicant made two corrections to the Staff Report. The hearings officer hereby incorporates those corrections. 4. The applicant proposed to reduce the number of required bicycle parking spaces to 35. The hearings officer finds that such a reduction is warranted based on the findings at p. 11 of the Staff Report, the testimony of the library director that fewer than a dozen bicycles commonly park at the library and CDC 18.765.050.E 5. The applicant proposed a number of changes to conditions of approval. The hearings officer responds to those changes in the following findings: a. The applicant objects to condition 4, which required the applicant to submit a "revised landscape plan that includes additional shrubbery along the southern and eastern border of the parking areas in compliance with TDC Section 18.745.050(E)(1)(a)." The applicant argued that the proposed landscaping suffices. Frankly neither the planning staff nor the applicant was very persuasive in this regard. Planning staff failed to say Tl'Pll Cal- -t-, rl,o ____-A 1-4nnn-- - «..t lJ1VV1JV1,' ♦Vaiy L11V ~J1V~JVJLsU 1a11L1aL.aIJ1116 10 11VL 16;,11VUrII. 1116 apJAIUMIL 1a11GU LU bQy p1masuiy why it is enough. The hearings officer concludes that the applicant failed to sustain the burden of proof that the proposed plan will "effectively screen the parking lot from view", because of the predominance of deciduous material used on the periphery of the parking lot. To comply with CDC 18.745.050.E1.a(1), the applicant should replace or supplement some of the alder, ash and white oak trees on the south and east periphery of the parking lot, but outside of the wetland buffer, with evergreen species suitable for the soil conditions. The goal of the revised landscape plan should be more year-round screening of the parking lot. A screen is not "effective" if it screens only half the time. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 7 • 9 b. The applicant had a concern that the city would not approve use of a particular eighth-inch minus crushed gravel product for bicycle parking areas. Condition of approval 7 does not prohibit use of such a material, but does not authorize it. The relevant section is CDC 18.765.050.D, which requires bicycle parking facilities to be surfaced with a hard surfaced material and be well-drained. Based on the testimony of the applicant, and given the many small spaces formed by the proposed surface material, the gravel product would be well-drained. To anyone who can remember falling down on a gravel surface, it surely is hard. It is more constant than dirt and more stable than bark dust, river rocks or cobbles. CDC 18.765.050.D does not say clearly that the hard surface cannot be gravel. Perhaps some gravel would not be appropriate. But the hearings officer is persuaded that a crushed gravel surface that is sufficiently stable and maintained and is not readily blown or tracked out of the bicycle area may be a suitable hard surface material. The hearings officer will amend condition of approval 7 to say that the city may approve use of crushed gravel if satisfied it will be sufficiently stable and maintained over time and will be well-drained beneath the surface. c. The applicant described how two loading spaces are proposed. City staff testified the proposed loading spaces can comply with standards. The hearings officer is persuaded condition of approval 8 should be amended accordingly. d. The applicant proposed to amend conditions 10 and 21 to combine them into one condition, and city staff agreed with the proposed revision. The hearings officer finds that the proposed language complies with 18.775.070.B.5 and 18.330.030.B.13 and .14. A path along Fanno Creek on the site is consistent with the city master plan. It is untimely to require the applicant to provide more details about the pathway, but it is feasible for the applicant to provide such details in the subsequent administrative review process. It also is feasible for the applicant to build the pathway is a timely manner roughly corresponding to the operation of the new library. The proposed language achieves this result. e. Condition of approval 11 should be amended to reflect all reasonably likely outcomes vis-a-vis ODSL (i.e., that the applicant has obtained a required permit, that ODSL has confirmed that no permit is required although work is proposed within its area of jurisdiction or that no work is proposed within ODSL's area of jurisdiction). If a permit is issued, the applicant should be required to provide the city with a copy of that permit. D. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings and discussion provided or incorporated in this final order, the hearings officer concludes that the applicant sustained the burden of proof that the proposed conditional use permit and associated adjustments and sensitive lands review do or will comply with the applicable criteria and standards of the Community Development Code, provided development that occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state, and federal laws and with conditions of approval warranted to ensure such compliance occurs in fact. E. DECISION In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the Staff Report and public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby approves CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-002, VAR 2003-009 and VAR 2003- 020 (Tigard Library), subject to the following conditions of approval : CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 8 • • THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 388) for review and approval: 1. Prior to issuance of building permits for the site, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan for the entire project site. 2. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall obtain the necessary approvals and permits from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to allow the proposed access to be located at the proposed location. 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised street tree plan showing the required plantings on SW Hall Blvd. for the City Forester's review and approval. The street tree plan shall include information on the species, size, and location of the proposed street trees. The street tree plan shall also demonstrate compliance with all relevant standards in Sections 18.745.030 and 18.745.040. 4. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that includes evergreen species on the south and east edges of the parking lot that will better screen the parking lot year- round in compliance with TDC Section 18.745.050(E)(1)(a). 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall revise the plan for screening the transformer and generator enclosure to include either a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet high. The revised method shall be accompanied by a detail of the facility. 6. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the facility, the applicant shall provide an additional 70 square feet in the mixed solid waste collection area, and a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler that services the site with a letter approving the facility location. 7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall ensure that at least 35 bicycle parking spaces are designed and will be constructed to the standards that are identified in TDC Section 18.765.050. The city may approve use of crushed gravel if satisfied it will be sufficiently stable and maintained over time and will be well-drained beneath the surface. 8. Prior to site work, the applicant shall show two (2) off-street loading spaces will be provided. Said spaces shall be designed and constructed to meet the dimensional criteria in TDC Section 18.765.080(B), and one space may be situated in front of the solid waste storage facilities if operated so they do not conflict. 9. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a letter from a registered professional engineer that indicates that any encroachments made by this proposal will not increase the flood levels during the base flood discharge. 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall show that it is making a continuing, diligent, good faith effort to identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along Fanno Creek that will not be below the elevation of an average annual flood. 11. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide a copy of a permit from ODSL or evidence in writing from ODSL that the proposal does not need their approval. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 9 • 0 12. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a tree protection plan from a certified aborist that defines standards that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction as required by Section 18.790.030(B)(4). 13. The applicant shall provide the City Arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. Unless otherwise provided by ODSL or CWS, the sequence shall provide that no work will be undertaken within the 100-year flood plain between October 15 and July 1. 14. The applicant shall notify the City Arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 15. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $30.00. (STAFF CONTACT: Shirley Treat, Engineering). 16. 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 frontage of Hall Boulevard. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for an arterial street from curb to centerline equal to 25 feet; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb, 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 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 Eng~'neer; I. underground utilities; J. street signs (if applicable); K. qd' eway a pron (if applicableand ustments in vertical and/or orizontal alignment to construct SW l Boulevard in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 117 Tx.-: _r v_ I riior to issuance ui the site perrim, the applicant snail ootam a permit rrom the State of Oregon Highway Division, to perform work within the right-of- way of Hall Boulevard. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. 18. Prior to issuance of the site permit, additional right-of-way shall be conveyed to the State of Oregon, by and through its Department of Transportation, Hi hway Division, along the frontage of Hall Boulevard to increase the right-of-way to 50 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. Verification that the conveyance has been submitted to the State shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 10 • • (For additional information, contact Rick Reeves, Oregon Department of Transportation, Right-of-Way Section, 123 NW Flanders, Portland, OR 97209-4037; Phone: 731-8461). 19. The applicant shall provide an on-site water duality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 20. The applicant shall obtain a 1200-C General Permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 469.740 an e e era can Water Act. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 388) for review and approval: 21. Prior to the issuance of a final occupancy permit, the applicant shall provide adequate financial assurances, in the form of a cash deposit, a bond or inclusion of the project on a city 5-year capital improvements project list, to ensure construction of that portion of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail that crosses the property. No portion of the trail shall be below the elevation of an average annual flood. 22. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall clearly identify and mark the location of the access drive in accordance with TDC Section 18.765.040(B)(3). 23. Prior to final occupancy, the site shall be inspected to ensure that curbs or wheel stops are provided as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. 24. Prior to final occupancy and during site work, the applicant shall comply with the conditions of the CWS service provider letter and submit verification of compliance from both Clean Water Services (CWS) and the projects qualified consultant from Kurahashi & Associates. 25. Prior to placement of any signs on site, the applicant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the appropriate plans to verify compliance with TDC Chapter 18.780. Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 26. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from ODOT. 27. If the traffic signal at Hall Blvd./Wall Street is approved to be installed, it shall be installed and operational prior to final inspection. 28. Prior to final inspection, the City shall demonstrate that they have included in the 2004-2009 Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), costs to complete the Hall Boulevard frontage improvements for the balance of the subject site frontage. The CIP shall also include a portion of the future anticipated bridge replacement costs. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page I1 0 • 29. Prior to final inspection, the City shall demonstrate that they have included in the 2004-2009 Five-Year CIP, costs to construct a southbound right-turn lane at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street. 30. Prior to final 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). 31. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall have a registered professional engineer certify that sight distance at the access location on Hall Boulevard meets City standards as outlined in Section TDC 18.705.030.H. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. CUP 2003-001, SLR 2003-001 and Hearings Officer Final Order VAR 2003-009 and -020 (Tigard Library) Page 12 Ah "r I:i w 0 RECOV D GR April 14, 2003 City of Tigard Attention: Brad Kilby 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 U, i v yr t tuARD PLANNING/ENGiINEERIN G APR- 14,E PLC`.)Re: CUP 2003-0001; SLR 2003-00001; VAR 2003-00009; VAR 2003-00020 Group Mackenzie Project Number 2020228 a, Ln M O co O a, co M N N n! ~ M M N 0 x 0 ~ w c m E 0 0 a Y m o E M Q a, to rn X 3 03 ; 0 m ri m cD a' o 'a V n co P 11 C Lo co N N `O N cD M M C a~ G Group Mackenzie, Incorporated Architecture Interior Design Land Use Planning Group Mackenzie Engineering, Incorporated Civil/Structural Engineering Transportation Planning The tradition of Mackenzie Engineering and Mackenzie/Saito continues. Dear Brad: The following responds to issues raised during the April 7, 2003 hearing regarding the above referenced case files. Bike Parking As part of the project application, a variance to the number of bike parking stalls from 48 to 40 was requested. At the hearing, we requested that this variance be altered to approve 35 bike parking stalls in lieu of the 48 required. Thirty of these stalls will be provided at the main building entrance, and five stalls will be provided at the employee entrance. 35 stalls is an appropriate number for the library project. At its current location, the library shares 15 bicycle parking stalls with City Hall. The library director indicated, at the hearing, that even at the library's high-use times (typically weekends), the majority of these stalls remain vacant. As such, 35 stalls is an appropriate number of stalls for this facility. Condition 4 South/East Screening As requested at the hearing, a full-sized landscape plan, clearly showing the proposed landscaping around the south and east sides of the parking lot, was provided to staff on April 8, 2003. An additional copy is included with this letter. This landscaping provides screening and buffering of the parking lot from the east and south sides. Condition 7 Bicycle Parking Paving Section 18.765.050(D) of the Tigard Development Code requires that "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." At the hearing, the project team provided additional information regarding the proposed "crushed gravel" and examples of where this treatment is currently in use. This material resembles a "decomposed granite" type of material that is compact yet permeable. Over time, it compacts further into a harder surface, yet still maintains a naturalistic look. The area is graded such that the bicycle parking facilities will be well-drained and no ponding will occur. FI APROJ ECTS\020228\W P\3d 1411.doc Brad Kilby Project Number 2020228 April 14, 2003 Page 2 Condition 10 and 21 The project team met with City staff to discuss Conditions 10 and 21. It was proposed that Conditions 10 be combined with Condition 21 with the following revisions: "Prior to the issuance of a final occupancy permit, APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE FINANCIAL ASSURANCES, IN THE FORM OF A CASH DEPOSIT, A BOND, OR INCLUSION OF THE PROJECT ON A CITY 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT LIST, TO ENSURE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT PORTION OF THE FANNO CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL THAT CROSSES THE PROPERTY. NO PORTION OF THE TRAIL SHALL BE BELOW THE ELEVATION OF AN AVERAGE ANNUAL FLOOD." It is our understanding that City staff is in agreement with this language. The above information addresses the issues discussed in the hearing. If you have any questions or concerns, please call me at 503-224-9560. Sincerely, Geraldene Moyle, AICP Senior Planner GEM/mpd c: Margaret Barnes, Gus Dueanas - City of Tigard Tim Ramis, Gary Firestone- RCCB Charlie Bahlman - SOJ Skip Stanaway - SRG Brian Wethington - Greenworks Brett Arvidson - Kurahashi 1-1 AP ROJ ECTs\020228\W P\3d 1411.doc "EXHIBIT A" PARTIES OF RECORD (Written Public Testimony received at the hearing) 0 Agenda Item: 2.1 vate: Ai rn 7, zuu;s i Ime: t:uu rm STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON S(wpingA(Better Community 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY CASE NOS: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) CUP2003-00001 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2003-00001 Adjustment VAR VAR2003-00009 3 VAR2003-00020 Adjustment (VAR OWNER: City of Tigard APPLICANT'S Group Mackenzie Attn: Gus Duenas REPRESENTATIVE: Attn: Geraldene Moyle 13125 SW Hall Blvd. PO Box 69039 Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97239-0039 PROPOSAL: The applicant is seeking Conditional Use approval to construct a 47,500 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking Sensitive Lands t t d o Review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain, and a jacen Fanno Creek for sewer and stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an Adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls from 48 to 42, and an Adjustment to the street spacing standards of the Tigard Development Code (TDC) Section 18.705.030(H(3). The TDC requires access along arterials to be placed no closer tan 600 feet apart. The applicant is requesting that the access be allowed to be 340 feet from the intersection of SW O'Mara Street. LOCATION: 13500 SW Hall Boulevard; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map No. 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DD, Tax Lot 600. The project is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the current City Hall campus on SW Hall Boulevard. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION: R-12; Medium Density Residential. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find that the proposed Conditional Use Permit, Sensitive Lands Review, and the requested Adjustments will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards for a Conditional Use. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended Conditions of Approval: CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 1 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit tote Planning Department (Brad i y, 639-4171, ext. or review an approval: 1. Prior to issuance of building permits for the site, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan for the entire project site. 2. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall obtain the necessary approvals and permits from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to allow the proposed access to be located at the proposed location. 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised street tree plan showing the required plantings on SW Hall Blvd. for the City Forester's review and approval. The street tree plan shall include information on the species, size, and location of the proposed street trees. The street tree plan shall also demonstrate compliance with all relevant standards in Sections 18.745.030 and 18.745.040. 4. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that includes additional shrubbery along the southern and eastern border of the parking areas in compliance with TDC Section 18.745.050(E)(1)(a). 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall revise the plan for screening the transformer and generator enclosure to include either a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet high. The revised method shall be accompanied by a detail of the facility. 6. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the facility, the applicant shall provide an additional 70 square feet in the mixed solid waste collection area, and a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler that services the site with a letter approving the facility location. 7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall ensure that all bicycle parking spaces are designed and constructed to the standards that are identified in TDC Section 18.765.050. 8. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to include two (2) off-street loading spaces. Said spaces shall be designed and constructed to meet the dimensional criteria in TDC Section 18.765.080(B). 9. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a letter from a registered professional engineer that indicates that any encroachments made by this proposal will not increase the flood levels during the base flood discharge. 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall provide plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pat that illustrates that no portion of the pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. 11. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL) that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. 12. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a tree protection plan from a certified arborist that defines standards that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction as required by Section 18.790.030(B)(4). CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 2 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • 13. The applicant shall provide the City Arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. 14. The applicant shall notify the City Arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 2471) for review and approval: 15. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $30.00. (STAFF CONTACT: Shirley Treat, Engineering). 16. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineeringg Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, which indicate that . ey will construct a half- street improvement along the frontage of Hall Boulevard. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. Cityy standard pavement section for an arterial street from curb to centerline equal to 25 feet; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb, 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 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; 1. underground utilities; J. street signs (if applicable); K. driveway apron (if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Hall Boulevard in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 17. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall obtain a permit from the State of Oregon Highway Division, to perform work within the right-of-way of Hall Boulevard. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. 18. Prior to issuance of the site permit, additional right-of-way shall be conveyed to the State of Oregon, by and through its Department of Transportation, Highway Division, along the frontage of Hall Boulevard to increase the right-of-way to 50 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. Verification that the conveyance has been submitted to the State shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. (For additional information, contact Rick Reeves, Oregon apartment of Transportation, Right-of-Way Section, 123 NW Flanders, Portland, OR 97209-4037; Phone: 731-8461). 19. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 20. The applicant shall obtain a 1200-C General Permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 3 OF 36 417/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 21. Prior .to the issuance of a final occupancy permit, or within eighteen (18) months of the date of this decision, the applicant shall construct that portion of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail that crosses the property to ensure connectivity is achieved as planned. 22. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall clearly identify and mark the location of the access drive in accordance with TDC Section 18.765.040(B)(3). 23. Prior to final occupancy, the site shall be inspected to ensure that curbs or wheel stops are provided as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. 24. Prior to final occupancy and during site work, the applicant shall comply with the conditions of the CWS service provider letter and submit verification of compliance from both Clean Water Services (CWS) and the projects qualified consultant from Kurahashi & Associates. 25. Prior to placement of any signs on site, the applicant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the appropriate plans to verify compliance with TDC Chapter 18.780. Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 2471) for review and approval: 26. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from ODOT. 27. If the traffic signal at Hall Blvd./Wall Street is approved to be installed, it shall be installed and operational prior to final inspection. 28. Prior to final inspection, the City shall demonstrate that they have included in the 2004-2009 Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), costs to complete the Hall Boulevard frontage improvements for the balance of the subject site frontage. The CIP shall also include a portion of the future anticipated bridge replacement costs. 29. Prior to final inspection, the City shall demonstrate that they have included in the 2004-2009 Five-Year CIP, costs to construct a southbound right-turn lane at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street. 30. Prior to final 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 applicants 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). 31. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall have a registered professional engineer certify that sight distance at the access location on Hall Boulevard meets City standards as outlined in Section TDC 18.705.030.H. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 4 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property is adjacent to Fanno Creek, and has only been developed with two (2) single-family residences. The land was utilized as small residential farms. Vicinity Information: The site is zoned R-12 and surrounded by a mixture of multi-family, single-family, and industrial development. The site is also adjacent to Fanno Creek and Hall Blvd. The majority of the site is at this point undeveloped. An application for a 42-unit condominium project was recently approved on the site that lies directly south of the project. The City is also involved in a separate study to construct Wall Street, a street connection between SW Hall Blvd. and SW Hunziker that would be aligned along the southern portion of this site. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is 14.6 acres in size and occupied by two (2) existing single-family residences and associated out buildings. The site is located adjacent to a State Highway that will require significant improvement, and the Fanno Creek greenway. A large portion of the site is plain, and several wetlands associated with the creek. The encumbered by the 100-year flood proposal is for a 47,500 square foot library facility with associated parking and infrastructure. The applicant is also requesting sensitive lands approval to locate a sewer line, a stormwater outfall; and some site work within the floodplain and riparian buffers of Fanno Creek. The applicant is also requesting two adjustments. One of the adjustments requested is to vary the bicycle parking requirements of the development code. The second adjustment requested is to allow the intersection to be located closer to the intersection of SW O'Mara Street and Hall Blvd. These requests are discussed in more detail in the following discussion. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to construct a 47,500 square foot Library facility. Libraries are defined as a cultural institution within the use classification. Pursuant to adoption of City Ordinance 02-25, which was adopted by the Tigard City Council on June 25th, 2002, Cultural Institutions and schools are permitted by Conditional Use in the R-12 zone. Summa Land Use Permits: Chapter 18.310 Defines the decision-making type to which the land-use application is assigned. The proppsed use is a Conditional Use permit which is a Type III-HO decision. The Hearings Officer reviews Sensitive Land permits within the floodplain. Staff reviews the adjustments. However, when multiple applications are being reviewed for the same property, the highest authority will oversee all review. In this case, the review is handled by a Type III-HO process and heard by the Tigard Hearings Officer. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE C A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in addressed in this report are as follows: A. 18.330 Specific Conditional Use Criteria kpplicable eneral Approval Criteria dditional Conditions of A proval~tandar B. Development pCode M MU MU Site uevelopment Keview) 18.370 Variances/Adjustments) 18.510 Residential Zoning Districts) 18.705 Access, Egress & Circulation) pter order in which they are CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 5 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands) 18.780 Signs 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) C. Street and Utili Improvement Standards 18.810 D. Impact Stud 18.39 SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. SPECIFIC CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 18.330.010.A states that the purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures under which a conditional use may be permitted, enlarged or altered if the site is appropriate and if other appropriate conditions of approval can be met. There are certain uses which due to the nature of the impacts on surrounding land uses and public facilities require a case-by-case review and analysis. Section 18.330.020.A states that a request for approval for a new conditional use shall be processed as a Type III-HO procedure, as regulated by Chapter 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.330.030A and subject to other requirements in Chapter 18.330. GENERAL APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR A CONDITIONAL USE: SECTION 18.330.030 The site size and dimensions provide adequate area for the needs of the proposed use; The existing site size is 14.64 acres or 637,718 square feet in size. The proposal ultimately calls for a 47,500 square foot library facility and associated infrastructure. This report evaluates the proposal and necessary sebacks, landscaping, etc., and as demonstrated in the application and this report, the site size is adequate for the needs of the proposed use. The characteristics of the site are suitable for the proposed use considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features; The site is currently developed with two single-family residences. The site design took into account the sensitive areas, and has located the structure and parkin areas outside of the sensitive areas. The site was purchased with the presumption that the library could be expanded in the future. The site is suitable for, the proposed development. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal; and All public facilities including streets, storm and sanitary sewers, and water have adequate capacity to serve the site as discussed in detail elsewhere in this report. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter. The proposed site is located within the R-12 zoning district. As indicated earlier, cultural institutions are permitted conditionally. As discussed later in this report, the project will meet the applicable requirements of the zoning district. The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters of this Code including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, if applicable, are met or can be conditioned to be satisfied. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 6 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • The applicable review criteria in this case include the following chapters of the Community Development Code: 18.330, Conditional Use; 18.360, Site Development Review; 18.370, Variances and Adjustments; 18.390 Decision Making Procedures; 18.510, Residential Zoning Districts, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.745, Landscapin and Screening; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage; 18.765, Off-Street Parking; 18.775, Sensitive Lands; 18.780, Signs; 18.790, Tree Removal; 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas; and 18.810, Street and Utility Improvement Standards. The development standards and requirements of these chapters are addressed further in this report. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following chapters: 18.350, Planned Development; 18.380, Zoning Map/Text Amendments; 18.410, Lot Line Adjustments; 18.420, Land Partitions; 18.430, Subdivisions; 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts; 18.530, Industrial Zoning Districts; 18.620, Tigard Triangle Design Standards; 18.630, Washington Square Regional Center; 18.640 Durham Quarry Design Standards; 18.710, Accessory Residential Units; 18.715, Density Computations; 18.720, Design Compatibility Standards; 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standards; 18.740, Historic Overlay; 18.742, Home Occupations; 18.750, Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations; 18.760, Nonconforming Situations; 18.785, Temporary Uses; and 18.798, Wireless Communications Facilities. These chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. The use will comply with the applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is implemented by the Community Development Code. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan policies are, therefore, assured by satisfaction of the applicable development standards of the development code as addressed within this report. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the General Approval Criteria for a Conditional Use are satisfied. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE. Section 18.330.030.6 states that the Hearings Authority may impose conditions on the approval of a conditional use, which are found necessary to ensure the use is compatible with other uses in the vicinity, and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimized. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: Limiting the hours, days, place and/or manner of operation; The applicant has not indicated hours, days, or manner of operation, however, it can be expected that the library would operate during the same hours that it currently operates. There is no evidence in the record to suggest that there is a need to limit the hours, days, place and or manner of operation for the Library. This criterion is satisfied. Requiring design features which minimize environmental impacts such as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare, odor and/or dust; The proposal would not likely generate any vibration, air pollution, odor, glare, noise, or dust that would be considered ouT of character for the use. The applicant has proposed a landscape plan that incorporates most of the existing vegetation and a lot of new screening that should assist in mitigating any adverse impacts. The noise from the train tracks and the adjacent State Highway can be expected to generate more noise than this use. This criterion is satisfied. FINDING: The proposed site is adjacent on two sides to noise sensitive units as defined in TMC Chapter 7.40. Requiring additional setback areas, lot area, and/or lot depth or width; CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 7 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • The lot is large enough to accommodate the proposed building that is to be constructed. The proposed use will meet or exceed the setbacks of the underlying zone. Dimensional criterion is discussed in more detail further in this discussion. This criterion is satisfied. Limiting the building height, size or lot coverage, and/or location on the site; The development will cover roughly 18.3% of the site. As proposed, coverage does not exceed the maximum of 80% imposed by the underlying zoning regulations. The applicant has indicated that the height of the building will not exceed 35 feet in height. The underlying zone allows a maximum 35-foot-high building. This criterion is satisfied. Designating the size, number, location and/or design of vehicle access points; The applicant is proposing to create a 50-foot access roughly 365 feet south of the existing intersection of SW O'Mara to service the site. Access is discussed in more detail later in this report. Requiring street right-of-way to be dedicated and street(s) to be improved; The applicant has proposed to dedicate and improve Hall Blvd. to the required width that is identified by ODOT and the Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP). The specifics of the improvements are discussed in more detail in the street and utility section of this report. This criterion is satisfied. Requiring landscaping, screening, drainage and/or surfacing of parking and loading areas; These items are addressed later in this report. As conditioned, the proposal will meet the prescribed requirements of the TDC. Limiting the number, size, location, height and/or lighting of signs; Compliance with the sign requirements for the underlying zone will be considered once a design is reviewed. The applicant will be required to indicate the location and type of sign proposed for this site prior to building permit issuance. Limiting or setting standards for the location and/or intensity of outdoor lighting; The applicant has indicated in the narrative that the parking lot and building entrances will be lighted per the Tigard Municipal Code minimum, however, without a lighting plan staff cannot ensure that the lighting standards are satisfied. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: Staff cannot assure that lighting from the site will not produce glare onto neighboring properties or create a safe nighttime environment for patrons of the face ity based on the applicant's description of lighting for the facility. CONDITION: Prior to issuance of building permits for the site, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan for the entire project site for approval. Requiring berms, screening or landscaping and the establishment of standards for their installation and maintenance; As discussed further in this report, the applicant has proposed a mixture of landscaping to screen the parkin areas from surrounding properties. Additional screening is not required. This criterion is satisfied. Requiring and designating the size, height, location and/or materials for fences; The applicant is not proposing any fences for the site. This criterion is not applicable. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 8 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees, soils, vegetation, watercourses, habitat areas and/or drainage areas; Some of the trees on site are scheduled for removal to accommodate construction. The applicant has provided a tree plan that will be discussed later in this report. Additionally, the applicant has provided a natural resource assessment which identifies and delineates those particular resources that are protected by the TDC. These areas and their protection are discussed in more detail further in this report. As demonstrated later in this report, the applicant meets, or can be conditioned to meet this criterion. Requiring the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain when land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100-year floodplain; and There is no need to dedicate any of the property as it will be owned by the City of Tigard. This criterion is satisfied. Requiring the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. The continuation of the Fanno Creek Greenway trail is planned for on this site in both the Metro Regional Transportation Plan and the Tigard Transportation System Plan, and the land belongs to the City. At the time of this application, however, the location of the trail has not been determined. The City has applied for grants to ensure this section of the trail is constructed, but did not include funding as part of the project. The City has committed to constructing this portion of the trail with future improvements to the greenspace; however, the timing of the improvement is not identified. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The trail is identified in both the Metro Regional Transportation Plan and the Tigard Transportation Systems Plan as a necessary component of a regional multi-use path. CONDITON: Prior to the issuance of a final occupancy permit, or within eighteen 18 months of the date of the Hearings Officers decison, the applicant sal construct that portion of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail that crosses the property to ensure connectivity is achieved as planned. ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USE TYPES: SECTION 18.330.050 There are no additional development standards for cultural institutions that require conditional use approval. This section is not applicable. B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (18.360) Tha Cifa rlavalnnmant Raviaw annrnvai ctanrlarrlc ranuira that a rlpvplnnmpn+ nrnnncal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Communi y Development Code. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. SPECIAL ADJUSTMENTS (18.370) Ad'ustments for street improvements are permitted pursuant to meeting the review criteria described in 18.370.020 (C)(5). This section states that where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to code standards with a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be conditioned. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot be reasonably achieved, the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, using the criteria contained in 18.370.020(C)(5)(b), below: CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 9 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The applicant is requesting an adjustment to TDC Section 18.705.030(H)(3) which states, "The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet." SW Hall Blvd. is classified as an arterial in the Tigard Transportation Systems Plan. The applicant is requesting an adjustment to allow the driveway for the facility to be spaced 365 feet from an existing intersection (SW O'Mara and SW Hall Blvd.). It is not possible to share access; The City worked with the developer of the Zander parcel to the south (Fanno Pointe Condominiums) to slide the proposed intersection to a point where half of the future right-of- way (ROW) of Wall Street would be on the Zander parcel. This enabled a shared approach to the access. The developer of Fanno Pointe (Polygon Northwest) agreed to the location of the intersection. There are no other parcels adjacent to this site that could provide opportunities for shared access. There are no alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; Site constraints, including the floodplain, Fanno Creek, and wetland areas, led the design of the facility to site the library structure in its location directly across from O'Mara Street. With the location of the building and the Hall Boulevard half-street improvements associated with the project, locating the driveway directly across from O'Mara Street is not possible without dividing the building and parking. Regardless, the driveway is located to align with the anticipated extension of Wall Street, in its preferred location. If Wall Street is extended, then a new driveway will be provided to the Library from Wall. A private street connection will also be provided for the Fanno Pointe project to the south. If Wall Street is not constructed in this location, then the proposed joint access is located as far south from the O'Mara Street intersection as practicable and still enables one point of entry for both the Library and Fanno Pointe projects. Locating the driveway 600 feet north of O'Mara Street is neither feasible nor desired due to the location of the library on the site and the complex environmental issues associated with crossing Fanno Creek and disturbing additional sensitive lands for a driveway. The access separation requirements cannot be met; The applicant reviewed the idea of aligning the Wall Street intersection across from O'Mara Street. That idea was rejected because in order to extend the roadway further to the east where it could eventually link up to Hunziker Street (as called for on the Transportation System Map) significant impacts to the wetlands and creek buffer would result. The proposed location reduces those impacts significantly. Although the spacing does not meet City standards, the location of the access allows shared access between the subject site and the development on the Zander parcel. One shared access is preferred on SW~ Hall to limit turning movements off of an arterial. The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; The applicant worked with the developer of the Zander parcel to obtain an agreement to share the burden of the access location between the two properties. This effort maximized the distance between the access and O'Mara Street, thereby minimizing the needed adjustment to provide access to both sites. If the access was not placed at the north end of the Zander property, the library access would still require the adjustment. The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and DKS Associates traffic impact report states that the new intersection location will function adequately, especially with the installation of a traffic signal which will be installed at the exoense of the applicant. The result will be an efficient and safe intersection. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 10 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. The DKS traffic impact report and the proposed plans show that the visual clearance standards can easily be met at the new intersection location. No specific improvements were needed to ensure this. This criterion can be met. FINDING: As conditioned, the proposed development will comply with all applicable access, egress, and circulation requirements of Chapter 18.705 by granting the requested adjustment. The Director may approve a reduction of required bicycle parkin per Section 18.765.050.E by means of Type II procedure, as governed by Section 1890.040, if the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed use by its nature would be reasonably anticipated to generate a lesser need for bicycle parking. The applicant has requested an adjustment to the bicycle parking standards that would be imposed on the development as dictated by Table 18.765.2 (Minimum Parking Standards). Under the current requirements, the library would be required to provide 1 space for every 1,000 square feet; therefore, the library would be required to provide 47 spaces. The applicant is proposing to provide 40 spaces spread between the employee entrance, and the main entrance (35 spaces at the main entrance, and 5 spaces at the employee entrance). The applicant states that the library can be accessed by a lot of different transportation modes, but contends that since it is suburban in nature, the library could expect patrons to travel by vehicle to the site more often than by bicycle. There are bike lanes on Hall Blvd., the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail runs past the site, and there is a bus stop immediate)y adjacent to the site. The applicant also argues that the City requirements are not typical of what other surrounding jurisdictions are requiring. Staff cannot support these arguments because plans and codes are specific to each jurisdiction based on goals and policies of the community, and differing codes are not uncommon. A suburban community may impose such restrictions in an effort to encourage bicycle and pedestrian transportation alternatives. However, a compelling reason to grant the 15% adjustment is to discuss the current use of the existing facilities. Currently, there are fifteen (15) bicycle spaces available at City Hall, only ten (10) are located at the main entrance to the library. Considering the remise that the existing complex utilizes the exact same transportation system, and that the fifteen spaces available to patrons of both City Hall and the current 27,000 square foot Tigard Library are seldom in use now, it is apparent that the nature of the library use does not require the same level of bicycle parking as required of other cultural institutional uses. Therefore, based on the particular dynamics and location of the proposed library, a reduction to the amount of bicycle parking is warranted. This criterion is satisfied. RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS (18.510) The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. Section 18.510.050 States that Development standards in Residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2 below: (Table is on the following page) CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 11 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES STANDARD R-12 PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size 3,050 S.F. 637,718 based on - Detached unit per unit overall site size - Boarding, lodging, rooming house Average Lot Width None N/A Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 20 ft 20ft - Side facing street on corner & through lots 20 ft N/A - Side yard 10 ft 220/400+ ft - Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 30 ft 400+ ft - Rear yard 20 ft 400+ ft - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a 20 ft N/A public or private street. Maximum Height 35 ft 35 ft Maximum Site Coverage 2 80% 18.3% Minimum Landscape Requirement 20% 81.7% [2] Includes all buildings and impervious area Based on the analysis above, the underlying zone's development standards are met or exceeded. FINDING: Based on the information provided in the narrative and on the site plan, the development standards in the R-12 zone are satisfied. ACCESS, EGRESS AND CIRCULATION (18.705) 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. Because the parking requirement is more than 100 spaces, the TDC requires at least two (2), 30-foot access with 24 feet of pavement, or one (1), 50-foot access with 40 feet of pavement. The applicant has indicated in the narrative and on the plans that there will be one 50-foot access with at least 40 feet of pavement. This criterion is satisfied. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.0301 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 site has frontage on SW Hall Blvd., a public street, and the proposed access connects directly with the site. This criterion is satisfied. Required Walkway Location On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: 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; The applicant has indicated that a concrete walkway will be extended from the entrance of the main building to SW Hall Blvd. There are also plans to provide sidewalks between this development and the adjacent Fanno Pointe development to the south of the site. In consideration of a future access onto SW Wall, the applicant should request and plan for a sidewalk connection to the proposed right-of-way. Although it is not required at this time, if Wall Street is constructed, and the facility expands, it will likely be a requirement. This criterion is satisfied. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 12 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 9 • Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected Ly walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; This criterion is in applicable to this proposal. 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; The applicant's plans show there are no required walkways crossing the vehicular access or parking area. The plans do indicate two marked crossings of the forward parking area, and have indicated a raised crosswalk directly in front of the main entrance. All sidewalks are concrete, and meet the minimum width of four feet. In fact, the sidewalk widths vary from four to eight feet in width. This criterion is satisfied. 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 applicant is proposing to construct all sidewalks with concrete materials, and lighting was discussed previously in this report. This criterion is satisfied. FINDING: As proposed, the applicants plans meet the required access/egress standards of the TDC. Access Management (Section 18.705.030.H): Section 18.70-5.030.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. A traffic impact report was submitted by DKS Associates, dated September 2002. The plans for this project call for a left turn lane on Hall Boulevard to serve the new intersection location at Wall Street. ODOT will need to provide the final approval for the left turn lane design. The preliminary plan shows that adequate sight distance can be achieved in either direction. Once the project is completed, prior to final inspection, the applicant shall provide a sight distance certification from a registered professional civil engineer verifying that the sight distance criteria are met. 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 be150 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 frrontage, 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. The plan shows a driveway onto Hall Boulevard to serve the library and the Zander propert y to the south (site of the recently approved Fanno Pointe Condominium project) until sucf~ CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 13 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • time that Wall Street is constructed. Wall Street is a separate protect being explored by the City to complete a required connection between Hall Boulevard and Hunziker Street, as shown by the approved TSP. If the Wall Street project moves forward, it will be constructed in two phases, with Phase 1 being a City project with partial funding from Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) revenue funds, beginning at the Hall Boulevard end and; Phase 2 being a local improvement district (LID) with involvement from an abutting property owner for the completed connection to Hunziker Street. The access location on Hall Boulevard is approximately 365 feet south of the O'Mara Street intersection, thereby meeting this criterion. If and when Wall Street is constructed, the library will be given a new commercial driveway along that street. The proposed location for that approach is roughly 160 feet east of Hall Boulevard which will also meet this criterion. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The proposed joint access between the Library and the Fanno Pointe Condominium project (also the potential intersection location of Wall Street) is approximately 365 feet south of O'Mara Street and 650 feet north of Fanno Creek Drive. The spacing to the north does not meet the City's standard, nor does it meet the ODOT standard of 600 feet. The applicant has applied to ODOT for a major deviation to their access spacing standards and from preliminary discussions with AT staff, the deviation is very likely to be approved. An adjustment to the City standard is necessary in addition to the ODOT major deviation. As discussed previously on page 11 of this report, the application can meet the standards necessary for City approval o the adjustment. FINDING: At the time of application, the applicant had not yet received approval from ODOT to deviate the minimum spacing standards of 600 feet for intersections on state roads. CONDITION: Prior to any site work, the applicant shall obtain the necessary approvals and permits from ODOT to allow the proposed access to be located at the proposed location. ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS - CHAPTER 18.725: Requires 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 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the Commercial zoning districts and the Industrial Park (I-P) 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 o 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. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 14 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • 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. There is no evidence in the record that would suggest that any problems associated with noise, emissions, vibrations, odors, glare and heat, or insects and rodents would result from this specific development. FINDING: Based on the information provided by the applicant, the use of the property will conform to the above requirements. If for some reason the above standards were in question, and it was subsequently found that the use was out of compliance with any of the above standards, the property owner would be subject to code enforcement, court review, possible fines, and revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. A search of City records does not indicate any code enforcement issues associated with the existing use. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING - CHAPTER 18.745: Street trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development pro ects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accorcance with Section 18.745.040.C Section 18.745.040.C required that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The project fronts SW Hall Blvd., and the applicant has indicated in the narrative that they ntend to plant street trees along that frontage, however, they did not provide the species name intend' of the trees to be planted. Staff cannot make findings that this criterion is satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has provided a landscape and street tree plan for the development to include the planting of street trees along SW Hall Blvd. The TDC code requires that the species and spacing of the trees meet specific standards. The applicant's plan does not clearly identify the species of the trees to be planted, so staff cannot determine that the spacing requirements are adequate. This standard is not satisfied. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised street tree plan showing the required plantings on SW Hall Blvd. for the City Forester's review and approval. The street tree plan shall include information on the species, size, and location of the proposed street trees. The street tree plan shall also demonstrate compliance with all relevant standards in Sections 18.745.030 and 18.745.040. Land Use Buffering and Screening: Buffering and Screening is required between different types of land uses. The proposed facility is in a residential zone and is adjacent to residential uses on two sides. The uses are separated by rights-of-way; therefore, there is no buffer requirement along those property lines. Residential uses abut the west and south property lines. The only requirement applicable to this development is the screening of the parking areas which is discussed in the next segment of this discussion. This criterion is satisfied. Screening of parking and loading areas is required. The specifications for this screening are as follows: CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 15 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • 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; The applicant has provided a landscape plan that utilizes a variety of native trees and shrubs. At maturity, the proposed landscape plan will provide an excellent screen of the parking areas that front SW Hall Blvd.; however, the parking areas need to be completely screened, and the evidence in the file suggests that the southern and eastern borders of the parking areas are proposed to be planted with forbes, sedges, and riparian perennials. The applicant is also proposing to plant some accent trees along this area. This criterion is not fully satisfied. FINDING: The proposed landscape plan fails to include plantings along the southern and eastern border of the parking areas to effectively screen the areas from adjacent uses. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that includes additional shrubbery along the southern and eastern border of the parking areas in compliance with DC Section 18.745.050(E)(1)(a). 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 The applicant's plan demonstrates compliance with this requirement by calling for the addition of 12 trees within the interior of the parkin lot in addition to the 5 large ma{ure trees in the center island of the proposed parking lot. The trees are proposed in locations that, at maturity would meet the standards of the development code by providing a canopy effect over the parking area. This criterion is satisfied. 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. The landscape plan shows planting islands within the interior of the parking area that vary between six and nine feet wide and are significant enough to exceed the minimum dimensions. The islands will be protected by six-inch curb. This criterion is satisfied. 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; The applicants' plans show all service facilities on the east-end of the building, however, the proposed screening is a mixture of wood fencing and chain link fencing. The wood fencing meets this criterion, but the chain link facility does not. Therefore, a condition is warranted to meet the criterion. FINDING: The screening that is proposed for the transformer and generator enclosure is constructed of chain link which does not meet the standard. The site is located in a residential zoning district and is adjacent to a 42-unit condominium project to the south. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of buildin permits for the building, the applicant shall revise the plan for screening he transformer and generator enclosure to include either a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet high. The revised method shall be accompanied by a detail of the facility. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 16 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • 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. The applicant is proposing to screen the refuse container in with a six-foot-high wood fence. This criterion is satisfied. FINDING: As conditioned, the proposal meets the requirements of TDC Chapter 18.745 as it pertains to landscaping, buffering, and screening. MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLES STORAGE - CHAPTER 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 acility location and compatibility. The applicant has indicated that the project would utilize the minimum standards method. Under that premise, the development would be required to provide 4 square feet for every thousand feet of building. At 47,500 square feet, the applicant is required to provide a collection area at least 190 square feet in size. The applicant is proposing to construct a 120 square foot enclosure which does not meet the minimum requirement. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not provided a sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility, nor provided sufficient area as required by the TDC for the minimum standards method of refuse collection. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits for the facility, the applicant shall provide an additional 70 square feet in the mixed solid waste collection area, and a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler that services the site with a letter approving the facility location. Location Standards. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-se arated recyclable 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, and 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 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; he.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. The site plan shows a trash enclosure at the rear of the lot next to the loading space. The location requirements are met. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 17 OF 36 417/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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 clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. The applicant has indicated in the narrative and on the site plan that all service facilities will be screened as required. The dimensions of the refuse facilities and the illustrations indicate that the applicant can construct a 10-foot-wide opening. This criterion is satisfied. FINDING: As conditioned, the proposal satisfies the approval criteria for Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage for institutional uses. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING (18.765) At the time o the erection of a new structure within any zoning district, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070. The subject site is located within the Metro Zone B. The maximum number of parking paces that can be provided by the site is 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. Therefore, the maximum number of parking spaces for the site would be 211 spaces. The minimum parking standards are as follows: The minimum amount of parking required by the facility is 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. As such, the minimum parking requirement for the development will be 119 parking spaces. The applicant has proposed to locate 69 standard spaces, 30 compact spaces, and 5 accessible spaces on site for a total of 104 spaces. The applicant is proposing to make up the remainder by sharing 16 parking spaces with City Hall. Shared parking for uses other than single-family and duplex may provide parking on a site not further than 500 feet from the property line when both uses can accommodate their minimum parking requirements without overlap. City Hall including the Niche is required to provide a total of 101 parking stalls. Currently, City Hall as a total of 242 s~alls. This criterion is satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has provided 104 spaces on site, and is proposing to share another 16 spaces with City Hall. City Hall has 141 excess spaces and is located within 500 feet from the property line of the library site. Shared parking is allowed. With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: 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; The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and [_irridnfinn• As discussed earlier in this report, this criterion is satisfied. 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; The applicant has not provided any information to suggest that the access drive will be marked. Recognizing that the library is a focal point for the community, and will be signed, the applicant can meet the standard by meeting the following condition. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The access drive is not clearly and permanently marked. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 18 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 CONDITION: Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall clearly and mark the location of the access drive in accordance with TDC Section 18.765.040(6)(3). Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; Vision Clearance is discussed later in this report. This criterion is satisfied. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; The applicant has proposed to pave the access and all parking areas. This criterion is satisfied. Excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030P, groups oftwo 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 parking spaces are serviced by two-way access proposed within this project, and there is room for service vehicles to turn around and enter the street so that no backing movement will be required. This criterion is satisfied. 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. The applicant has identified a loading and unloading area on the site plan along the east side of the new building that will not prevent traffic flow. This criterion is satisfied. Parking Lot Striping: 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. The applicant has indicated that the parking lot will be striped but has not indicated direction arrows on the plans, however, the direction of flow within the interior of the site is two-way, and can be expected to operate in the same manner as a roadway. This criterion is satisfied. 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. The applicant has not proposed concrete curbs at the edges of paving adjacent to planting areas, nor have they indicated within the narrative or site plan thaf wheel stops will be provided if curbs are not provided. This criterion has not been met. FINDING: The proposal does not address the requirements for curbs and wheel stops as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. CONDITION: Prior to final occupancy, the site shall be inspected to ensure that curbs or wheel stops are provided as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 19 OF 36 4/7103 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Space and Aisle Dimensions: Table 18.765.1. outlines the minimum dimensions for angled parking. The proposal identifies a total of 104 new spaces utilizing 90-degree parking. Staff review of the parking plan illustrates compliance with Figure 18.765.1. This criterion is satisfied. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements. The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. Bicycle parking was discussed previously in this report, and staff has recommended approval of an adjustment to the bicycle parking standards. A staff review of the location standards of the bike parking facility indicates that they have been met. However, the design requirements are not satisfied, and have not been addressed adequately. For example, the applicant has proposed to place the parking spaces on crushed gravel, while the design standards call for a hard surface. The bicycle parking design standards are not met. FINDING: The applicant has illustrated and briefly discussed a bicycle-parking scheme for the proposal, however, there is no discussion of the design as required by TDC Section 18.765.050. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall ensure that all bicycle parking spaces are designed and constructed to the standards that are identified in TDC Section 18.765.050. Off-street loading requirements: 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: 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. Off-street loading dimensions: Each loading berth shall be approved by the City Engineer as to design and location; 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; Entrances and exits for the loading areas shall be provided at locations approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 18.710; Screening for off-street loading facilities is required and shall be the same as screening for parking lots in accordance with Chapter 18.745. Because of the size of the building, the facility would be required to provide two (2 off-street loading spaces to meet the standard. The applicant has indicated only one (1) loading space on the plan. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not addressed the need for off-street loading facilities as required by TDC Section 18.765.080. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to include two (2) off-street loading spaces. Said spaces shall be designed and constructed to meet the dimensional criteria in TDC Section 18.765.08G(B). CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 20 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 SENSITIVE LANDS (18.775): The Hearings Officer shall have the authority to issue a sensitive lands permit in the 100-year floodplain by means of a Type HIA procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.775.010 B-E The proposal involves placing a storm outfall and sanitary line within the 100-year floodplain and into a wetland buffer. The applicant is also proposing to utilize a portion of the floodplain temporarily for construction activities. They contend thaf ultimately, there will be no impacts to flood storage capacity of the floodplain. This proposal is considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer. 18.775.040 General Provisions for Floodplain Areas. Permit review. The appropriate approval authority shall review all permit applications to determine whether proposed building sites will be safe from flooding. The Hearings Officer reviews all applications for land use consistency, and the Building Official will review all construction plans in compliance with this title and the Oregon Uniform Building Code as required. Special flood hazard. The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled "The Flood Insurance Study of the City of Tigard," dated September 1, 1981, with accompanying Flood Insurance Maps (updated February 1984) is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter. This Flood Insurance Study is on file at the Tigard Civic Center. The applicant and staff have reviewed these maps and agree that this site is within one of the identified special flood hazard areas. The application is being reviewed under this premise. Base flood elevation data. When base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with Subsection B above, the Director shall obtain, review and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a federal, state or other source, in order to administer Subsections M and N below. The base flood elevation has been provided for this site and has been discussed elsewhere in this report. Test of reasonableness. Where elevation data is not available either through the Flood Insurance Study or from another authoritative source, applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a local judgment and includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate at least two feet above grade in these sensitive land areas may result in higher insurance rates. As discussed previously, the elevation data is available on the maps that are available within Tigard City Hall. Resistant to flood damage. All new construction and substantial improvements, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. All materials and utility equipment is reviewed for resistance to flood damage by the City of Tigard Building Division. Minimize flood damage. All new construction and substantial improvements, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 21 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER To ensure that any construction on site minimizes flood damage, the City of Tigard Building Division will review the proposed construction and require adjustments where necessary. No portion of the building will be located within the 100-year floodplain. Equipment protection. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air-conditioning equipment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. The equipment will be reviewed prior to building permit issuance by the City of Tigard's commercial plans examiner to ensure that it is flood proofed. Water Supply Systems. All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the system. There are no new water supply systems proposed with this application. The project will utilize the existing water service from SW Hall Blvd. Anchoring. All new construction, all manufactured homes and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. Anchoring is also required by the Oregon Uniform Building Code (OUBC). Anchoring for all new structures will be reviewed at the time of building permit review. Sanitary sewerage systems. New and replacement sanitary sewerage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the systems and discharge from the systems into floodwater. There are no new or replacement sanitary sewerage systems associated with this proposal. The applicant will be connecting to an existing sewer system that is already established. On-site water disposal systems. On-site water disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. There are no on-site detention facilities associated with this proposal because it lays directly adjacent to Fanno Creek. This criterion is met. Residential Construction. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure, including manufactured homes, shall have the lowest floor, including the basement, elevated at least one foot above base flood elevation; This standard does not apply as the purpose of this- construction is for institutional purposes. Nonresidential Construction. New construction and substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential structure shall either have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to the level of the base flood elevation, or together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall: 1. Be flood-proofed so that below the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; 2. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 22 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 3. Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting provisions of this subsection based on their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the Building Official as set forth in Subsection 18.775.030 E2; and 4. Non-residential structures that are elevated, not flood-proofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in 18.775.040 L2. Applicants flood-proofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one foot below the flood-proofed level (e.g., a building constructed to the base flood level will be rated as one foot below that level). As discussed previously, the City of Tigard Building Division will be reviewing the construction plans for this proposal to ensure that they are consistent with the State and Local requirements as they pertain to development within proximity to the 100-yyear flood lain. In fact, no portion of the structure will be located within the 100-year floodplain, and the proposed storm and sanitary lines will be buried. The applicant has provided a letter from a certified registered engineer that states that the proposed structures have been verified for consistency prior to application. Subdivisions and partitions in 100-year floodplain. Subdivisions and partitions in the 100-year floodplain shall meet the following criteria: This proposal does not involve a subdivision or partition. 18.775.050 General Provisions for Wetlands Code compliance requirements. Wetland regulations apply to those areas classified as significant on the City of Tigard "Wetland and Streams Corridors Map" and to a vegetated corridor ranging from 25 to 200 feet wide, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the wetland, per "Table 3.1 Vegetated Corridor Widths" and "Appendix C" Natural Resource Assessments of the CWS "Design and Construction Standards". Wetland locations may include but are not limited to those areas identified as wetlands in "Wetland Inventory and Assessment for the City of Tigard, Oregon," Fishman Environmental Services, 1994. The location of the proposed sanitary connection and the stormwater outfall are identified as significant wetland, and therefore subject to sensitive lands review for wetlands. Delineation of wetland boundaries. Precise boundaries may vary from those shown on wetland maps; specific delineation of wetland boundaries may be necessary. Wetland delineation will be done by qualified professionals at the applicant's expense. The applicant has submitted a report by Kurahashi & Associates, an environmental consultant that has consulted on a number of environmental issues within the Tigard area. This criterion is satisfied. Within the 100-year floodplain The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request with in the 100 ear floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified by a registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge; CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 23 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • The applicant has provided a letter from Brett Arvidson, P.E. from Kurahashi & Associates indicating that the general standards for activities within the floodplain can be met by the proposal. The applicant has added that, " the project is deInn ed to propose a net cut and fill of T yards, and none of the activities will alter the existing nel geometry." This criterion has not been satisfied. FINDING: The applicant maintains that any encroachments into the floodplain will not result in a change of the floodplain, but the claim has not been substantiated as required by the above criteria. CONDITION: Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a letter from a registered professional engineer that indicates that any encroachments made by this proposal will not increase the flood levels during the base flood discharge. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards; The alterations that are proposed within the 100-year floodplain are proposed to accommodate placement of the stormwater outfall and sanitary sewer line. These items are identified as utilities within Chapter 18.120 of the TDC. However, the proposed temporary construction activities are not. That being said, the construction activities that are temporary would not result in alteration or development of that area. It is requested to use that area only during construction, and the request seems reasonable as long as none of the temporary activity within that area occurs during the wet season. Staff would support the temporary construction activities in the floodplain provided the previous condition is met, and the activity does not take place between October 15th and July 1" of any year. These dates were chosen to coincide with those months that are considered wet by CWS for erosion control purposes. This criterion is satisfied. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood; As discussed earlier, the applicant has indicated that there will be a net cut of 2 yards in the 100-year floodplain. A cut would not increase the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. This criterion is satisfied. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bic cle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely; The Fanno Creek Trail system will be located on the site consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan, and the adopted Transportation Systems Plan. The construction of the trail has been conditioned elsewhere in this report. This criterion is met. The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. The location of the trail has not been determined as of the date of this application, therefore, staff cannot ensure that the pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. FINDING: The applicant has not provided for the construction of the bicycle/pedestrian path that has been conditioned previously in this report so staff cannot verify elevation at this time. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 24 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall provide plans for the pedestrianlbicycle path that illustrates that no portion of the pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands (DSL) approvals shall be obtained; and It has not been ascertained as to whether or not the applicant would need any approvals from the Oregon DSL for work within the 100-year floodplain, however, staff has been in contact with the Army Corps of Engineers, Kathryn Harris, and has a letter from Colin MacLaren with the Oregon DSL. Both people have indicated that the future proposed location of SW Wall Street, and the library access will encroach into wetlands and waters of national and regional significance. Any cut and fill within these areas will require approval from the appropriate agency. These activities are not proposed at this time, but the encroachments of the stormwater outfall and the sewer line do encroach into these areas, and they did not speak specifically to these activities in their comments. This criterion has not been satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not provided any evidence that would indicate that no approval from the Oregon DSL is necessary for the work that is proposed within the 100-year floodplain and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. The property already belongs to the City, and the conditions related to trail construction previously addressed in this report will satisfy the requirements of this criterion. Within wetlands. The Director shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request for a sensitive lands permit within wetlands based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: The proposed land form alteration or development is neither on wetland in an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor is within the vegetative corridor established per "Table 3.1 Vegetative Corridor Widths: and "Appendix C: Natural Resources Assessments" of the CWS "Design and Construction standards," for such a wetland; The proposed encroachments are in fact within the vegetated corridor widths; however, TDC Section 18.775.090 includes special provisions for development within locally significant wetlands and along Fanno Creek which allows utility and service provider infrastructure construction as long as it is approved by the City andCWS. The City criteria can be met, and CWS has provided a letter indicating that the conceptual plan is approvable provided the final construction plans are approved by them. This criterion is satisfied. The extent and nature of the proposed land form alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use; The applicant has provided a wetland delineation prepared by Kurahashi & Associates that has been affirmed b the.Oregon Division of State Lands and Clean Water Services CWS). There is no proposed disturbance to the wetland, but there is disturbance of the CWS vegetated corridor. The applicant maintains that the proposed alteration is for the purpose of providing utilities. Further, they state that there will be no permanent land form alteration, and thaf the site will be disturbed to the minimum extent necessary to place the utilities. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 25 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER They add that the work area will be restored to its previous state once the utilities are placed. By complying with the conditions of approval and subsequent approvals from CWS, ODSL, and the Army Corps. of Engineers (ACOE), the criterion can be met. Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage which would adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated; As stated above, the applicant has provided a delineation of the wetland, and has gained approval of a mitigation plan from CWS. FINDING: The applicant has been provided with several conditions from CWS to mitigate impacts from this development on the nearby wetland. CONDITION: The applicant shall comply with the conditions of the CWS service provider letter and submit verification of compliance from both CWS and the projects qualified consultant from Kurahashi & Associates. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; The applicant has provided an erosion control plan that addresses such measures that will be approved by CWS and the City of Tigard Engineering Department prior to site work. This criterion has been satisfied. All other sensitive lands requirements of this chapter have been met; All sensitive lands requirements of the Sensitive Lands chapter can be achieved with compliance of the Conditions of Approval for this project. This criterion has been satisfied. The provisions of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal, shall be met; These provisions are addressed later in this report. Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards, Floodplains and Wetlands, Natural Areas, and Parks, Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan have been satisfied. As indicated previously, this proposal can be conditioned such that it satisfies the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. This criterion is satisfied. SIGNS (18.780 Requires that a permit be issued for any sign that is erected, re-erected, constructed, structurally altered, or relocated within the City Limits. The applicant has indicated that they intend to place a monument sign and a wall sign on the building. However, no application was submitted for the signs at this time. Staff cannot verify compliance with the sign requirements without all of the information. Signs can be applied for at a later date, which is often times the case with most projects. FINDING: The applicant has indicated the need for signage, but did not provide an application or the necessary information for staff review. CONDITION: Prior to placement of any signs on site, the applicant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the appropriate plans to verify compliance with TDC Chapter 18.780. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 26 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 TREE REMOVAL - CHAPTER 18.790: Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist be provided for a conditional use application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, identification of which trees 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. The applicant has provided a tree survey and removal plan. According to the plan, there are 162 trees over 12 inches on site. Of these 162 trees, the applicant is proposing to remove 25 to accommodate construction. Therefore, the retention is equal to 84.57°/x. According to the TDC Section 18.790.030(B)(2)(D), the applicant is not required to mitigate for any of the trees removed. However, the chapter still requires that the applicant protect the trees that are to remain on site during construction activities. FINDING: The applicant did not propose any tree protection measures that would be necessary in order to ensure the viability of those trees that are in close proximity to the construction areas as required by Section 18.790.030(B)(4). CONDITIONS: Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a tree protection plan from a certified arborist that defines standards that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction as required by Section 18.790.030(B)(4). The applicant shall provide the City Arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. The applicant shall notify the City Arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS - CHAPTER 18.795: Section 18.795.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.13. states that 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, measure from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center fine grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. The applicant has indicated in the narrative and the site plan that a clear vision area will be maintained. Staff will review the areas at the time of final occupancy to ensure compliance with the standards. This criterion is satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the vision clearance standards have been met. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS CHAPTER-18.810: 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: CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 27 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • 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. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as TDCrtion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires an arterial street to have a 64 to 128-foot right-of-way width and varied paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. SW Hall Boulevard This site lies adjacent to SW Hall Boulevard, which is classified as an arterial street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW adjacent to this site, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant's plans show they will dedicate additional ROW to provide 50 feet from the centerline. SW Hall Boulevard is currently paved, but not fully widened to ultimate width. This roadway is also under ODOT jurisdiction and any improvements made to this roadway must be permitted and inspected by ODOT: A typical improvement for this roadway is a three-lane improvement; as the five-lane section is not necessary at this time. ODOT has required a curb-to-centerline width of 25 feet, which would accommodate three lanes plus bike lanes. Staff anticipates this same level of improvement for this project. The applicant has been in contact with ODOT and has recently submitted proposed construction plans for the Hall Boulevard frontage improvements. The actual frontage for the subject site (combination of Tax Lots 100 & 200, Map 2S1 02DD, and Tax Lot 600, Map 2S1 02DA) covers a span of approximately 1,300 feet. However, the applicant proposes to only improve the south 700 feef of the library site frontage. They plan to terminate at the south edge of the bridge that crosses Fanno Creek. This makes sense for a couple of reasons: 1) In order to improve the entire frontage now, the bridge over Fanno Creek would need to be replaced with a structure of sufficient width and at an elevation above the 100-year floodplain. This alone would be a very expensive project that would bring the total value of improvements and dedications for this project well over the value of the project impact, and therefore would not be roughlyy proportionate; and 2) The extent of the library project extends no further north than the Fanno Creek bridge, so the improved portion of roadway will coincide with the improved portion of the property. Staff has spoken with ODOT staff with regard to the remaining frontage of Hall Boulevard. By (?DOT'S standards, the entire 1,300-foot frontage is subject go their frontage improvement requirements. ODOT has stated that if the City were willing to place the remaining frontage improvements in the City's next five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), they would consider their standard met. The City is willing to put the frontage improvement in the 2004-2009 Five-Year CIP. The entire cost of the bridge replacement would not be included, as ODOT recognizes that the bridge would need to be a joint project with the City. The City's CIP should include a portion of the anticipated future bridge replacement costs. The applicant has also worked with Polygon (developer of Fanno Pointe Condominiums immediately to the south) to coordinate efforts regarding the frontage improvements. The City required Polygon to pay funds to the City to cover the cost of the frontage improvements adjacent to Fanno Pointe. The City, as a part of the Library project, will construct both the Library frontage and the Fanno Pointe frontage as one project. This will minimize the amount of traffic disruption along Hall Boulevard. Prior to construction of the Improvements, the applicant will need to obtain a permit from ODOT for this work. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 28 OF 36 4/7103 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street Intersection The traffic impact report submitted by DKS Associates (see full discussion later in this report indicates that a southbound right-turn lane is warranted based upon Year 2005 background traffic, when the volume-to-capacity (v/ c) ratio would reach 1.0, exceedingg ODOT's allowable 0.99 maximum. When the library traffic is added, the v/c reaches 1.10. ODOT's policy is that a developer can not make a failing situation worse, and therefore subjects the CIty to a requirement of installing the southbound right-turn lane. The expected costs of the right-turn lane would bring the total cost of improvements and dedications for this project well over and above the value of the project impact. Therefore, it would not be roughly proportional to require the project to install this lane. However, ODOT must have some assurance that the lane will be constructed in a reasonable timeframe. Staff spoke with ODOT staff about this issue and agreed that the City will place the costs of this right-turn lane into the City's 2004-2009 Five Year CIP. Prior to final inspection of the library, the City will need to demonstrate that the costs of this improvement are included in the Five-Year CIP. SW Wall Street Wall Street is classified as a three-lane collector street with bike lanes. It is to provide an ultimate connection between Hall Boulevard and Hunziker Street to the east. A 70-foot ROW width is required for this street. The applicant plans to dedicate ROW for Wall Street as a part of this project. The applicant should only dedicate this ROW if the Wall Street LID project is approved in the proposed location. A preliminary alignment study was conducted by the City to determine how and where this street would need to cross Fanno Creek and the railroad ROW to the east. Four options were considered, with the location near the southern border of this site being the finalist. The other options that were considered resulted in more impact to Fanno Creek and the associated wetland areas adjacent to the creek. If the City obtains approval to construct this roadway, the construction would be in phases, with the first phase simply providing a full-width improvement from Hall Boulevard a distance of approximately 475 feet to a point where access into the library site and the Fanno Pointe site can be achieved. This first phase can be constructed without impacts to Fanno Creek or the railroad. A separate effort to deal with the creek and railroad crossing will continue beyond the scope of the library project. As was stated previously, the construction of Wall Street is proposed in two phases, with the first phase being a segment beginning from Hall Boulevard andfunded partly by the City and partly from TIF funds, and the second phase being a LID. The Wall Street project is not part of the library project. The library project can be served alone by the driveway configuration shown on the plan. This configuration will accommodate the future construction of the first phase of Wall Street, should it be approved in the location desired by the City. Should the all Street project be delayed, the library project can move forward with the driveway plan as shown. This provision has also been discussed with ODOT. 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. By constructin a concrete sidewalk along the Hall Boulevard frontage to ODOT standards, this criterion wql be met. 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. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 29 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.C states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing 12-inch public sewer line located along the southern edge of this site. The line has ample capacity to serve this development. The plan shows two options for extending a lateral to the library building. Option 1 avoids impacts to wetlands, but involves a longer pipe run. Option 2 is shorter, but would require additional wetland impact permit approval. Either option would work, but if Option 2 is chosen, they must obtain the necessary approvals to address the wetland impacts. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. There is an upstream drainageway that crosses the site in a northeasterly direction. The channel also impacts the Zander parcel. The applicant and Polygon have coordinated efforts and have approached Clean Water Services about removing the existing pond on Zander site and returning the channel to a free-flowing channel. CWS is in favor of this work. Fanno Creek also crosses this site in a southeasterly direction. The flows from the creek do not affect the proposed design of the site. The building will be located out of the 100-year floodplain. 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 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 Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). This site is located immediately adjacent to Fanno Creek. No onsite detention is required. The applicant's plans call for the onsite runoff to be directed to the eastern edge of the site where it will be treated and released into the tributary creek that flows into Fanno Creek. 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. Hall Boulevard is classified as a bicycle facility. The applicant's construction plans accommodate the striping of a bike lane on the east side of the roadway. The final design shall be reviewed and approved by ODOT. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.6 states that 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. The cost of the striping of the bike lane will be included in the roadway construction costs. Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.C states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 30 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER i The minimum bike lane width is five feet; six feet is preferred. The final design of the bike lane will be reviewed and approved by ODOT. 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 electric 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 appprove location of all surface mounted facilities; All underground utilities, includingg 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.C 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 fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Hall Boulevard. The applicant is proposing to place these overhead lines underground as a part of the Hall Boulevard improvements. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings As was mentioned previously, DKS Associates completed a traffic impact report for this project. The report studies the following intersections: Hall/McDonald Hall/O'Mara Hall/Wall (site access) Hall/Fanno Creek Drive One of the issues the report points out is that the Hall/McDonald intersection currently operates at level of service (LOS) D during the PM Peak Hour, with a volume-to-ca acity (v/c ratio of 0.97. With additional background traffic in the next two years (not including traffic from the library), the LOS remains at D, but the v/c increases to approximately 1.00, which exceeds ODOT's maximum allowance of 0.99. When the anticipated library traffic is added to the analysis, the v/c ratio increases to 1.10. As was stated previously, ODOT's policy is that a developer can not make a failing situation worse. DKS suggests an additional southbound right turn lane be considered at this intersection to improve the LOS and the v/c ratio. The City has committed to including the cost of this right-turn lane in the 2004-2009 Five-Year CIP. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 31 OF 36 417/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • When the Hall/Wall Street intersection is completed, it will operate at LOS F during the PM Peak Hour unless a traffic signal is installed. The applicant is willing to install a signal and has applied to ODOT for approval. ODOT has yet to render their decision about the signal but preliminary indications are that they will approve the installation. The intersection at Hall/O'Mara Street currently operates at LOS F during the PM Peak Hour, and a v/c ratio of 0.23, but that LOS only affects less than 3% of the total vehicles that enter that intersection during that timeframe. The addition of background traffic in the area and the site generated traffic from the library do not improve or worsen the LOS. The v/c increases slightly to 0.38 with background traffic alone, and increases to 0.48 when the library is occupied. Based upon the findings of the traffic impact report, the impacts of the library project can be mitigated with the installation of a traffic signal at Hall/Wall Street, as proposed. Public Water System: This site will be served from the City's public water line located in Hall Boulevard. A new public water line will be constructed as a part of the Wall Street improvements. 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 plan calls for a vegetated Swale to be constructed near the east edge of the site where the runoff will be treated then released into the tributary that flows into Fanno Creek. The Swale will become a publicly-maintained facility. 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 resultin from development, construction, rading, excavating, clearing, and any other activi~y which accelerates erosion. Per GWS 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 =this t be issued for any development that will disturb five or more acres of land. 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. A final grading plan will be reviewed and approved prior to construction. A NPDES (1200-C) permit is required prior to construction as well. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assi ningg addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $30.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of the site permit. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 32 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • For this project, the addressing fee will be $30.00. D. IMPACT STUDY: Section 18.390.040.B.2.e 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 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 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. The applicant has submitted an impact study addressing the required elements above. The report substantiates that all services are capable of serving the site. In addition, to the requirements imposed on the development, the applicant has proposed to make several improvements as part of the project that would not necessarily be imposed due to the rough proportionality assessment, but is necessary to improve impacts to the systems that are affected by the development. ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development. Presently, the TIF for this project is estimated at $184,555. According to the Washington County TIF ordinance, 32 percent of a projects impact is met by its TIF assessment in Tigard. This leaves 68% unmitigated. The actual cost of system improvements per trip generated by new development on the Tigard street system can be determined by the following equation (Larson, Mackenzie Engineering, Dolan Findings, June 1995): $184,555 divided by.32 equals $576,734.37. ($184,555 is theTIF assessment according to the Washington County TIF ordinance effective July 1, 2002). Less mitigated costs The applicant is required to dedicate right-of-way along the frontage of SW Hall, and SW Wall. At an approximate cost of $3.52 a square foot (SF), and a total of 29,756 SF, the value of this dedication is equal to $104,741. The applicant is also required to make a half-street improvement along the frontage of SW Hall Blvd. A preliminary engineering estimate places the value of this improvement at $373,843. The applicant is also required to provide slope easements along SW Hall and SW Wall. At an estimated square footage of 18,825 SF, and an estimated value of $1.75 SF, the total value of the easements are $32,944. In addition, the applicant has been conditioned to ensure that the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail is expanded, that improvements further north on Hall Blvd., and at the intersection of SW Hall and SW McDonald are completed to mitigate impacts of the project. The applicant is also nrnnncinn to nlacP a traffic sinnal nt the intersection of the drivewav and SW Hall Blvd. Estimate of Unmitigated Impacts Full Impact $ 576.734 Less TIF Assessment 184,555 nmitigatea imps FINDING: Although the value of the required improvements is not roughly proportional to the fees and improvements imposed on the development, the applicant proposed and negotiated the improvements to ensure that the project would have nominal impacts to the public systems by which it is to be served. The applicant has proposed to make improvements that meet city and state standards to ensure that the project mitigates the impacts imposed to the respective services. CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 33 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Cityy of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered no commen}s or objections. The City of Tigard Engineering Department was sent this proposal for review and the comments have been incorporated into this report. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager has reviewed this application and has expressed that the waterline will have to be extended to provide service to the site. All utility work should be coordinated with the department. City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed this application and offered no comments or objections. City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and offered no objections. The Crime Prevention Officer, Jim Wolf has been involved with the project from the beginning. City of Tigard Arborist has reviewed this application and recommended protection measures. His approval is conditioned for tree protection measures. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services has reviewed the proposal and stated the service provider letter revision must be submitted for sanitary sewer encroachment into the vegetated corridor, and that final plans must be submitted and approved prior to beginning construction. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet o all portions o the exterior wall o the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. When buildings are complete) protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the Chief. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width o not less than 20 eet (15 feet for one or two dwelling units and out buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.1) Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 28 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 28 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as nee ded. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all- weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 50,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. Documentation from a registered engineer that the finished construction is in accordance with the approved plans or the requirements of the Fire Code may be requested. (Design criteria on back) (UFC Sec. 902.2.2) CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 34 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 25 feet and 45 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. UFC Sec. 902.2.2.3) PAINTED CURBS: Where required, fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red or black on yellow background. (W Sec. 901.4.5.2) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is less. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (UFC Sec. 903.3) Fire District records indicate the required fire flow is available. COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - FIRE HYDRANTS: No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway. Any hydrants that are left over from the minimum number of hydrant calculations may be fulfilled by hydrants that are up to 500 feet from any point of the building. The fire Prevention Ordinance has further requirements that need to be used for acceptance and placement of fire hydrants. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - MINIMUM NUMBER OF FIRE HYDRANTS: The minimum number o fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving credit for fire protection systems divided by 1500. If the answer is equal o or greater than x.5 the next whole number of hydrants shall be used. There shall not be less than 2 hydrants per building. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1) Considerations for placing fire hydrants shall be as follows: Existing hydrants in- the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants; however, hydrants that are over 500 feet away from the nearest point of the subject building shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highway, freeway, or heavily traveled collector streets shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the Chief. Private hydrants or public hydrants that are on adjacent private property shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants for the subject building. Exception: The use of hydrants located on other private property may be considered i their locations and access are encumbered in a legal document (such as deed restriction) by the owners of the involved parcels of property. The encumbrance may be lifted only after approvals by the Chief on behalf of the fire department and any other governmental agencies that may require approval. When evaluating the placement of hydrants at apartment or industrial complexes the first hydrant(s) to be placed shall be at the primary access and any secondary access to the site. After these hydrants have been placed other hydrants shall be sited to meet the above requirements for spacing and minimum number of hydrants. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1.1 FIRE HYDRANY DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hvdrants shall be iocatea not more tnan 15 Teet Trom an approvea Tire apparatus access roaaway. kur-L: Sec. 903.4.2.4 REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation o 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. (UFC Sec. 901.4.3) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 70 feet o a fire department connection FDC . Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5) FDC locations shall be approved by the Chief. (1996 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Sec. 904.1.1) CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 35 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The FDC piping shall be connected directly to the system piping on the downstream side of all control valves. FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONS ON BUILDINGS: Fire department connections s all not be located on the building that is being protected with the exception of Group R, Division 1 Occupancies not over 4 stories in -height. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any other construction on the site or subdivision. (UFC Sec. 8704) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal 's Office for an order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. (UFC Sec. 902.4) The Oregon Department of Transportation has reviewed the proposal and has indicated that due to complications, their comments will be postponed, but available prior to the hearing. Staff is having on-going conversations with the Department as of the date of the staff report. Tri-Met has reviewed the proposal and has requested that the applicant provide a shelter with an electrical feed for lighting and a digital bus tracker. Theyy dislike the pull-out that is proposed but concedes that it is an improvement requested by MY'. Finally, Tri-Met states that regular cleaning of the bus stop should be a part of the library's site maintenance. The Oregon Division of State Lands has reviewed the proposal and has indicated that the location of the proposed future drive, and Wall Street improvement would impact wetlands, and waters of the state. a Joint Removal/Fill Permit would be necessary for future improvements on the site that affect the resources. The Oregon Division of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has reviewed the proposal and a representative has stated that they were told that Wall Street is a necessary part of the proposal. If constructed the ODFW would be concerned about the lack of compensatory mitigation. Staff contacted Jim Grimes and indicated that although Wall Street is not necessary for the library project, the access is being proposed at the preferred location of the right-of-way to make it easier to relocate the driveway if Wall Street is constructed. The Wall Street project is separate from the library, and his comments are specific to the impacts that would be created by the construction of Wall Street. The US Army Corps of Engineers has reviewed the proposal and offered comments that are similar in nature to the comments from ODFW. Their approval is conditioned as a part of this report. Portland General Electric, Metro, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, the Portland Western Railroad, and the Tigard-Tualatin School District were given the opportunity to review this proposal and submitted no comments or objections. PREPARED BY: Brad Kilby Associate Planner APPROVED B : Richard Bew o Planning Manager March 31, 2003 DATE March 31, 2003 DATE CITY OF TIGARD LIBRARY PAGE 36 OF 36 4/7/03 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 W J M0 W J J a x 3 SW WMARA STREETi I I -D;7 ;i, I I i, _ to LK \ euFF[R~ u-le' s,rz w•us ~ "I', " I ~.TO-ELL NO All \ \ ` I \ CORCPEIE 9iE wKLS --RD ~0'v1Y WE sb]EPDE - - wXD PE..E ERELM IIE couwWpi: - (x) 6' wOOD urES p/ I / \ eueOR+C I ELEtr .RE, GI s IF Y[1IYiFRMER e / 1 MFIM CNCLro- / ` \ j 1 .J / - fx)1EO e' C.. LMy/ y .^ti /G \ \ - s x;z a an I d w. ® s• • P IF D{s n~ s s ) I i \ e n n eao ~ o \ I I e a D of TIGAR T A,~k CITY OF TIOARD (ITY D s'rm FXJLN N (Map is not to scale) e \ \ a , 4m!\ \ ,Z71 \ - ) CU P2003-000011SLR2003.00001NAR2003.00009NAR2003.00020 CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY 1=7 Z=ZD, 1=7 P ~Q W V d L6 un ~ a H a Q d d V~Q d P D.. D Q D 0 0 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: February 19, 2003 TO: Jim Wolf, Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Brad IGlby, Associate Planner [x24341 Phone: 15031639-4171/Fax- 15031684-1291 CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development ShapingA Better Community RECEIVED PLANNING FEB 2 1 2003 CITY OF TIGARD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT [CUP)2003-00001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SIR] 2003-OOOOVADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2003-00009 CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY Q REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,000 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking sensitive lands review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls on site. LOCATION: The project site is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is described as: WCTM 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780. 18.790. 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement/Plans for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE_NEED-YOUR COMMENTS_BAC`K MARCH-5-2003:. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If ou are unable to respond b the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CAECK'THE"FOLLOWING"ITEMS;THAT APPLY:' ✓ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: LN-I(n-IQ- \Vw A\\ AJI\(, C(i\%t QZeJ(yM'ki0 US(~G pF - Name & Number of Person(s) Commenting: V\M W 6\~ It, Iq • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: TO: FROM: STAFF CONTACT: February 19, 2003 Matt Stine, Urban Forester/Public Works Annex City of Tigard Planning Division Brad lUIK AWclate Planner D034) Phone: 15031639-4111/ Fax: [503) 684-1297 CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development ShapingA Better Community CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1CUP)2003-OOOOVSENSMVE LANDS REVIEW [SLR] 2003-00001/ADJUSTMENT [VAR) 2003-00009 ➢ CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY Q REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,000 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking sensitive lands review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an adjustment to reduce the reouired number of bicycle stalls on site. LOCATION: The protect site is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is described as:. WCTM 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement/Plans for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE-NEED YOUR COMMENTS-BACK.='BY MARCH-5-2003. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond b the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your commen s and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK'THEfOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:. We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: -Jr Wefts T'iR1- TtW -,1R&K- 19 "7Dt Y 16 19WAI c.CIF- MAE A&A N'#9ftt o f NN h4- NO No i s EEM 70 135 MJ c I-Uhg A It rfi E" AM PL.& iv ~v IR NuJo kiss A- C04L-F, a-F WKS - 40. Name & Number of Person(s) Commenting: • MEMORANDUM TO: Brad Kilby FROM: Matt Stine, City Forester RE: City of Tigard Public Library DATE: February 25, 2003 i As you requested I have provided some comments on the "City of Tigard Public Library" project. If you have any questions or concerns regarding my comments please contact me anytime. 1. TREE PROTECTION DEVICES 18.745.030 E. 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 the individual trees). 1.1. All tree protection devices shall be located on the Tree Protection Plan. Any tree that will not be removed onsite that is within the limits of disturbance of this project must be protected. Any tree that is located on property adjacent to the construction project that will have more than 15% of its root system disturbed by construction activities shall also be protected. 1.2. Details and specifications are required as to how the trees will be protected on site. 1.3. Provide a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, or installation of sediment and erosion control measures, and other activities that may be required to implement the tree protection measures. • 1.4. Include in the notes on the final set of plans that equipment, vehicles, machinery, dumping or storage, or other construction activities, burial, burning, or other disposal of construction materials must not be located inside of any tree protection device or outside of the limits of disturbance where trees are being protected. No grading, filling or any other construction activity may occur within the tree protection devices at any time or outside of the limits of disturbance where trees are being protected unless approved by the City Forester. 1.5. All tree protection devices shall be: ■ Visible. ■ Constructed of 11 Gauge steel chain-link fencing supported on at least 2" O.D. steel posts. Each post shall be no less than four feet high from the top of grade. Each post shall be driven into the ground to a depth of no less than two and a half feet below grade. Each post shall be spaced no further apart than four feet. ■ Between each post, securely attached to the chain-link fencing, shall be a sign indicating that the area behind the fencing is protected and no construction activity, including material storage, may occur behind the fencing. ■ Approved in the field prior to clearing, grading, or the beginning of construction. ■ Remain in place and maintained until all construction is completed and a final inspection is conducted. 1.6. To determine the size of the tree protection zone follow the guidelines listed below: For individual trees follow the trunk diameter method. For every one=inch of diameter at breast height (DBH), or 4 Y2 feet above the ground, allow 12 inches of space from the trunk of the tree. For example, a tree that is 15" at DBH must have at least 12' of tree protection zone around the entire canopy of the tree. For groups of trees the tree protection zone must be outside of the dripline of the trees on the edge of the stand. If there are conifers with narrow crowns on the edge of the stand follow the trunk diameter method or the dripline method, whichever is greater. 1.7. Identify, on the Tree Protection Plan, the location of the stockpile area and the staging area (if different from the stockpile area). 1.8. All of this information must be included in the final plan's notes or drawings. 1.9. If it is necessary to enter the tree protection zone at any time with equipment (trucks, bulldozers, etc.) the City Forester must be notified before any entry occurs. Before entering the protection zone a layer of at least five (5) inches of wood chips or mulch must be placed over the root zone where the vehicles will be driven. This method will minimize the adverse impacts of compaction from the equipment. When access to this area is no longer needed the wood chips or mulch must then be dispersed (somewhere onsite is okay) down to a level of not more than four (4) inches deep. 1.10. Specific to this proiect: • All trees on the neighboring properties must receive the same protection guidelines as the trees on the applicant's site. 2. TREE SPECIES SELECTION & PLANTING 18.745.030 C. INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS. The installation of all landscaping shall be as follows: 1. All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures. 2. The plant material shall be of high grade, and shall meet the size and grading standards of the American Standards for Nurberg Stock (ANSI Z-60, 1-1986, and any other future revisions); and 3. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of this title. G. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL_ OF EXISTING VEGETATION. The review procedures and standards for required landscaping and screening shall be specified in the conditions of approval during development review and in no instance shall be less than that required for conventional development. 2.1. It is recommended that all tree planting follow the guidelines set forth by the International Society of Arboriculture's tree planting guidelines as well as the standards set forth in the American Institute of Architects' Architectural Graphic Standards, 10th edition. In the Architectural Graphic Standards there are guidelines for selecting and planting trees based on the soil volume and size at maturity. Additionally, there are directions for soil amendments and modifications. I recommend that these guidelines be followed and adhered to at all times. 2.2. In order to develop tree species diversity onsite it is recommended that the following guidelines be followed: ■ No more than 30% of any one family be planted onsite. ■ No more than 20% of any one genus be planted onsite. ■ No more than 10% of any one species be planted onsite. 2.3. 1 recommend that all of this information be included in the final plan's notes or drawings. If you have any questions please call me anytime. Thank you for requesting my comments on this project. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development ShapingA Better Community DATE February 19, 2003 TO: Dennis Koellermeler, Operations Manager/Water Depannil EIVED PLANNING FROM: Cipl of Tigard Planning Division FEB 2 7 2003 STAFF CONTACT: Brad WIN, Associate Planner [x24341 CITY OF TIGARD Phone: [5031639,4111/ Fax: [5031684-1291 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT [CUP12003-00001/SENSMVE LANDS REVIEW [SLR] 2003-00001/ADIUSTMENT [VAR) 2003-00009 ➢ CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY Q REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,000 square foot library on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also seeking sensitive lands review to allow work within the 100-year floodplain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls on site. LOCATION: The project site is located on property that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is described as: WCTM 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780. 18.790. 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement/Plans for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE-NEED-YOUR COMMENTS BACK-=BYs MARCH-5. 2003. You may use the space provided be ow or attach a separate letter to return your comments. you are unable to respond b the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT AP,PL`Y: Name & Number of Person(s) Commenting: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: 0 • MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: March 26, 2003 TO: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner FROM: Brian Ra9er, Development Review Engineer RE: CUP 2003-00001, City of Tigard Public Library Access Management (Section 18.705.030.1-11) 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. A traffic impact report was submitted by DKS Associates, dated September 2002. The plans for this project call for a left turn lane on Hall Boulevard to serve the new intersection location at Wall Street. ODOT will need to provide the final approval for the left turn lane design. The preliminary plan shows that adequate sight distance can be achieved in either direction. Once the project is completed, prior to final inspection, the applicant shall provide a sight distance certification from a registered professional civil engineer verifying that the sight distance criteria are met. 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 be150 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. The plan shows at least a driveway onto Hall Boulevard to serve the library and the Zander property to the south (site of the recently approved Fanno Pointe Condominium project) until such time that Wall Street is constructed. Wall Street is a separate project being explored by the City to complete a required ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 1 • r connection between Hall Boulevard and, Hunziker Street, as shown by the approved TSP. If the Wall Street project moves forward, it will be constructed in two phases, with Phase 1 being a City project with partial funding from Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) revenue funds, beginning at the Hall Boulevard end, and Phase 2 being a local improvement district (LID) with involvement from an abutting property owner for the completed connection to Hunziker Street. The access location on Hall Boulevard is approximately 365 feet south of the O'Mara Street intersection, thereby meeting this criterion. If and when Wall Street is constructed, the library will be given a new commercial driveway along that street. The proposed location for that approach is roughly 160 feet east of Hall Boulevard, which will also meet this criterion. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The proposed joint access between the Library and the Fanno Pointe Condominium project (also the potential intersection location of Wall Street) is approximately 365 feet south of O'Mara Street and 650 feet north of Fanno Creek Drive. The spacing to the north does not meet the City's standard, nor does it meet the ODOT standard of 600 feet. The applicant has applied to ODOT for a major deviation to their access spacing standards and from preliminary discussions with ODOT staff, the deviation is very likely to be approved. An adjustment to the City standard is necessary in addition to the ODOT major deviation. 18.370.020.C.5.b provides the criteria by which the Director can approve an adjustment to this standard. The criteria can be addressed as follows: (1) It is not possible to share access. Response: The City worked with the developer of the Zander parcel to the south (Fanno Pointe Condominiums) to slide the proposed intersection to a point where half of the future ROW of Wall Street would be on the Zander parcel. This enabled a shared approach to the access. The developer of Fanno Pointe (Polygon Northwest) agreed to the location of the intersection. There are no other parcels adjacent to this site that could provide opportunities for shared access. (2) There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street. Response: Site constraints, including the floodplain, Fanno Creek, and wetland areas, led the design of the facility to site the library structure in its location directly across from O'Mara Street. With the location of the building and the Hall Boulevard half-street ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 2 0 0 improvements associated with the project, locating the driveway directly across from O'Mara Street is not possible. Regardless, the driveway is located to align with the anticipated extension of Wall Street, in its preferred location. If Wall Street is extended, then a new driveway will be provided to the Library from Wall. A private street connection will also be provided for the Fanno Pointe project to the south. If Wall Street is not constructed in this location, then the proposed joint access is located as far south from the O'Mara Street intersection as practicable and still enables one point of entry for both the Library and Fanno Pointe projects. Locating the driveway 600 feet north of O'Mara Street is neither feasible nor desired due to the location of the library- on the site and the complex environmental issues associated with crossing Fanno Creek and disturbing additional sensitive lands for a driveway. (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met. Response: The applicant reviewed the idea of aligning the Wall Street intersection across from O'Mara Street. That idea was rejected because in order to extend the roadway further to the east where it could eventually link up to Hunziker Street (as called for on the Transportation System Map) significant impacts to the wetlands and creek buffer would result. The proposed location reduces those impacts significantly. Although the spacing does not meet City standards, the location of the access allows shared access between the subject site and the development on the Zander parcel. (4) The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access. Response: The applicant worked with the developer of the Zander parcel to obtain agreement to share the burden of the access location between the two properties. This effort maximized the distance between the access and O'Mara Street, thereby minimizing the needed adjustment. (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access. Response: DKS Associates traffic impact report states that the new intersection location will function adequately, especially with the installation of a traffic signal, which will be installed at the expense of the applicant. The result will be an efficient and safe intersection. (6) The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. Response: The DKS traffic impact report and the proposed plans show that the visual clearance standards can easily be met at the new ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 3 0 intersection location. No specific improvements were needed to ensure this. Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): 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. 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 18.810.030.E requires an arterial street to have a 100 foot right-of-way width and a paved section to accommodate four travel lanes, a center turn lane and two bike lanes. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. SW Hall Boulevard This site lies adjacent to SW Hall Boulevard, which is classified as an arterial street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW adjacent to this site, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant's plans show they will dedicate additional ROW to provide 50 feet from the centerline. SW Hall Boulevard is currently paved, but not fully widened to ultimate width. This roadway is also under ODOT jurisdiction and any improvements made to this roadway must be permitted and inspected by ODOT. A typical improvement for this roadway is a three-lane improvement; as the five-lane section is not necessary at this time. ODOT has required a curb-to-centerline width of 25 feet, which would accommodate three lanes plus bike lanes. Staff anticipates this same level of improvement for this project. The applicant has been in contact with ODOT and has recently submitted proposed construction plans for the Hall Boulevard frontage improvements. The actual frontage for the subject site (combination of Tax Lots 100 & 200, Map 291 021DD, and Tax Lot 600, Map 2S1 02DA) covers a span of approximately ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 4 • w 1,300 feet. However, the applicant proposes to only improve the south 700 feet of the library site frontage. They plan to terminate at the south edge of the bridge that crosses Fanno Creek. This makes sense for a couple of reasons: 1) In order to improve the entire frontage now, the bridge over Fanno Creek would need to be replaced with a structure of sufficient width and at an elevation above the 100-year floodplain. This alone would be a very expensive project that would bring the total value of improvements and dedications for this project well over the value of the project impact, and therefore would not be roughly proportionate; and 2) The extent of the library project extends no further north than the Fanno Creek bridge, so the improved portion of roadway will coincide with the improved portion of the property. Staff has spoken with ODOT staff with regard to the remaining frontage of Hall Boulevard. By ODOT's standards, the entire 1,300-foot frontage is subject to their frontage improvement requirements. ODOT has stated that if the City were willing to place the remaining frontage improvements in the City's next five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), they would consider their standard met. The City is willing to put the frontage improvement in the 2004-2009 Five-Year CIP. The entire cost of the bridge replacement would not be included, as ODOT recognizes that the bridge would need to be a joint project with the City. The City's CIP should include a portion of the anticipated future bridge replacement costs. The applicant has also worked with Polygon (developer of Fanno Pointe Condominiums immediately to the south) to coordinate efforts regarding the frontage improvements. The City required Polygon to pay funds to the City to cover the cost of the frontage improvements adjacent to Fanno Pointe. The City, as a part of the Library project, will construct both the Library frontage and the Fanno Pointe frontage as one project. This will minimize the amount of traffic disruption along Hall Boulevard. Prior to construction of the Improvements, the applicant will need to obtain a permit from ODOT for this work. Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street Intersection The traffic impact report submitted by DKS Associates (see full discussion later in this report) indicates that a southbound right-turn lane is warranted based upon Year 2005 background traffic, when the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio would reach 1.0, exceeding ODOT's allowable 0.99 maximum. When the library traffic is added, the v/c reaches 1.10. ODOT's policy is that a developer can not make a failing situation worse, and therefore subjects the City to a requirement of installing the southbound right-turn lane. The expected costs of the right-turn lane would bring the total cost of improvements and dedications for this project well over and above the value of the project impact. Therefore, it would not be roughly proportional to require the project to install this lane. However, ODOT must have some assurance that the lane will be constructed in a reasonable timeframe. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 5 • 0 Staff spoke with ODOT staff about this issue and agreed that the City will place the costs of this right-turn lane into the City's 2004-2009 Five Year CIP. Prior to final inspection of the library, the City will need to demonstrate that the costs of this improvement are included in the Five-Year CIP. SW Wall Street Wall Street is classified as a three-lane collector street with bike lanes. It is to provide an ultimate connection between Hall Boulevard and Hunziker Street to the east. A 70-foot ROW width is required for this street. The applicant plans to dedicate ROW for Wall Street as a part of this project. The applicant should only dedicate this ROW if the Wall Street LID project is approved in the proposed location. A preliminary alignment study was conducted by the City to determine how and where this street would need to cross Fanno Creek and the railroad ROW to the east. Four options were considered, with the location near the southern border of this site being the finalist. The other options that were considered resulted in more impact to Fanno Creek and the associated wetland areas adjacent to the creek. If the City obtains approval to construct this roadway, the construction would be in phases, with the first phase simply providing a full-width improvement from Hall Boulevard a distance of approximately 475 feet to a point where access into the library site and the Fanno Pointe site can be achieved. This first phase can be constructed without impacts to Fanno Creek or the railroad. A separate effort to deal with the creek and railroad crossing will continue beyond the scope of the library project. As was stated previously, the construction of Wall Street is proposed in two phases, with the first phase being a segment beginning from Hall Boulevard and funded partly by the City and partly from TIF funds, and the second phase being a LID. The Wall Street project is not part of the library project. The library project can be served alone by the driveway configuration shown on the plan. This configuration will accommodate the future construction of the first phase of Wall Street, should it be approved in the location desired by the City. Should the Wall Street project be delayed, the library project can move forward with the driveway plan as shown. This provision has also been discussed with ODOT. 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. By constructing a concrete sidewalk along the Hall Boulevard frontage, this criterion will be met. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 6 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.C states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing 12-inch public sewer line located along the southern edge of this site. The line has ample capacity to serve this development. The plan shows two options for extending a lateral to the library building. Option 1 avoids impacts to wetlands, but involves a longer pipe run. Option 2 is shorter, but would require additional wetland impact permit approval. The applicant is approved for either option, but if Option 2 is chosen, they must obtain the necessary approvals to address the wetland impacts. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.C 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 is an upstream drainageway that crosses the site in a northeasterly direction. The channel also impacts the Zander parcel. The applicant and Polygon have coordinated efforts and have approached Clean Water Services about removing the existing pond on Zander site and returning the channel to a free-flowing channel. CWS is in favor of this work. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 7 • • Fanno Creek also crosses this site in a southeasterly direction. The flows from the creek do not affect the proposed design of the site. The building will be located out of the 100-year floodplain. 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 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 Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). This site is located immediately adjacent to Fanno Creek. No onsite detention is required. The applicant's plans call for the onsite runoff to be directed to the eastern edge of the site where it will be treated and released into the tributary creek that flows into Fanno Creek. 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. Hall Boulevard is classified as a bicycle facility. The applicant's construction plans accommodate the striping of a bike lane on the east side of the roadway. The final design shall be reviewed and approved by ODOT. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.13 states that 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. The cost of the striping of the bike lane will be included in the roadway construction costs. Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.C states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. The minimum bike lane width is five feet; six feet is preferred. The final design of the bike lane will be reviewed and approved by ODOT. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 8 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 electric 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.C 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 fee in-lieu of under- grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Hall Boulevard. The applicant is proposing to place these overhead lines underground as a part of the Hall Boulevard improvements. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 9 Traffic Study Findings: As was mentioned previously, DKS Associates completed a traffic impact report for this project. The report studies the following intersections: • Hall/McDonald • Hall/O'Mara Hall/Wall (site access) Hall/Fanno Creek Drive One of the issues the report points out is that the Hall/McDonald intersection currently operates at level of service (LOS) D during the PM Peak Hour, with a volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio of 0.97. With additional background traffic in the next two years (not including traffic from the library), the LOS remains at D, but the v/c increases to approximately 1.00, which exceeds ODOT's maximum allowance of 0.99. When the anticipated library traffic is added to the analysis, the v/c ratio increases to 1.10. As was stated previously, ODOT's policy is that a developer can not make a failing situation worse. DKS suggests an additional southbound right turn lane be considered at this intersection to improve the LOS and the v/c ratio. The City has committed to including the cost of this right-turn lane in the 2004-2009 Five-Year CIP. When the Hall/Wall Street intersection is completed, it will operate at LOS F during the PM Peak Hour unless a traffic signal is installed. The applicant is willing to install a signal and has applied to ODOT for approval. ODOT has yet to render their decision about the signal but preliminary indications are that they will approve the installation. The intersection at Hall/O'Mara Street currently operates at LOS F during the PM Peak Hour, and a v/c ratio of 0.23, but that LOS only affects less than 3% of the total vehicles that enter that intersection during that timeframe. The addition of background traffic in the area and the site generated traffic from the library do not improve or worsen the LOS. The v/c increases slightly to 0.38 with background traffic alone, and increases to 0.48 when the library is occupied. Based upon the findings of the traffic impact report, the impacts of the library project can be mitigated with the installation of a traffic signal at Hall/Wall Street, as proposed. Public Water System: This site will be served from the City's public water line located in Hall Boulevard. A new public water line will be constructed as a part of the Wall Street improvements. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 10 10 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 plan calls for a vegetated swale to be constructed near the east edge of the site where the runoff will. be treated then released into the tributary that flows into Fanno Creek. The swale will become a publicly-maintained facility. 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 five or more acres 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. A final grading plan will be reviewed and approved prior to construction. A NPDES (1200-C) permit is required prior to construction as well. 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 $ 30.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of the site permit. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 11 • • For this project, the addressing fee will be $30.00. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $30.00. (STAFF CONTACT: Shirley Treat, Engineering). 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 frontage of Hall Boulevard. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for an arterial street from curb to centerline equal to 25 feet; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb, 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 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; 1. underground utilities; J. street signs (if applicable); K. driveway apron (if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Hall Boulevard in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall obtain a permit from the State of Oregon Highway Division, to perform work within the right-of- way of Hall Boulevard. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 12 • Prior to issuance of the site permit, additional right-of-way shall be conveyed to the State of Oregon, by and through its Department of Transportation, Highway Division, along the frontage of Hall Boulevard to increase the right- of-way to 50 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. Verification that the conveyance has been submitted to the State shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. (For additional information, contact Rick Reeves, Oregon Department of Transportation, Right-of-Way Section, 123 NW Flanders, Portland, OR 97209-4037; Phone: 731-8461). The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to. the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. The applicant shall obtain a 1200-C General Permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from ODOT. If the traffic signal at Hall/Wall Street is approved to be installed, it shall be installed and operational prior to final inspection. Prior to final inspection, the City shall demonstrate that they have included in the 2004-2009 Five-Year CIP costs to complete the Hall Boulevard frontage improvements for the balance of the subject site frontage. The CIP shall also include a portion of the future anticipated bridge replacement costs. Prior to final inspection, the City shall demonstrate that they have included in the 2004-2009 Five-Year CIP costs to construct a southbound right-turn lane at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 13 • • Prior to final 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). Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall engineer certify that sight distance at Boulevard meets City standards as outlined \\ti g333\usr\depts\eng\brianr\mmments\cup\cup2003-00001.dac have a registered professional the access location on Hall in TDC 18.705.030.H. ENGINEERING COMMENTS CUP 2003-00001 Tigard Public Library PAGE 14 0 • "EXHIBIT C" WRITTEN TESTIMONY (Applicant's materials and pertinent correspondence filed with Hearings Officer prior to Public Hearing.) AL - C., " EXHIBIT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - P of fi► a ' - - - - - - - - KOM_ $t .(t ec3:519 re-cawvlnq-,rL tu- C-C9 S6- 141 14 -L ll 6+1 CL t 40 VAL tiv~ - - - ( - _ . _ z ~1 I . ? s° - _ 1nr~ _ cre concR m- -JQ- ~-i -t J _v tc- P ad _ ~ n ~ IUD y r a~~i~~,, -v~S1ai~ S to end CAJQ. c ems - 1►~ sv~_ G r,n rJAe--_ - cma lam. 1 ` Ave-`l - 1- - - - - - -1 04/07/2003 08:42 FAX GROUP MACKENZIE • 0001/010 EXHIBIT J- G R Pa of Pages 0690 SW Bancroft Street I PO Box 69059 1 Portland, OR 97239 COVER ■ www.groupmackenzie.com I Info@grpmaedLeom ■ tOl: 503.224.9560 I 360.695.7979 I fam 503228.1285 Brad - Attached is a letter outlining our understanding of the conditions of approval. Please call with questions. Thanks -gem ■ C: by FAX to., Margaret Barnes, Gus Dueanas-C of T FAX 684-7297 Tim Ramis - RCCB 243-2944 Charlie Balilman - SOY 299-6769 Skip Stanaway - SRG 294-0272 Brian Wethington - Greenworks 222-2283 Brett Arvidson - Kurahasbi 644-9731 P-Q_NEI_DENDAt_fTY NOTICE: The Information contained in this facsimile transmission is confidentlal and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipiem, this serves as notification that any reading, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this communication is strictly prohibltad. If this transmission was received in error, immediately notify us at 503-224-9560 to arranne for return of the original facsimile. er a Use On -elow::tFtuslltatr . - - - FAX INSTRUCTIONS: PLEASE NOTE THAT AN ORIGINAL OF THE FAXED INFORMATION WILL NOT BE SENT TO RECIPIENTS UNLESS SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS ARE GIVEN BELOW: DISTRIBUTION: To WORD PROCESSING (ONLY it document originated in Word Processing) ORIGINAL (check one) COPY: To FILE E] To FILE 0 To SENDER E] To SENDER Q To RECIPIENT E] To RECIPIENT Q Send in-house copies to: OTHER INSTRUCTIONS: (Only if necessary) Docummu 04/07/2003 08:42 FAX • GROUP MACKENZIE G __R _JJ P April 7, 2003 City of Tigard Attention: Brad Kilby 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 • X002/010• Re: Tigard Library CUP 2003-00001; SLR 2003-00001; VAR 2003-00009; VAR 2003-00020 a Group Mackenzie Project Number 2020228 o m Dcar Brad: a m • M N ' N N a The project team has reviewed the proposed conditions of approval for the land use approvals o n associated with the above referenced project. In general, we find the conditions acceptable and appropriate for the project. However, there are a few conditions that we would like to ID E g a clarify and/or propose rewording. As such, the following identifies each condition of approval ° and provides additional information on our understanding of what is required. E o d x 1. Lighting plain - Acceptable. A lighting plan will be provided. o 2. ODOT approvals- Tt is our understanding that this condition can be interpreted to allow site work to proceed with the issuance of a temporary construction permit from ODOT. N o 3. Street tree information - Acceptable. The street trees, which are included in the Hall a C U; Blvd. project, will be shown for reference on the Tigard Library drawings submitted to N the City of Tigard for building permit. ~ Mo T M 4. South/East screening - This condition requires additional shrubs and vegetation along p F the eastern and southern sides of the parking lot. This project is focused on the aspects of a sustainable site design- One ofthe eoinponents designed into the project to meet that goal was a bio-swalc (along the southern edge of the Group parking lot) that will convey and treat run-off from the parking area before it enters the Maakouxie, Incorporated water quality facility (along the eastern edge of the parking lot), and ultimately into Fanno Creek. ^tr vim., q^ Another goal of the New Tigard Library design tram was to site the new far ilitie c M hr, Ldnd u.c Plnnninq able to expand in an easy and responsible manner in the future, if the need arises. As a Group result, the swale was sized to be 12 feet in width, and heavily planted with species that Maeken4o aid in cleansing the water before entering Fanno Creek. In the future, when parking is Engineering, I expanded to meet the needs of a building expansion, the swalc and its vegetation will ncorDUrated ncorporated remain intact. The standard to design a 12-foot swale is very specific as far as depth and Cnginn"ring Eng.^~~~;^~ side-slopes are concerned (2-foot minimum depth with 1:4 side slopes). Planting a thick screen of vegetation along the parking would require roughly 3 feet of groundcovcr beyond the edge of parking (overhang for vehicles), plus another 3 to 5 feet of area for a reasonably sized hedge planting. This would result in the screening vegetation being The tradition o: placed at the bottom of the wet swale Macrcazic Ma ' . Engineering and Dffac!•enzlclSa;la 11:\PROIFCTSW202281WP\3d0711.doe CIn/In G.'S. . 04/07/2003 08:42 FAX GROUP MACKENZIE • Brad Kilby Project Number 2020228 April 7, 2003 Page 2 0003/010 The other option is a uniform hedge on the southern side of the swalc, which would be removed in an expansion. lie native, water quality plantings (forbs, rushes, sedges, and native woody material) will grow to 3 to 4 feet high in time and should provide a reasonable screen in a short time frame. We also planted a number of trees in the swale to help screen efforts. The same holds true for the east side of the parking; lot. It is our hope that the native woody plant material in the water quality swale and water quality facility, along with the following points, will meet the intent of the code: a. The southern edge of the parking lot is, at its closest point, 90 feet from the property line. The area between the parking lot and the property line will be heavily seeded with a native grass and wildflower mix that will be mowed once or twice: a year and should maintain a reasonable height. The east edge of the parking lot is 480 feet from the eastern property line. b. There is an existing, mature stand of vegetation and a wetland that will be maintained and restored to CWS standards between the parking area and the adjacent property to the south. Wall Street, if it is built, will heavily impact this vegetation, but it will also be roughly 6 feet higher than existing grade. It will act as berm. between the New Tigard Library site and the adjacent property to the south. C. Fanno Creek and its heavily vegetated riparian corridor will be maintained and enhanced according to CWS standards. This corridor, along with an existing, substantial stand of trees will buffer the parking lot from the adjacent property to the cast. 5. Transformer/generator enclosure -1be enclosure is currently proposed as a cmu wall with ehairAink gates. In accordance with your direction, we are proposing the addition of wooden slats in the chain-link gates to meet the screening requirement. We will also propose an alternative design at the hearing. Due to our efforts to design the site in as naturalistic manner as possible, it was felt that a vegetative screening would be more appropriate to hide these mechanical systems. The Fanno Creek trail will be passing very closely to this area, it is our hope that a vegetative screen would meet the intent of the code and provide a more "naturalistic" look to the service side of the New Tigard Library. 6. Mixed solid waste collection area - We have calculated and designed the mixed solid waste collection area as follows: 48,000 SF building 11,000 = 48 SF x 4 = 192 SF of storage Section 18.755.040 (C)(4)(e) provides the option of vertical storage between 4 and 7 feet to reduce the square footage required for. mixed solid waste (43%). This calculates: as 192 x .43 = 82.44; 192 - 82.44 = 109.44, rounded up to 110 SF of storage. As such, we have provided a 10-foot x 12-foot (120 SF) space surround by a 6-foot high wood fence that we feel meets the intent of the code. 7. Bicycle Marking = The "crushed gravel" as shown on the plans submitted to the City of Tigard planning division is intended as a finely graded, highly compactable surface. This material has not yet been specified, but the intent is that it will resemble a "decomposed l l:\PROJEC I S\020228~WP\3d07tl.doc 04/07/2003 08:42 FAX GROUP MACKENZIE R004/010' • Brad Kilby Project Dumber 2020228 April 7, 2003 Page 3 granite' type of material that will be compacted yet permeable when installed. This meets our understanding of TDC18.765.050(D) to provide a material that is well drained. Over time, as wear occurs to the surfacing, it will compact further into a harder surface yet maintain a naturalistic look. As part of our goal toward a sustainable site design, we have undergone considerable effort to reduce the amount of impervious surface to an absolute minimum, while still retaining functional spaces for the client. Bicycle parking, while an important part of the development code, lends itself well to having a penneable and naturalistic surfacing beneath it. It will receive a fraction of the wear that the main plaza and entrance to the building will endure, yet it takes up a considerable amount of space. We believe a quality, finely-graded, compacted gravel surface will meet the intent of the code for a firm surface bcncath the bike parking. 8. Off-street loading - The standard requires two spaces for a 47,000 SF building as found acceptable by the City Engineer. Attached is a site plan detail showing how two loading spaces can be provided within the currant design. Based on the uses and activities occurring at the library site, it is anticipated that their loading needs can be accommodated with one space sized to accommodate medium-sized trucks and one space to accommodate vans-sized deliveries. We recognize that one of the spaces is in front of the trash enclosure but no conflicts are anticipated as deliveries and trash removal will occur at different times. 9. Flood levels - Acceptable 10. Greenway trail elevation - As discussed, we propose that this condition be reworded and combined with Condition #21 _ 11. DSL approval - Proposed rewording: "Prior to site work, the applicant shall OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY APPROVLAS from Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL) OR PROVIDE AN ALTFRNATTVE STORM SEWER SYSTEM." 12. Certified arborist for tree protection plan - Based on our discussion, it is our understanding that the tree protection plan can be prepared by the project. landscape architect if it includes review and approval from a certified arborist (i.e., a letter from the arborist stating that is has been reviewed by the arborist, etc.). GreenWorks, PC will be preparing a Vegetation Removal and Protection Plan and a set of detailed specifications for the protection of the existing trees that are to be saved as part of this project. It is our. intent that a professionally licensed Landscape Architect would stanip and sign this drawing- 13_ Construction sequence for tree protection - Acceptable 14. Tree protection measures - Acceptable 15. Addressing fee - Acceptable 16. Half=Street improvement plans - Acceptable 17. Work within the ROW permit from ODOT- It is our understanding that these pennits would include temporary constriction, street opening; permits, etc. 18. Dedication of ROW - Acceptable I I:\PI OJEC.TS\020228\WP\3do7)l .doc 04/07/2003 08:43 FAX a Brad Kilby Project Number 2020228 April 7, 2003 Page 4 GROUP MACKENZIE • 0005/010 19. On-site water quality facility - Acceptable 20. 1200-C permit - Acceptable 21. Greenway trail - Proposed rewording: "Prior to the issuance of a final occupancy permit, the applicant shall construct that portion of the Farmo Creels Greenway Trail that crosses the property to ensure connectivity is achieved as planned, OR PROVIDE ADEQUATE ASSURANCE, AS APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER, THAT IT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED. PLANS FOR THE GREENWAY TRAIL W1T.L ILLUSTRATE THAT NO PORTION OF THE PATHWAY WILL BE BEL`VO TIME ELEVATION OF AN AVERAGE ANNUAL FLOOD." 22. Mark location of access drive - Acceptable. 23. Curbs or wheel stops - -Acceptable 24. Compliance with CWS - Acceptable 25. Sign permit necessary - Acceptable 26. Complete work in ROWiODOT approval - Acceptable 27. Traffic Signal installed and operational - Acceptable 28. Hall Blvd., frontage improvements in 5 VR C& - Acceptable 29. Southbound rigbt turn lane in 5 YR CIP - Acceptable 30. As-built drawings .-Acceptable 31. Certify sip&t distance - Acceptable Enclosed is a site plan with information regarding the bike parking, the generator enclosure, and the loading area. The project team will be presenting this information and the proposed rewording of Conditions 11 and 21 at the hearing this evening. If you have any questions or conceins, or wish to discuss our understanding of the conditions prior to the hearing, please call me at 503-224-9560. Sincerely, eAIC'P Scnior Planner GEM/mpd C' Margaret Barnes, Gus Dueanas - City of Tigard Tim Ramis, Gary Firestone - RCCB Charlie Bahlman - SOJ S1dp Stanaway - SRG Brain Wethington - Greenworks Brett Arvidson Kurahashi H:1PROJI "TS\a20228\WP\3dO7t1.do: z. 04/07/2003 08:43 FAX GROUP MACRENZIE • • j~ 3 0 _ . r, 1 ♦•rr e ~ !1 1 4. I fit 'I _ , ~ . _ sir (~;il t _i ; r'/~~ { ~ i f //,y: / t l ~ 111• - J / ' ----0~= 1 ` t { ~\{11i, III' \ ~...--~'t~'•~\t\ _/ctti^. ~ lj ` L?' it c'Fi=~J/~ 1• \v 1`14; f, t _\\\••.c ~ LG~~-~ @tF~p'1N~''-.` \~cL ~ ..i--j 1~ _ ~=mar , ,~•i• ~ \ il' I j i. _ d Ir-'t \\i \ I 1 `•r`r.4.;\1 p i/ J~~ rl~1to /•1•'~f rr--- : r _ _•.-jam-- ~1 i~~~ ,it 1 r-- gg I I \ Y~• 'sir y~ e ! a t t ~ t, , 1 /J lit e I 0~11 ry yy_= - - - S 1 , I! Mal w4*srms `-'4'"" ` 41 1 . a ti't' - :~.~°r'~' • \ . t:' , . a. : ~.}~L I ~ x,51 iii: :..;p'i3cbs~. , - 1_ I it I aL'mLtn~~ ~ r-+auw..xur--- + f~ y 1 '.i. x. 1'.' 1' ~ •k'-•,~ki, ~ . - ~~••:f rf;.i;. ; - • C ,rat I ice'' ~ ; =~~~?~~:~•'P.•••~f.!!f•! ti::-. i J - ' . Ova c I j i d:J;~. Z' 'f/•~•r-?rfi3-~"iii; ~ I..u.af~.oa-nmr~ I / ~ + ~~'t!'.::. ' ^•l.•:•ij~^: u~anr 1.. . ••-v..--spwvuucV I II'.I I• / 4'/ -__6~~'".~iKx. \~:1•'~~ rvae'latlL ~ -y-~..Iil~~t -1~_ :Ll.)~ '•\'A6- -r rsay~wor..ua~q~a II'I' ~ .if ivir _::.+r~~'1;~ ~,tk~i-. i~'~°..,.~.'_°.~~~.N.,_~•Y 4~trM 'v~A- .p, ~ C m S 1 .tar.c.+o 16, Yjj 'A' ivd s ~tA}br " .690~Q ZI IUImO ALM LEMO tm i1 ~i1NO ne7 W14V , e.or.•orn.w 13N / 4 cxrulm fQCEDi wowo v ,wc u•rm+i oc71 ~M a Lv c wr. s~[C mmu a~ 'ar wzT v 01+r"ILaw+. fM~] on ma 0 0 N 0 0 W 0 00 IP W a Dd 0 9 C b N 1.4 • L3.01 I uANO pOM lay tmcJL r_w m 'tC iw~oL~rty ^-f New Tipg Library c o..w... ra 5076 Co~IfuWDA Doaumn y+ 0 ;-,~-es w.e ersu oew.roaT 04/07/2003 08:43 FAX GROUP MACKENZIE + + -lt + +11 41 y W` W •Y W V•~ y W W W J. J. Jr +t+++++t+++++ * 'W W W W ~W J• W W W W W + + + ~yX ^^pp~ L Y Jr W ~V ~Y y y W W y + " + + + + + Ii"f3? W W W y W y 3 W W L W 18~ri .V W d W y •Y W W W I' L. ~W/ W f + + + + t + - 'SY3 W ~V*'Y W ~ J~ •V W W W + + + (w 41 -41 fjI + + + i; + + + + .e HUNDR-ro V FLAW s ! f Yn 4 -It 1+ + +aaP.s~ ? t 440 + + + , r &lA'~' _ * f + TOP OF * i + + + is F + e + + + + + +Jj 1 } a ° , P r, it •I• f+ + fs + n ° I + -!1 + + + + d ' 4-, + 1+ v v ° f y + . F + + '+i + ✓ O ii o W E - + + + + + 4 E~ + . Q o + t + i•+ + + + 20 V-D) % ♦~f ♦ i. + +i + + + + 51 + + . I y W W + + + + + 411 • S ` g + + + + + ze W, p 21. V -14- 4- r ♦ l f W i+ J++ + + +w+ .sy ; w r 1 W y + i + 41' - + + + + + ,i f + + + t + + + '`1.~ + + ~VL e- r~/•~x~ r s+ t t + ~ t 1 ~ OA ellIN MEMO. 64/07/2003'08:43 FAX GROUP MACKENZIE.......__.., ~ 0009/010 1 O s ' 101X12* *STTE STORAGE WOOD FENCE ENCLOSURE 61 WOOD GATES ELE(' GAS ` TRANS ORMER & ,T. AN GENMATOF? ' METERS J ADING I j I iM.M00 3 .-1a> ZONE y~ 3 i r4r1y`fcY alJ y rup or 114 4N A D i j A ES (S t ~ f o° p B00 K I -BICYCLE DROPOFF C S (S~ PARKING(6) i a Syr: S L' 1, t i .r „_,.,w •m, ~ ~ 04/072003 08:44 FAX GROUP MACRENZIE [a010/010,; 4 COMMUNITY BUILDING j ~I- SEE SHEET 1.02 FOR EN LARGMENT s.R zt Jw. m jj S w^.em f `t ire - LOBBY - BICYCLE PARKIN t ON IC MPACTED, FINELY.. RUSHED RAVEL L r ~AVING DONOR BRICK BANDS (1186 BRICKS) BENCHES ON CRUSHED GRAVE °c6 CFF 00 00 [ a a R I ~ 8.00 5.0~ 8 .0 a° ' RAIS Lq N t CR0, ALK 7.7 j C~ CMAT _ € 7 nn X6.0' ss sS^ Ole4oPZ4e RAoezp^j s ~Q b x ~ (r0 -Tr-" jull! IC Dc: SW HALL BLVD. 77 77 :r Iq [pbry v g D D I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I Ip -I o I I I I / I I I I I 14I` ~I I 4 I L~J ' m III , S _ -.I P I I a a W ~ I K, w ~ I 2X 2X rr i I `21oa R 1 I \ P; ~ 1 I / / ti Y \ y A J+Oa',a A CN \ f \ ~ I c `1 A ffiJ ' I Y i 1 I \ Q \ ` io i i ~ II 1 STRE&M j I 1 QMHANNEL I \ ~ I , ..o + a w ~ I \ , ~ , . q a O \ I o ~ I 11 I I I1 ? C% Sz ( I fE` ..........1 R ~ 54 o • I ~r 4' Iti, 1 ..off / I tl I I I. . NDARY , I 6W I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ra) i I I ~ 1. yl I I N rl ~I;X' 1 i q r s; I I I I I I 1 t, - - 310.58' S 02520!' W r , r I I I I rJ,' r 1 I I t I NI , I i~ & I" I I i 1 I 0~ I I I I I 1 1 I I I j I I 0 SHEET DESIGNED BYE DATE NO. DATE REVISION BY _ 3 DRAWN BY--E&- DATE Sr M li PLAN REVIEWED BY Bff DATE._ OF I111/ PROJECT N0.30 REF 32811PBS SCALE HIM ?-W 32811PII 7 FANNO FORM YM, ra 87DIMIft v Pry>snSVZUWKW ~sepe~l® l~Ot~tt OMM e05-4a-M=<ra 1103-4m-11M MAU yr+eDm no-ow sw ouc. POnum.os vrm- EXHIBIT Pagt I of Page _lo c f~~y o> c~ Cl. m~ xrn W a 0 0 0 0 o p 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 4 0 • • • IMAGES OF FINELY-GRADED CRUSHED ROCK COD TRI-MET • • TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT OF OREGON 710 N.E. HOLLADAY STREET PORTLAND, OREGON 97232-2168 March 3, 2003 Brad Kilby, Associate Planner City of Tigard 131125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: CUP 20003-00001 City of Tigard Public Library Dear Mr. Kilby: DocC #CPO15333 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the conditional use review for the new ' Tigard library on the east side of SW Hall Boulevard at Omara Street. The purpose of Tri- Met's comments is to encourage development patterns that are transit, bicycle and pedestrian supportive. This site is served by Line #76 Beaverton/Tualatin. This line originates at the Beaverton Transit Center and terminates at Meridian Park Hospital in Tualatin. The line provides connections to MAX and 20 other bus lines servings the southwest metropolitan area, including connections to Lines 12, 45, 64 at 78 and the Tigard Transit Center. While this line currently provides service every 30 minutes, the Line #76 line ranked in the top tier of lines to be upgrade to frequent service. Service will be increased to 15-minute headways as soon as operating funds are available. The applicant states that Tigard's zoning code provides the following approval standard at Section 18.360.090: 11. Public Transit a. Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to 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. The application proposes a bus pull-out and transit stop area on Hall Boulevard adjacent to the parking lot south of the building. The pull-out is an ODOT requirement. TriMet generally does not favor pull-outs because they can compromise the speed and reliability of the bus line. (503)238-RIDE • TTY238-5811 • http://www.M-met.org March 3, 2003 0 Page 2 Because the library is an important public facility that will be served by a "frequent service" line, TriMet requests that the applicant provide a "Type B" standard bus shelter at this transit stop. The attached drawing illustrates a probable layout of the shelter. TriMet would also like a direct electrical feed from the library to the shelter site. This would provide an opportunity for an internal shelter light and for a Transit Tracker (real time bus arrival information) display in the future. Regular cleaning of the stop should be considered part of the library's regular site maintenance. The applicant should contact Young Park, TriMet Capital Projects Manager, at 962-2138, to order the shelter and arrange for shelter installation. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. I may be reached at 503/962- 2292 if you have questions. Sincerely, lii < f Jillian Detweiler Land Development Planner C: Young Park, TriMet Capital Projects Charles Bahlman, Sheils Obletz Johnson CONCRETE SHELTER PAD (SEE FIGURES 1A - 1 C FOR DETAILS ON TYPE pB", "SX" AND "A" SHELTER PADS) XIs11NG ;n mWAL O CONCRETE WASTE RECEPTACLE PAD (SEE FIGURE 1E FOR DETAILS) FUTURE BUS SHELTER (BY ETHERS) ADA LANDING PAD (SEE EICURE 10 FOR DETAILS) \ L . ` ---L\--EXISTING BUS STOP SIGN AND POLE (SEE FIGURE 98 FOR 1 Q' R_0 W. DETAILS) 0 Shelter Pad/ADA Pad Figure 1 • • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: w~W7 SYAFF ,IIUUT: fehreanl19.2003 Lee Walker. auanWater Sennces/SWM Program On of Tllarul PlaMina Dnnsion Brad 101 t.ltssociate P180"er 024341 Phone: [5091639-4111/ fax: [5031684-1291 CITY OF TIGARD Community rDeoeropment Sftapfng?1 Better Community COMB IIDNAL USE PERMIT (COP12003-000MENSITIVE LAUDS REVIEW ESLM 2903-ODOOVADJUMENT (VAR) 2003-00009 ➢ CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY Q RE, IIUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking conditional use approval to construct a 47,000 square foot libn r f on approximately 14.6 acres located within the R-12 zoning classification. The applicant is also see :ing sensitive lands review to allow work within the 100-year flood plain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek for t:)rmwater infrastructure to support the new facility. The applicant has also requested an adjustment to I .,duce the required number of bicycle stalls on site. LOCATION: The project site is located on pro arty that is directly across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is des :jibed as: WCTM 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Meg ium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of hog ,ing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are alsc permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Ch; P-ters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765. 18.775, 18.' 80, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attac iod are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement/Plans for your review. From inforr cation supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a repot and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near futur(, If YOU wish to comment on this application, NO Illla aC ,10.E Elftll l? IC+IIa,n~BiNRb no 111111 " i S... You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comr en s. Itwou are unable to rest and by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your a:)mmen s and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, cont< ;t the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. Ea;fF,1 Ott` W, W'h of ~,~EMS~aI~,~~►~;~a!P►I IIfi'' l,!:!! ~ a,!I Gi ' &5 ' t~3 L_ me & Number of Person(s) Commenting: T0001 IRRMA)Mq XAT.VM KTV471 ezceQVQenc FV.J TT :7T C-n A7 i-Yn We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: c re ran ~ z ae Theodore R. Kulongoski, Governor March 25, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD BRAD KILBY, ASSOCIATE PLANNER 13125 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 Re: Tigard Library Public Notice Division of State Lands 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100 Salem, OR 97301-1279 (503) 378-3805 FAX (503) 378-4844 www.oregonstatelands.us. RECEIVED PLANNING MAR 2 7 2003 CITY OF TIGARD State Land Board Theodore R. Kulongoski Governor Bill Bradbury Secretary of State Dear Mr. Kilby: Randall Edwards State Treasurer The Division of State Lands has reviewed the proposed Tigard Library plan, included on Design Development Submittal 1-1.0 (1/27/03), east of Hall Blvd near Fanno Creek. The design includes an entry drive and a future entry drive. Based on the figure, the future entry drive will affect wetlands and waters of the state. Prior to conducting excavation or filling in any waters in the State of Oregon, you may be required to obtain a permit from the Oregon Division of State Lands (Division) and/or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Under OAR 141-085-0025(3)0) "A written analysis of alternatives that were evaluated to determine the practicable alternative to avoid and minimize impacts to waters of this state, including water resources and navigation, fishing and public recreation uses. A practicable alternative is one that is capable of being done (i.e. feasible) and proposed on a site owned or controlled by the applicant.... The analysis must explain why the applicant chose the option identified in the application..." If the library project necessarily includes the future entry drive, a permit application including the development footprint of the library facility will need to be submitted as part of a Joint Removal/Fill Permit Application. If you have any questions or wish for further information, please let me know. Sincerely, CC-, V' - , , Colin MacLaren Natural Resource Coordinator - Field Operations Oregon Division of State Lands 775 Summer St NE Salem, OR 97301 (503) 378-3805 x244 Fax (503) 378-4844 colin.maclaren(aD_dsl.state. or.us CM:jed JAMacl.arenUetters\Tigard library 032103.doc c. Jim Grimes, ODFW Kathryn Harris, COE Heidi Berg, CWS i3radley Kilby -T( gard Library.doc Ah , Page 1 I TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE • SOUTH DIVISION COMMUNITY SERVICES • OPERATIONS • FIRE PREVENTION March 21, 2003 Brad Kilby, Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Tigard Library Dear Brad, I have reviewed the submittal for the above named project and have the following comments: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the Chief. 2) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (15 feet for one or two dwelling units and out buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.1) Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 28 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 28 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. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4) 3) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 50,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. Documentation from a registered engineer that the finished construction is in accordance with the approved plans or the requirements of the Fire Code may be requested. (Design criteria on back) (UFC Sec. 902.2.2) 4) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 25 feet and 45 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.3) 5) PAINTED CURBS: Where required, fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red or black on yellow background. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2) 6) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is less. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (UFC Sec. 903.3) Fire District records indicate the required fire flow is available. 7) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - FIRE HYDRANTS: No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway. Any hydrants that are left over from the minimum number of hydrant calculations may be fulfilled by hydrants that are up to 500 feet from any point of the building. The fire Prevention Ordinance has further requirements that need to be used for acceptance and placement of fire hydrants. 7401 SW Washo Court, Suite 101 • Tualatin, Oregon 97062 • Tel. (503) 612-7000 • Fax (503) 612-7003 • www.tvfr.com 6radley Kilby - Tigard Wl ry.doc Page.2 (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1) 9) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS -MINIMUM NUMBER OF FIRE HYDRANTS: The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving credit for fire protection systems divided by 1500. If the answer is equal to or greater than x.5 the next whole number of hydrants shall be used. There shall not be less than 2 hydrants per building. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1) Considerations for placing fire hydrants shall be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants; however, hydrants that are over 500 feet away from the nearest point of the subject building shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highway, freeway, or heavily traveled collector streets shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the Chief. • Private hydrants or public hydrants that are on adjacent private property shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants for the subject building. Exception: The use of hydrants located on other private property may be considered if their locations and access are encumbered in a legal document (such as deed restriction) by the owners of the involved parcels of property. The encumbrance may be lifted only after approvals by the Chief on behalf of the fire department and any other governmental agencies that may require approval. • When evaluating the placement of hydrants at apartment or industrial complexes the first hydrant(s) to be placed shall be at the primary access and any secondary access to the site. After these hydrants have been placed other hydrants shall be sited to meet the above requirements for spacing and minimum number of hydrants. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1.1) 10) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.4) 11) 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. (UFC Sec. 901.4.3) 12) FIRE HYDRANTIFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 70 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. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5) FDC locations shall be approved by the Chief. (1996 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Sec. 904.1.1) The FDC piping shall be connected directly to the system piping on the downstream side of all control valves. 13) FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONS ON BUILDINGS: Fire department connections shall not be located on the building that is being protected with the exception of Group R, Division I Occupancies not over 4 stories in height. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5) 14) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access rnarlwnve and lira Fighting t rntr c .,liac cL.on ha .,ctnno.i ~.,.1 ..,r7......1 s,... ,.tl... the ..b......b .-e. ~upr...,., t,h., vpetahvtta. Nrivt to any other constiiiction on the site or subdivision. (UFC Sec. 8704) 15) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. (UFC Sec. 902.4) Please contact me at (503) 612-7010 with any additional questions. Sincerely, Eric T. McMullen Bradley Kilby -Tigard Librar y:doc Pa e 3 Eric T. McMullen Deputy Fire Marshal MAR-7-2003 02:26P FROM:SAUVIESLAND 5036213025 Po: FaR't~ote 7671 qAf _ n .I'• 7 From M-1 Fix W DATE FehrnaN 19, 2003 TO: Oregon Department of Fish & Wlhl~lto FROM: CIN of Tigard Planting DWSlea T0=95036847297 P:1/1 31~10,~ STAFF CONTACT: Brad IOlby, Associate Planner 6124341 Phone: [5031639-499 Fail: (5031684-7291 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT [CUP) 03-00001/SENSITIVE LANOS REVIE ➢ CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY Q CITY OF TIGARD Community'Dwefopmani Sf+apingA Better Community NAR12003-00009 REQUEST: The City of and is seeking conditional use approval to con ct a 47,000 square foot library on approximately 14. cres located within the R-12 zoning classifi tion, The applicant is also seeking sensitive lands review to w worts within the 100-year flood la' ,and adjacent to Fanno Creek for stormwater infrastructure to suppo ' 't it The as also requested an adjustment to reduce the required number of bicycle stalls on se. ATION: The pproject site is located on property that is direct) across and to the south of the City Hall Campus on SW Hall Boulevard and is described as: WCTM 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200, and 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District, The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 sgcare feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement/Plans for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, LNE EE'DE"We1e-C0111[NfENTS!°A`_C.i-. I1~NT.M, '~.2~G3. You may use the space provided below r attach a separate- otter to return your comments. ou are unable to res nd b the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments an confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. P;LEASE'HECK THE FOLLOWING. ITEMS: ~HAT.APPL. ; 4 c We have reviewed the proposal and have no bjections to it. Please contact Itin, i ~D"' ~Zl - iq of our office. Please refer to the enclose letter. Written comments provided below: 04/031/03 15:52 FAY 1 503 731 59 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS Z002.`007 F iregon Theodore K. Kulongoski, Governor Department of Transportation Region 1 123 NW Flanders Portland, OR 97209-4037 (503) 731-8200 FAX (503) 731-8259 FILE CODE- April 3, 2003 PLA9-2A -141 ODOT Case No_ 1491 City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Attn: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner Subject: CUP-2003-00001/SLR2003-00001NAR2003-00009: Tigard Library Hall Blvd Dear Brad, We have reviewed the applicant's proposal to relocate the existing City library to a new location on Hall Blvd. ODOT has permitting authority for this facility' and an interest in ensuring that the proposed. 1.11 land use is compatible with its safe and efficient operation. To ensure compatibility with stat6,-*, - ' standards and requirements, we request the City of Tigard require the mitigation measures outlined below through conditions of approval- ODOT Standards According to the Oregon Highway Plan (1999), Hall Blvd is classified a District Urban highway- The posted speed in this section is 40 miles per hour. Based on speed and classification, the access spacing standard is 500 ft. The mobility standard is 0.99 volume to capacity (v/c) ratio. Local Approval Criteria (note: emphasis added) 18.330.030 Approval Standards and Conditions of Approval A. Approval standards- The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a conditional use or to enlarge or alter a conditional use based on findings of fact with respect to each of the following criteria: 3. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal B. Conditions of approval. The Hearings Officer may impose conditions of the approval of a conditional use, which are found necessary to ensure the use Is compatible with other use in the vicinity, and that the impact of the proposed use of the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimized. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: ' OAR 734-051 website. http://arcweb.sos.state_or.us/rules/OARS 700/OAR 734/734_051.htmi Fv- 734-1850 (1-03) 9 04/03/03 15:52 FAY 1 503 7319 City of Tigard; Tigard Llbrary ODOT RESPONSE ODOT Issues and Requirements ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 2 4-3-03 16 003/007 At this time, the applicant proposes to construct a private approach road to the highway to serve the proposed library use. ODOT is in agreement with City staff that the main driveway for the library can eventually function as a joint access between the library and the Fanno Pointe development immediately to the south. The Fanno Pointe development currently is approved with a separate driveway onto Hall Blvd., but is required to be converted to an emergency vehicle access only when either Wall Street is constructed or when a joint driveway can be constructed. There is a drainage resource that crosses the path of the driveway needed to provide joint access (or future Wall St. alignment) that requires approval from various resource agencies before a crossing can be constructed. The resource is not in the way of providing access into the library, but precludes a joint access with the Fanno Pointe access at this time. If the Wall St. construction were to move forward within the same construction window as the library project, ODOT will expect that access to both properties will come entirely from Wall St. The Fanno Pointe development was conditioned to cover the costs of half street improvements. for. a three lane section along their property's highway frontage. It is our understanding that the City'r4111-66 . constructing these improvements in conjunction with Hall Blvd improvements required of the library project. ODOT typically requests the City require frontage improvements along the entire length of a site's highway frontage. The library site's frontage is approximately 1300 SF, the applicant has proposed only to construct improvements from the bridge to Wall St which is approximately half the site's actual highway frontage. The applicant has submitted an ODOT approach road permit application for the proposed library highway access. According to OAR 734 Division 51, the change of use of the property requires that all access to the property be reviewed. The applicant proposes to close the two existing accesses and leave in place the access to an old house just north of the library which is planned to be converted to an office use. The applicant will need to obtain permits from ODOT for both the library and the existing house. Based on our review of the Traffic Impact Study prepared by DKS Associates, Sep 2002, we have identified capacity deficiencies on Hall Blvd at the main library access and the McDonald St intersection that are triggered by the traffic generated from the library project. The Hall Blvd/library access will operate above the mobility standard .99 v/c ratio with the library traffic. The applicant proposes a signal to mitigate the capacity problem- While a signal adequately addresses the capacity problem, the proposed curvature in the driveway design and the lack of a joint access may make it difficult to obtain approval from the State Traffic Engineer. The City's best chances for obtaining signal approval would be to straighten the alignment of the driveway and provide access to the Fanno Pointe development. The McDonald St intersection is currently operating above the standard at a v/c ratio of 1.0. With the library traffic, the intersection will operate at a v/c ratio of 1.1. In conditional use cases where a facility is already operating beyond the mobility standard, ODOT's practice has been to require mitigation to maintain the intersections current operations in order to avoid further degradation. According to the traffic study, a southbound right turn lane would adequately mitigate for the degradation in operation caused by the addition of site traffic at this intersection. Due to right of way constraints construction of a southbound right turn lane at the McDonald St. intersection may involve the relocation of signal poles and the realignment of the Hall Blvd mainline to fit into the existing right of way. There are no programmed projects to make this improvement- In sum, the applicant proposes to do frontage improvements along the property's highway frontage-,-- ' from the bridge to the library access and install a traffic signal. Based on conversations with Brian' ~,a 04/03/03 15:52 FAX 1 503 731 59 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 0004/007 City of Tigard; Tigard Library 3 ODOT RESPONSE 4-3-03 Rager, City Development Review Engineer, the cost of these improvements is extremely close to the total amount the City can require for transportation improvements. To meet the standards of the Tigard Development Code, frontage improvements are needed north of the bridge to the =praperty -line.. and a southbound right turn lane is needed at the McDonald St intersection. To meet the intent of the City and State requirements, the City has committed to putting the remaining improvements into the next City of Tigard Capital Improvement Plan (2004-2009). In order for ODOT to be satisfied that funding will be identified and the improvements will be done in a timely manner, we request that the City require this commitment as a condition of approval that must be met prior to occupancy. Recommended Conditions of Approval ODOT,recommends the land use decision include the following Conditions of Approval to address applicable state and local approval criteria and ODOT permit requirements: 1. An ODOT approach permit is required for the library access and the existing house access to the state highway'- The applicant shall obtain a temporary ODOT approach permit for construction as shown on the plans. 2. The applicant shall obtain approval from the State Traffic Engineer and install the library access signal prior to occupancy. 3. Frontage improvements for a three lane section shall be constructed along the property's highway frontage from library access to the bridge and along the Fanno Point property frontage to current ODOT/ADA standards- 4- Prior to occupancy, the City shall include in the CIP (2004-2009) update a project to construct a southbound right turn lane at the. McDonald St/Hall Blvd intersection and a project to construct frontage improvements for a three lane section on Hall Blvd from the north end of the bridge to the north property line. 5. An ODOT permit is required to perform all work in the highway right of way3- 6. An ODOT drainage permit is required for connection to state highway drainage facilities 4. Connection will only be considered if the site's drainage naturally enters ODOT right of way. The applicant should provide ODOT District 2A with a preliminary drainage plan. The plan should show any drainage impacts to the highway right of way. A drainage study prepared by an Oregon Registered Professional Engineer is usually required if: A. Total peak runoff entering the highway right of way is greater than .05 cubic,,_meters ..per second; or B. The improvements create an increase of the impervious surface area greater than 1,000 square meters. 2 OAR 734-051 website: http://arcweb.sos.state.or-us/rules/OARS_700/OAR -7341734_051.htmi 3 OAR 734-055 4 OAR 734-051 website: http://areweb.sos.state.or.us/ruies/OARS_700/OAR_734/734_051.htmi 04/03/03 15:52 FAX 1 503 7319 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 10005/007 City of Tigard; Tigard Library 4 ODOT RESPONSE 4-3-03 Contact Sam Hunaidi, ODOT District 2A Assistant Manager, at 503-229-5002 for information on the written permit application process. Thank you for coordinating with ODOT on this review. If you have questions regarding ODOT's review of the traffic study, please contact Kate Freitag, Sr Transportation Analyst. Ms. Freitag's comments on the traffic study are attached. I can be reached at 503-731-8258. Please forward a copy of the Decision with Final Findings when it has been issued. Sincerely, _ Marah Danielson Associate Planner C: :Sam Hunaidi, Kate Freitag, ODOT 04103103 15:53 FAX 1 503 731 9 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 16007/007 other libraries. This provided enough documentation for ODOT to accept the trip generation-;'. methodology that was used in the original TIS. Totai Cdnditions (2005} With the addition of library traffic, the intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is expected to degrade to a v/c of 1.10 in the PM peak hour. The addition of the traffic generated by the library is expected to also degrade the operations at the library approach on Hall Boulevard to a v/c that exceeds ODOT's mobility standard. The TIS, proposed two mitigation measures that would improve the intersections that will fail under total traffic conditions. Those measures were the installation of a southbound right-turn lane on Hall Boulevard at McDonald Street and installation of a traffic signal at the proposed library approach to Hall Boulevard. Installation of a southbound right-turn lane on Hall Boulevard at the McDonald Street intersection would improve operations of that intersection as well as greatly reduce queuing of the right-turning vehicles southbound on Hail Boulevard. It appears that the southbound right-turn lane would reduce the v/c ratio for total traffic conditions to below ODOT's mobility standard- Therefore, a southbound right-turn lane would adequately mitigate for the library's traffic impacts. Conceptually, this mitigation seems acceptable; however, this mitigation would need to meet ODOT design standards and final approval. Construction of a southbound right-turn lane may involve relocation of signal poles and even realignment of the Hall Boulevard mainline to fit the additional lane into the existing right-of-way. The City has proposed that a signal be installed at the library approach to Hall Boulevard (future Wall Street intersection). A signal would adequately mitigate for the operational problems anticipated at this intersection in 2005 with the addition of the library traffic. Progression analysis, provided by DKS Associates, indicates that the addition of a signal at the joint access to the library and Fanno Pointe (and, in the future, to Wall Street) would be acceptable from a signal system operations standpoint. The intersection only marginally meets signal warrants for 100% warrants. It was determined that the 100% warrants are applicable, not the 70% warrants, due to the fact that the posted speed on Hall Boulevard is 40 mph. ODOT Region 1 Staff could support the signal application if the approach to the library:were shared with the Fanno Pointe development to the south. The proposed signal must meet the ODOT State Traffic Engineer's approval in order to be installed. If there are any questions or concerns regarding these findings, please contact me at (503) 731-8220- Cc'. Doug Anderson, ODOT Signal Manager r Sam Hunaidi, ODOT District 2A Assistant Manager 1 1 1 1 1 ■ ■ • G R Q1LP 1 MACKENZIE Table of Contents Section Project Summary Introduction Proposed Site Development Conditional Use Approval Standards Site Development Review Approval Standards Title 18 Standards Sensitive Lands Review Administrative Adjustment Impact Study Summary Exhibits A Application Form B Aerial Photo/Vicinity Map C Existing Conditions D Site Plan E Grading Plan F Landscape Plan H Utility Plan I Storm Drainage Plan J Floor Plan - First Floor K Building Elevations L Building Elevations & Sections M Establishment of Flood Plain Elevation N Sensitive Lands Certification O Tree Plan f 114ei ) lborl lood Meeting rDlocumentat:101-1 Q Pre-Application Conference Notes Attachments A Preliminary Stormwater Report, 1/03, Kurahashi & Associates B Wetland Delineation/Determination Report, 9/02, Kurahashi & Associates C Traffic Impact Study, 9/02, DKS Associates 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 GROUP MACKENZIE ' Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com 0 Application For CONDITIONAL USE SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT To CITY OF TIGARD For TIGARD LIBRARY nui . -.1 13125 JVV ridll DIVA. Tigard, OR Submitted January 21, 2003 (Resubmitted for Completeness February 11, 2003) Project Number 2020228.00 1 1 1 • 6 R ACKENZIE 1 . PROJECT SUMMARY Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 P: (503) 639-4171 / F: (503) 624-0752 Agustin Duenas, City Engineer gus@ci.tigard.or.us Project Location: 2S 1 02DD tax lot 100, 200 2S 1 02DA tax lot 600 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential / Open Space Zoning: R-12 Request: 1) Conditional Use approval for cultural institution (library) use 2) Site Development Review approval for library project 3) Sensitive Lands Permit approval 4) Administrative adjustment to bicycle parking standards Project Team: Legal: Ramis, Crew, Corrigan, Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt St Portland, OR 97209 P: 503-222-4402 / F: 503-243-2944 Gary Firestone garyf@rccb.com Land Use: Group Mackenzie 0690 SW Bancroft / P.O. Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239 P: 503-224-9560 / F: 503-243-29 44 Geraldene Moyle, AICP gmoyle@grpmack.com Proiect Management: Shiels Obletz Johnsen, Inc 111 NW First Ave, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97209 P: 503-242-0084 / F: 503-299-6769 Charles Bahlman cbahlman@sojpdx.com Civil Engineering_ Kurahashi & Associates, Inc 15580 SW Jay St, Suite 200 Beaverton, OR 97006 P: 503-644-6842 / F: 503-644-9731 Greg Kurahashi, P.E. gregk@kurahashi.com Brett Arvidson, P.E. bretta@kurahashi.com GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 Architecture: SRG Partnership 621 SW Morrision St, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97205 P: 503-222-1917 / F: 503-294-0272 Skip Stanaway, AIA sstanaway@srgpartnership.com Jocelyn Helgerson, AIA helgerson@srgpartnership. com Landscape Architecture: Greenworks, PC 24 NW Second Ave, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97209 P: 503-222-5612 / F:503-222-2283 Mike Faha, ASLA mikef@greenworkspc.com Brian Wethington brianw@greenworkspc.com 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 1 • • f R ACKENZIE 2. INTRODUCTION ' The City of Tigard proposes the development of a City Library on a 14.64-acre site along Hall Boulevard. Through the work of the New Library Resource Team, the project vision for the library was established: "The New Tigard Library will be a center for learning, ' discovery, and community, integrated into the unique natural beauty of the site demonstrating environmental stewardship, and expressing the values and spirit of the community." From this vision, the design of a 48,000 SF library and its associated parking ' and landscaping has been established. The subject site is zoned Medium Density Residential (R-12) by the City of Tigard. ' Libraries are classified as cultural institutions per Chapter 18.130 of the Tigard Community Development Code. Cultural institutions are permitted with Conditional Use approval in the R-12 zone. Site Development Review approval is required for all proposed ' development within the City of Tigard. For purposes of this application, while the overall site area is comprised of 14.64 acres on three tax lots, the actual development area associated with this project is 10.2 acres. This application requests Conditional Use and Site Development Review approvals for the proposed library project and a Sensitive Land Permit for portions of the stormwater system ' (pipe and outfalls) and temporary construction activities located within the 100-year floodplain, the vegetated corridor along Fanno Creek, and a Locally Designated Wetland, and an administrative Adjustment to the site parking spaces requirement. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT Surrounding development includes open space to the north and east, future residential to ' the south, across the planned Wall Street extension, and residential to the west, across Hall Boulevard. ' NATURAL CHARACTERISTICS The location for the new Tigard library is one of the last remaining undeveloped areas within the City, just south of the present Tigard library and City Hall on Hall Boulevard. Fanno Creek borders the 14-acre site along its north and east edges. The site area for the library development is on the southern part of the site, which is above and outside of the ' flood plain and away from the natural wetland areas and the associated vegetative buffers bordering Fanno Creek. The library is positioned on the site to remain outside yet adjacent to these natural features, preserve several large mature groves and trees and integrate into ' the rolling topography of the site. STREETS/TRANSIT ' The site is bound to the west by Hall Boulevard, currently a two-lane, north-south roadway classified as an Arterial, a Transit/Service Route, a Regional Corridor On-Street Bikeway, ' and a pedestrian route by the City of Tigard. ODOT also classifies this road as a District Urban Highway. Future city streets in the area include the extension of Wall Street along the southern boundary of the site. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 ' 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 2 ' • • GR ACKENZIE Hall Boulevard is a transit street, with Tri-Met Route 76 traveling north and south on Hall ' Blvd. in front of the site. This route includes transit stops on both sides of Hall Boulevard at its intersection with Omara Street, directly in front of the site. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 3 ACKENZIE 3. PROPOSED SITE DEVELOPMENT ' The design concept for the new Tigard library is based on three major goals contained within the project vision statement: ' Create a center for.learning, discovery, and community; ■ Integrate and exhibit the unique natural beauty of the site demonstrating ' environmental stewardship; ■ Express the values and spirit of the community. While the existing Tigard library has served the staff and community well since 1986, the ' collection has outgrown its capacity. The planned future addition of a second floor could not be executed partly due to the change of seismic codes. As the New Library Resource Team (NLRT), community groups and SRG collaborated and discussed values, certain ' priorities were outlined to shape the design of the library. The library should express the values and spirit of the community and foster community involvement and pride. The library should stand as a landmark and a beacon with an inviting presence. It should create ' long-term value for the city and community. Functionally, the library should be expandable so the next generation will not have to start from scratch. As eloquently summarized in the vision statement, the library should provide a "functional, flexible, efficient, accessible, ' expandable, and inviting facility." The site of the new Tigard library was selected for its natural beauty and proximity to ' other civic functions. The site is bound by Hall Boulevard to the west and a proposed new street alignment to the south; Fanno Creek defines the northern and eastern edges of the site. A significant portion of the site lies in the Fanno Creek 100-year flood plain and buffer zone, leaving only the southern portion buildable. Standing at the rim of the natural bowl, the views are to the north and east toward the creek and natural wetland vegetation where the afternoon sun illuminates the trees. The intention in orientation is to maximize ' this view, allow soft northern light into the interiors, and provide good reading light. Preliminary designs for the project illustrated possibilities for building/parking relationships, and it was discovered that the most successful solution was to have a long, narrow floor plan running east-west, with parking and vehicular access to the south. This will accommodate maximized views and northern exposure, a strong street presence, and allow for the preservation of some of the major trees on the site. SITE ANALYSIS INFORMATION The following provides a brief summary of the proposed development plan: Site Area: 10.2 acres development area (14.64 overall) Building SF: 48,000 SF ' Building height: 35 feet Building coverage: 18.3% Landscaping: 81.7% Required parking: 2.5 - 4.5 / 1,000 SF = 120 spaces Proposed parking: 120 spaces (106 on-site; 14 on adjacent City-owned property) GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Bo x 69039 Portland OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 , F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 4 1 1 1 SITE DESIGN • ~ r R ACKENZIE General Site: The main design objective for the site design of the new Tigard library is to locate the building, parking, and other support facilities in such a manner as to protect, enhance, and celebrate the natural characteristics of the property. It is important that the built and natural environments function together as an efficient and cohesive whole. The New Library Resource Team process began by evaluating the natural characteristics of the site: topography, natural features, drainage ways, flood plain, and significant vegetation. Information was compiled into an analysis plan that highlighted these natural features, thus outlining the most appropriate locations for the library building and the adjacent parking. Other important objectives to be explored through the continuing design process were universal accessibility to all areas of the site and the protection and enhancement of the natural resources on the property and along Fanno Creek. Ten principles of sustainable site design were established that were used throughout the project to help guide us toward the most site sensitive and sustainable project we can design: 1 1 Reduce Stormwater Runoff Reduce Water Consumption Conserve Energy Control Erosion Rebuild Disturbed Soils Enhance Ecological Conn.ectivity Reduce Lawn Protect Existing Vegetation Protect Rivers, Streams, and Wetlands Utilize Local and Recycled Materials Lastly, all of these principles were brought together to create continuity between exterior spaces and the building through consistent construction materials, colors, and details that will result in a recognizable image for the entire project, tying together architecture, landscape architecture, and natural resources into unified whole. Building and Parking Siting: The parking lot .and building forms were driven by the desire to save as many of the very large, significant trees covering the site as possible, as well as enhancing the natural rolling topography. The new Tigard library and community meeting room buildings are sited linearly, east to west, with the long north face of the buildings taking advantage of the best views. Across the gently rolling "bowl," to Fanno Creek and beyond, the design allows for views from the first and second stories of the library building. The parking lot has undergone many studies in the effort to maximize on-site parking for the facility while protecting vegetation. A significant row of Linden trees, along with specimen examples of Norway Maples and a Ponderosa Pine, are being saved. The mature nature of these trees will add a character to the development of this site that could not be achieved using new plant material. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 5 ACKENZIE 1 1 1 1 Spaces: The Library user will enter the site through an entry drive off of Hall Blvd. at the proposed intersection with Wall Street. If Wall Street is built, the entrance will move to the east to accommodate any design or code related criteria. There are two drop-off areas: one for books and another for library visitors. The book-drop is located in the island of the turn-around area at the east end of the building, which will also provide service access for the building. In the center of the turn-around will be some building mechanical systems and the book-drop facilities, hidden by new vegetation. The visitor drop-off area is located in a plaza directly south of the common entrance to the new Tigard library and community meeting room. The plaza will have areas for gathering, seating, and bicycle parking. Once books and passengers have been dropped off, the user will continue to the parking area, which has a combination of standard and compact parking spaces. There are concrete curbs around a small portion of the parking area, which will direct stormwater flow to specific outlets and will be conveyed into stormwater treatment swales located on the north and south sides of the parking area. The rest of the parking lot will sheet drain into those same stormwater swales and be conveyed to a treatment facility located west of the parking area, which will clean the storm runoff before being discharged into Fanno Creek. Where there are no curbs, wheel-stops will be used to safely keep vehicles on the parking lot. After visitors have entered the building, they will have access to another exterior plaza that exists on the north side of the building, between the Community Meeting Room and the Library. This space will act as an outdoor reading, education, and gathering space. The space uses a series of low walls, steps, and native vegetation to pull the surround landscape up around the building in an attempt to further integrate the site and the building. Beyond the building and the parking area is the rest of the site, which will be protected in its current condition, or enhanced. The areas directly adjacent to the building and the parking will be planted with native Oregon plant material, wherever possible, that will be selected carefully to blend the building into the site. The large open space "bowl" to the north of the building will be maintained in its current form, but could be over-seeded with native grasses appropriate to the site. A 50-foot Clean Water Services buffer zone to the south of the Fanno Creek will need to be cleared of invasive plant materials and replanted with appropriate native riparian vegetation to bring the buffer up to current CWS vegetation corridor standards. BUILDING DESIGN The exterior of the new Tigard library will be primarily glass and brick, providing building materials of prominence, durability, and efficiency. These materials exhibit a strong civic presence, and the proposed red brick color relates to the existing City Hall' facility, creating a common element for public identity and recognition. The building size and scale are compatible for the site, and the building does not overpower the natural beauty of the landscape. The long floor plan canted to the northeast will allow the fagade to open to the site and the northern light. The stacks are arranged north to south in conjunction with the structural grid so views can be enjoyed from anywhere within the library. The reading areas are distributed across the entire northeast wall in small, informal groupings. The special Grace T. Houghton room includes a cozy fireplace that penetrates the wall, creating a traditional GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 ' 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 6 ' ~ 0 sH QCKENZIE 1 1 1 1 1 reading room. The roof lifts with a clerestory on the second floor to illuminate the stacks. The south and east walls are primarily masonry, with controlled openings to accommodate shelving needs for staff areas, reference, and circulation. Staff areas are consolidated to the east with separate circulation. Library expansion is planned to the east where staff areas will be consolidated, yielding the main body of the library for stacks. The Community Meeting Room is separate from the main body of the library. Functionally, it will allow the room to be accessed for public use when the library is not in operation. In form, the void between buildings becomes a courtyard space accessed from the Community Meeting Room, entry lobby, or the children's area. This allows for programs and story time to spill outside to the courtyard, and controlled access to the Fanno Creek trail. The glass-walled entrance lobby and the secured courtyard beyond occupy the space between the library and the Community Meeting Room. It contrasts from the masonry masses on either side and acts as a beacon, clearly marking the place of arrival. From the lobby, one looks into the courtyard, which blends into the natural site beyond. A coffee bar will occupy a corner of the lobby, and art is planned for this area. The library space is designed to be intuitive for visitors and highly functional for staff. On both floors a wide visitor aisle connects the public stairway and elevator at the west end to the public restrooms at the east end. Off this spine are the circulation, reference, welcome, and children's desks, and perpendicular rows of stacks that allow views north to the natural landscape. Reading areas occur along the north wall, with light and views toward Fanno Creek. Special features for the public include the Grace T. Houghton room, the Oregon History room, two group study rooms, a conference room, and a computer training room, all on the second floor. Reference, fiction, non-fiction, young adults, and electronic resources are also on the second floor. A large children's area and a special program room are located on the first floor as well as new books, CDs, DVDs and videos. The library is planned to accommodate 17 years of collection growth as well as the future inclusion of an automated book-sorting system. UTILITIES 1 Water: A 12-inch ductile iron main in Hall Blvd. provides water service to the site. The tapping connection point will be 120 feet south of the intersection at O'Mara t Street. The fire service consists of an 8-inch ductile pipe with a double check valve assembly located in a vault at the property line. Domestic service consists of a 2-inch Schedule 80 service with a water meter and double check assembly at the property ' line. On-site fire suppression consists of four hydrants and a fire department connection pipe. ■ Sanitary Sewer: A 6-inch lateral will extend to the south and connect to an existing ' sanitary sewer in the proposed Wall Street Alignment. Final sewer location will depend on building plumbing, tree conflicts, and avoiding an identified wetland area. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 ' 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H: PROJECTS\020228\WP13a21r1-M.doc 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • ri K ACKENZIE ■ Storm Drainage: Site storm drainage consists of conveyance and water quality facilities. Due to the proximity of Fanno Creek, detention facilities are not required. In accordance with Clean Water Services standards, the project proposes a single water quality Swale at the southeast end of the property, outside of the 50-foot vegetative buffer. This Swale will discharge into Fanno Creek with an outfall. Site conveyance consists of a variety of pipes and channels conveying the drainage to the water quality swales. STREET IMPROVEMENTS ■ Hall Street: Hall Street is a state highway administered by ODOT. Current regulations require a half-street improvement as a condition of development. The half-street improvement consists of widening the pavement by approximately 11 feet to a total pavement width of 50 feet (the eventual width will be 74 feet), and adding an 8-foot sidewalk with a variable planter strip.. The Hall Street vertical and horizontal alignment should be coordinated with Wall Street and other development activities in the area. ODOT will require a storm drainage system with water quality Swale.. The drainage pipe placement will consider future widening of the street. ■ Wall Street: The main access for the new library site will occur from Wall Street. A three-quarter street improvement must be constructed as part of this project. The three-quarter improvement consists of a 36-foot wide pavement section with curb and a 6-foot sidewalk constructed on the library side of the road. Wall Street improvements will be constructed in accordance with City of Tigard standards. The Tigard transportation plan identifies Wall Street, which borders the south property line, as a future collector street. An alignment study addressing the horizontal and vertical is underway. Final site access and grading is contingent on the design alignment of Wall Street. A 12-inch water main will be constructed in the Wall Street right-of-way. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PR0JECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ACKENZIE 4. CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL STANDARDS Cultural Institutions, such as libraries, are permitted in the R-12 zone as conditional uses. Conditional Use approval of the proposed library is requested :as part of this application. Section 18.330.030 lists the approval standards for a Conditional Use approval. The following identifies these standards and addresses how the proposed development meets each. 1. The site size and dimensions provide adequate area for the needs of the proposed use; Response: The development area of the site intended for the library development is 10.2 acres of a 14.64-acre site. The New Library Resource Team developed project visions and goals, and the design team interpreted these requirements into the programming needs of the facility. This resulted in a 48,000 SF building that can accommodate the library's needs for 17 years, with a planned expansion space of approximately 5,000 SF, providing additional room for growth as needed. The library project includes library space, a community meeting room, outdoor plaza areas and parking and landscaping within the 10.2 acres of the site. The remainder of the site, 4.44 acres, is left as open space. As shown on the site plan, the site is more than adequate in size and shape to accommodate the building square footage and the associated parking and landscaping as well as retaining sufficient land for a future expansion of the building and parking area. In addition, the location and layout of the facility ensures that minimal impact to Fanno Creek, its vegetated corridor and the 100- year floodplain occur. 2. The impacts of the proposed use of the site can be accommodated considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features; . Response: The library is sited to minimize the impacts to the natural features on and around the site. The site is bound to the north and east by Fanno Creek, and a large portion of the site is within the 100-year floodplain. Topographically the site slopes gently to the north and south, and there are several existing mature groves of trees within the site. As such, the library was positioned on the site to fit within the natural features while remaining outside of the floodplain and the vegetated corridor around Fanno Creek and wetland areas on adjacent property. In addition, the proposed development preserves many of the large trees and incorporates these trees into the overall landscape concept for the site. Transportation, utility and noise impacts for the site are addressed in Section 8 of this application. The library site is across the street from the existing library; as such, there will be minimal change in traffic patterns, as existing library patrons will still be arriving and departing in the same general area. Overall, all traffic impacts are mitigated with the street improvements included with this application - half-street improvements along the Hall Boulevard site frontage and two-third street improvements for the initial portion of Wall Street. Water, storm, and sanitary service exists to the site, and the proposed development includes the GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 ACKENZIE extension of these services into the site to serve the library development. Noise impacts are anticipated to be at a level permittable by the Tigard Municipal Code. The design of the facility, as described above, will ensure that all impacts from the project are minimized. 3. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal; Response: The following public facilities provide service to the site: • Water: 12-inch ductile iron main in Hall Boulevard provides water service to the site. The tapping connection point will be 120 feet south of the intersection at O'Mara Street. The fire service consists of an 8-inch ductile pipe with a double check valve assembly located in a vault at the property line. Domestic service consists of a 2-inch Schedule 80 service with a water meter and double check assembly at the property line. On-site fire suppression consists of four hydrants and a fire department connection pipe. • Sanitary Sewer: A 6-inch lateral will extend to the south and connect to an existing sanitary sewer in the proposed Wall Street Alignment. Final sewer location will depend on building plumbing, tree conflicts, and avoiding an identified wetland area. • Storm Drainage: Site storm drainage consists of conveyance and water quality facilities. Due to the proximity of Fanno Creek, detention facilities are not required. In accordance with Clean Water Services Standards, the project proposes one water quality swale at the southeast end of the property. This swale will discharge into the Fanno Creek floodplain with an outfall. Site conveyance consists of a variety of pipes and channels conveying the drainage to the water quality swale. • Streets: Half-street improvements to Hall Blvd consist of widening the pavement by approximately 11 feet to a total pavement width of 50 feet (the eventual width will be 74 feet), and adding an 8-foot sidewalk with a variable planter strip. The main access for the new library site will occur from Wall Street. A three-quarter street improvement must be constructed as part of this project. The three-quarter improvement consists of a 36-foot wide pavement section with curb and a 6-foot sidewalk constructed on the library side of the road. All public facilities are adequate to provide service to the proposed library. 4. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter; Response: The proposed development meets the applicable requirements of the zoning district. The following chart identifies how the standards of the R-12 zone are met: GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a2lr1-M.doc 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 R > ACKENZIE Standard Required Proposed Minimum lot size 3,050 SF 10.2 ACRES Average lot width None N/A Minimum setbacks Front and 20 FT 20 FT Street side and 20 FT 20 FT Side and 10 FT N/A Rear and 20 FT N/A Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 30 FT N/A Maximum height 35 FT 35 FT Maximum lot coverage 80% 18.3% Minimum landscaping 20% 81.7% 5. The applicable requirements of 18.330.050; and Response: Section 18.330.050 lists the Additional Development Standards for Conditional Use Types. No additional development standards are identified for cultural institutions such as a library. 6. The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters of this code including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, if applicable, are met. Response: Chapter 18.780, Signs is addressed in Section 6 of this application package. Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review is addressed in Section 5. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland. OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 11 ,R ACKENZIE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Site Development Review (SDR) approval is required for all proposed development within the City of Tigard. This application requests SDR approval for the proposed library project - the 48,000 SF building and associated parking and landscaping. It is understood that the future library expansion area and the future parking area associated with the expansion area, and the future building and parking area located on the north end of the site will require additional Site Development Review approval at the time of development of each of those areas. Section 18.360.090 lists the approval standards for Site Development Review approval. The following identifies these standards and addresses how the proposed development meets each. 1. Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards; Response: Compliance with the applicable requirements of Title 18 is addressed in Section 6 of this application package. Generally, the project complies with the development standards of Title 18. 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; 2. Located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; 3. Located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and 4. Oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Response: The new Tigard library includes 48,000 SF of library and community meeting space. It is positioned on the site to fit within the natural features, including the rolling topography, and several large mature groves of trees. It is outside the floodplain and buffer zone of Fanno Creek. The library is rectangular in plan, and oriented in the east-west direction to take advantage of the natural site slope, opportunities for natural daylighting and ventilation, and to maximize the views north toward Fanno Creek. The retainage of several large trees mixed with new trees will provide a more mature-looking landscape for the new building. b. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. Response: Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal, is addressed is Section 6 of this application package. Trees will be preserved to the extent possible. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 12 ' • • ti R ACKENZIE 3. Exterior elevations: a. Along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple-family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of 30 feet . Response: The proposed project does not include single-family attached and/or multiple-family structures. This standard does not apply. 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: 1. The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; 2. The size of the buffer required to achieve the purpose in terms of width and height; 3. The direction(s) from which the buffering is needed; 4. The required density of the buffering; and 5. Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. Response: Surrounding uses include residential to the west, across Hall Blvd., and future residential to the south. The site is bound to the east by Fanno Creek; and to the north, across Fanno Creek, is existing industrial and ' commercial development. As such, the site has limited buffering requirements. However, buffering and screening is provided through the orientation of the building on the site, the siting of service areas away from the residential ' development on the east side of the building, and the landscaping proposed with the project. ' 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, ie., 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 enclosed site and landscape plans and building elevations show the proposed screening of service and storage areas, parking lots, and rooftop mechanical equipment. Screening is provided via landscaping and screening materials and the siting of service/storage areas and mechanical equipment to minimize the impact to adjoining properties. 1 5. Privacy and noise: multi-family or group living uses Response: The proposed project does not include multi-family and/or group living uses. This standard does not apply. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 '0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • G R ACKENZIE 6. Private outdoor area: multi-family use Response: The proposed project does not include multi-family uses. This standard does not apply. 7. Shared outdoor recreation areas: multi-family use Response: The proposed project does not include multi-family uses. This standard does not apply. 8. Where landfill and/or development is. allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. Response: The subject site contains the 100-year floodplain; however, no development, other than storm drainage facilities (i.e., outfall), is proposed within the floodplain. 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: All site improvements on this property are public areas. The courtyard between the library and the community meeting building is semi- public and separated from the open, public landscape by fencing. This area will be used by the public during building hours of operation only. The new structures are open to the public during hours of operation. They contain private areas for staff and back-of-house operations. Security cameras will be provided in the public areas within the library for crime-prevention, public safety and protection of property. 10. Crime prevention and safety: a. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; b. Interior 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; GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 14 ' ~ • ±i R ACKENZIE 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 light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person. ' Response: Crime prevention and safety have been considered in the overall design of the campus improvements. Outside the building, all lines of sight will be clear of landscape obstructions. The parking lot and building entrances will ' be lighted per the Tigard Municipal Code minimum to provide safe illumination levels. Security cameras will be provided in the public areas within the library for, crime-prevention, public safety and protection of property. 11. Public transit: a. Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to 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: Tri-Met route 76 travels along Hall Blvd. in front of the site with ' existing transit stops at the intersection of Hall Blvd. and Omara Street. The proposed library project includes incorporating the transit stop on the east side of Hall Blvd into the site design. As shown on the site plan, the transit stop ' includes a bus pull-out lane and the incorporation of the transit stop area into the pedestrian sidewalk and plaza in front of the library. 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 c. A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. Response: The requirements of Chapter 18.745 are addressed in Section 6 of this application. As shown on the landscape plan, 81% of the gross area of the site is landscaped. 13. Drainage: All drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan. Response: Drainage plans are designed in accordance with the adopted 1981 Master Drainage Plan criteria. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239.0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 15 1 0 0 ® ACKENZIE 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: Accessible parking is provided in front of the proposed building. The site meets the accessibility requirements of ORS Chapter 447 and sidewalks on the site connect building entries with the public way and are designed in accordance with the local governing building code. 15. All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections of this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. Response: All provisions of the underlying zone are met with the proposed development, as shown in the response to the Conditional Use standards. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 16 U R ACKENZIE 6. TITLE 18 COMPLIANCE 18.510 Residential Zoning Districts The subject site is zoned R-12. Cultural institutions, such as a library, are permitted with Conditional Use approval in the R-12 zone. The Conditional'Use approval standards, including the requirement to comply with the R-12 standards, are addressed in Section 4 of this application package. ' 18.705 Access, Egress, and Circulation The site plan included with this application shows how the proposed development meets the general provisions for access, egress and circulation identified in Section 18.705.030 ' of the code. Public street access is provided via a driveway that connects to Hall Blvd., a public street, ' at the south end.of the site. This driveway serves a parking lot of 106 spaces (with future expansion of 54, for a total of 164 spaces) and is 26 feet in width; this meets the standards for a commercial driveway. The development of the site includes a pedestrian walkway system that provides connections from the library directly to Hall Blvd. and to the on-site parking area. Traffic circulation through the site is designed to be two-way in the parking area, but one-way in the service/book drop area. 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards Noise: The proposed project will meet the noise regulations of Sections 7.40.130 through ' 7.40.2'10 of the Tigard Municipal Code. Visible emissions: Not applicable; the site is not within a commercial or industrial park zone. Vibration: No vibrations that extend beyond the property line are anticipated with this ' project. Odors: The proposed project will meet DEQ rules for odors. ' Glare and heat: All lighting is designed to not glare or emit light beyond the property line. Insects and rodents: All materials on site, including wastes, will be stored, and all grounds will be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. 18.730 Exceptions to Development Standards No exceptions to development standards are proposed with this application. 18.745 Landscaping and Screening Landscaping to meet the standards of this section is proposed as indicated on the landscape plan. To the extent possible, existing. mature groves of trees are retained and preserved on the site. While the site has limited buffering requirements, due to the adjacent Hall Boulevard and anticipated Wall Street extension, buffering and screening is provided through the extensive landscaping along the west and south sides of the site. Existing vegetation within the Fanno Creek vegetative corridor, along the north and east sides of the GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 17 ACKENZIE development area of the site are preserved and protected, with minimal plantings and disturbance proposed. Street trees are provided along the Hall Boulevard frontage, spaced to meet the standards of this section. Overall, the proposed project exceeds the minimum 20% landscaping requirement, with 81% landscaping provided. ' There is a 50' Clean Water Services buffer zone to the south of the Fanno Creek that will need to be cleared of invasive plant materials and replanted with appropriate native ' riparian vegetation to bring the buffer up to current CWS vegetation corridor standards. 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage The minimum storage area required for the proposed project is based on the requirement of ' 4 SF of storage area per 1,000 SF of gross floor area (Section 18.755.040.5.b(5)). The library is 48,000 SF in size; therefore, 202 SF of mixed solid waste and recyclable storage area is required. This storage area is provided within the service area of the development ' as identified on the site plan. 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements 1 As a cultural institution, the library is required to provide parking at the rate of 2.5 - 4.5 spaces per 1,000 SF. This equates to 120 spaces for the initial library development of 48,000 SF. As shown on the site plan, the development includes 106 spaces on site in the ' initial phase. The remaining 14 required parking spaces are provided within 500 feet of the property, at Tigard City Hall. ' Bicycle parking is required at a rate of 1.0 space per 1,000 SF; therefore, 48 bicycle parking spaces are required with the initial development. Section 8 of this application requests an administrative adjustment to this standard. The proposed project includes 42 bicycle spaces on site as identified on the site plan. Two off-street loading spaces are provided at the east end of the library. 18.775 Sensitive Lands Section 18.775 is addressed in Section 7 of this application. 18.780 Signs The proposed project includes a future monument sign and building signage. Building signage will be reviewed separately as part of Signage Permit and is not included in this application; however, building signage will be less than or equal to five percent of the gross area of the wall face on which the sign is mounted. The future monument sign location and size, and general massing, is shown on the site ■ plan- The fiitiire monument born mPPtc the ctnnAnr`1c for non-identiol in +11c D-1 1 1------ - - ...0.. `..v .,.-11~a - L- .--a. G1111 R1 uses 111 L11 1\1G zone - one freestanding sign not exceeding six feet in height and 32 SF in area per sign face. 18.790 Tree Removal The required tree plan is included with this application. A list of all trees over 12" in caliper, their species, and the status (protected or removed) is also included. According to the plan, there are 135 existing trees on site over 12" in caliper. The proposed plan includes the retention of 92, or 68.15%, of the existing trees over 12" in GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 18 ACKENZIE caliper. If analyzed by caliper inch, there are a total of 2,552 caliper inches of trees over 12" on site, with 1,768, or 69.28%, of the caliper inches being retained. As such, mitigation for 50% of the trees to be removed is required. It is important to note that a significant amount of trees being removed are associated with the Hall Blvd. improvement. ' Section 18.790.060D requires that "if a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of ' replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees At 50% mitigation, 21.5 trees or 392 caliper inches are required to be replaced (43 trees/ 784 caliper inches x 50% = 21.5 trees / 392 caliper inches). This mitigation is proposed by ' planting 392 caliper inches of new trees at an average caliper size of 2.5" per new tree, or 157 trees. As shown on the landscape plan, 206 trees are. proposed within the library development area. 16 of these trees are required street trees, and an additional 16 are 1 required parking lot trees; leaving 174 trees (394.5 caliper inches) on site eligible towards meeting the mitigation requirement. 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas Hall Blvd. is a designated arterial street. As such, the vision clearance area required is a minimum of 35 feet on each side of an intersection. As shown on the site plan, this requirement is met on each side of the proposed driveway connection to Hall Blvd. 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards Half-street improvements to Hall Boulevard along the project site's street frontage are proposed with this development. A driveway connection from the site to Hall Boulevard is provided in the final alignment of the future extension of Wall Street. This driveway includes a two-third street improvement at its intersection with Hall Boulevard, providing the starting point for this future extension. All road improvements will meet the standards of this section. On-site utility improvements are shown on the enclosed plans and will meet the standards of this section. 1 GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 ' 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 19 1 11 t t • • , R ACKENZIE 7. SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW Fanno Creek travels through the site. As such, the site includes sensitive lands designations for the creek, the 50-foot vegetated corridor on either side of the creek, the 100-year floodplain, and a Locally Significant Wetland and its associated buffers in the southern portion of the site. The proposed development is designed to minimize impacts to the sensitive land areas on the site. All buildings and parking are located outside the sensitive land areas and their associated buffers. However, the storm drainage system is designed to outfall into Fanno Creek. Storm drainage lines are located within the floodplain north of the building, and the system's outfall drains from the Swale, located in the southeast corner of the site, into the wetland which drains into Fanno Creek. The storm line and the outfall will each disturb less than 50 cubic yards of material. Minimal ground disturbance between 10 and 50 cubic yards of material are considered administrative sensitive lands permits in the 100-year floodplain and drainageways. In addition, temporary construction activities will occur within the floodplain along the northern side of the building. These construction activities will also disturb less than 50 cubic yards of material. Due to the location of the outfall, the sanitary sewer line is also proposed to cross the wetland in the same area; it will disturb less than 50 cubic yards of material. The proposed outfall and sanitary sewer line are located within the 50-foot vegetated corridor around a Locally Significant Wetland as designated by the City of Tigard. Section 18.775.090 includes Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and along Fanno Creek; subsection 5 of this section allows "Utility /service provider infrastructure construction (i.e., storm, sanitary sewer, water, phone, gas, cable, etc), if approved by the City and CWS," within the standard setback distance or vegetated corridor. Section 18.775.070 identifies the approval criteria for disturbances within the 100-year floodplain, within drainageways, and within wetlands. The following identifies these criteria and addresses how the proposed construction activities, stormline and outfall, and sanitary sewer line meet each. Within the 100-year floodplain 1. Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified by a registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge. Response: The anticipated floodplain work consists of minor drainage improvements. These improvements result in a net zero cut and fill amount in the floodplain. The existing channel geometry remains unchanged. The proposed improvements will not impact flood storage capacity or raise floodwater elevations. Certification from the project engineer, Kurahashi & Associates, is enclosed with this application. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 20 ACKENZIE 2. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards. ' Response: Proposed disturbance within the floodplain is limited to less than 50 cubic yards each for the storm line, the outfall, the sanitary sewer line, and the temporary construction activities. The project proposes a neutral cut and fill and does not alter the existing channel geometry. The floodplain storage and ' conveyance capacity will remain unchanged. 3. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain ' it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood; Response: The limited disturbance resulting from the installation of the utility lines, outfall, and the temporary construction activities will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year floodplain. All pipes and conveyance systems will be installed and covered, with the vegetation cover restored to its original form. 4. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely; Response: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways are included in the half-street improvements planned for Hall Boulevard as part of this project. 5. The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood; Response: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways are included in the half-street ' improvements planned for Hall Boulevard as part of this project. These pathways are not within the floodplain. ' 6. The necessary US Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands, and CWS permits and approvals shall be obtained; and Response: All necessary permits and approvals from applicable jurisdictions will be obtained. ' 7. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. 1 GROUP MACKENZIE Since ,10 ' 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 21 1OfACKENZIE ■ Response: The library is a public area and the impact on the floodplain is minimal. No dedication should be required. Within drainageways 1. The extent and nature of the proposed land form alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than that required for the use; Response: Proposed disturbance within the drainageway buffer is limited to less than 50 cubic yards associated with the installation of the outfall and utilities. No permanent land form alteration is proposed, and the floodplain will be restored to ' its original elevation upon completion of the work. 2. The proposed land form alteration or development will not result in erosion, stream ' sedimentation, ground instability, or other adverse on-site and off-site effects or hazards to life or property; Response: Erosion control facilities designed in accordance to City, CWS and DEQ ' standards will be included in the final construction documents. Permanent site facilities will be designed to avoid erosion, stream sedimentation, ground instability, and other adverse conditions. ■ 3. The water flow capacity of the drainageway is not decreased; Response: Proposed disturbance within the floodplain is limited to less than 50 cubic yards each for the storm line, the outfall, and the temporary construction activities. The project proposed a neutral cut and fill and does not alter the ' existing channel geometry. The floodplain storage and conveyance capacity will remain unchanged. 4. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, the areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted to prevent erosion in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; ■ I Response: All areas disturbed by the installation of the outfall will be replanted to prevent erosion in accordance with the standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening. 5. The drainageway will be replaced by a public facility of adequate size to accommodate maximum flow in accordance with the adopted 1981 Master Drainage Plan; Response: The master plan does not associate public drainage facilities with the project. 6. The necessary US Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands, and CWS approvals shall be obtained; Response: All necessary approvals from the applicable jurisdictions will be obtained. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 22 ACKENZIE 7. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. 1 Response: The library is a public area and the impact on the floodplain is minimal. No dedication should be required. Within wetlands ' 1. The proposed land form alteration or development is neither on wetland in an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor is within the vegetative corridor established per "Table 3.1 Vegetative Corridor Widths" and "Appendix C: Natural Resources Assessments" of the CWS "Design and Construction Standards," for such a wetland; 1 Response: The proposed outfall and sanitary sewer line are located within the 50- foot vegetated corridor around a Locally Significant Wetland as designated by the City of Tigard. Section 18.775.090 includes Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and along Fanno Creek; subsection 5 of this section allows "Utility /service provider infrastructure construction (i.e., storm, sanitary sewer, water, phone, gas, cable, etc.), if approved by the City and CWS," within the standard setback distance or vegetated corridor. 2. The extent and nature of the proposed land form alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use; Response: Proposed disturbance within the wetland area is limited to less than 50 cubic yards each associated with the installation of the outfall and utilities. No permanent land form alteration is proposed, and the wetland area will be restored to its original vegetative state upon completion of the work. Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage which would adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated; Response: The project includes wetland improvements and mitigation, even though negligible impacts are anticipated. The only anticipated impact involves a stormwater outfall and sanitary sewer line with about 20 SF of disturbance. Mitigation measures involve extending the wetland planting further into the site. 4. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 23 ACKENZIE 1 Response: All areas disturbed by the installation of the outfall will be replanted to prevent erosion in accordance with the standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening. 5. All other sensitive lands requirements of this chapter have been met; Response: This application addresses the requirements and standards for disturbances within the floodplain and drainageways. 6. The necessary US Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands, and CWS approvals shall be obtained. Response: All necessary permits and approvals from applicable jurisdictions will be obtained. 7. The provisions of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal shall be met; ' Response: No trees are proposed for removal with the installation of the stormwater outfall or sanitary sewer line. Tree removal related to the library is addressed in Section 6 of this narrative. r 8. Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards, Floodplains and Wetlands, Natural Areas, and Parks, Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan have been satisfied. Response: The following identifies the applicable policies of the Comprehensive ' Plan and addresses how the proposed outfall and utility line meet each. Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards ' 3.1.1 The City shall not allow development in areas having the following development limitations except where it can be shown that established and proven engineering techniques related to a specific site plan will make the area suitable for the proposed development. (Note: This policy does not apply to lands designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map). I t Response: The proposed outfall and sanitary sewer line are located within the 50-foot vegetated corridor around a Locally Significant Wetland as designated by the City of Tigard. While this policy does not apply to designated significant wetlands, Section 18.775.090 includes Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and along Fanno Creek; subsection 5 of this section allows "Utility/ service provider infrastructure construction (i.e., storm, sanitary sewer, water, phone, gas, cable, etc.), if approved by the City and CWS," within the standard setback distance or vegetated corridor. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 24 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 • ~ r,R ACKENZIE Floodylains and Wetlands 3.2.4 The City shall prohibit development within areas designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map. No development shall occur on property adjacent to areas designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map within twenty five (25) feet of the designated wetlands area. Development on property adjacent to significant wetlands shall be allowed under the Planned Development section of the code. Response: The proposed outfall and utility line are permitted within the significant wetland area as stated in Section 18.775.090 of the Tigard Development Code. Natural Areas 3.4.1 The city shall designate, in accordance with Goal 5, the following as areas of significant environmental concern: a. Significant wetlands b. Areas having educational research value, such as geologically and scientifically significant lands; and c. Areas valued for their fragile character as habitats for plants, animal or aquatic life, or having endangered plant or animal species, or specific natural features, valued for the need to protect natural areas. 3.4.2 The City shall: a. Protect fish and wildlife habitat along stream corridors by managing the riparian habitat and controlling erosion, and by requiring that areas of standing trees and natural vegetation along natural drainage courses and waterways be maintained to the maximum extent possible; b. Require that development proposals in designated timbered or tree areas be reviewed through the planned development process to minimize the number of trees removed; and c. Require cluster type development in areas having important wildlife habitat value as delineated on the "Fish and Wildlife Habitat Map" on file at the City; d. Address Goal 5 rule requirements pertaining to the preservation of wetlands once adequate information on the location, quality, and quantity of wetland sites is obtained. This Goal 5 review will include determining which wetland sites are ecologically and scientifically significant. Citizens will participate in making policy recommendations for the protection and preservation of those wetland areas designated as significant. The City shall complete its Goal 5 review of wetland areas before the City's next periodic review, but no later than December 23, 1996 Response: The city completed its Goal 5 review of wetland areas and the subject wetland is designated as a Locally Significant Wetland by the City of Tigard in accordance with the established Goal 5 criteria. Section 18.775.090 "Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and Along the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and South Fork of Ash Creek" established standard setbacks and vegetated corridors around wetland areas. In addition, this section GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 25 1 ACKENZIE allows for encroachment into the vegetated corridor with utility ' infrastructure such as the outfall and sanitary line proposed. Parks, Recreation and Open Space 3.5.1 The City shall encourage private enterprise and intergovernmental ' agreements which will provide for open space, recreation lands, facilities, and preserve natural scenic and historic areas in a manner consistent with the availability of resources. 3.5.2 The City shall coordinate with the school districts to develop recreational facilities. ' 3.5.3 The City has designated the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek, its tributaries, and the Tualatin River as greenway, which will be the backbone of the open space system. Where landfill and/or development are allowed within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. 3.5.4 The City shall provide an interconnected pedestrian/bikepath throughout the City. Response: The library site is owned by the City of Tigard. Development ' is located in the southwest corner of the site to avoid impacting the 100- year floodplain, Fanno Creek, and the wetlands. The remainder of the site is intended for utilization as open space with coordination of trails ' and uses to be determined by the City. The library is a public area and the impact on the floodplain is minimal. No dedication should be required. 1 t GROUP MACKENZIE ' Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 26 ACKENZIE 8 ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT The 48,000 SF library requires 48 bicycle parking spaces, based on the requirements of Section 18.765.050.E (1 space per 1,000 SF for cultural institutions). This application requests approval to provide 42 bicycle parking spaces: 36 in front of the main entrance and 6 near the employee entrance. Section 18.370.020.C.e states, "the Director may approve a reduction of required bicycle ' parking per Section 18.765.050.E by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, if the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed use by its nature would be reasonably anticipated to generate a lesser need for bicycle parking.' The proposed development is a "commuter" library in a suburban city where the majority of the users travel to the library by auto. In addition, the site is located directly on a transit ' line, Tri-Met Route 76, which travels along Hall Blvd., providing the opportunity for library users to reach the site by bus. While the orientation of the building towards Hall Blvd. and the site's location along a bike route and adjacent to a park encourage bike use, it is unlikely that 48 bike parking spaces would be utilized at one time. The current library, located adjacent to Fanno Creek Park and along the same bike route as the subject site, has 10 bike parking spaces in two locations, which are shared with Tigard City Hall. These ' spaces, according to the City Library Director, are consistently underutilized despite the multi-use function of the facility. Providing 42 spaces is only a 12.5% reduction from the required number of stalls, so there will still be sufficient bicycle parking to meet the needs of the library use. Bike parking is required to be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to ' structures. The primary entrance to the library is via a large pedestrian plaza that leads to the glass-walled entrance lobby; from this lobby visitors can access the library and community meeting room. The portion of the main plaza area within 50 feet of the primary ' entrance is 2,856 SF; according to City code, 48 bicycle parking spaces require 1,320 SF (27.5 SF per stall) of this area. Providing these spaces directly in front of the main entry would take a significant portion of the entry plaza, obstructing pedestrian movement and other activities in this area. As such, it is proposed that 36 spaces be provided in the front entry plaza, with an additional 6 spaces provided near the employee entrance on the east side of the building. In addition, the City of Tigard's bike parking requirement for this type of use is significantly higher than the required amounts of bike parking for other nearby jurisdictions. The following provides an overview of the bicycle parking requirements for library uses in various jurisdictions throughout the metropolitan area: 1 GROUP MACKENZIE Slnce 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 27 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • R ACKENZIE Jurisdiction Required Bicycle Parking Ratio Number of Bicycle Spaces Required for New Library (48,000 SF City of Tigard 1 space per 1,000 SF 48 spaces City of Beaverton Short Term - 1 space / 2,500 SF Short Term - 19 spaces Long Term - 1 space / 10,000 SF Long Term - 5 spaces Total - 24 spaces City of Lake Oswego 1 space per 4,000 SF 12 spaces City of Portland Short Term - 1 space / 10,000 Short Term - 5 spaces SFLong Term - 1 space / 10,000 SF Long Term - 5 spaces Total - 10 spaces As shown above, the City of Tigard bicycle parking requirement is twice the requirement of the City of Beaverton and four times that of the City of Lake Oswego and the City of Portland. With the proposed 42 spaces, the site would still have 175% of the number of stalls required if the site was in Beaverton and 420% of the number of stalls required by the City of Portland. For these reasons, it is proposed that 42 bicycle parking spaces be provided with the new development. These stalls will be located in two locations, with 36 stalls near the front entry and 6 stalls located by the employee entry. This number of stalls and their locations are appropriate for the proposed project. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 28 6Rn AGKENZIE 9. IMPACT STUDY ' Section 18.390.040.B.2.(e) requires an Impact Study for projects requiring a Type II or Type III approval. In accordance with this section, 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 the 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" This application includes materials identifying the effect on public facilities and services, and proposed improvements where the public services do not meet the City standards. The following addresses the impacts of the proposed library development on the public facilities and services. • Transportation System: The enclosed Traffic Impact Study identifies the traffic related impacts of the proposed library and recommended mitigation for these impacts. ' • Drainage System: Site storm drainage consists of conveyance and water quality facilities. A water quality swale is proposed at the southeast end of the property. This Swale will discharge into Fanno Creek with outfalls. Site conveyance consists of a ' variety of pipes and channels conveying the drainage to the water quality Swale. • Parks System: No impacts to the park system are anticipated with the proposed library ' project. • Water System: A 12-inch ductile iron main in Hall Boulevard provides water service to the site. The tapping connection point will be 120 feet south of the intersection at ' O'Mara Street. The fire service consists of an 8-inch ductile pipe with a double check valve assembly located in a vault at the property line. Domestic service consists of a 2- inch Schedule 80 service with a water meter and double check assembly at the property line. On-site fire suppression consists of four hydrants and a fire department connection pipe. • Sewer System: A 6-inch lateral will extend to the south and connect to an existing sanitary sewer in'the proposed Wall Street Alignment. Final sewer location will depend on building plumbing, tree conflicts, and avoiding an identified wetland area. The sewer system is currently adequate to serve the proposed new library. • Noise Impacts: The noise levels associated with the proposed new library are within ' the levels designated by the City of Tigard Municipal Code. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 29 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • U R ACKENZIE 10. SUMMARY In summary, based on the information presented and discussed in this narrative and the attached supporting plans and documents, the proposed New Tigard Library project meets the development standards and criteria for approval of the requested Conditional Use, Site Development Review, Sensitive Lands Permit, and Administrative Adjustment. GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 30 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 10. Exhibits A Application Form B Aerial Photo/Vicinity Map C Existing Conditions D . Site Plan E Grading Plan F Landscape Plan H Utility Plan I Storm Drainage Plan J Floor Plan - First Floor K Building Elevations L Building Elevations & Sections M Establishment of Flood Plain Elevation N Sensitive Lands Certification O Tree Plan P Neighborhood Meeting Documentation Q Pre-Application Conference Notes GROUP MACKENZIE Since 1960 0690 SW Bancroft Street PO Box 69039 Portland, OR 97239-0039 T 503.224.9560 360.695.7879 F 503.228.1285 groupmackenzie.com 6R ACKENZIE H:\PROJECTS\020228\WP\3a21r1-M.doc 31 M PRE,W. HELD BY: rS1:0`N° CITY OF TIGARDTLANNING D1VJ , TIAR. 97223-4189' 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD µ 501639:41F71 /503.68417297 ` w t OF TIGARD ; ffy OREGON LAND'U:SE PERMIT! A PLICA 1'0' N. ile # Other;.Case ate By Receipt Date;Application Complete° TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ 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)] Site Development Review (II) Home Occupation (II) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) , ress i available) SW Hall Boulevard . 2S 1 0200 tax lot 100, 200 ; 2S 1 02DA tax lot 600 14.6 acres total R-12 ' Group Mackenzie for the City of Tigard, Attention: Geraldene Moyle PO Box 69039, Portland, OR 97201 503-224-9560 t-AX NO. ~18-1 285 ipA - Geraldene Moyle PROl a 503-224-9560 PROPERTY UWNF-R/UF-~U HOLDER (Attach is i more an one Cit of Ti and 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 503-624-0752 'When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in ssession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the ace provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. ease be spea c Conditional use approval for 'cultural institution' (library) Site Development Review approval for library Sensitive ' Administrative Ad-iustmen ~ to bicycle parking qtandardq PLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. • 0 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. ignature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature ` Agent/Representative's ature Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date Date Date ' Date Date 1~2/~U3 Date , ' Date rr rr r r~ ~r r r rr rr ~r■ rr r r rr r r~ r r r 'Ilk Existing Tigard Library a7ca- ~k 1 - a. ~ ~ t •S ~S j' ~ ~ • tY ~ r ~ 414 1 j ~ - I. .ice ~ ~ 1.,- r Y M/ 'rye 1 I / ~ . New Tigard Library Site ~F.~ ~M 3~ n, , +c + r 6. ~Ci G ; k-' K 4 W-p- c FAJ Rff -M } I fl 02501005800 e ~~i i~f~I~ `i__ Feet G R 1j - - _ ACKENZIE 0690 SW Bancroft Street I PO Box 69039 ?ortlanQ oa a7239 ■ www. groupm ckemie. corn info 0 9rpmack. corn ■ yM7~',~ a~ i 1 e I: 503. 224. 9580 360.895. 7878 1 a x: 503.228.1285 r.~a $a will H A -L - i i'. - \ t~ r nH`'/jJ2~ t ~Pe P twill a s ~ .we aa~510""~ DEH ~^(`8~"~~yl~y a~ww~ ny ~+~r°° •cr,R~a.s CITY OF TIGARD ~ uRO~ ca anew v 416RAB SOE 3~ r!t ' I 1 Mtl{{ !ll ~d u` W A 0 o m Q ~ m am r so so _ `rues E \ so low- 1Ij It n I 'oo j`~ 1 I i carRrrRDxs J u+c-- t2t°sa."c+"(~~ { t_ J t 1 1 1 !'r . j{t{ KGMCaTAf. . ~ - !k ti-.t _ h- YI ( I / l~' { p/U~''r~ ' acsrww I ~ t, Y~ y - i...., r i. t l 1 _ ~I T - 1 '7(r ~ r,; ~ • .,..t•~ li`* ~ ~i _„-ter,' - ~ j IE- i 1 gg 1 , - \ 1 11 1 ~ 1 1 zronue^ - a 1 1~ t\ \ i 1 . 4 l1 t{ 1 • ~t ~p~5---.- - ~ -_T:- - - ~ 11 t 'DE51GN i ~ r- ~ J. ~ wmr and Library 4 SUBMIj~AI - p1/27 L1 l.. cirS. N,~ 1+_ II ' j I t i I.1j1 i k- r t I I j ~ i ~iy I I: A 'Z 3 I 8i[i ►amlb, PC. LEGEND , ' eo. eonal or ru. li . , . . J - ' eoc eo.rau aF arm - ; + ~ t, , ~ me ma a ws ` , . 1 I ~ II \ ' o• ~ ~ P' F• E K ` ~ • 1 a w.an cuwnw I \ ' ~l . ~ _ F ~P roc Tor of ox.or I I ' ~ I - ~ i - trot uc emn ' ^ ~ / • . aar SWK. srmE +uu (12'W.) HI r- T-+ •e•`~K:~. aS gun /r r'/~! I \ r.y`'-",• 11 I.• V~.-t ~'-j ~;,~'jZ ra :~',I •/I rt~~wow^"t' II .0 P. fit • I V1 t Y 6.- r; ,4. ij;nf~l / f, n;rr d '.•r l a{.w. ~ i -r I ~ 0 • 1•. r I:~___ ny,•~ r 'DESIGN DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL - 01/27, New Tigard Library w~'\M Y.Ir onnoa PIAM L2.0 old. ! u I I J ! co I J : Jj { Q I Q_;- A I I 1 , n>a• J I ~ .t~ I J r i Z ~Y± I. I i; I . ...a,.;.; _ \•.J -1 LEGEND SYMBOL OESUOPnON MANUFACTURER MODEL NO. PSI RAOLS GPM .,:r.• \ Y"..1~:/ • RO1W IQAD RAElOID i.-K-10 .0 SI tl ` r(`,y • aoTW NEAR RAN•Yp T.o-10 b Y' I , 1z_ - - "'l` ♦ O11AY WAO YA!®p 14W-SW-15 W " I r I I. I I` I I , I I I , I I 1 I I• a+ I I I \ I 1 I I I I j I 1 r I I .Nil t. t o / I o I i t 0 ' • . H ® aTne YETE11 - tlY WNEas I / `i I ~retic•,. l- E K ® C Ea[laAa R[OIRATW - 1Q,O11 -r SET ro W PR ROWTf fri11ROl VNTE- RA•,•M P® "E"on C01iNpl VKK- RAVOICN [CI-IW cm V / II t ' / ' i~'i O' QIGC O U'LO'_ W0 - R/MBIm WI TER UK • ( GTE VNVC - >g SPERICAl1010 t - % : ✓ •AG6LOw PRWIIIOI OMOE *AM Moon WV. Y Ow1YL OEM N WY IS IMIOIIAI - I I % t i f t..; I t I ~ ~i 1 , i 4-11Mlul aamaEnl - RAw®ID f9-]wa sE.Es ' , r ~ • _ - , \ t %t YAMUN ORAw -w_ OMAIHOI N NOTE WNTRALroR ro I u ALL WAN VALKS ro WNV ALL EOw AREAS OE PIPE. - ' E \ \ • ~ l 1 1 T~yZ \ • ~ , I Alft- s nA11011 NI.FA oN- EKA'YI s-sNRUe o-aaa ; \ • F" ter t l ]S Mw 9a l1E 4Ai5 300 PVC -(9MY IY MNIWI) fUl OAn 1W PW - SZ[r W AS OR•R W N01ED MM UW O.ASS ]W Pt -(RIMY 1S k0dAIIQ 0 .E • / 1 - i \ P.nc - Pawl OF mr«ErnoN r ~t 07, 'a I, ^ ~_'t'%r.acim,}` i ncoD w~v \ IRRIGATION PLAN NOTES DOIEfLnW 'i}; '/;i Ij .w~or.l I"~ 1 L, " •r f 1 3. ..uRN. m. le~.,w, $,1> m .~..Ym, ar w wV a n. OO I I. _ r s ~rW~..n..l a..r.l.n.r i..... rr wewr ara. `n mra.INn w nwry .P..r . IMn b a •«r.ra.r. 43. lamb a .aN~ b bW rw. P~Rr. 00 v •vAr, ~_-:r _ . mn.raa as d a gr,lYy .na mr, n..+.r....w• , • ,.;b,r.:.. on rm NnaN otmr d ml' Mbae,u Iran M -1 by pm. b u,rbuClm. n Trw IeuOera rr0 bJ r,0 ribMr appeM A ,;f i'~ i a b.lal a.+. ...s•~vd.m... .1px+m roo• daw r,a,~a. .a /1 - i .v.- I x" T. Ind." ^a,m„drp-eMmM, d Nceaa, .,e•n .n Na. a, .PrREN, I v r...... - ~ ' I •v.rrlcx.~ .~i.E.rua,~ Pr rr,awr:N..r'....rRm1Y,a. v.rvv db a..r nrN• m ~I 1\' \ • n RemaeP pp..-. •~nArlar adMUam,a r . ,„Yln..., r a~ r .e, F 11 • , :,:bi.' • R. mePn Aep INUEI, lnram mtl Pa, P111in . - ' .•1:•":!:..~ 1 wdr Zaa (rrlpv0en mmpera. aGw Prnur,4 N.Ipaaun Tlrrv I ~ M rrruwG WRr NM b.r, a1mEIW. ...Jf . f~~UEFER. "m.' % 1 I~,I\ I)rO.fcY, YIr sep0yc /(ar( \ t yr N►ls`:\ 1 am DESIGN DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL - 01/27/ 1 NRb•r E~ New Tigard Library we.. .a D a..,a. urPA LI Wtu71oN YEAEI ~ In,.a~a, •"y L3 0 ftpc . u 1J Q I.oFwl o n ~ ILI. q ` . QI • r v A/ A F •q I F . / I I'F I Iq ` .I iI NNVVEN lu4 . •-r~'r ,r./. f •,~...1 r di -\v c, . ts., -Z j 44. 1 _ r ~ ~ I• , 7 r, E mE. Ec m...........~ s. P . New Tigard Library LEGEND TREES / ,omnRR rPas ro Puuw - siRai rvm • .CFR PY9PL lED SIHYT - W Snrl PW Yq:Y . R.wP.w un raEs PuPrs a.R. - Rr .r.. rPH caPUU - IR~.N lMn r,.,misTPa:s .f2Olr M[S n r .ccort rPas "uwn Rmu - aw ur .EP UPf M1 - v.r WV. CElit6 oamoaua - P..,.. bs/ .oRUUS mmaasxs - c,.ws w.. PUNS VIUBVU~Rw uJJ, C11d1., - vb~gY SHRUBS LROUIDCOVER wuc scar n.Rnc uxronwnnuos w.-NPs, - P..n.,:..s rPPUPw p¢OO,9J -craw sa..e.n aewauE rJwssa - vaN.r R. mnsrtnR w.R,.c • CNPM:S SfACG YLHR• - .,,N R.Go.r Noq.m. ~.H. _ a ,o aaa PSS SNP]PUmN - PM MrrM1p Cvraw n uHOmsidN I4R,R,G • uucraP uPR4PP1 - a.ww, oao. cunrrcRr sHUEON - swm ' m wRUnw RrrsPwls •r,•' tmm rases um smas CW WNE BUTTER -CEYFM ~ser~ow/tw rNJ V t'r= a b=l` - ~ - ~ i rM xy ~l~Y•=- _ lauiaH uo cPawwc a Hurt rtmns sHOwH Bn~lnuPrsa: mr u~mNr of au wa~~ Pna Y I Fi -I~W~, - barrtP or r~,~ HP. -,R-a. „P. aRFR'rdD ..s .4L PI.NIra1a /NAJ, u:tFlr M NrrFP [MMHCLYEHi PPU. FP~IGIIaH~ PwuTm N4mHa . NLLY wrasunc NroEPNPanR SYStd. ] NL P1.1VIiHa rRrAS SHOE RECOK iaPSaP. SOLL NIwMERrS. Pra WLW PS VG SP[fJll'APONS J. NL Pl.N1i5 S1NLL PC WSTUIID W •Cf.Om.xaC wM PVNIMa oEr.ES Pra sPmrcmus y ;DESIGN DEVE{ T SUBMITTAL - 01/27/ LAtmar:VBlEAN L4.0 m m m m ~ m m m m m m m m m m m Im m m fKyu b♦c.ra MEHxIDG oF.Y as wo wus[xrrt, a IravnPe wR+KromK. -fnA, n nA AEAS - un W A n9E uw sa[ - sarrLO eraalDP nAxwen LYVA~ I~ _ ~ -IT fASX IWme CCMA I ~ ~ r >avA mia -1riflm WfRK 1U tw[9 9w ULN SaF ' -mi EYrtKaOX .r -Sli: kt aWl. [ImX.Lr ' -ax♦ a (start aa. (nv) __Ymul[ nas laax NO'.IYTr 5}Tlr rgTr urLR cox 1 BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY X4f: Nf$ ffsrED 4WL( BKX i Sw0 CwS. YIiP ICGIeF fmaunr w REUEn aencs _ i W 4N0 f0 TVC 4LIx IUtM K _ aaaD [JI♦'J WC vwH Uai Ltil X - II♦TEAf arc. a carun eos LI~'y lu vwn GATE VALVE ASSEMBLY sutra. Ins mn. Owl JrwnJ ws aEarm P s[eistm - al r u+r sl..ix K 4tarn nl!al rD IALL nm %aED nA[ Lfml ra • xx to slw.E / m Uaw a anrwt u _ _ en ryPl fJ95N wcDC'\ 'MU]'.( Bf9w rFLY I(D IiJ a Itl01BW aRR SUWe ~ Brer. roux - r uPlx -sw w:cx um[ swJ • _ Hnua a emo mtE sul¢s P a s ~ " r IU w E ,ua y U 4a x. --au r I aU01BR1 W I S1Mt9 Swa E- M" a Mar rRr arD • mnw IIfAlIRdO ffA CONIFER US TREE PLANTING 11 SCwLE: NIS 5acU.n UGab a aaa C(iHER WwI vwx m. 6 Ship f41 afmtuulur 6l eK:wl w-Sa raw WnTc z) Eu(i Rnre rhaw[xRls IvIPVaB 4wts wm SEaff[C W1 [QIIF raw Mil Sx.91 --«E Resew rw rwxoe Yannr:ncfa o I9KrED wwl _ Mrw1 U •IYYN N - lM 411 rn n9x wvRAw:naaP~xlm la.fi.n X01. UX:1R - DNS [ IhP If OVLX (ILnlF tl:x - A n W. Klwl ♦SL.W v nX r w vvc. [tEflRw Yamnw0. l . mPX: w / nJ' llu UL wo nl♦♦:6w1 r IJtlfOM LR tntl' IN cT.LW V T, a ,a Ito v. 2'w P'K -1 fw (Uf41 ML II 1tatl _ P.OIIKM B'L95 IF- mi nlx %!X r wE1G 0lwawL W. ' rx m s' afao mtt a acme A I ~ (v lDaac In rarfcP awl roR n rsan 111 - e' w. p .s¢ ncEED was vih hJ1iS f6Wfn Uifkk w: X9E5 ro a NSU1LL0 Xi Ra IO-R all II . _ pril. V., Y(a Wx Wr J/i R'ODIa WIED GNAT - ' i 6' . 19' mnArt BUCa, f aDL iro WpUA 9UED .0 fdd5 011 iR WALLMOUNT CONTROL VALVE CONTROL VALVE ASSEMBLY X,LE N,s s.ilw.: 3 XuE: N., J' wl fapl TaY a IR Jt Pu aac e a r / c . l 51 1 '1. ' ~ Tr o' nnnvwsl TRENCHING IN F. is xort r~ -Z SIV1 REC StVFi .s vE[rm 5 P- :'sfw 'wa ♦s srtam m'f(X n: lau tlM SKaN YwCx IES; w 0 Srw n ryF w4 UfM tF/1 ~ P[Y(M IS.PiIP IRW IT I(f a natdwl wrtr SIVA. \ -area uhnr . r ar;n ewu nEa Lw r slw: FTW 6' arcTa laFi SIwnS n DpD wdl- 3, wFnl sou urFTE x;, z,' s a rrtu rel nw uatweo ~ . BCIDX 12 DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING XT Nrs s♦ao, I SRO had* ar..W...w _ reanrn, rwfwan 9 s s 1 t - le frxs IAA Iglu u.s rro JL YA1(s Garr atoll aJO 4sr.F¢s mEm K ralEO ro IEaiWn vwc T- vLCrcD ru' cawKtm f~a Fnu 1 - s>a,aa 4LE'x aAU za Px. u[ao 6 frUfS BFNe Cal a P.xWR. (UIIB, wD wl IRRIGATION SLEEVES -9Et CNCw: p R(fnRaL i'~ 1' 6,N. YJtal-- PBSA faCJ! U/[4 f YSx rAh'1F ~ RrROA nECJ` rQw la /f U F(aRWti C` -T.Yai SWS MO BiaLY - - - uar ~ .na T :x sw xW ' SHRUB PLANTING rro a Bwtl rEw rfcvED auar oR ra a sm 0 C `fJYD m lagf - _ 9(D. r4 P YC. SiltQl (l - SMD ^ C 1 , 190 0.J LL -PVL XHD. m wru unxv uA a zm vF9. -_._yyED u nIRL w aE --«x'n m vvL. 41u1 n SWING JOINT 4 ASSEMBLY FOR ROTOR HEADS XPLE: NR Sect~P+ Im rmll Ca[ a P.we, aEa DR BlE01c ~ fft511D WD[ V IP a SC 1-1 Iw a o♦RF axa wv-w fsuwr IumF. 519II1 um. +rA99 Bwm _ ELDOK Wfiff~S C' 1 EiBw E/SI'ht eKH amrs - sclo w rtE - UIWI PPE- a IJO PC POLY-PIPE g ASSEMBLY FOR SPRAY HEADS X4E: H,s sX<4on PtNwL ua9ID mxR 4uLL a ~ ~ .ro FUlrtln♦IL1EA9 95~ ' , }J~ )Lf( svww: rtR a ttma sP+csc ~ _ U S"ACEID rn gPBiK hNl taPlE deUw LQ(R UA r 'SKnO a S sswrrP rww .r aEm. . sanw. a m:u xvo Y sla ti. uaas DMExrcI SttfIED C~KI GROUNDCOVER/ SHRUB COVER PLANTING ...kx 14 svAE N,s P1Xx rfwEO aut aful : vuL cws [cxnc luvm cv w xm' au.r'.xx 3 E ~ L.HO PO Pvf. 41M' nNJn U IAWBAO - EPLt(W Ia1ERw w RM of I arcX w csAUrt aDFX f1WA - 2;u fl S .D R. W:l ~i 5 MANUAL DRAIN VALVE ASSEMBLY - XTLE: Nis secL'an , _t9CVA➢ L➢TL< -ttux n um :.a- lo' Rolm wx m. [ _ -SrSp EL WIC. CdL[evG'.wA aznrtD J/i .104x pP!r arAO( -allm a - s[REn u 9UEk b 1:'.C. 190 aL. n snhD m P.vc. ImgE. JH' f C er IwafA - - ' mrD u v.vc sran u raEO RRDtl oR rte OUICK-COUPLER VALVE ASSEMBLY X4L NTs $.[lqn • • DESIGN DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL - 01/27/ v no.Fll> „ tl raNnsFwPe um New Tigard Library ,K.saD.Dfaa °°•X L5.0 p~~ll~p31p:46.19 AM. elvin. ~~ahashi S Assacaates. Inc. D~~1~V8EET S\21ppC1.dw g. R a E t 9 1 1 1 r W:\210"W&\aLlS\210DC2.dwg. 02/11/0310:48:21 AM, elvin, Kurahashi 6 Associates. nc. e~l c 1 l I~ d LEGEND i a r" j I ~ i I j I I I I , I of i 1 ~I I _ _ti I i pz l1 i / j o ,w I o ! V l!" A I _ 11 i OO.~ 'vi '~~---------~ri~?j i i°• L Ec^--~9 -~~~0 I rsa 77 iSr `(L7 _ J ~y 1 I I ~L~ i 44' Ali I _ HI , CI ~ ~ I I I ! III I G]~ I 1_. we ~ .zr z I I mm ~ I I ®r; - I G I I - rJ ~ O 1. ` I J I I I I I I m .,.m. ncua nwu New Tigard Library t m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m s m m m LEGEND 0-.-- „o G i - _ I ® 11 I I I I , I i I I I i I \ I I f I I ' I~ I I I I i I p} i i i m. +wancwrt ! I I 01- „ Irv' .m. o lul K IT , ~ f I lid I! I 4 I, 1D i ; • F:-T- r-, I~ I V-(~n~ I _ i ,..u, If Fi\ °"---i - - - - , c c- ~ , i~1 Inn • • , , . - i t~ C m New Tigard Library _ ~DFf ¢ r• 4O~ A2.2 m m m m m s M m m m M m m M m M m M M ROOF ASSEMBLIES LEGEND . sanaam ~'l ~I ► `I; ~ i I' lil ► iiI ►i (~IiII' it it i I I' ( i i~ ► ,i I L~~I ihi lii i!il~~Fl''I lilt►;,ii~i~i~;E II ► i~" I !ill' 'i !Jill I ~ i~ ~ ~ ' l ~ ~'i i~lu ~ lH i{ ~~.}y l6 ,1 ilj,,~ ,li ~i~ll i II ~ hii+ ! ~I•}i,l Ji!i!I;!r i 11IR►iI(ii!ii iil i A~ y i i I n UPPER ROOF PLAN wJ ..-n i0 'PO L, I ! i~~ i f I ! i I I New Tigard Library r,.au.o. m.: ,3 A2 6AG ft-*v, PC ......onwr, ..w.s.r.~ i E M M M M M M MO 0. I 1 tU I ~ OO W -I~ I j ~ N~~ ELEVATION I I f CM golf) M A T uatea I I%1 ilil~rfr"';Ifi~;1~P.1~1' ."r^r~,`'a~•,~Ii7, m..~M O i ~a i Si ~,mem nr.,m BUYIIIq ®8VA7101b New Tigard Library a* Pc All Im m m r= m===!=! m m m r- AY,6 ION - HOUGHTON ROOM G fib i i I I ' i I i C~ (D i j ORTH ELEVATION - HOUGHTON ROOM j~NORTH ELEVATION - LOBBY ~5OUTH-ELEVATION - LOBBY 9 lea= A@WAXAT GOMM ROOM INr5T EXIT Al➢iIIC 08YAlLib New Tigard Library n" AM SX7M 8 j r~.~.. A3.2 uG?.- Pc robs r KURAHASHI & ASSOCIATES, INC. January 16, 2003 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: Tigard Public Library (2100) Sensitive Lands Certification i Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: The City of Tigard proposes to construct a new public library on Tax Lots T2S RI W Section 02 Lots 100, 200, and 600. With the site lying adjacent to Fanno Creek, the city's sensitive lands ' code section (City Municipal Code Section 18.775-Sensitive Lands) comes into affect. City Municipal Code Title 188.775.040 M(3) requires certification by a professional engineer regarding the floodplain aspects of the project. Based upon Kurahashi & Associates design efforts and review of the project of technical documents, we certify that the Tigard Public Library Project complies with the provisions of subsection 18.775.040 of the city code. If you have any questions regarding this certification, please contact me at 503-644-6842. t Sincerely, 1 Brett Arvidson, PE 1 t 1 1 ' 15580 S.W. Jay Street, Suite 200, Beaverton. Oregon 97006 503.644.6842 Fax 503.644.9731 Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Environmental Planning Surveying 1 t 1 1 1 0 0 robs KURAHASHI & ASSOCIATES, INC. January 16, 2003 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: Tigard Public Library (2100) Establishment of Floodplain Elevation ' Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: The City of Tigard proposes to construct a new public library on tax lots T2S RI W Section 02 Lots 100, 200, and 600. With the site lying adjacent to Fanno Creek, the city's Floodplain Code (City Municipal Code Title 18.775-Sensitive Lands) comes into affect. Based upon the information provided by the city the floodplain elevation varies from 141.7 at the southeast corner of Lot 200 to 144 at the northwest corner of Lot 600 (at the intersection of Hall ' Boulevard and Fanno Creek). Attached is a copy of the map provided by the city. If you have any questions regarding this Floodplain Elevation, please contact me at 503-644-6842. ' Sincerely, T _ Brett Arvidson, PE N ■ 1 1 ' 1.5580 S.W. Jay Street, Suite 200, Beaverton. Oregon 97006 503.644.6842 Fax 503.644.9731 Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Environmental Planning Surveying 01/13/2003 02:55 N0.293 P02 d ~ rr' \ I •.11, ~ ~ ,-1 V IM~ 1~1~1 1!' ' lY. 1 c 1 1 / , M II 1 1 1 , 11 1 1 , I - 1 1 Sri TIM 218C. 'Ilk"i ✓ r 1 1 11iY I j I, 1 - n1 /1 n /nnnn 11-T 1 A en /mv /r„v atn r.~ r.n \ n, New Tigard Library 1/21/2003 Tree Summary Caliper Caliper Tree # Species Size Preserved or Removed Tree # Species Size Preserved or Removed 1 birch 14 preserved 51 ash 24 preserved 2 willow 60 preserved 52 maple 15 preserved 3 alder 16 preserved 53 ash 20 preserved 4 alder 16 preserved 54 hawthorn 12 preserved 5 alder 16 preserved 55 ash 60 preserved 6 alder 12 preserved 56 hawthorn 12 preserved 7 alder 12 preserved 57 ash 36 preserved 8 alder 12 preserved 58 ash 18 preserved 9 alder 12 preserved 59 alder 15 preserved 10 alder 12 preserved 60 ash 20 preserved 11 willow 15 preserved 61 hawthorn 12 preserved 12 willow 15 preserved 62 hawthorn 12 preserved 13 willow 36 preserved 63 hawthorn 12 preserved 14 fir 40 preserved 64 hawthorn 12 preserved 15 fir 18 preserved 65 hawthorn 12 preserved - 16 ash 28 preserved 66 ash 20 preserved 17 maple 24 preserved 67 ash 24 preserved 18 ash 24 preserved 68 ash 24 preserved 19 ash 36 preserved 69 ash 28 preserved 20 ash 18 preserved 70 ash 24 preserved 21 ash 12 preserved 71 ash 24 preserved 22 ash 18 preserved 72 ash 30 preserved 23 dec 20 preserved 73 ash 24 preserved 24 dec 15 preserved 74 ash 24 preserved 25 dec 20 preserved 75 ash 30 preserved 26 cedar 40 preserved 76 ash 20 preserved 27 cedar 32 preserved 77 hawthorn 24 preserved 28 dec 20 preserved 78 alder 16 preserved 29 holly 15 preserved 79 ash 20 preserved 30 holly 15 preserved 80 ash 30 preserved 31 holly 15 preserved 81 ash 14 preserved 32 holly 15 preserved 82 ash 18 preserved 33 maple 14 removed 83 alder 12 preserved 34 maple 38 preserved 84 alder 15 preserved 35 maple 24 preserved 85 willow 20 preserved 36 maple 14 removed 86 ash 20 preserved 37 maple 22 preserved 87 dec 12 preserved 38 maple 14 removed 88 locust 15 preserved 39 pirie 36 preserved 89 locust 15 preserved 40 apple 14 removed 90 hawthorn 14 removed 41 maple 22 removed 91 hawthorn 16 removed 42 maple 22 removed 92 dec 12 removed 43 maple 20 removed 93 hawthorn 12 preserved 44 dec 22 removed 94 hawthorn 12 preserved 45 oak 24 removed 95 hawthorn 12 preserved 46 dec 24 preserved 96 hawthorn 12 preserved 47 locust 28 preserved 97 hawthorn 12 preserved 48 alder 20 preserved 98 willow 18 preserved 49 ash 12 preserved 99 hawthorn 12 removed 50 maple 18 preserved 100 locust 24 removed New Tigard Library 1/21/2003 Tree Summary Caliper Tree # Species Size Preserved or Removed 101 hawthorn 15 removed 102 hawthorn 15 removed 103 fir 20 removed 104 poplar 12 removed 105 poplar 12 removed 106 poplar 12 removed 107 poplar 12 removed 108 poplar 12 removed 109 poplar 12 removed 110 poplar 12 removed 111 poplar 12 removed 112 poplar 12 removed 113 poplar 12 removed 114 poplar 12 removed 115 poplar 12 removed 116 poplar 12 removed 117 poplar 12 removed 118 poplar 12 removed 119 sequioa 18 removed 120 fir 15 removed 121 cedar 12 removed 1,22 cedar 12 removed 123 fir 20 removed 124 dec 15 removed 125 cedar 12 removed 126 fir 15 removed 127 cottonwood 24 removed 128 locust 15 removed 129 alder 20 removed 130 oak 12 preserved 131 oak 24 preserved 132 oak 24 preserved 133 dec 24 preserved 134 alder 24 preserved 135 alder 24 preserved 135 Total number of trees 43 Number being removed 92 Number being preserved/retained 68.15 Percent retained Trees 1 - 50 1061 Caliper Inches Trees 51 - 100 951 Caliper Inches Trees 101 - 135 540 Caliper Inches 2552 Total Caliper Inches 784 Caliper Inches removed 1768 Caliper Inches preserved/retained 69.28 Percent retained 50% mitigation required 21.5 Trees required for mitigation 392 Caliper inches required for mitigation ~I • I ` f ~ tE f B ~ it e 9~ 3~ d y- Z ~ ,egg gg BB I I I ~ 1 rx~; 1 5 1111!J11111.1" ill11 AIR • g Si G'/TY OF 77GARD DEHAAS V ~ ® eaociatea, Inc. w•nw d L.IBRABY S/TE wmr K ovw a$ ~i ~ • GR in 11 A October 2, 2002 ! 2S 102DD-00401, 2S 102DA-00402, 2S 102DA-00400 ' ; . 2S 102DA-00401, 2S 102DA-00200, 2S 102DA-00704 CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW HALL ' TIGARD, OR 97223 - ~ Re: City of Tigard Library M o m Dear Interested Party: ' 9 - cli M roup Mackenzie is representing the owner of the property located on Hall Boulevard at its C) intersection with SW Omara Street, on tax lot 600 of map 2S 1 2DA and tax lots 100 and 200 ° of 2S 1 2DD. The City of Tigard is considering siting the new City Library at this location. ' This project requires Conditional Use and Site and Design Review approvals. `o E a Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, we would like to discuss the a a proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited X end a meeting on: to att o co ° a 0 Wednesday, October 16, 2002 ' N Z Tigard Town Hall o 13125 SW Hall Blvd C " 10 a e 7:00 p.m. ' m y N This is a community meeting regarding the library. Information regarding the land use o approvals required for the project will be incorporated into the community meeting agenda. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. ' Group We look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at Mackenzie. Incorporated 503-224-9560 if you have any questions. ' Architecture Interior Design Sincerely, Land Use Planning Group ' Mackenzie Engineering. Geraldene Moyle, AICP Incorporated Senior Planner ' Civil/Structural Engineering GEM/mpd Transportation Planning c: City of Tigard - Brad Kilby ' The tradition of Mackenzie Engineering and ' MackenzieiSaito H:\PR0JECTS\020228\WP\2J03LI.DOC continues. FREQUENTLY ASKED City of Tigard NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING QUESTIONS S~0'~ t""4' , ' hat Is The Pur ose Of This Nei hborhood Meetin ? The purpose of the meeting is to allow the prospective developer to share with you what they are ' planning to do. This is your opportunity to become informed of their proposed development and to let them know what issues or concerns you have in regard to their proposal. What Happens After The Neighborhood Meeting? After the neighborhood meeting, the prospective developer finalizes their submittal package (often t taking into account citizen concerns) and submits an application to the City. Sometimes it takes a while before the developers application is ready to submit, so there could be several months between the neighborhood meeting and the submittal of an application. Once an application is submitted to the City, Staff reviews it for completeness. Once an application has been deemed complete, the formal application review begins. It takes approximately 6-8 weeks ' from the time the application is accepted for a decision to be made. Many types of applications require a public hearing at which citizens are given the opportunity to provide comments or concerns. ' For all types of applications, property owners within 500 feet of the subject parcels receive notice of the public hearing (if applicable), notice of the decision, and are given the opportunity to appeal the decision. ' What If The Proposal Presented At The Neighborhood Meeting Is Not What Is Actually Submitted? ' Applicants are not required to submit exactly what was presented at the neighborhood meeting if it generally follows the type of development proposed. This provides for the opportunity to address the neighborhood issues and address other changes necessitated by the development or staff. If the project is entirely different, a new neighborhood meeting would be required. In any case, notice of decision is sent to property owners within 500 feet of the proposed development allowing them the opportunity to appeal. How Do I Know What Issues Are Valid. ' A decision is reviewed based on compliance with the Tigard Development Code. Review the development code to familiarize yourself with what is permitted and what may not be permitted. A copy of the development code is available for viewing at the Tigard City Library or a copy may be purchased at the Community Development Services counter. You may also contact City Planning staff and ask what the standards are for a specific issue. Be prepared, however, that you may not LIKE all the standards, but at least you- know what they are. If a development meets the code standards, it can proceed. • What applications are you (the developer) applying for? When do you expect to submit the ' application(s) so that neighbors can review it? What changes or additions are expected prior to submittal? F Will the decision on the application be made by City Staff, Hearings Officer, Planning Commission or City Council? How long is the process? (timing)/ • At what point in the process are citizens given notice and the opportunity to provide input? t Has a pre-application conference been held with City of Tigard Staff? ✓ Have any preliminary requirements been addressed or have any critical issues. been identified? ' ✓ What City Planner did you speak with regarding this project? (This person' is generally the Planner. assigned to the land use case and the one to contact for additional information). 19REETS • Will there be a traffic study done? What are the preliminary traffic impacts anticipated as a result of the development and how do you propose to mitigate the impacts if necessary? What street improvements (including sidewalks) are proposed? What connections to existing streets are proposed? Are streets proposed to be public or private? What are the proposed street and sidewalk widths? • What are the emergency access requirements and what is proposed to meet those requirements? Q MI G D D S1 What is the current zoning? What uses are allowed under this zoning? Will there be a re-zone requested by the developer? If yes, to what zone? How many units are proposed for the development and what is the minimum and maximum density allowed in the zone? ID4NAGE AND WATER QUALITY • What is your erosion .control and drainage plan What is the natural slope of the property? What are the grading plans? Is there a water quality facility planned within the development and where will it be located? Who will own and maintain the facility? LMMD DS UP G • What are the tree removal plans and what is proposed to mitigate for trees removed? L What are the landscaping plans? What buffering or fencing is required and/or proposed? The following is a list of questions developed by a subgroup of the Citizen Involvement Team. These uestions are intended to aid you in formulating your own questions for proposed development in your krea. Feel free to ask more or alter the questions to address your own unique concerns and interests. °b n• n,tm.n, nDn+aMu xtaaaeor:tn n amuFan OEOORAGNIC INFORMATION SYSTEM VICINITY MAP NEW LIBRARY v' . Tigard Area Map nDxuDn n( N nDmaua ntanavu / nDl~IiN 0 200 400 600 Feet xDna/Da n nu1~00Na0 nt 1D0atlM 1"= 453 feet atmutw tom ntmuan n'nouao~ 8001O nDxWaWI City of Tigard ~I nlilaaMlSl Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd u cr - - 7(503.63 97223 87 C-) SW AR N r (503) 639-4171 171 S80P""I__ IdtpJ/v .ci.t(ard.or.us Plot date: Oct 2, 2002; C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR 2S102DD-05800 1995-102 PARTITION PLAT ' OWNERS OF LOTS 1 & 2 , 0 ' 2S102DD-01200 AMARIR JEANNE M AUMAN & R AHMED AMARI , 13615 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223 ' 2S102DD-00902 BANTA MICHAEL CHARLES SR & RUTH 8878 SW EDGEWOOD ST ' TIGARD, OR 97223 ' 2S102DD-01500 BLICK CARL J DONA JEAN 8740 SW O'MARA TIGARD, OR 97223 2S 102DA-00900 CHARBONNEAU LARRY & WELSH ROBIN 13337 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223 ' 2S10100-01201 COE MANUFACTURING CO THE ' P 0 BOX 520 PAINESVILLE, OH 44077 ' 2S10200-00900 COLLING CHARLES W 13835 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DD-00901 COLLING CHARLES W 13835 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S 102DA-00690 EIKREM A PO BOX 82824 PORTLAND, OR 97282 ' 2S10100-01200 FIELDS FRED W ' 1149 SW DAVENPORT PORTLAND, OR 97201 2S102DA-00600 FIELDS FRED W 1149 SW DAVENPORT PORTLAND, OR 97201 2S102DD-00100 FIELDS FRED W 1149 SW DAVENPORT PORTLAND, OR 97201 2S102DD-00200 FIELDS FRED W 1149 SW DAVENPORT PORTLAND, OR 97201 2S102DD-01603 HOLLAND RONALD P MARY L 8850 SW EDGEWOOD TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DD-01400 HOLSTEIN MARVIN R/LORETTA R TRS 8710 SW OMARA TIGARD, OR 97223 2S 102DD-05600 HUDSON KATHLEEN L 13705 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S10100-00600 JEMPAK PARTNERS LLC 7034 SW 83RD AVE PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S10200-01601 JENSEN DAVID L AND LOIS C 8840 SW EDGEWOOD TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DD-01300 KRAEMER JULIA A & MARK W PO BOX 80665 PORTLAND, OR 97280 2S 102DD-01604 LASNIEWSKI WILLIAM L AND TERESA A 8860 SW EDGEWOOD TIGARD, OR 97223 I 2S 102DA-00100 ' MAGNO LLC 8800 SW COMMERICAL ST TIGARD, OR 97223 ' 2S102DD-01501 O'FARRELL WILLIAM B & PEGGY JO ' 3311 E MERCER SEATTLE, WA 98112 2S102DD-05700 REUTHER DEBBIE 11900 SW JAMES CT 1 TIGARD, OR 97223 ' 2S102DA-00800 SCHALTZ RANDY A & MARGARET C 13335 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97224 2S102DA-00300 ' SCHRAMM ANN M C/o KIM WILLIAM YOSHIO & NINA VO 8770 SW BURNHAM ST TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DD-00400 SOLARES HOMES L L C BY NORRIS BEGGS & SIMPSON LOAN SVC DEPT 121 SW MORRISON #200 ' PORTLAND, OR 97204 2S102DD-01100 SOLIS EDGAR TRUSTEE PO BOX 231193 ' TIGARD, OR 97281 ' 2S102DD-01301 STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRASPORTATION ' RIGHT OF WAY SECTION 417 TRANSPORTATION BLDG SALEM, OR 97310 2S102DA-00701 TIGARD CHRISTIAN CHURCH 13405 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223 2S 102DA-00704 TIGARD CITY OF ' 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 • • 2S102DD-00401 TIGARD CITY OF 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DA-00402 TIGARD CITY OF 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DA-00400 TIGARD CITY OF 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DA-00401 TIGARD CITY OF 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DA-00200 TIGARD CITY OF 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S 102DA-00500 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT 23J ATTN: BUSINESS MANAGER 6960 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DD-01600 TINNIN ROBERT 0 ELAINE M 8876 SW EDGEWOOD STREET TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DD-01602 TOKUDA KAZUHIDE AND CAROL LYN 8870 SW EDGEWOOD ST TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102DD-00300 ZANDER DENELL D CAROL M 13700 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223 11111111M 111111M M M 1♦ M 11111M 111111M M M M M 11111111M 111111M M M M M CITY-OF TIGARD COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT TEAM (CIT) SUBCOMMITTEES E$T' C1T EST C~1'1' `EAST O T i 1 T ~ I C n 90 Ed & Fran Egan Jack Biethan Naomi Gallu - Sally Christensen 6 Debra Seeman 14635 SW Bull Mountain Road 15525 SW 109' Avenue 11285 SW 78 Avenue 15685 SW 16 Avenue 13372 SW aearview Way Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Earl & Marilyn Elias Carolyn Minch " Sue Rorman ' Mary Ann Melvin Mary Skelton 10 35 SW W l S 13540 SW Village Glenn Drive 15025 SW 141 Avenue d O 9 224 Avenue 11250 SW 82 Ti d OR 97223 10395 SW Bonanza Way Ti d OR 97224 a nut 3 treet d Ti OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigar , R 7 gar , gar , gar , Craig Minor Ellen Beilstein °i John Snyder nd Stephen Bicker ' Kathleen Anderson 14210 SW Wndsong Court Avenue 14630 SW 139 I 1100 SW 82 Avenue Avenue 14235 SW 97 12132 SW Lansdowne Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 91223 Paul E. Owen Charlie & Larie Stalzer Jack Biethan Mark Bogert Jack Biethan 10335 SW Highland Drive 14781 SW Juliet Terrace 15525 SW 109ei Avenue" ~ Ti d OR 97224 14445 SW 100°' Avenue Ti d OR 91224 15525 SW 109°' Avenue Ti d OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 gar , gar , gar , Beverly Froude Twyla Brady Don & Dorothy Erdt " 12200 SW Bull Mountain Road 9360 SW Edgewood Street 13760 SW 121 Avenue .Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Craig Smelter Debra Muir Suzanne Riles 14900 SW 103'd Avenue 15065 SW 79°i Avenue 13215 SW Genesis Loop Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Joan Best Sue Siebold 10705 SW Murdock Lane, #F2 15374 SW Thurston Lane. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Kath Palmer Tim Esav do Jc hn Tigard House PO Box 230695 14260 SW High Tor Drive Tigard, OR 97281 .Tigard, OR 97224 ` . , Jack Biethan Jeanette Phelps 15515 SW 109' Avenue 15305 SW Bull Mountain Road Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 91224 PLEASE NOTE: In addition to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject site, notice of meetings on land use proposals shall be sent to all names on this list. • 0 I:\curp1nVnasters\rev1s&RC1T SubcommltteeS.mst Revised: 28-Feb-2000 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD. MEETING NOTICE 1 1 IMPORTANT~"NOTICE THE ~IP~LICANT IS REQUIRED T0' MAIL THE CITY OFfT1GARD~A COPY OF THE N I, H130K Ogp'fikETING!NOTICE THAT.'j RT~IIt S TO THISAFFIDAVIT AVTI♦E SAME f[~IEwP~ROPERTY i OWNERS'ARE MA) ED' NOTICE;;TO:THE SW RES'S BELOW " r City of Tigard Plannmg'Drv~s~on I3I25'SW' HallBoulevard ;`Tigar"d, OAR :97223=81189 IN. ADDITION, THE,APPLICANT :SHALL: SUBMIT ,.THIS AFFIDAVIT & ;COPIES 'OF ALL NOTICES AT aTHE 71ME OF (APPLICATION: MAILING: , being duly sworn, depose and say that on the ~ day of 2 d I caused to have mailed to each o~,the persons on t e attached list, a•notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. ' I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly add essed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at l/ar~~ with postage prepaid thereon. Signature (In the presence of a No46 Public) POSTING: I, do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed a.~ affec 'ng the I nd located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently egi tered) a r l0 5 /DW. ZdU as X25 / 706 a-~ and did on the V'~ day of 6' , 20a Z _ personally pKsst notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to ' discuss the proposal. 25/ L D~ G •y[.~S! / The sign was posted at ~ you posted notice on property) Signature (In the presence of a N ry Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF ©eE C.? 0 ) ' County of Mul 7~4 d AkL ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the S~r day of (SL(° fd7~ , 20Z 2 , 1 1 OFFICIAL SEAL BARBARA M MC CULLOUGH NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO A331798 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEBRUARY 21, 2004 i•'ARY PUBLIC OF OREGON Commission Expires: Applicant, please complete•the information below: NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Address or General Location of Subject Property: Subject Property Tax Map(s) and Lot #(s): hNogh4)aCylmasterslaffidavit of maiirg-posting neighbodwd meeting.doc 1 1 1 1 1 1 This evening is an opportunity for you to continue communi to share your thoughts about the design of our 0 Oty new library. We encourage your input to tell us meeting your vision for the new library, what you see as for the new the library's role in the community, the features you would like to see in it, and view what has Y been developed to date on the design by the 80 architectural team of SRG Partnership. You have tir"r-%rd librar the opportunity to talk directly to the library staff and the architectural design team about the design and see the progress and approach to the design to date. Please walk through the stations in the room and let your thoughts be heard, ask questions, and become part of the library design direction. The stations include: Site design, Children's area, Adult's area, and Community area. You may leave your written comments on the bottom of this handout or at the stations on "stickys" or flip charts. Ask questions and show your creativity. A &N - I tonight's agenda 1 1 7:00-7:30 Community input opportunity • 7:30,8:00 Presentation of design progress and community input 8:00-8:30 Community input opportunity next community meeting: December 11 Plan on seeing how your comments have been integrated into the design. When 1 step into this library, I cannot understand why I ever step out o it. Marie de Sevigne SRGPARTNERSHIP Architecture Planning Interiors M M M M M M M = = M W = = M w = ~ ~ New Tigard Library Community Meeting Wednesdav, October 16, 2002 Name Address Phone Email L 1l /vd 7o 1( 3 Gr -7 0 A T c q13~ 7C0 ~0 L4 `5a-( Zufn.11 4774 Y J~ ) 7 -4c,01 LEFZ-EX Lw UR-)74LjNk, jc/u ~t ~~~z c ct S /~o?Pv SLJ 7.~~~f 6039 - .5 u c~ < t l vt !7!~ G,~n r- l•J - / 1. _ Li, v! . l ' to(; l Z, - a ^ . Il i C S ~~l 1 d#~:~ ~C~ ~v -Ie 34 zS f Cam/ ~ i G. ~"C/G ~ ` l / J ; 0 New Tigard Library Community Meeting Wednesday, October 16, 2002 Name Address Phone Email SC5' co 9 `~'14 S~\~S 4 -~.,✓1~, C~ m zzz s Sb3 sz~r- ~Gc-i6 L ~l~ ,r Icy Q . .j~ SI.J K~-~,,.1~z.~, ~ SC? Ej~i 779r 10~.;~~ t. its ~✓c d~~~~' ,o~' 4pu ~L~~ ~Y' Y`~7Z L q' ~2' -CIXk C9~ Ct~1 i ~Dm „ ~Ma ~°Sw L~ P~ moo'>- 2sc 2 7 2 lZticl. ( 15(c5~ 114 ~ I' I ~ b -~(c~ -0 73? S~ c ~C c: C~ ~i~ . ccn %J r , I V }~y % { Sv ✓ - i'Q ! SZL ~ ~ /J mac? S~ C7 0 J 14-Z4-0 .5u) Tr 5Z3 S?lF- :21-?G ~4°~~~Ju..~a.Cam Ac New Tigard Library Community Meeting Wednesday October 16, 2002 Name Address Phone Email - f to-, cll.e,PL MSS, C ~3 ,7 (2- .1 GL~,1`i-e,2.rn1~~✓ l 3~S~S 56-~ • ~,li 81~--~'~ ~ ~f~`~ - ~Z`f~ 1 • 0 ~w w w r w~ w w~ it r w r w w New Tigard Library Community Meeting Wednesdav, October 16, 2002 Name Address Phone Email ICE o t?31( efFr0e,) i CsO~ Si;i N f'y~ E --1-, 6.4 Ir o y~ax 17 7- I 1 0 0 I ZOO[i [LZV8 ON YH/%Z) ZO:VT a ZOOZ/90/ZT 1 t t 1 e 11 s • New Tigard Library Community Meeting Citizen Comments and Suggestions October 16, 2002 Site and Miscellaneous • Reader board - electronic • Advertising klosk for upcoming events, etc. • Money set aside for artwork • Maintain as many trees as possible • Preserve wetlands • More volunteers - esp. weekends • Greenway access - trail • Align O'Mara with Wall and traffic signal • Reasonably sized parking spaces • Would you consider doing away with the flat roof? An exposed ceiling of natural wood with peaks gives a feeling of space. • Are there windows to any view of trees - so peaceful? • Consider multi-level parking to save land • Eco Roof - plants growing on roof (slows down storm water) • Make trail low impact/out of wetlands - consider boardwalk trail • Site C most sensitive to landscape • Spacious circulation workroom • Better interior traffic pattern than Beaverton • More checkout stations arranged more efficiently • Intercom system throughout both floors • Book drop close to building • Plan adequate space for servers and technical support for computers and electronic technology • Consider carefully the geotechnical report when siting the building so as to avoid huge cost and environmental disturbance in foundation work. Further away from creek, less it will cost to build foundation - ground less spongy • Site C Is prettier, but it may make more sense to build Site A if it allows you to build on firmer ground Community Room • Will all the seating options be available? OR is seating permanent? • Who can use this room? • Any kitchen facilities? Z d bLt TL£t199fi 'ON/10:tF1 'LS/Z0:V1 ZO ,9 'ZI (I HA) ous wouzq ' c090 [LZV8 ON XH/XS] ZO:VT~ ZOOZ/90/ZT t 1 I t • • How high are ceilings? Will they be-high enough for good projection? • Acoustics? What are the plans? • What do other libraries do for community rooms? What have you learned from these libraries? • Location of rest rooms - only through community room. Not through entry/lobby • Divider for rooms? (moveable) • Quiet/study rooms? • Cafd? Who is running It? • Would like current technology for presentations - for example: easy computer hookups, large screen presentations, good sound system,! teleconference. • Tables and chairs for cafe? • Is room available for catered events? • Is the storage room separate? • Would there be a charge for room? • What equipment would be available for public use? • Will there be books for sale at the new library? Children t • How many restrooms? • Will the courtyard be secure/fenced? • Will the program room have a sink and work surface? • How about portable step seating or stage for audience and performers? • Designated space for craft donations; sign or bin • Will "parent shelf" still be a part of the children's room? (parent educational materials) • It would be nice for kids to be able to walk the Fanno Creek Trail and have access to the children's room • Will there be computers In the children's area, both catalog and Internet? • Explain what "expanding collections" mean • Low levels only for picture books (i.e., .one or two high - three at the most) Adults • Where are the computers (public work stations) located? • What is the training room for? • Will audio and visual materials be interfiled with books? • Where will juvenile materials be kept? • Conference room for public use? £ d VLVIL£fi989s 'ON/IO:iii 'LS/ZO:i~i ZO .9 'ZI (IMA) I OUS WOVE UM ON XH/X11 MtT I ZOOZ/so/ZT • • Will there be more computers for the public? How many? Where? How many printers? : Where will microfiche/fiim machine be located? • Are there bathrooms on the second floor? Will "new books" have a greater presence than AV materials? • Will foreign languages have a separate section? • Will there be a quiet project area for homework, papers, research to spread out? • Move the History Room (or have a room about Natural History) closer to 1 the Houghton Room and/or in a place to capture the out-of- doors/wetland? • What is the purpose of the smaller quiet room? Will there be several small quiet study rooms or just one area? After presentation - Please have a fireplace - it will be a great, comfortable feature. 1 1 ) I:/lib/new library resource team/Input from Community Meeting 10-16-02.doc. I b d bLfii ILfib986 'ON/I0: b I '-LS/Z0 : t l ZO .9 'Z I ( I2i3) DES WOUA t t NON=RESIDENTIAL ~ o r;MCO~ 4/1 IWAPPLICANT: C, ~ ~ 04' -T~~ qa O AGENT: V.~fjm'ip- dJ Q Ten Phone: ( ) Phone: (sc-J (D'3g -qji, e.44 315 PROPERTY LOCATION: 1 ADDREWGEHERAL LOCATION: a ST J 4 A,, 3j j Ql' i'~Srr ~(-Or1 C t,~ ((clt ~frpm F. U La e AP- ~ S k~ 1 -)S* '10:1 nA -a(aon aEina-f n- mGY1 3 00 00 TAX MAP(SYLOT #(S): s; a i pry l ; - - nn n(t = 7T NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: SDr~ PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: es. ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: 2- is CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM (C.I.T.) AREA: o u ; u ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18. 5 k O 1 ' MINIMUM LOT SIZE: ~J n sq. ft.. Average Min. lot width: N A ft. Max. building height: 3s ft. Setbacks: Front a0 ft. Side ID ft. Rear : <n ft. Comer Z~o ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: `dQ216 Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area:' Co [dNEIGN8ORN000 MEETING [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Hand®uU THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S), 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. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes p NON-Resides U App z4wPlxvu Division Sec5m Page Of 9 of NABRATIVE [Refer to Code Chapter 18.3901 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. (~,/IHPACT STUDY [Beier to Code Secdons 18.390.040 and 18290.0501 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 1 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. ❑ ACC [Refer to Chapters 18.105 and 18.7651 Mini m number of accesses: Minimum access width: Minimu pavement width: All drive ys and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in us queuing areas:. ❑ WALKWAY BEQUIR ENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.705.030) ' WALKWAYS S LL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOG LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to th streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connect io between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless imp ctical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and ' neighboring development 0/i; To es i I; C_a~ 00 ❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS [Refer to Code hapter 18.7301 ➢ STREETS: the centerline of 1 ➢ LOWER INTENSITY ZONES:` ➢ FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE Y ❑ SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Rt BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - height of 75 feet provided that: S along the site's boundary. Code Section 18.730.0103J dings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a ➢ A maximum building floor area to site are ratio (FAR) of 1..to 1 will exist; ➢ All actual building setbacks will be at least alf ('h) of the building's height; and ➢ The structure will not abut a residential zone district. ❑ BUFFERING AND SCREENING [Refer to Code Chapter 18.745 In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHE REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developmen ,especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain s e perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas m t be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve'a alance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be req ired; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may on be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required bu r area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Apprication Conference Notes NONRas"fial App6ca6MRWdN oivwon sedan Page 2 of 9 . , w L_.j I nvw U rXV_WUU\CLl E.)lJrrcr[ Vvlu 1 no d Iiume to Lur r0 sal area are: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. eet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, Sl T OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: ❑ LANDSCAPING. [Refer to ode Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.7051 STREET TREES AR REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC-OR PRIVATE STREET as ell as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within t e public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street tre s must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet- above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the p posed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be btained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TR FOR EVERY SEVEN. (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking area in order to provide a vegetative-canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special desi features which effectively screen the parking. lot areas from view. These. design features may incl de the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised ' planters. ❑ RECYCLING [Refer to Code Chapter 18.75 Applicant should CONTACT FRAN HISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locat g 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. Lenny, ing is the contact person and can be reached at (503) 625-6177. ❑ PARKING [Refer to Code Section 18365.0401 REQUIRED parking for this type of use: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): ` 1 t 1 t t t NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES'%.,MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows; ➢ Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 niches x 18 feet, 6 inches. ➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 in`Shes x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width a stripe that 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 dimensl ns, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon re est. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and a appropriate sign shall be posted. ➢ BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, OMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas pr ected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. ❑ LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.765.0801 Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF ,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 NON-Residedal AppGcabonfi fanning Oi 6m Section separates the parking space from an adjo ing space. Note: A maximum of three (3) feet of the vehicle verhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking ace depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum perce ge requirements. Page 3 of 9 ❑ BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Sc Lion 18.7651 BICYCLE RACKS are requ ed FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND" INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle rack shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. I/SENSMVE 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 precise identlfv sensitive land areas, and their boundaries is the responsibility of the applicant Areas 1 meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be dearly indicated on plans submitted with the development aaDlication. t 1 1 Chapter 18.775 also-provides. regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIRITFn WITHIN FI nnnpl AINR ❑ STEEP SLOPES fR r to bode Section 18715.080.111 When STEEP OPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which a dresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080. . The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recom endations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. ~CLEANWATER SERVICES [CWSI BUTTER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96a4419SA Regulations -Chapter 31 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 MANUALIRESOLUTION & ORnFR 96-" • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 0 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% 1 10 to < 50 acres 30 feet 1 > 50 to <I 00 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' Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankfut flow) for streamstrivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor, shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. SVegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 6The 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 9 W Residwfial AppicAm"a wirq Dvsim Sec6m Restrictions in the V etate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, ' lawns, application of chemicals, 1 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 comdor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. ' CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service 1 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 [Ref to Code Chapter 183801 SIGN PE ITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A " uidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyon Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development r iew application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's revie TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.CJ 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 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: 0 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; 0 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.;. 0 Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to beremoved be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; ' 0 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. ITI GATION [Refer to Code Section 18390.06013 dM ' 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 9 NON-Residential A ikafionlPlaiming Division Section ➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would ' not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: 0 The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated 1 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. OCLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 187951 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. a size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. d WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT [Refer to Code Section 18.7910301 The WATER. RESOURCES (WR) OVERLAY DISTRICT implements the policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is intended to resolve conflicts between development and conservation . of significant wetlands, streams and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifically, this chapter allows reasonable economic use of property while establishing clear and objjective standards to: protect significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designated riparian corridors; maintain and enhance water quality;- maximize flood storage capacity; preserve native plant cover; minimize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish - and wildlife habitats; and conserve scenic, recreational and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the "safe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR .660, Division 23). These provisions require that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualatin. River, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow less than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). ' ➢ Major streams in Tigard include FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIBUTARY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps Minor streams in Tigard include Summer Creek, Deny Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain short tributaries of the Tualatin River. Riparian Setback Area: . This AREA IS MEASURED HORIZONTALLY FROM AND PARALLEL TO. MAJOR STREAM OR . ' TUALATIN RIVER TOP-OF-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The riparian setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). ' CITY OF TIGA Pre-A n Conference Notes NONAm dwU AWcatim"arw ug Division Section Page 6 of 9 1 t 1 1 ➢ The standard .TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. ➢ The MAJOR STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. ➢ ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no riparian setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Cleanwater Services (CWS) standards adopted ' and administered by the City of Tigard. ❑ RIPARIAN SURACK REDUCTIONS Mefef to Code Section 18.797.1001 The DIR TOR MAY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFIC REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJ STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK BY AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or ' pervious surfaces otherwise prohibited by this chapter, provided that, equal or better protection for entified major stream resources is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement o panan vegetation in preserved portions of the riparian setback area. TO BE ELIGIBLE F A RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor s substantially disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on the Vegetation Study required by Section 18.797.100 that demonstrates all of the fo wing: Native plant species rrently cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; ➢ The tree canopy cur- fly covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been re ved from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; ➢ That vegetation was not r oved contrary to the provisions of Section 18.797.100 regulating removal of native plant spe 'es; ➢ That there will be no infringe ent into the 100-year floodplain; and ➢ The average slope of the ripan n area is not greater than 20%. ❑ ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet u Lots created as part of a partition must 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT E; parcel is less than 1 % times the minimum lot CODE CHAPTERS 18.330 (conditional use) 18.340 pinecws Interpn b&m) 8.350 (Planned Development) 18.360 (site Development Review) 18.370 (vadanoeslAdp tnents) 18.380 (zoning Magext Amendments) 18.385 (&oenane= Pwnib) ._{C./ _ 18.390 (Dedsion tdakhV ProoeduresAmpad swy) 18.410 pot une Adjustments) _ 18.420 (rand Partitions) 18.430 (suhdnrisions) 7 18.510 (Residential zoning oistr&) 18.520 p nmenaal zoning oist icts) 18.530 pndusbw zoning mwcts) CITY OF Tr" Pre-Application Conference Notes NON Residential Appkafioni"anning Division Section to Code Section 18.810.0601 lot is created through the minor land partition process. a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum =D 2% TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the of the applicable zoning district. 18.620 (rgard Triangle Design standards) 18.630 (washington square Regional center) 18.705 (AmewEEgrewnirouution) 18.710 (Accessory Residential units) 18.715 pen* computasa►s) 18.720 (Design comp a ty standards) V/ 18.725 (Envaomnental Performance standards)- 18.730 (Exceptions To Development standards) 18.740 (HKistmt overlay) - 18.742 (Home o=vawn Pemit) 18.745 landscaping & s«eening standards) 18.750 (Manu(acfiuewAow Horne Regulations) 18.755 (Lued solid WastelReq&v swage) 18.760 (Nonoontonnirg siltation) - 18.765 (offstreetParlmguadmg Requaernents) _Z18.775 (sensitive lands Review) - 18.780 (signs) - 18.785 (Tawomry use Permits) 8.790 (Tree Removal) 18.795 (vmw ciearanoe Areas) 8.797 (water Resonaces MR) overlay DiswA 798 (wreim communication Facmws) 18.810 (sbeo & utmty kwmemmt standards) Page 7 of 9 1 ~ ADOMONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: • r Servo FA6.c r 7* Ar-ec, S-10 1,)Qek~ ' Accp-s S ~ C.B~vn ~rL,rG1~ . 1 . x 4o ap ncJ. ve G-ye a s r V)a .e Tft~F T o~c 1c^., (9f) )W'1+;c_A0" 1 f61 PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. held by the City Council. with the Commission making a An additional public hearing shall be APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 NONAesidenU AppkAm Pla v*V Division Section The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or. additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or ' protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard ~4EraQ~ Na b~-e~ A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is availab from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less 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. 1 1 1 t 1 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 OBTAINED). LITTON PERMIT IS PLEASE NOTE: The conference an noes cannot cover a e requirements an aspects related o site planning that should Me to the developpment of your site. plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the 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 .[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: flit OF TIGARD PLANNING 61VISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 E-MAIL- (:dl's fast name)@d.tigard.or.us TITLE 18 (aTY OF TIGARD'S (OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (ODE) INTERNET ADDRESS: WWW.Ci tigard.ar us HApa"asters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 1-Nov-2001 (Engineering section: preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes NO Residential AWkatiomMa m" Division Section Page 9 of 9 CITY OF TIGARD I GENERAL INFORMATION • • PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE REQUEST 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX.' (503) 684-7297 Applicant: C KA. Address: 131,25- SW 'HA I) BIU oI Phone: 50 II City: Ta~ chart, F Zip: Q-1aa 3 LO Contact Person: V61p) 6e, Kinug&. O,Phone: "(P3 , 1-11 ' X315 Property Owner/Deed Holder(s): & : F~ S 1141 SW Dm/en nt h Address: mQ t f a1'1-a-o I Phone: City: Zip. Property Address/Location(s): GO C~: I 9a~ A- 0Hall BIS4- aC 4,oss D 1 Matra S Ci~' Tax Map & Tax Lot #(s): J; r& 16 D a X0_0 1Ay Matt 2S 12t~~} ASI 2M ' Site Size: I (o AG PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE INFORMATION All of the information identified on this form are required to be submitted by the applicant and received by the Planning Division a ' minimum of one (1) week prior to officially scheduling a pre-application conference date/time to allow staff ample time to prepare for the meeting. r A pre-application conference can usually be scheduled within 1-2 weeks of the Planning Division's receipt of the request for either Tuesday or Thursday mornings. Pre-application conferences are one (1) hour long and are typically held between the hours of 9:00-11:00 AM. ' PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCES MUST BE SCHEDULED IN PERSON AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER FROM 8:00-4:00/MONDAY-FRIDAY. r IF MORE THAN 4 PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND THE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IN YOUR GROUP, PLEASE INFORM THE CITY IN ADVANCE SO THAT ALTERNATE ROOM ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROUP. fir` i 4 '~"'.~a- 3,t+.~ LR"k'~' .,Zf~ ~'1v iS,f~. FORSTAFF,USEONLYk, ~ . Case N9.: Receipt No L `~APplication Accepted'13.y ~ z'-f,~wr~t~ N DATE OF, PRE APP..,a 1 x. Z.r PRE APP= HELD:WITH .~G?,1~-,. ti ~ s ` j the ~ yx C t .~tk lreviSed~Pre,App Requestdoc Rev .1216/2000 lcurpinVnasters REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS (Note: applications will not be accepted. without the required submittal elements) ❑ Pre-Application Conf. Request Form 2 COPIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING: Brief Description of the Proposal and any site-specific questions/issues that you would like to have staff research prior to the meeting. ® Site Plan. The site plan must show the proposed lots and/or building layouts drawn to scale. Also, show the location of the subject property in relation to the nearest streets; and the locations of r1rivPwnvc nn thp_ SubieCt DrODerty and across the street. _ _ _ _ ® The Proposed Uses. Topographic information. Include Contour Lines if Possible. If the Pre-Application Conference is for a MONOPOLE project, the applicant must attach a copy of the letter and proof in the form of an affidavit of mailing, that the collocation protocol was completed (see Section 18.798.080 of the Tigard ,n Community Development Code). Fee $240.00 gem - r- V,n - 1 f R f f S h erence equest or Placement o urcharge for t e new Pre-application Con Library Description of Proposal: A site east of Hall Boulevard has been identified for the construction of a new City Library. The City intends to place surcharge material at the ' proposed building site this summer to provide sufficient time for the new material to settle over the existing soft, organic soil. The material will be graded and compacted to an elevation that is ready for construction of the building foundation in the future. A ' permit is requested to allow the City to perform the work. 1 1 r 1 1 t 1 1 1 ► R~C~3V=D ~ File Number Clean Wate Services l 4 !uij Our commitment is clear. GROUP i1nvrC idc7 1E Clean Water Services . Service Provider.Letter Jurisdiction Tigard Date February 7, 2003 Map & Tax Lot 2S102DD00100 200 Owner City of Tigard 2S102DA00600 Agustin Duenas Site Address SW Hall Blvd at Omara St Contact Group Mackenzie/Geraldine Tigard Address PO Box 69039 Proposed Activity Construction of new Portland, OR 97201 library Phone 503-224-9560 This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (R&O 00-7). YES NO i YES NO Natural Resources Assessment (NRA) ® ❑ Alternatives Analysis i Required ❑ Submitted (Section 3.02.5) District Site Visit Date: ( ❑ J ® { Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis ❑ ❑ Concur with NRA/or submitted information I ` ® ❑ I i Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis i ❑ ❑ Sensitive Area Present ~ ® ❑ ~ Vegetated Corridor El ❑ On-Site { Averaging Sensitive Area Present Off-Site ® i ❑ ' Vegetated Corridor Mitigation Required ❑ Vegetated Corridor i Present On-Site I ® ❑ ' On-Site Mitigation I Width of Vegetated Corridor (feet) i 50 feet Off-Site Mitigation ❑ I Condition of Vegetated I Corridor Degraded Planting Plan Attached ® i ❑ Enhancement Required ® I ❑ ' Enhancement/restoration start and completion dates To be determined Encroachment into Vegetated Corridor i I ® i El SAT (no longer required) i ❑ (Section 3.02.4) , I i Type and Square Footage Vegetated Geotechnical Report ❑ L~j of Encroachment I Stormwater outfall ' required Allowed Use (Section 3.02.4(b)) ® ❑ i Conditions Attached ® El i This Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. Page 1 of 3 File Number FTIT17 In order to comply with Clean Water Services (the District) water quality protection requirements the project must comply with the following conditions: No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the sensitive area which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.3.a (1), (2), or (3). 2. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the vegetated corridor which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.4.b.1) (a through h). 3. The vegetated corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum of 50 feet wide, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive area. 4. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction the vegetated corridor and water quality sensitive areas shall be surveyed, staked, and temporarily fenced per approved plan. During construction the vegetated corridor shall remain fenced and undisturbed except as allowed by Section 3.02.4.b.4. and per approved plans. 5. Prior to any activity within the sensitive area, the applicant shall gain authorization for the project from the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The applicant shall provide the District with copies of all DSL and USACE project authorization permits. No activity is proposed in Sensitive Areas. 6. For vegetated corridors 50 feet wide or greater, the first 50 feet closest to the sensitive area shall be equal to or better than a "good" corridor condition as defined in Section 3.02.6, Table 3.2. 7. An approved Oregon Department of Forestry Notification is required for one or more trees harvested for sale, trade, or barter, on any non-federal lands within the State of Oregon. 8. Clean Water Services shall be notified 72 hours prior to the start and completion of enhancement/restoration activities. Enhancement/restoration activities shall comply with the guidelines provided in Appendix E: Landscape Requirements (R&0 007: Appendix E). 9. Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the vegetated corridor shall be removed. During removal of invasive vegetation care shall be taken to minimize impacts to existing native trees and shrub species. 10. Enhancement/restoration of the vegetated corridor shall be provided in accordance with the attached planting plan. 11. Protection of the vegetated corridors and associated sensitive areas shall be provided by the installation of permanent fencing or other demarcation between the development and the outer limits of the vegetated corridors. 12. Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with Section 2.11.2 of R&O 00-7. If at any time during the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80% survival level, the Owner shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity and the two year maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting. Page 2 of 3 File Number 27t3 13. Performance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1.4 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2.2. 14. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) for Erosion Control, in accordance with the CWS Erosion Control Technical Guidance Manual shall be used prior to, during, and following earth disturbing activities. 15. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from the District or its designee is required pursuant Ordinance 27, Section 4.B. 16. Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with Section 3.13 of R&O 00-7. 17. Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the extent practicable. 18. The water quality Swale and detention pond shall be planted with District approved native species and designed to blend into the natural surroundings. 19. Removal of invasive non-native species by hand is required in all vegetated corridors rated .good". Replanting is required in any cleared areas larger than 25 square feet. 20. Final construction plans shall clearly depict the location and dimensions of the sensitive area and the vegetated corridor (indicating good, marginal, or degraded condition). Sensitive area boundaries shall be marked in the field. 21. Final construction plans shall include landscape plans. Plans shall include in the details a description of the methods for removal and control of exotic species, location, distribution, condition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preserved, and installation methods for plant materials. Plantings shall be tagged for dormant season identification. Tags to remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes. 22. A Maintenance Plan shall be included on final plans including methods, responsible party contact information, and dates (minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September 30). 23. Should final development plans differ significantly from those submitted for review by the District, the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and if necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider Letter. 24. The applicant has indicated that this is a "stand alone" project without proposed impacts. If any proposed road extensions are a vital or essential part of the proposed library project, they must be considered together, in order to look at potential alternatives to impacting sensitive areas. Please call (503) 846-3613 with any questions. zo~ - /4~2 Heidi K. Berg Site Assessment Coordinator Page 3 of 3 . / 1 I ^ g ~'I v d I' f +I II, I, II gg E J .i ~I i (i \ _ . - t I - i. '1 I I T I` I.I i i I y7-1 { M1 Ipm it y _ I i a A hwal♦e TNT sRCPamnhk% PC mar.I rr•wrkar Faa 4 41- ' V % 21 ! t l t r 'e~1 rl' F~- a>`c- 77 or; RZgp -roper ANW - ~ - _ - ,alb ~ . = - - . 1. _ Q37 3!F ; a \ r:': ~erm .77 -c-..zap r I` ~ _ ~..~f ~ ~r•j', - Berm - = `7F u tv New Tigard Library TIGARD. OREGON LEGEND TREES I IEXISONG~TREE5 TO REMAIN vu SR+EET rt7EE5 ACER RUBNUY 'PEO SUNSET' - Rea S-N gee Pope LFU PANNING LOT FREES ALNUS PUBRA - Ae0 Wn TILIA COROATA - LiOk-Leaf Lineen ra CONIERWS ACCCNt niEES UDOTSIIGI 4 - pHoan Fl~ 11WAn RIGTA FASnCIA ASOWTA - Mogan Cear (ArIaRERIOR ACCENT TREES im.. RUBRA - RM War r ACER aRaNATUY - Vne yepe CERCIS OCCIOENTMIS - w..t- Raalwd POPULVS iREYULOIOIES - Quo" Aapm ~LA~TREE LO S 55 4ITIGAtION a BUFTLP U- AUIU RURRA - ReaZ. ACER aRCMTUY - Vae Mope CERCIS OCCIDENTWS - Wvia m Rodbw FRAXIIUS LATIFOW - Omgan Ae WERCUS GARRYANA - Oregon Wtite Oak SHRUBS / CROUNOCOVER NAIh1: ACCENT PtANNIC ~ORIgA SEPoCFA NELSEN' POLr511CNW YUNTUY - Where Swrafam MAHM" NERVOSA - D.9 Or"- Grape ARCTOSTMNrEL05 UVA-URA - Kl-kk ak iRAGAPU CKOENAS - Conan Strawberry ORNAMENTAL GRASSES - Vaoia PT1llJl INAINE TRAN$(fgN PI,WI_INO a ROSA NOOTNAa1 - Nootka Rase SPIREA OOL'o," - Do." Spi- CORNUS SERICEA '6ANTI' ^ ' mti Reposer Oogw SYMPHORCARPOS ALBA - 5nawaerr> "HONA AOUEFOULM - Oron Grave CORNUS Se-RICE - Rea 0 Dog ooo M13E5 SANGURIEUY - Rea flc ra Currant NNOER a" RANTING k - i ARCro- S1 pA - Kt-okl sck YAHONU AOU.F0W4 - Qraq- Gape CAULTHERU SHALLON - Scat IS~WALE PLANTING I~-'F UfEO RIiJ PMtuN PERENNjA15 uaEp FORBES AND SEDGES INATNEE F140GRASS r CAS NATIVE BUFFER ENHANCEMENT BUFFER PyNTING MATRIX - SEE DIAGRAM BELOW FOR TYPICAL PLANTINGS . Plant Yobnp Bot p Nam C man Name Tat.. BY Pal Natal ^ T a IS W' CPO 4fuuDa I Lot C I LOCATION AND GROUPING OF PENT MATERIALS SHOWN i ABOVE IS FOR EXAMPLE ONLY. SITE CONDITIONS WILL Y DETERMINE BEST LAYOUT OF PLANT MATERIAL. FANMO CREEK 2 I R I I NI I -Law.vW ROT , : -c ep1Fw o r I O;rvrT PLOT L- J OPEN FIELD NOTES: T ALL PLANT-"G AREAS. ACCEPT ""E BU-- E MANCwENT AR A SHALL BE IRRIGATED UTILIZING A FULLY AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SYSTEM. 2. ALL RANTING AREAS SHALL RECEIVE TOPSOIL SOIL AMENDMENTS. AND MULCH AS PER SPECpICATIONS 3. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE ;NSTALEO IN ACCORDANCE WITH RANTING DETAILS AND SPECIFKAnONS I ~ L DESIGN DEVELOPMENT S1,18MITTAL - 01/27/03 nwawr,m UND5GPPMN 71f H - L4.0 r • I- r, R March 18, 2003 o, M O O o• P 0 0 n N Co N Co M in X E 0 u e E EL rn 3 3 U 3 0 0. ,o in m e~ N O. N `O M O o 10 N M F City of Tigard Attention: Brad Kilby 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 • Re: Tigard Library CUP 2003-00001, SLR 2003-00001, VAR 2003-00009 Group Mackenzie Project Number 2020228 Dear Brad: As you are aware, the new library is one of several projects underway or anticipated in this general area of the City. The land use approvals requested by our project team are for the library project and the associated Hall Boulevard half.-street improvements only. All work associated with Wall Street and the adjacent property are separate projects and are not included in the reviews requested at this time. As such, the project is designed to "stand alone." The driveway access, while located in the general alignment of Wall Street, is designed to serve the library site without impacting the sensitive land areas or adjacent development. The library is located and designed to minimize its impacts on the site, resulting in limited sensitive land area disturbance along the vegetative buffer due to sewer lines and outfalls. Based on our meeting with City staff, the following is an addendum to our application and Group includes a request for an adjustment to the minimum driveway spacing requirement; updated Mackenzie. tree mitigation information, updated information on the overall impacts to the Sensitive Lands Incorporated po Area, and updated landscape, bicycle, auto and driveway information. ch1f fe Arectu Interior Design Land Use Planning Chapter 18.705 Adjustment Group Section 18.705.030.H.3 requires "the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a Mackenzie Engineering, collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial Incorporated shall be 600 feet." Hall Boulevard is classified as an arterial street; therefore the spacing Civil/Structural between Omara Street and the proposed library access drive is required to be 600 feet. The Engineering spacing is proposed to be approximately 300 feet. As such, this application includes a request Transportation for an adjustment to this standard. Planning The tradition of Nfackenzie Engineering and Mackenz:esSai ro H:\PROJ ECTS\020228\WP\3c 18il .doc ~onnnues. 1 1 • • Brad Kilby Project Number 2020228 March 18, 2003 Page 2 Section 18.370.020.C.5.a requires that where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to confirm to Code standards with a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access with another parcel cannot be achieved, then an adjustment may be granted by the Director if the criteria of Section 18.370.020.C.5.b are met. The following identifies these criteria and addresses how the proposed access meets each. 1. It is not possible to share access Response: The proposed driveway is located at the southern property line of the site. Shared access with the adjoining property is not possible due to site constraints including significant natural resource areas located along the property line, and the proposed development plans for the property to the south. In addition, the adjoining property is a flag lot, with limited frontage along Hall Blvd. The proposed driveway provides access to the library and is also in the general alignment of the anticipated extension of Wall Street. If Wall Street is extended, then this driveway and any anticipated driveways associated with development to the south will be served from Wall Street. There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street Response: Site constraints, including the floodplain, Fanno Creek, and wetland areas, led the design of the facility to site the library structure in its location directly across from Omara Street. With the location of the building and the Hall Boulevard half-street improvements associated with the project, locating the driveway directly across from Omara Street is not possible. Regardless, the driveway is located to align with the anticipated extension of Wall Street, in its preferred location. If Wall Street is extended, the driveway will be relocated to serve the library directly from Wall Street. If Wall Street is not extended, then the driveway is located at the southernmost point on the site, at the furthest possible distance south from Omara Street while still remaining on the property. Locating the driveway 600 feet north of Omara Street is neither feasible nor desired due to the location on the library on the site and the complex environmental issues associated with crossing Fanno Creek and disturbing additional sensitive lands for a driveway. 3. The access separation requirements cannot be met Response: The access separation requirements cannot be met; hence this request for an adjustment. The requirement is a minimum of 600 feet between driveways and streets; the project is proposing 300 feet. 4. The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access Response: The request is the minimum adjustment required, 300 feet. The driveway is located at the southern property line to be as far from the Omara Steet intersection as possible while still remaining on the subject property. HAPROJECTS\020228\WP\3c 181 1 .doc F, . • • Brad Kilby Project Number 2020228 March 18, 2003 Page 3 The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; Response: The proposed driveway meets all City standards including minimum access width and minimum amount of pavement, except for the distance requirement. This ensures the driveway will result in a safe access. In addition, it should be noted that the driveway is located outside the area of influence for an arterial -150 feet from the intersection, further ensuring the safety of the access. 6. The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. Response: The vision clearance requirements of Chapter 18.79 require a 35-foot vision clearance area on either side of the driveway. As shown on the site plan and the landscape plan, this requirement is met. Tree Mitigation Enclosed is an updated tree plan and analysis. There are 162 trees over 12" in caliper on the site. Of these, 25 trees are proposed for removal with the library project. Therefore, 137 trees are preserved, or 84.57% of the trees over 12". As such, according to Section 18.790.030, no . mitigation is required. Landscape Plan The enclosed updated landscape plan reflects the updated tree plan and no need for mitigation. In addition, based on 104 parking spaces, 15 parking lot trees are required. With this plan , we are utilizing the 5 existing trees within the large central parking lot island as parking lot trees and providing an additional 12 trees, for a total of 17 parking lot trees. Sensitive Lands Review At our meeting last week you requested information regarding the cumulative effect of the impacts included in the Sensitive Lands Review. These impacts were a storm sewer line and outfall and a sanitary sewer line, both located within the 50-foot vegetated corridor around a Locally Significant Wetland, and temporary construction activities within the 100-year floodplain. These impact areas are identified on the attached exhibit. While all impacts disturb less than 50 cubic yards of material individually, collectively these impacts disturb a total of 8,522 SF of area with temporary impacts and 100 SF with permanent impacts. Regardless, the proposed developments within the floodplain and drainageways have minimal impact. The project is designed to propose a net cut and fill of 2 yards, and none of the activities alter the existing channel geometry. Floodplain storage and conveyance capacity remain unchanged and the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood will not increase. No permanent land alteration is proposed, all areas disturbed will be replanted. All wetland buffer areas will be restored upon completion of the installation of the sewer lines and outfall. It should also be noted that Clean Water Services approval for the proposed impacts was issued and a copy included in our application package. DSL approval for the sewerlines and outfall is currently in process. H APROJ ECTS\020228MMc l 811.doc Brad Kilby Project Number 2020228 March 18, 2003 Page 4 Driveway, Bike Parking and Auto Parking The site plan has been modified such that the driveway is now 50 feet wide. This dimension complies with the requirements of Section Our application includes an adjustment to the bike parking requirements. Based on the 48,000 SF library, 48 bicycle parking spaces are required. In our original application, we requested an adjustment to 42 spaces; with the ongoing evolution of the project, we can now only provide 40 bicycle parking spaces. This is still more than sufficient bicycle parking and the justification previously submitted is still applicable to this request. Automobile parking is proposed on-site and at City Hall, within 500 feet of the site. With the widening of the driveway the parking lot has been reconfigured to provide 104 parking spaces on site, with the remaining 16 spaces provided at City Hall. This is only two more spaces than previously identified. Enclosed are updated copies of the site plan, landscape plan, and tree plan. If you have any questions or concerns, or need additional information, please call me at 503-224-9560. Sincerely, Geraldene Moyle, AICP Senior Planner GEM/mpd c: Gus Duenas - City of Tigard Charlie Bahlman - Shields Obletz Johnsen Skip Stanaway - SRG Partnership, P.C. Brian Wethington - GreenWorks, P.C. Brett Arvidson - Kurahashi & Associates HAPROJECTS\020228\WPUc 1811.doe Preliminary Stormwater Report Tigard Public Library Prepared For City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 1/16103 Kurahashi and Associates 15580 SW Jay St. Suite 200 Beaverton, OR 97006 City of Tigard Library Preliminary Stormwater Report 1/16/03 Introduction The City of Tigard intends to construct a library on an undeveloped site adjacent to Hall Boulevard. The 4.99-acre site (developed portion) lies between Hall Boulevard and Fanno Creek. Historically site contained a house with an open field behind the building. The new addition involves adding 1.91 acres of buildings, parking, landscaping and other uses. The site drains to Fanno Creek and eventually the Tualatin River. Appendix C contains a site map of the proposed facilities. Table 1 summarizes the hydrology and hydraulic calculations for the site. The following information provides a preliminary description of the stormwater system. Contributing Areas The. portion of the site under development contains 4.99 acres of which 1.91. acres will convert to impervious surfaces. The entire parcel consists of 3 separate tax lots (T2S RI W Section 2 Lots 100, 200, 600) totaling 14.7 acres. Table 2 contains the individual existing and proposed and impervious surface by tax lot While the site contains a major draw, Hall Boulevard intercepts any off-site runoff. Appendix c contains a drainage map for the site. Site Hydrology Stormwater flows were calculated using the Santa Barbara Unit Hydrograph (SBUH) methodology to determine the site hydrology for both the existing (Predeveloped) and post developed conditions. The Washington County Soil Survey identifies the site soils as Quatama with a classification C (note some Verboort Clays are located in stream corridor). Using this soil type, pervious area CN was established at 86 and the impervious areas received a CN of 98. Appendix A contains the soil information for the site: Table 1 summarizes the SBUH assumptions. Existing Site Flows Based upon a composite CN of 86, existing site runoff flows were calculated for the 2, 5, 10, 25, and 100-year stormwater events. The Time of concentration was estimated using the lag method, and a Type IA-rainfall distribution applied with Clean Water Services (CWS) standard rainfall amounts. Appendix B contains the data and SBUH printouts for the predeveloped conditions. Table 1 summarizes the predevelopment site flows. (Note: Hydroflow by Intellisolve was the software package used to determine flows and make detention calculations.) Tigard Public Library Preliminary Stormwater Report Proposed Site Flows Based upon a composite CN of 91 and a minimum time of concentration of 5 minutes, postdevelopment runoff flows were calculated for the 2, 5, 10, 25, and 100-year stormwater events. Appendix B contains the SBUH printouts for the postdeveloped conditions. (Note: Hydroflow by Intellisolve was the software package used to determine flows and make detention calculations.) Detention System The site discharges to Fanno Creek, which lacks downstream flow capacity restrictions. In the absence of downstream impacts, detention was not included in the project. Water Quality Treatment In order to meet Clean Water Services' water quality requirements, the project includes a water quality swale with a pollution control manhole. Based upon the 0.36-inch water quality storm and the design criteria in the CWS Manual, an preliminary 30-foot by 120-foot swale was included in the southeast corner of the site. Appendix D contains the swale hydraulic calculations. Conveyance The majority of the site conveyance consists of a conventional piped system with manholes, rain drains, cleanouts, catch basins, and other related appurtenances. In the parking lot and building entrance areas, several proposed landscaping swales connect to the conveyance system. Design of the final site conveyance facilities will be designed in accordance with the City of Tigard Plumbing Code. Public System Impacts The proposed facilities avoid impacts to the public system with direct discharge to Fanno Creek. The city's transportation master plan indicates a major arterial along the south site boundary. Site drainage facilities anticipate construction of that roadway. Tigard Public Library Preliminary Stormwater Report 2 Table 1 Tigard Public Library Summary of Storm Drainage Criteria 1/16/03 Pre Development Data Post Development data Soil Type Quatama Group C Quatama Group C Total Area ac 14.7 14.7 Developed Area ac 4.93 4.99 Impervious Area ac 0.03 1.91 Pervious area ac 4.99 3.08 CN- ervious 86 86 CN-Impervious 98 98 CN-Composite 88 91 To min 11 5 Water Quality Volume ft3 na 2496 Water Quality Flow cfs na 0.2 Predevelopment Flows cfs Post development Flows cfs Detention Release. cfs Rainfall inches 2 year 1.3 2.02 na 2.5 5 year 1.93 2.75 na 3.1 10 Year 2.31 3.18 na 3.45 25 Year 2.82 3.74 na 3.9 50 year na na na 4.2 100 year 3.5 4.49 na 4.5 Note Verboort soils also present on site • 0 Tigard Public Library Preliminary Stormwater Report 3 Table 2 Tigard Public Library Impervious Area by Tax Lot 1/16/03 Tax Lot Total Area Existing Impervious Proposed Impervious (acres) Area (acres) Area (acres) 100 3.33 0 0.53 200 3.30 0 1.07 600 8.07 0.1 0.37 Total 14.7 0.1 1.97 Note Total area reflects tax lot area, not the entire developed portion of site Tigard Public Library Preliminary Stormwater Report 4 0 0 Appendix A Soils Data 3 0 L 0 C,n) 1 J s 5,000-toot add ticks based on state coordinate system. Lend division comers, if slaws,'aro apProximststy positioned. This map was campitad-on 1975 U.S. Q.Btdh'o::tr9:M~lsbQ~tti9rRlasler mr :9:t9444P~4.SFtA2•.JIY.SQt V.3.P.t?tftPAlW ?t.M~Sd~ ~411~QDt}1V1U2n Sarria and roooaratIAa aaralu. r r is i.o t PORTLAND.7.7 Ml. V W 122 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 13.-Soil and Soil name and Hydro- Flooding logic map symbol group Frequency Duration Months Klickitat: 25E. 25F. 25G B None Knappa : 26 B None Labish : 27 D Frequent Very long Dec-Apr Laurelwood: 288, 28C, 28D. 28E, 29E, 29F B None McBee: 30 B Frequent Brief Nov-May Melbourne: 31B.-31C. 311), 31E 31F None . Melby: 32C. 32D. 32E, 33E, 33F, 33G C None Olyic: 34C, 34D, 34E, 35E, 35F. 35G None Pervina: 36C, 36D. 36E, 36F C None Quatama: 37A, 37B, 37C, 37D None Saum: 38B. 38C. 38D, 38E. 38F C None Tolke : 39E,. 39F B None Udifluvents : 40 B Frequent Very brief Nov-Apr Verboort: 42 Frequent Brief Dec-Apr Wapato: 43 D Frequent Brief Dee-Apr Willamette: 44A, 44B, 44C, 44D B None Woodburn: 45A. 456. 45C, 45D C None Xerochrepts: ' 46F: Xerochrepts part B None Haploxerolls part C None '471): Xerochrepts part D None - - Rock outcrop part. 'This mapping unit is made up of two or more dominant kinds of soil. See mapping unit description for the composition and behavior of the whole mapping unit. 118 SOIL SURVEY TABLE .12. Physical and chemical Soil name and map symbol Depth Permeability Available water Soil capacity reaction is I"~`~ la/is p8 Melby: 32C, 32D, 32E, 33E, 33F, 33G 0-9 0.6-2.0 0 19-0 21 9-25 -46 25 0.6-2.0 02-0 6 . . 0.19-0.21 4.5-5.5 4.5-5.0 46 . 0.13-0.17 4.54.5 Olyic: 34C, 340, 34E, 35E, 35F, 35G 0-12 0.6-2.0 0 19-0 21 12-41 41 0.2-0.6 . . 0.17-021 5.0-0.0 4.6-5.b Pervina: 36C, 360, 36E, 36F 0-4 0.2-0.6 0 18-0 20 4-29 29 60 0.2-0.6 . . 0.18-020 5.6-6.0 6-6 5 0 - 60 0.2-0.6 0.13-0.16 . . 6.1-6.0 r'3 atama 7A 3 B, 37C, 37D 0-16 0.6-2.0 0 16-0;18 15-30 30-62 0.2-0.6 0 2-0 6 . 0.19-0.21 5.6-6.0 5.6-6.0 . . 0.10-0.12 5.6-6.0 Saum: 38B, 38C, 38D. 38E, 38F 0 -8 0.6-2.0 0 19-021 8-23 23-50 0.6-2.0 0 2-0 6 . 0.18-0.20 5.6-6.0 60 . . 0.12-0.16 5.6-6.0 Tolke: 39E, 39F 0-10: 0.6-2.0 0 17-0 21 10-61 0.6-2.0 . . 0.19-0.21 6.1-5.6 4'6~5'0 UdiBuvents: 40 0-60 rboort: (:!42 19-00-19 3 0.2-0.6 <0 06 0.19-0.21 .6-0.0 33-60 . 0.06-0.2 0.03-0.05 0 19-021 6. 6-6.5 Wapato: . 6.667.3 43 0-14 14-60 0.2-2.0 02-0 6 0.19-0.21 5.6-6.5 . 0.19-0.21 6.6-6 5 Willamette: . 44A, 448. 44C. 440 0-23 • 0.6-2.0 0 19-0 21 23-43 43-60 0.6-2.0 0 6-2 0 . . 0.19-0.21 5.6-6.5 . . 0.19-0.21 5.6-6 5 Woodburn: . SA, 45B. 45C. 45D 0-16 0.6-2.0 0 19-0 21 16-,31 0.6-2.0 . . 0.19-0.21 5.6-6.5 r c e r na-ov 0.us 02 0.19-0.21 6 . 5..6x 6 5 5 Xerochrepts: . '46F. Xerochrepts part 0-60 0.2-2.0 0 16-0 21 Haploaerolls part 0-12 . . 5.1-6.0 12-60 0.2--2.0 0 2-2 0 0.19-0.21 5.1-6.0 ~ 47D: . . 0.19-0.21 5.1-6.0 Xerochrepts part 0-15 15 Rock outcrop part. 'This mapping unit is made up of two or behavior of thee.wh ol mapping unit. more dominant kinds of soil. See mapping unit description for the composition and ( } t y.f k t ' w WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON properties of soils-Continued 119 Risk of corrosion Erosion factors Shrink-swell potential Uncoated steel Concrete K T Low High High 0.32 4 Low High High 0.43 Moderate High High 0.32 Low High Moderate 0.32 3 Low High Hi h 0 37 g . Moderate High Moderate 0.24 5 Moderate--------------------- High Moderate 028 High High High 1-10.28 Low Moderate Moderate 0.32 5 Low Moderate Moderate 0.43 Low Moderate Moderate 0 55 . Low Moderate _ Moderate 0.32 3 Moderate Moderate Moderate 028 Moderate Moderate Moderate _ 028 Low High Moderate 028 5 Low High High 0.43 Moderate Moderate Moderate - - High High Low , Moderate High Low Moderate High Moderate Moderate High Moderate Low Moderate Moderate 0.43 5 _ Moderate Moderate Moderate 0.43 Moderate Moderate Moderate 0.49 Low Moderate Moderate 0.43 6 1'OW Moderate - muueraie Moderate mwaaaw Moderate 0.32 Low High Moderate 0.43 5 Low High Moderate 0.32 5 Moderate High Moderate 0.43 KING COUNTY- WASHINGTON, SURFAC)WATER DESIGN MANUAL TABLE 3.51B SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural. suburban and urban land use for Type 1A rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP LAND USE DESCRIPTION A B C D Cultivated land (1): winter condition 86 91 94 95 . t Mountain open areas: low growing brush and grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: 65 78.. 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed or older second growth 42 64 76 at Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 .I2 81 86 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. good condition: grass cover on 75% or more of the area 68 80 90 fair condition: grass cover on 50% to 75% of the area 77 85 90 92 Gravel roads and parking lots 76 85 89 91 Dirt roads and parking lots 72 82 87 89 Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs, etc. 98 98 98 98 Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds, etc. 100 100 100 100 Single Family Residential (2) Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre % Impervious (3) 1.0 DU/GA . 15 Separate curve number 1.5 DU/GA 20 shall be selected 2.0 DU/GA 25 for pervious and 2.5 DU/GA 30 _ impervious portion 3.0 DU/GA -14 of the site or basin 3.5 DU/GA _ 38 4.0 DU/GA 42 4.5 DU/GA 46 5.0 DU/GA '48 5.5 DU/GA 50 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA 56 Planned unit developments, % impervious condominiums, apartments, must be -computed commercial business and industrial areas. ti) ror a more aetanea aescription of -agricultural lana use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972- (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system. (3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are.considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. 3.5.2-3 11192 Appendix B Predeveloped Flow Calculations Post Developed Flow Calculations • Hydrograph Return Period Recap • Page 1 Hyd. Hydrograph Inflow Peak Outflow (cfs) Hydrograph No. type (origin) Hyd(s) 1-Yr 2-Yr 3-Yr 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr description 1 2 SBUH Runo SBUH Runo - - - 1.30 2.02 1.93 2.75 2.31 3.18 2.82 3.74 3.50 4.49 Library Site Predevelopment Library Site Post Development Proj. file: Library hydrology.gpw Run date: 01-13-2003 Hvrimflnw Hvdrnnraohs by Intelisolve 0 Hydrograph Summary Report • Page 1 Hyd. No. Hydrograph type (origin) Peak now (cfs) Time interval (min) rime to peak (min) Volume (cult) Inflow hyd(s) Maximum elevation (ft) Maximum storage (cult) Hydrograph description 1 SBUH Runo 1.30 6 480 22,390 - Library Site Predevelopment 2 SBUH Runo 2.02 6 480 29,105 - Library Site Post Development Proj. file: Library hydrology.gpw Return Period: 2 yr Run date: 01-13-2003 u...i..,a..... u."--I- t- lntalicnlvo Hydrograph Summary Report • Page 1 Hyd. No. Hydrograph type (origin) Peak flow (cfs) rime interval (min) rime to peak (min) Volume (cuft) Inflow hyd(s) Maximum elevation (fl) Maximum storage (cuff) Hydrograph description 1 SBUH Runo 1.93 6 480 31,496 - Library Site Predevelopment 2 SBUH Runo 2.75 6 480 39,125 - - Library Site Post Development Proj. file: Library hydrology.gpw Return Period: 5 yr Run date: 01-13-2003 LJ,.A.... -hc by Intelisolve Hydrograph Summary Report Page 1 Hyd. No. Hydrograph type (origin) Peak flow (cfs) Time interval (min) Time to peak (min) Volume (cult) Inflow hyd(s) Maximum elevation (ft) Maximum storage (cult) Hydrograph description 1 SBUH Runo 2.31 6 480 37,008 - Library Site Redevelopment 2 SBUH Runo 3.18 6 480 45,079 - library Site Post Development Proj. file: Library hydrology.gpw Return Period: 10 yr Run date: 01-13-2003 • Hydrograph Summary Report • Page 1 Hyd. No. Hydrograph type (origin) Peak flow (cfs) Time interval (min) Time to peak (min) Volume (cult) Inflow hyd(s) Maximum elevation (ft) Maximum storage. (cult) Hydrograph description 1 SBUH Runo 2.82 6 480 44,255 - Library Site Predevelopment 2 SBUH Runo 3.74 6 480 52,816 - - Library Site Post Development Proj. file: Library hydrology.gpw Return Period: 25 yr Run date: 01-13-2003 Hvdraflow Hvdrooraohs by Intelisolve • i Hydrograph Summary Report Page 1 Hyd. No. Hydrograph type (origin) Peak now (cfs) Time interval (min) rime to peak (min) Volume (cult) Inflow hyd(s) Maximum elevation (k) Maximum storage (cult) Hydrograph description 1 SBUH Runo 3.50 6 480 54,128 - Library Site Predevelopment 2 SBUH Runo 4.49 6 474 63,239 - - Library Site Post Development Proj. file: Library hydrology.gpw Return Period: 100 yr Run date: 01-13-2003 U-1-a-, u..,a-hc by Intelisolve • Hydrograph Report Hyd. No. 1 Library Site Predevelopment Hydrograph type Storm frequency Drainage area Basin Slope Tc method Total precip. Storm duration = SBUH Runoff = 25 yrs = 4.99 ac = 2.0% = LAG = 3.90 in = 24 hrs 0 Page 1 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Peak discharge = 2.82 cfs Time interval = 6 min Curve number = 86 Hydraulic length = 550 ft Time of conc. (Tc) = 11.4 min Distribution = Type IA Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Discharge Table Hydrograph Volume = 44,255 cuft Time - Outflow Time - Outflow Time - Outflow Time - Outflow (hrs cfs) (hrs cfs) (hrs cfs) (hrs cfs) 3.60 0.03 7.00 0.61 10.40 0.77 13.80 0.57 3.70 0.04 7.10 0.65 10.50 0.75 13.90 0.57 3.80 0.05 7.20 0.70 10.60 0.75 14.00 0.56 3.90 0.06 7.30 0.76 10.70 0.75 14.10 0.56- 4.00 0.07 7.40 0.84 10.80 0.74 14.20 0.56 4.10 0.09 7.50 0.93 10.90 0.73 14.30 0.56 4.20 0.10 7.60 1.29 11.00 0.72 14.40 0.56 4.30 0.11 7.70 1.86 11.10 0.71 14.50 0.56 4.40 0.12 7.80 2.31 11.20 0.70 14.60 0.56 4.50 0.13 7.90 2.63 11.30 0.69 14.70 0.56 4.60 0.14 8.00 2.82 << 11.40 0.68 14.80 0.55 4.70 0.16 8.10 2.69 11.50 0.67 14.90 0.55 4.80 0.17 8.20 2.34 11.60 0.66 15.00 0.55 4.90 0.19 8.30 2.04 11.70 0.64 15.10 0.55 5.00 0.20 8.40 1.78 11.80 0.63 15.20 0.55 5.10 0.22 8.50 1.57 11.90 0.62 15.30 0.54 5.20 0.24 8.60 1.45 12.00 0.61 15.40 0.54 5.30 0.26 8.70 1.38 12.10 0.61 15.50 0.54 5.40 0.27 8.80 1.31 12.20 0.61 15.60 0.54 5.50 0.29 8.90 1.24 12.30 0.61 15.70 0.54 5.60 0.31 9.00 1.17 12.40 0.61 15.80 0.53 5.70 0.32 9.10 1.10 12.50 0.62 15.90 0.53 r on ~.Uw n 4A W.IM n nn U.4v A nA J.v+ 12.60 0.62 16.00 0.53 5.90 0.36 9.30 0.99 12.70 0.61 16.10 0.53 6.00 0.38 9.40 0.94 12.80 0.60 16.20 0.53 6.10 ...0.41 9.50 0.91 12.90 0.60 16.30 0.52 6.20 0.44 9.60 0.87 13.00 0.59 16.40 0.52 6.30 0.48 9.70 0.86 13.10 0.59 16.50 0.52 6.40 0.50 9.80 0.85 13.20 0.60 16.60 0.52 6.50 0.53 9.90 0.84 13.30 0.60 16.70 0.52 6.60 0.54 10.00 0.82 13.40 0.59 16.80 . 0.51 6.70 0.55 10.10 0.82 13.50 0.59 16.90 0.51 6.80 0.56 10.20 0.81 13.60 0.58 17.00 0.51 6.90 0.58 10.30 0.78 13.70 0.58 17.10 0.51 Continues on next page... Library Site Predevelopment Hydrograph Discharge Table 'Time Outflow Time Outflow (hrs cfs) (hrs cfs) 17.20 0.50 22.30 0.38 17.30 0.50 22.40 0.38 17.40 0.50 22.50 0.38 17.50 0.50 22.60 0.37 17.60 0.50 22.70 0.37 17.70 0.49 22.80 0.37 17.80 0.49 22.90 0.37 17.90 0.49 23.00 0.36 18.00 0.49 23.10 0.36 18.10 0.48 23.20 0.36 18.20 0.48 23.30 0.36 18.30 0.48 23.40 0.35 18.40 0.48 23.50 0.35 18.50 0.47 23.60 0.35 18.60. OA7 23.70 0.35 18.70 0.47 23.80 0.34 18.80 0.47 23.90 0.34 18.90 0.47 24.00 0.34 19.00 0.46 19.10 0.46 19.20 0.46 End 19.30 0.46 19.40 0.45 19.50 0.45 19.60 0.45 19.70 0.45 19.80 0.44 19.90 0.44 20.00 0.44 20.10 0.44 20.20 0.43 20.30 0.43 20.40 0.43 20.50 0.43 20.60 0.42 20.70 0.42 20.80 0.42 20.90 0.42 21.00 0.41 21.10 0.41 21.20 0.41 21.30 0.41 21.40 _ 0.40 21.50 0.40 21.60 0.40 21.70 0.40 21.80 0.39 21.90 0.39 22.00 0.39 22.10 0.39 22.20 0.38 Page 2 • Hydrograph Report Hyd. No. 2 Library Site Post Development Hydrograph type Storm frequency Drainage area Basin Slope Tc method Total precip. Storm duration = SBUH Runoff = 25 yrs = 4.99 ac = 0.0% = USER = 3.90 in = 24 hrs • Page 1 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Peak discharge = 3.74 cfs Hydrograph Discharge Table Time interval = 6 min Curve number = 91 Hydraulic length = Oft Time of conc. (Tc) = 5 min Distribution = Type IA Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume = 52.816 cult Time Outflow Time Outflow Time - Outflow Time - Outflow (hrs cfs) (hrs cfs) (hrs cfs) (hrs cfs) 2.50 0.05 5.90 0.60 9.30 1.07 12.70 0.66 2.60 0.07 6.00 0.63 9.40 1.02 12.80 0.65 2.70 0.08 6.10 0.68 9.50 0.99 12.90 0.65 2.80 0.09 6.20 0.72 9.60 0.96 13.00 0.65 2.90 0.10 6.30 6.76 9.70 0.95 13.10 0.66 3.00 0.11 6.40 0.79 9.80 0.95 13.20 0.66 3.10 0.13 6.50 0.81 9.90 0.94 13.30 0.66 3.20 0.14 6.60 0.80 10.00 0.92 13.40 0.65 3.30 0.15 6.70 0.79 10.10 0.92 13.50 0.64 3.40 0.16 6.80 0:80 .10.20 0.90 13:60 0.63 3.50 0.17 6.90 0.84 10.30 0.86 13.70 0.63 3.60 0.19 7.00 0.89 10.40 _ 0.84 13.80 0.62 3.70 0.20 7.10 0.95 10.50 0.83 13.90 0.62 3.80 0.22 7.20. 1.02 10.60 0.83 14.00 0.61 3.90 0.24 7.30 1.11 10.70 0.83 14.10 0.61 4.00 0.25 7.40 1.22 10.80 0.83 14.20 0.62 4.10 0.26 7.50 1.34 10.90 0.81 14.30 0.61 4.20 0.27 7.60 2.08 11.00 0.80 14.40 0.61 4.30 0.29 7.70 3.07 11.10 0.79 14.50 0.61 4.40 0.30 7.80 3.53 11.20 0.77 14.60 0.61 4.50 0.32 7.90 3.73 11.30 0.76 14.70 0.60 4.60 0.33 8.00 3.74 << 11.40 0.75 14.80 0.60 4.70 0.35 8.10 3.20 11.50 0.73 14.90 0.60 4.80 0.37 8.20 2.46 11.60 0.71 15.00 0.60 4.90 0.39 8.30 2.05 11.70 070 15.10 0.59 5.00 0.41 8.40 1.77 11.80 0.69 15.20 0.59 5.10 0.43 8.50 1.56 11.90 0.68 15.30 0.59 5.20 0.46 8.60 1.51 12.00 0.67 15.40 0.59 5.30 0.48 8.70 1.51 12.10 0.67 15.50 0.58 5.40 0.51 8.80 1.43 12.20 0.67 15.60 0.58 5.50 0.53 8.90 1.35 12.30 0.68 15.70 0.58 5.60 0.54 9.00 1.27 12.40 0.68 15.80 0.58 5.70 0.56 9.10 1.18 12.50 0.69 15.90 0.57 5.80 0.58 9.20 1.11 12.60 0.68 16.00 0.57 Continues on next page... • • Library Site Post Development Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Outflow Time Outflow (hrs cfs) (hrs cfs) 16.10 0.57 21.20 0.43 16.20 0.57 21.30 0.43 16.30 0.56 21.40 0.43 16.40 0.56 21.50 0.43 16.50 0.56 21.60 0.42 •16.60 0.56 21.70 0.42 16.70 0.55 21.80 0.42 16.80 0.55 21.90 0.41 16.90 0.55 22.00 0.41 17.00 0.55 22.10 0.41 17.10 0.54 22.20 0.41 17.20 0.54 22.30 0.40 17.30 0.54 22.40 0.40 17.40 0.54 22.50 0.40 17.50 0.53 22.60 0.40 17.60 0.53 22.70 0.39 17.70 0.53 22.80 0.39 17.80 0.53 22.90 0.39 17.90 0.52 23.00 0.38 18.00 0.52 23.10 0.38 18.10 0.52 23.20 0.38 18.20 0.51 23.30 0.38 18.30 0.51 23.40 0.37 18.40 0.51 23.50 0.37 18.50 0.51 23.60 0.37 18.60 0.50 23.70 0.36 18.70 0.50 23.80 0.36 18.80 0.50 23.90 0.36 18.90 0.50 24.00 0.36 19.00 0.49 19.10 0.49 19.20 0.49 ...End 19.30 0.49 19.40 0.48 19.50 0.48 19.60 0.48 19.70 0.47 19.80 0.47 19.90 n .A7 20.00 0.47 20.10 0.46 20.20 0.46 20.30 0.46 20.40 0.46 20.50 0.45 20.60 0.45 20.70 0.45 20.80 0.44 20.90 0.44 21.00 0.44 21.10 .0.44 Page 2 9 • Appendix C Drainage Areas Proposed Facilities Map Vicinity Map v,-7 04 iL tt 1.. fit- wo . ti Z.t;n * • 'o . p+ • V 1 F~ 1 f °iw f•• ' a ~ • iOC y :mu laiai~rrcswnn~cnnn.mv romu •wvrvL•fn•n•nn.m nn T+ue•...~..~............., sli I i fitly N 4 ~ w l~ a V3 C:3 ij `i m 0 0 r- ` r~ IL i XF of t ~ ~1 85b4 % ~ ~p;tSF.'O I' a+w aura AREA=1.91 AC AR =3.0$ AC pibutan ~k K-u GRAPHIC SCALE "°Rm 30 60 0 60 t Y inch I a v I I=, m ~o ,w~ 1~2 01/ tS/43 G1:39:33 pM. irina Kuraha~hi 6 Assnc+a~es Inc. 1WG\IXHt81TS\draintacilitias.dwg^ i10f7 K q .7 t. ~ r 1 r y 11 0 I ~ 3 1# (;56070 /S,S y ^1 i .n,.'f9 1~~ r O• . 1 11 r ti r gZ11 s~ 1 t p` f 10 014 kt , IN rr~ t • x ~r,dr • ~j r fi ~p C tb Cat a I s C~ f ,y N lard Public ubf . STY •Wd. aOgpQ9 1h'MH 9 Appendix D Water Quality Calculations Tigard Public Library Preliminary Water Quality Calculations 1/15103 Basin Area Characteristics Water Quality Area (acres) 1.99 Water Quality Flow (cfs) 0.2 Water Quality Volume 2496 Swale Dimensions Mannings N 0.24 Length (ft) 100 Longitudinal slope (ft.) 0.005 Bottom Width 2 Side slope 4 in flow area Channel Depth (ft) 2.4 Swale Design Parameters Flow Depth at WQ Flow 0.35 Flow Depth at 25 year 1.37 Channel Area at WQ flow (ft2) 1.18 Channel Area at 25 year (ft2) 10.18 Velocity at WQ Flow 0.17 Velocity at 25 year 0.37 Freeboard (ft) 1.03 Detention time (seconds) 590 540 seconds required i 0 0 WETLAND DELINEATION / DETERMINATION REPORT TIGARD LIBRARY Prepared For: City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Prepared By: 15580 SW Jay Street, Suite 200 Beaverton, Oregon 97006 Phone: (503) 644-6842 Fax: (503) 644-9731 June 6, 2002 1 10'f/t0'2/LWuZ ly:SL LNUIr#Na bWb44';U,51 . NO. 5?? Pol WETLAND DELINEATION 1 DETERMINATION REPORT COVER FORM This form constitutes a request for a jurisdictional determination by the Division of State Lands and must be attached to the front of reports submitted to the Division for review and approval. ❑ Applicant ® Owner Name, Firm and Address: Business phone # (503) 639-0171 City of Tigard (Vannie Nguyen) Home phone # (optional) 13125 SW Hall Blvd Fax # (503) 624-0752 Tigard, Oregon 97223 E-mail: vannie@ci.tigard.or.us ® Authorized Legal Agent: Business phone:(503) 6"-6842 Name and Address: Fax # (503) 644-9731 Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. (Gregory Kurahashl) Emal:gregk@kurahashi.com 16580 SW Jay Street, Suite 200 Beaverton, Oregon 97006 The Information contained In the attached report Is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I either own the property described below or I have legal authority to allow access to the property. I authorize the Division to access the property for the purpose of confirming the information in the report, after prior notification to the pr' ry contact. Typed/Printed Name: Vannla Nguyen ler '4'e4l 'A Signature V Date: 417/oz-' Special instructions regarding site access: Project and Site Information for latitude and longitude. use centriod of site or start and and points of linear project) Project Name1l and Libra Latitude: 45° 26" 30" Longitude: 1220 451350 Proposed Use: Tax Map # Construction of a public library, 2S102DA00 100, 200, 300, 500, 600, 690,1200 Project Street Address (or other descriptive location): Township 2S Range 1W Section 02 QQ SE Bast of SW Hall, North of SW McDonald St, West Tax Lots 100, 200 300 500, 600. 690. 1200 of Fanno Creek, and South of Fanno Crook Park Waterway: River Mile: City. Tigard County: Washington Fanno Creek 3 Wetland Delineation Information Welland Consultant Name, Finn and Address: Phone # (503) 644-6842 Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. (Brent Davis) Fax # (503) 644-9731 15580 SW Jay Street, Suite 200 E-mail address: gregk@kurahashi.com Beaverton, Oregon 97006 Prima Contact for report review and site access Is ® Consultant ❑ Applicant/Owner O Authorized Agent pate of Delineation Report: Wetiand/Water Present? Total Site Acreage: 60.45 June 6, 2002 Yes No Total Wetland Acreage: 0.4S Oregon Qlvidlon of State Lands Attn.: Wetlands Program Leader 71S Summer Street, NE, Suite 100 Salem, Oregon 87301-1279 %^11ul 1111U1711a~1V11 Yes No Unknown Is any of the property crop land? ❑ ® ❑ If yes, is Applicant/Owner a USDA Program Participant? ❑ ® ❑ If yes, has a MRCS Form 026 been completed for the site? ❑ ❑ ❑ Does Local Wetland Inventory, if any, show wetland on parcel? ® ❑ ❑ If yes. LWI wetland code: El 4-20, 39 Has a previous dellneation/application been made on parcel? ❑ ❑ If applicable, previous Division State Lands # NWI Quad Name(s): Beaverton Site Zoning: R12, R7, I-L For Office Use only Corps Project Date Delineation Received: / DSL Wetland Mgr.: DSL WD # Date Review Completed: / / Related Case Number(s): DSL Project # A9 /AA /AAA.i t-T AO.- r--,-- - n.,AA~ ra,nn, TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................2 2.0 WETLAND DEFINITION & REGULATIONS ...........................................................................2 3.0 PROJECT METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................3 HYDROLOGY ........................................................................................................................3 Table 1: Hydrologic Zones in Non-Tidal Areas ......................................................3 SOILS ....................................................................................................................................3 VEGETATION .......................................................................................................................3 Table 2: Vegetation Indicators Status ......................................................................4 4.0 SITE LOCATION & GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS ..............................................................4 5.0 WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................4 5.1 LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY .....................................................................................4 5.2 PRECIPITATION DATA ...................................................................................................4 Table 3: Total Precipitation Prior to the Field Work ..............................................5 5.3 ON-SITE INVESTIGATION ..............................................................................................5 Hydrology 5 Soils 5 Vegetation 6 Table 4: Site Vegetation ...........................................................................................6 5.4 WETLAND BOUNDARY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................7 6.0 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................7 7.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................7 FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP 8 FIGURE 2: TAX LOT MAP 9 FIGURE 3: SCS SOIL SURVEY MAP 10 FIGURE 4: PLANT COMMUNITIES 11 FIGURE 5: WETLAND BOUNDARY MAP 12 FIGURE 6: DELINEATION BOUNDARY DETAIL 13 APPENDIX A: WETLAND DELINEATION DATA SHEETS APPENDIX B: LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY APPENDIX C: SOIL DESCRIPTIONS APPENDIX D: PARTIAL DETERMINATION BY FISHMAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc June 6, 2002 • 1.0 INTRODUCTION Kurahashi & Associates, Inc., while under contract with the City of Tigard, completed a wetland delineation / determination study. The on-site delineation study was performed May 3 and 22, 2002 just East of SW Hall Boulevard and North of SW McDonald Street (T2S R1W Sect 02 Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, 500, 600, 690, and 1200) (Figure 1 and 2). The purpose of this study was to determine the possible environmental affects of building a public library on Tax Lot 600. This report is the result of the wetland study. 2.0 WETLAND DEFINITION & REGULATIONS Wetlands are defined as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marches, bogs, and similar areas" (CE Federal Register 1982 and EPA Federal Register 1980). The three criteria that must be met for an area to be considered a wetland are hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. Hydric soils are defined as "a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part" (USDA-NRCS 1995). Another accepted definition is "a soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation". (US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) 1985, as amended by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) in December 1986). Wetland hydrology is defined as "encompass(ing) all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season. Areas with evident characteristics of wetland hydrology are those where the presence of water has an overriding influence on characteristics of vegetation and soils due to anaerobic and reducing conditions." (Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual 1987). Hydrophytic vegetation are defined as "the sum total of macrophytic plant life that occurs in areas where the frequency and duration of inundation or saturated soils produce permanently or periodically saturated soils of sufficient duration to exert a controlling influence on the plant species present" (Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual 1987). Federal, state, and local regulations that govern activities located in or near wetland streams include: • The Clean Water Act Section 401 and 404, which are administered through the Army Corps of Engineers • The "Swampbuster" provision of the Food Security Act of 1985, which is administered through the Natural Rp~,~..o~ a.uaa.aw -0 a.vuava ♦aaavu vva rave. • The Oregon's Removal-Fill Law (ORS 196.800-.990) and the Oregon's Wetland Inventory and Wetland Conservation Plans, Standards, and Guidelines (ORS 196.668-.692), which are administered through the Division of State Lands. • The Washington County Development Code Section 422. • The City of Tigard Municipal Code Title 18: Environmental Performance Standards (18.725), Sensitive Lands (Section 18.775), and Water Resources Overlay District (18.797). Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. June 6, 2002 • 0 3.0 PROJECT METHODOLOGY The site was delineated and the wetland boundary was determined using the methodology described in the Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, 1987. This was a routine on-site investigation. HYDROLOGY Wetland hydrology is considered present when the. soils are saturated or inundated continuously for at 12.5% of the growing season and is sometimes considered a wetland if saturation or inundation occurs 5%-12.5% of the growing season. This requires a minimum of 12 consecutive days between March 23 and November 11 for Washington County, Oregon. An area is considered inundated if, on average, the water is greater than 6.6 feet deep. If a site had at least 1 primary indicator or 2 secondary indicators, it was considered to have wetland hydrology. All observations were recorded in the data sheets in Addendum A. The primary indicators are: visual observation of inundation or saturation within 12-inches of the surface, watermarks, sediment deposit, and drainage patterns. Secondary indicators are: oxidized root channels in the upper 12-inches, water-stained leaves, local soil survey data, and the FAC-Neutral test. Table 1: Hydrologic Zones in Non-Tidal Areas Degree of Inundation or Saturation Duration* Wetland Characteristic Permanently inundated 100% Present Semipermanently to nearly permanently inundated or saturated >75%-100% Present Regularly inundated or saturated >25%-75% Usually present Seasonally inundated or saturated >12.5%-25% Often Present Irregularly inundated or saturated >5%-12.5% Often Not-Present Intermittently or never inundated or saturated <5% Not-Present * Refers to the duration of inundation and/or saturation during the growing season Source: Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, 1987 Clark and Benforado, 1981 SOILS The soil series have been mapped in the Soil Survey of Washington County by the Soil Conservation Services. The descriptions of the soils that are mapped within the site area are attached in Addendum C. A 16-inch soil horizon profile was complete for each data point and recorded on the data sheets in Addendum A. The soil colors' hue, value, chroma, and mottle abundance were described using the 1995 Munsell Soil Color Chart. The soils texture was also recorded for each location. The soil characteristics at the horizon immediately below the A-horizon, or 10 inches (whichever is less) was used to determine the if the soils were hydric. A soils was considered hydric if the matrix chroma was 2 or less with mottling, or 1 or less without mottling. Other hydric soil indicators are: histosols, histic epidedon, sulfuric odor, aquic moisture regime, reducing conditions, gleyed or low-chroma colors, concretions, high organic content in surface layer in sandy soils, organic streaking in sandy soils, listing on the local hydric soils list, and listing on the national hydric soils list. VEGETATION The dominate species' indicator status in each location for each layer was recorded on the data sheets in Addendum A. The layers that were observed are trees, shrub/scrub, herbs, and woody vines. The wetland status of the vegetation was determined using Reed's National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9) and the 1993 supplement to this list. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. June 6, 2002 • 0 The 50/20 rule was used to determine dominance. An area was considered as having hydrophytic vegetation if greater than 50% of the dominant species had an indicator status of facultative or wetter. Other hydrophytic vegetation indicators are: visual observations of plant species growing in areas of prolonged inundation and/or soils saturation, morphological adaptations, technical literature, physiological adaptations, and reproductive adaptations. 1 able l: Veeetation Indicators Status OBL Obligate Wetland Plants (occur in wetlands -99% of the time) FACW Facultative Wetland Plants (occur in wetlands 67%-99% of the time) FAC Facultative Plants (occur in wetlands 330/o-67% of the time) FACU Facultative Upland Plants (occur in wetlands 1%-33% of the time) UPL Obligate Upland Plants occur in wetlands -1% of the time Source: Army Corp of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, 1987 4.0 SITE LOCATION & GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS The studied site area is located East of SW Hall Boulevard and North of SW McDonald Street near O'Mara Street (T2S RIW Sect 02 Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, 500, 600, 690, and 1200). This is both West and South of Fanno Creek. Except for Tax Lot 500, the studied area is currently undeveloped and is describes as "excellent wildlife habitat with diverse vegetation" according to Tigard's Local Wetlands Inventory. There are 2 homes on these properties with additional residential development to the south. The east side of Fanno Creek is a mix of bottomland forest shrub vegetation. There are likely to be additional wetlands on this side of the creek, however, the study area is confined to the portions of the subject properties west of Fanno Creek plus an additional 40 feet to the south where a utility easement is located. A majority of the study area is a pasture. There were two horses grazing the site at the time of the study. The site is predominantly open with the exception of sporadic trees and shrub patches adjacent to the creek and a hedgerow of non-native landscape trees that runs from the creek west to Hall Blvd. Fanno Creek is deeply incised 8 to 10 feet below the elevation of the pasture. Wetlands on the site are associated with a tributary stream that crosses the southeast corner of the site. The total area studied was 60.45 acres, of which 0.45 acres are wetlands. The studied area is zoned as R- 12 (zone class MFRI), R-7 (zone class SFR6), and I-L (zone class IL). The elevation of the area ranges from 140 to 160 feet above sea level. The proposed library site is located on Tax Lot 600. This library will replace the current library located on Tax Lot 500. 5.0 WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS 5.1 LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY The wetlands identified in this report are mapped at E19 in the City of Tigard Local Wetland Inventory (1996). The LWI maps E19 in conjunction with several other associated wetlands and describes them all in a single summary sheet (Appendix B). 5.2 PRECIPITATION DATA Precipitation data was collected for the two weeks prior to both site visits, as shown in Table 1. This information was downloaded from the National Weather Services Forecast Website Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. June 6, 2002 4 (http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/Portland/climate/) for the Portland Station (#356751) located at the Portland International Airport (45( 35( N and 122( 36( W). Table 3: Total Precipitation Prior to the Field Work Date 7 Days Before 14 Days Before May 3, 2002 Ma 22, 2002 0.48 inches 0.79 inches 0.48 inches 0.86 inches 53 ON-SITE INVESTIGATION The field work was conducted on May 3 and May 22, 2002. A partial determination was made by Fishman Environmental Services, LLC. in September, 2001 (Appendix D). 5 wetland boundary points were established in the Fishman study and verified in this study. Hydrology In the southeast portion of the site there is a tributary stream that flows into an instream pond. The pond is clearly man made as it -is surrounded by a berm on three sides, however the pond has been in existence for some time and was at least partially constructed in existing wetlands. It appears that the pond outlet has washed out and now the pond is generally less than 1 foot deep and is generally devoid of vegetation. The small tributary stream is incised approximately 1 foot upstream of the pond as it flows through the wetland on the site. This wetland wraps around the berm on the south end of the pond and extends off- site to the south this area appears to be inundated periodically from overflow in the pond and tributary channel. The pond surface elevation was surveyed at 138.0 foot elevation at the time of the study, but had been observed to be at 140.1 foot elevation earlier in the spring. Topographic mapping and observed drainage patterns indicate that the water overflows to the south at approximately 140 foot elevation. Saturated soils were only observed adjacent to the pond (dataplots 3 and 6), but drainage patterns and secondary indicators were present at the other wetland dataplots. Near the southeast corner of the pond there is also an intermittent seep located within a deeply incised ditch. The presence of uplands adjacent to this seep is confirmed by Data Plot 8, at the time of the field investigation water was present in the lower portion of the ditch, but it was not visibly flowing. Soils The SCS Soil Survey of Washington County maps 4 soil series on the site (see Figure 3). These are Quatama Loam (37), McBee Silty Clay Loam (30), Verboort Silty Clay Loam (42) and Huberly Silt Loam (22). Verboort and Huberly are listed as hydric soils. Wetlands were found only in the area mapped as Huberly and the surrounding uplands area mapped. as Huberly or Quatama. Huberly Silt Loam is poorly drained and is generally formed in mixed silty alluvium on terraces. Quatama Loam is moderately well drained and is formed in mixed loamy alluvium on older terraces. The soils mapping generally could not be confirmed on the site. The wetlands have been at least partially graded in the past due to utility construction (in the easement) or pond construction. In addition, the wetland areas have been heavy mixed or otherwise altered by horse hooves and manipulation of the tributary channel (there were pieces of old 12-inch concrete culvert pipe exposed within the stream channel). Upland soils adjacent to the wetlands have been disturbed by the same impacts. Test pits were excavated to 16 inches depth or more. Wetland soils were generally observed to be l OYR 3/2 (very dark grayish brown) silt loams with iron mottling (IOYR 4/4) at 10 inches. At data plot 6, near the pond, the soil was black (2.5/N) muck at 10 inches. Oxidized root channels were observed in the upper 12 inches in some of the test pits. Upland soils on the pond berm was mixed fill with a matrix color ranging from 10YR 5/3 to 2.5YR 5/3 (brown to reddish brown) sandy clay loams with large mottles of various colors (mostly reddish-oranges, yellows and grays) at 10 inches. Other upland soils ranged from Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. June 6, 2002 • I OYR 3/2 (very dark grayish brown) to l OYR 4/3 (brown) silt loams with no redoximorphic features at 10 inches. Vegetation Vegetation on the site is generally disturbed and characterized by a mix of naturalized and invasive pasture grasses (bluegrass, timothy, fescue, bentgrass) and wildflowers in grazed areas and himalayan blackberry and mixed rose on the berms and banks of the creeks. There are sporadic trees and shrubs on the site consisting of a few natives (Oregon ash, douglas fir, big leaf maple, and red alder, black hawthorn) and a mix of invasive and ornamental trees (english hawthorn, chestnut, davidia). Reed canarygrass, rose species, and bentgrass generally dominate the wetlands. Table 2 is a summary of the vegetation observed in the data plots. The plant communities are mapped in Figure 4. Table Q: Site Vegetation BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME INDICATOR WETLANDS A rostis s pp.* Bent grass FAC Ranunculus re ens* " Creeping Buttercup FACW Phalaris arundinacea Reed Canass FACW uisetum arvense Giant Horsetail FAC Trifolium ratense Red Clover FACU Poa ratensis* Kentucky Bluegrass FAC E ilobium ciliatum Hai Willowherb FACW Rosa nutkana* Nootka Rose ~ FAC Cratae s dou lasii* Black Hawthorn FAC Holcus lanatus* Common Velvet ass FAC Carex obnu to Slough Sedge OBL Juncus effusus Soft Rush FACW Oenthe sarmentosa Water Parsley OBL Tanacetum vul are Tanse Ragwort NI Mentha Arvensis Field Mint FACW- Alo rcurus ratensis* Meadow Foxtial FACW Rubus discolor Himalayan Blackberry FACU UPLANDS A ostis tenius* Colonial Bent ass FAC Phleum ratense* Timothy FAC- Taraxicum officianale Dandelion FACU E uiaetum arvense Giant Horsetail FAC Parentucellia viscosa* Yellow Parentucellia FAC- Poa ratensis Kentucky Bluegrass FAC Tanacetum vul are Tanse Ragwort NI E ilobium ciliatum Hai Willowherb FACW- Trifolium ratense* Red Clover FACU Phalaris arundinacea Reed Cana ass FACW Rosa Ele anteria* Sweetbriar Rose FACW Rubus discolor* Himalayan Blackberry FACU Acer macro h lum Big Leaf Maple FACU Alnus rubra* Red Alder FAC Fraxinus latifolia Oregon ash FACW Cratae us douglasii* Black Hawthorn FAC Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. June 6, 2002 6 Tellima randiflora* Frin ecu NL Daucus carrota Queen Anne's Lace FACU *Species used in dominance calculations at various data plots 5.4 WETLAND BOUNDARY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Five existing wetland boundary points (originally flagged by Fishman Environmental Services, Inc.) were confirmed and 19 additional boundary points were established to define approximately 0.45 acres of wetland. The wetland boundary was flagged in the field and surveyed. A portion of the wetland boundary between points WLS and WB17 is defined by the channel of the stream where it enters the subject property and runs east to point WB17 as mapped in the survey. 10 dataplots were established to determinate the location of the wetland boundaries (data forms are in Appendix A). Additionally, a small seepage area is identified on the wetland boundary map (Figure.5 and 6) this wetland is confined to a narrow, deeply incised channel devoid of vegetation and was not flagged in the field, but was mapped in the topographic survey. 6.0 LIMITATIONS The delineation of wetland boundaries is an inexact science. Wetlands are transitional areas (ecotones) between upland and aquatic environments that often change seasonally as well as over time. The wetland boundaries mapped in this report were determined based on the knowledge, experience and best professional judgement of the authors in the application of the 1987 US Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. It is not uncommon for wetland delineation experts to differ in opinion regarding the precise location of wetland boundaries. This report documents the investigation, best professional judgement and conclusion of the investigator. It should be considered a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination and used at your own risk until it has bee reviewed and approved in writing by the Oregon Division of State Lands in accordance with OAR 141-090-0055 through 141-090-0055. 7.0 REFERENCES Kollmorgan Corporation. 1995. Munsell Soil Color Charts. MacBeth Division of Kollmorgen Corporation, Baltimore, MD. Reed, Porter B, Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Biological Report No. 88 (26.9) Reed, Porter B., Jr., et al. 1993. 1993 Supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. Washington DC. 10 pp. U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Services, Springfield, VA. USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1975. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. Sheet 44. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. June 6, 2002 7 0 0 Wetland Delineation Op L L~ FIGURE 1 Vicinity Map ft:,mAW9h= Project No.: 2057 Scale = 1:24000 (1" = 2000') IT Tigard City Library City of Tigard May 23, 2002 Drawn By: BHD Source: USGS 7.5' Topographic Series 0 0 I I FOO r' 600 690 m in ,711Y 400 491 Wetland Delineation -1 FIGURE 2 N KliRAHASHI Chu mwmwtmx . Taw *am"" Tax Lot Map Tigard City Library " City of Tigard ` E00 May 23, 2002 Drawn By: BND Project No.: 2057 Scale = N/A Soils Legend: 22 Huberly Slit Loam 30 McBee Silt Loam 37 Quatama Silt Loam 42 Verboort Silty Clay Loam KU RAHA Ski i Wetland Delineation Project No.: 2057 Scale = 1:12000 (1" = 1000'; FIGURE 3 SCS Soil Survey Map Tigard City Library City of Tigard May 23, 2002 Drawn By: BHD Source: SCS Soil Survey, Washington County Plant Legend: D.U. Distrubed upland RCG Reed Canary Grass HR Hedge Row PSS Shrub/Scrub RES Residential 03 Is I& IN KURAHASHI ,.m~.F. hcmmRiae Imm 8N JO 8~ Adte E00 aft"eft Project No.: 2057 Scale = 1:3500 (1" = 3001) Wetland Delineation FIGURE 4 Plant Communities N% Tigard City Library City of Tigard May 23, 2002 Drawn By: BHD Source: Aerial Photography (Soils from SCS) • 0 Wetland Delineation 19L . M" SM Jy ft*O- W" WO Project No.: 2057 Scale = 1:2400 (1" = 200') FIGURE 5 Wetland Boundary Map iI } Tigard City Library City of Tigard May 23, 2002 Drawn By: BHD I! i I I 11 I / of ata f~ / I Wetlahd Oound~ry I ~ I 1 I 1. I I ! 1 / I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 W85 WB6 WL4 -i<3 . ~ 111 VVL-2W-' e k IIl~B) t 1 / ~ ~ - c 8I l l WL2 T ! 1 i if I I III '1~ ~ \ 1 l Ditch with seepage flow ~ J \1 mOm KURAHASHI ~ assocurES, ura issm 3W ,m ~ . (5m)6"- ea k. (sw~aasra Project No.: 2057 SCALE: 1"= 40' Tigard City Library Wetland Delineation City of Tigard May 23, 2002 Drawn By: BHD FIGURE 6 Source: Feld Survey Wetland Detail I i I APPENDIX A: WETLAND DELINEATION DATA SHEETS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION C b ed Project/Site: ` Date: 0 a&d Art 1 A_R,r . Applicant/Owner.nryo!E~~ re'61< ? I v ti at - 9 6 " County: q..s - State: Dig n es g or g'4E 4_ 1 A'115 - Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ~ Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes if needed, explain on reverse. Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: / VEGETATION Species %Cover Indicator Species %Cover Indicator Trees Herbs oS r <I 670 4D G JNGvL ~5 k'd Zry D - 0 1r✓ J ~,✓1 VAS Shrub / Scru b iQ,4,v5/ S < _ J 10 t c, F - Lf4S~l 10 _01 FAY" Woody Vines Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) UD Remarks: tO,4,57v/zG' i5 HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: K Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: - (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in. _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ~~T-A,&i 5 or 31.1 'Ju- ~~K SOILS Map Unit Name Drainage Class: l~~R (Series and Phase): Jr3EQ(;~ !57L---r 1 09M Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgroup): TYP' L FP-401.49MAES Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, inches Horizon unsell Moist unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc t~) - l 10 2 -4/Z - IAW 010 D v~ Z-/ t 13 1616 2 V q ~ Dr as 5/~T Lcn~ Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Concretions _ _ Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ - Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: IK~~r ; /~9A~'G~~S6 G•,.~,~, r`~ l~~S v~ ~ ref a c~eoM A J ofc 10 / zE p R~ Lt^S S WRTI.ANn DR.TFRMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No (Circle) Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? No Hydric Soils Present? s No Remarks: 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: s l3 X02 Project/Site: II&Aie0 Gil--l L1B/Z 4 t C J Applicant/Owner:_ G,~! of Ti64zZ-2 y: t, oun ~Sy State: all Investi ator: 3/~N7' 019415 Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? c No Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yesp Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes if needed, explain on reverse. Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: Z X 7T!N1L'T A grTn?r ♦ J.:,v a ra a avi Species % Cover Indicator Species % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs ~lrn ,2.~rdS~ ° -To t1com Shrub / Scru b Woody Vines Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) / .~D ~M rN A-~-' f Zo "LC Remarks: _ ,P1151-01Z6 16 ok-T! v6z-~ 6rcll ZED T.IVnnnT nr_V Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs Inundation Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available Water Marks ! Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: - (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 4MYT .C Map Unit Name Drainage Class: "-'1644 (Series and Phase): UCJAf A lg' Il.~' ~FYM Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgroup): 44Z)0LTi c. ibMwk&P.aLE.5 Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon unsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc IO A Z 16-1120- 6 0 e 3 a0 t~4 Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions - Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions , High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: XV-P rT . A Nil Tlr IM.R W N A TION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ® No (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ~o is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Hydric Soils Present? Yes (9 Q!5 Remarks: • i DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION t/Sit P ~r 2 b G -4 f 4 6 h Date: Sl3l o z rojec e: / & 4e I T - L4 g i Applicant/Owner: G►T`(. Dt= T+6rt-1L.sj County: ~wASy, I ti t ( 1 1 4 State: p.~ nves ga or: ✓ ,4 -5 3 ^ Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes 4W Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species I % Cover I Indicator I Species I % Cover I Indicator (IV Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) I/) Remarks: Mo~AlE,o HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: - (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: - (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: f-f1W MM OG, t1 ` S / d A)6 ~ 5-51L `X6-6,0 ~i✓ ~GO- SS /s'1 i1-7* W i ri~ ' . L66-Ae- l3tLCA9 /n3 ✓LG 1 SaL e 7__0A96+ey Nl.e_- /3Rc5HK JV04 , soil us Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): dJF36AG-1 6U--F Drainage Class: A* L)P' 1^1 Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgroup): 1-, 4,11 Er--*e j 4 QJ6-PT-S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, inches Horizon unsell Moist unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures etc 1 o-ta .31z, love, f tA*6671 mo s Sic-T 1'e 4m io- R 0 _ 61,r q :5,11%)D D I 1 0 3 rl d`Jf~ C' na' car,2sE o God Y R to 0" a sr d,~ r L r Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Concretions _ _ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List - Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors - Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 01-I L 1 r"I Ef}SIEM ENT AI AEI 14 f+a/E a C J 7'!Q&'s.1 ~ /J i G fi-CF (q- 0 OtTl+ i tvt p6r-77F j Al 4 TC-7E4 ii4L. , 0)0OrZr--0 N&L5 ~i E3 0 XV Ti . A Nil Y1 TFR MTN A TinN Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? a No (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? XNo No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland a No Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: 9 • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION ProjecdSite: ~t&4ft Ge Gl~(~R~l Date: 5/37027 unt : t~ C ~5f Applicant/Owner: G tT-A OF T164R.D y , o . State: Ox_ Investigator: G~a D4 i Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (fp Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: if needed, explain on reverse. % nn0-11 rul l TYr%'kT ♦ LNJJLU 1 A 11V 1I S Gies % Cover Indicator Species % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs TJS qo D ny- 0 AAI- W mss Z.a D F46 46"s ris njl vs G NJ~Gv(~5 6~NS D /e/. 08^10r-M G Shrub/ Scru b -TdIJC25 SUS Z_ 45- FWt,_ l.✓ r1*v*Xr0r4 116k-64R& All Go rum L1L/ ✓I i1 _ G.~Ec)diV",p O Woody Vine s = IX~ Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Z12, % . i, r.% l ,V ,,J7- l2 1-6/70 I<V 1 _67 Remarks: Pok, )2G /S c.~-l G.e.s z~v TrtmDn7 n0v it i Yi~v w v v Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: __L_(in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: , G „R Cnii .C Map Unit Name - M K\ / & Drainage Class: - LAjqM S %L ►H~`C u7~cc r pt (Series and Phase): t ) b A- J T1 C, S T Field Observations k E'R l~S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes 9a t group): t~ u Q L Taxonomy ( g i Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, inches Horizon unsell Moist unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc (2-5 41 io-4e- Z INA 3 1w vE- p"410.v f v9rH ~ ~ t 1 Z o R 3 L lb f~ ~ M~~ Cd~~S~ rs ~ 5i~ o M J 1- 12 I 11 l lol C_' 61 )o R `n u - t .51fl Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Concretions Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor - Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils - Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ` Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 15 /Y} 6D C - 5d, iS lfi 5 WFTi.ANil DF.TFRMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Am~o (Circle) Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Des No Hydric Soils Present? Ye No Remarks: • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Y G -l ~ _ Date: p r7 t GA Applicant/Owner: G r`C OED i lCa~ I ti ato : ) fig//S County: i9-S!~ State: O/Q nves g r , - Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Is the area a potential Problem Area? if needed; explain on reverse. es No Yes (0 Yes 4g> Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: - VEGETATION Species I % Cover Indicator Species % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs !FIN do 1 fig;m Pb4 f~' T~r.tS/S _ E4L oGi J^+ i-'S5 ZD D Fi96) S io A Jwl 11OL6AAG ES All Shrub / Scru b a rV 4s- - -3a Woody Vines Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, F CW orr FAC (excluding FAC-) 7 02, 't a DA REP- f~J[ ~ Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: - (in.) Secondary Indicators: - _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in• FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks- rprG S ;q0 / i jo . • SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): L04-7-&M fy S Taxonomy (Subgroup): ]gWQb7V(, i Y IL r L-CA-14 Drainage Class: R~c~O~kA7fc~~( u~G-~ t Field Observations c~t ta~-S Confmn Mapped Type? Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon unsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc /4 1 Z ~ ~ 16~ /0 v & i►-t Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _ Concretions Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime ' r• Redubing Conditions - - High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils - Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: e 6R A1 /~1~ i,~CL UiJ E f3 5~ / L l M /je t l I L(~ v64 d 6r6 D6e~Je<>,)S WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o (Circle Hydric Soils Present? Yes Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes o Remarks: • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: ~'~4FLD G~T~ ~ii3a4e-4 Date: -S- 3 . D2 Applicant/Owner: Lt T"A Qr D G-A-P-D County: _ 1,,115 ~1 State: Or~G Investigator: 1 i- t -S - Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ONs No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (!11;5> Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: 61 if needed, explain on reverse. VF,GF,TATION S cies % Cover Indicator Species % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs tA nJ1i-r_1l fi4rJJ1V6JM PENS EP [ o/3~vNi auk~ S' . %-'4L w- /..JV-J 10 Shrub /Scru b Wood Vines Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 3 Remarks: A/45i axe '}ci jlgvl G~fI~Eo HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: v~GoD~ p~irt ~ ✓f'O~,e. ~~`',2) ~ r f'v~p • SOILS Map Unit Name ( (Series and Phase): Jt X&tCA 5 tUT- Taxonomy (Subgroup): -'Yf l G Fes Drainage Class: /~9 ~✓f~% Field Observations ! "oJEW Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon unsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc --q wk hi b 3 P- 7-11 iota, 14 64#- 1*P 0,45 4wt W a. Z lnfrz 1 !5i(-r LOAoA Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor - Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _&Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: O )C c D 7, e p 0L00 T o- Z" j WF.TT.AND M.W..RMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? a No (Circle) Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? No . Hydric Soils Present? a No Remarks: • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: T1Ga1-) GIT-`t G ( 6.tAA~{ Date: 2- b Applicant/Owner: 6t-r-( o P i t G~-R-o State: OK Investigator: f'3i D4%J1 - Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? s No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes <T Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes (1~5> Plot ID: if needed, explain on reverse. VEGETATION Species % Cover Indicator Species % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs S p .~i d3ff O A,3 - r^ to 2&9E 6AaWo ~o Shrub / Scru b rJ ^..,.a a o Wood Vines O o Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 1 -:in , r µ nlA-,J'- E JZ-6 Remarks: W460.4 J1113ES c so t3! t~oMt~ tNE v PoR. Do~~ nr~,N cG c at.Gs. HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: - (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: a I,J1)lc j©e45 SOILS Map Unit Name ' - L PIMA- (Series and Phase):f~E~ R1L`~ Jr ~-T ~.ZY~}-w► Drainage Class: Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgroup): TIP I c- t 7t./t`G ~ r~QJl~~S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes To Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon unsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc - 16+ s N L GE 13l ock cc.q c'qM r Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions - Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions ! High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: B';E~r-KA` CJIplcJCC o~= f=(Lx- leu oGS j j(-Zl6Q Pt,9or WETI AND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes o (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o (Circl Hydric Soils Presept~.. Yes o Is this Sampling Point Within a. Wetland? Yes a 4 ♦ w Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: ` C - e Date: Z oZ I j e& j, Applicant/Owner: C-41-`4 of Couriit: ' W r45 1/6a j o.J I ve ti ator: 3 - 19A n s g - 3-&t - T - Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes <2!9> Transect ID: Is thebtea a.potential Problem Area? Yes Plot-11). ~ i ,t i; if riepded q x lain,p yeverse,• - VEt119TATION H Species % Cover Indicator Species % Cover I Indicator Trees Herbs W Shrub / Scrub Wood .Vines Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: h~p~Eb HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs Other go-Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: K Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: I JNti"( OCKY X9-0 61wo l i&AA" /01 f two e`L~ //`1 4444gl 0 or%y r • N V Z}JY Map Unit Name cc / Drainage Class: (Series and Phase): J q Field Observations ooh (Subgroup): l°~l t~C~A• Taxonomy Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ~~~i TS r Profile Description: - - Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, inches Horizon unsell Moist unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures etc pt 2 L f Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol - Concretions r Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ _KGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: C D lam- C,(r}- n~ E L C"Gd•-j Ta'9-77'P ri S Uk t o t? . i rrmrrr AM""wTiwi2MTNATT[IN Hydrophytic Vegetation present?; a No (Circle) Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a, Wetland? es No Hydric Soils Present? a No Remarks: 0 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION r- Project/Site: j 16i9yQU G! G /Fj~ + ' Date: S OZ rck-J Applicant/Owner: G / ojF:-- T l6 b y1C State: e,94 J I ti t - or: n nves ga Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Do Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes J9 Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes ] = P.Iot=ID:_ if needed, explain on reverse. ' , VEGETATION Species % Cover Indicator Species % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs Lic* J JS ~ ' i0 F 6 d c o J Shrub / Scru b Joe-.4- 5 J-Jo C Woody Vines . v c d J Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: /M6WC^p HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 0 0 SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): kwLy . Drainage Class: M Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgrou4 ~/G ~/•L14C 9/~PS- Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors 'Mottle Texture, Concretions, inches Horizon unsell Moist unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc ot- 0 32 - l6 0 iQ „ 7. . Hydnc Soil ndicators: Histosoi': Concretions Histic Epipedon ~ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidicb(for Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Koisture Regime 'Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducin. Conditions `~'Listed on National Hydric Soils List 'Gle ed or Low-Chroma Color's _ y ' ~Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?`; QW No (Circle) (Ci Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Hydric Soils Present? Yes Is this Sampling Point Within a.:1?uett~ttd.?\ Yes No Remarks: 0 • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: I-io rJ ei k4 Lib - ~ Date: -5/2z OZ r ar. Applicant/Owner: C-ih of i;aard CouBry:'_'l,~aghi n-0-0,1 Investigator: 7,ren1- L11,,15 State: D r,-- 9 on Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ® Transect ID: Is the area a-potential Problem Area? Yes 'plot ID: 40 - if needed, explain on reverse. VEGETATION Species % Cover Indicator Species % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs P V v 694 2 Shrub / Scru b / 20 Wood Vines q p o Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: ( FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 00 Alr P c e 1, c 4-<O~ ,s 0 SOILS • Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Taxonomy (Subgroup): G IC A 5(c4- &4+"q Drainage Class: Field Observations p8l< 461 s ) 57/°7zs Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon unsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, unsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structures etc 8 / 2 - Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _ Concretions _ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on Local.liydric Soils List _ Listed on Natiolial iii dric Soils List - Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation' Present? 'I"Yes Q (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes (Circle Hydric Soils Present? Yes N Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes (No Remarks: • 0 APPENDIX B: LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY 0 0 Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory - Offsite Option WETLAND SUMMARY SHEET UNIT: 7 WETLAND: E14-16, 18-20, 39 Wetland Acreage: 25 Field Verified. Date: 9/13/94 (=19 ac P17014 ac PEM/2 ac POW) Location: Fanno Ck E of SW Hall & N of Colony Ct Beaverton Quadrangle T2S R1W Sec. 1,2 !Tax Map: 25102 DA, DD & 25112 BA, BB J Zoning: R-4.5, I-L, R-12, R-7, Greenway Aerial: NE (E-20, E-20, 21) & SEA NWI Classification: POW, PEM, PFO Mapped Soils: non-hydric, 42 Verboort SCL, 13 Cove SCL, 22 Huberly SL Hydrologic Basin: Fanno Sub-basin: Fanno Creek Hydrologic Source/Comments: Fanno Creek; perennial stream. Dominant Vegetation: Trees Fraxinus latifolia Alnus rubra Sal& lasiandra Shrubs (Rubus discolor) Crataegus douglasii Spiraea douglasii WWHA Score: 80 Herbs/Emergents _ Phalaris arundinacea Juncus ef'usus Boundary Information: distinct topographic break; vegetation changes to Himalayan blackberry and pasture grasses. Buffer Information: Standard 25 ft minimum. Comments: Fanno Creek, perennial stream with areas of fringe wetlands including forest, emergent and pond. Excellent wildlife habitat with diverse vegetation. Interspersion w/stream and upland coniferous woodland; additional wetland N of new condos between E-20 & E-19. And additional (E- 39) wetland between RXR tracks E of E-21 (ash/willow/blackcottonwood, seasonal pond). Paved walkway (=10 ft) adjacent to wetland. Steep channel banks vegetated with Himalayan blackberry and diverse forest cover. Fishman Environmental Services CITY OF TIGARD It 7 < Wetlands Inventory Unit 7 Identified Wetlands Streams 33134 Public Land Survey 4 3 Section IDs Resource Unit Boundary A Sample Plot Location Source: Scientific Resources Inc. and Fishman Environmental Services. Aerial photography from April, 1994 at a nominal scale of 1', = 4001. Information on this map is of a generalized nature. In all cases, actual field conditions determine wetland boundaries. Public Land Survey Information: All Public. land survey sections depicted on this map survey are within either T1SR1W or T2SR1W. Index Map _ I 4 6 7 11)8 i" - r " - - feet A Plot Date: 09123/96 Scale 1 700 f N 9 • APPENDIX C: SOIL DESCRIPTIONS • 0 Soil Survey of Washington County OR067 1 of 3 Ma Unit Symbol Map Unit Name 1 Aloha silt loam 2 Amity silt loam 3E Astoria silt loam, 5 to 30 percent slopes 3F Astoria silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 4B Briedwell silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 5B Briedwell stop silt loam; 0 to 7 percent slopes 5C Briedwell stony silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 5D Briedwetl stony silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 6B Carlton silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 6C Carlton silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 7B Cascade silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 7C Cascade silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 7D Cascade silt loam, 12 'to 20 percent slopes 7E Cascade silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 7F Cascade silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 8C Chehalem silty clay loam 9 Chehalis sit day loam, occasional overflow 10 Chehalis silt loam, occasional overflow 11B Cornelius and kinton silt loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes 11C Cornelius and kinton silt hams, 7 to 12 percent slopes 11D Cornelius and kinton silt loams, 12 to 20 rcent slopes 11E Comelius and kinton silt loams, -20 to 30 percent slopes 11F Cornelius and kinton silt loams, 30 to 60 percent slopes 12A Cornelius variant silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 12B Cornelius variant silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slo s 12C Cornelius variant silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 13 Cove silty day loam 14 Cove day 15 Dayton silt loam 16C Delena silt loam, 3 to 12 percent slopes 17B Goble silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 17C Goble silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 17D Goble sift loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 17E Goble silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 18E Goble silt loam, 2 to 30 percent slopes* 18F Goble silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 19B Helvetia silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 19C - Helvetia silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 19D Helvetia silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 19E Helvetia silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 20E Hembre silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 20F Hembre silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 20G Hembre silt loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes 21A Hillsboro loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 21 B Hillsboro loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 21C Hillsboro loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 21D Hillsboro loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 22 Huber) sift loam 23B Jo silt clay loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 0 0 Soil Survey of Washington County OR067 2 of 3 23C Jo silt clay loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 23D Jo silty clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 23E Jory silt clay loam, 20 to 30 .percent slopes 23F Jo silty clay loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 24G Kilchis klickitat complex, 60 to 90 percent sloiles 25E Klickitat stop loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 25F Klickitat stop loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 25G Klickitat stop loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes 26 Kna a silt loam 27 Labish muck day 28B Lauretwood silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 28C Lauretwood silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 28D Lauretwood silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 28E Lauretwood silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 29E Laurelwood sift loam, 3 to 30 percent skn)es 29F Lauretwood silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 30 Mcbee silty clay loam 316 Melbourne sift clay loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 31C Melbourne silt day loam, 7 to 12 percent s s 31D Melbourne silty clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 31E Melbourne silty day loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 31F Melbourne silty day loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 32C Melb silt loam, 3 to 12 perc6nt slopes 32D Melb silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 32E Melb silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 33E Melb silt loam, 2 to 30 percent slopes 33F Melb silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 33G Melb silt loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes 34C 01 is silt loam, 5 to 12 percent slopes 34D OI is silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 34E 01 is silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 35E Otis silt loam, 5 to 30 percent slopes 35F OI is silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 35G 01 is silt loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes 36C Pervina silt day loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 36D Pervina silty day loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 36E Pervina silt day loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 36F Pervina silty day loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 37A Quatama loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 37B Quatama loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 37C Quatama loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 37D Quatama loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 38B Saum silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 38C . Saum silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 38D Saum silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 38E Saum silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 38F Saum silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 39E Tolke silt loam, 5 to 30 percent slopes 39F Tolke silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 40 Odifluvents, near) level 0 Soil Survey of Washington County OR067 3 of 3 41 Urban land 42 Verboort sift clay loam 43 Wa ato silty day loam 44A Willamette silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 44B Willamette silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 44C . Willamette silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 44D Willamette silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 45A Woodburn silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 45B Woodburn silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 45C Woodburn silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 45D Woodburn silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 46F Xerochre is and ha loxerolls, ve steep 47D Xerochre is rock outcrop complex 48F Sca is braun silt loams, 30 to 60 percent north slopes 49F Sca nia braun silt loams, 30 to 60 percent south slopes 50F Wauld very ravel) loam, 30 to 70 percent sk)pes 51E Tolan loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 52F Tolan loam, 30 to 60 percent north slopes 53F Tolan loam, 30 to 60 percent south slopes 54F Cater) ravel) sift loam, 30 to 60 percent north slopes 55F Cated ravel! silt loam, 30 to 60 percent south slopes 56G Braun sca onia silt loams, 60 to 90 percent north slopes 57G Braun sca o nia silt loams, 60 to 90 percent south slopes 58E Vemonia silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 59 Eilertsen silt loam 606 Multnomah cobbl silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 61 Huma ue ts, nded 62B Salem silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 636 Salem ravel) silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 76 Pits W Water • Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha and Quatama soils, which make up as much as 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit 1-1; wildlife group 2. 21B-Hillsboro loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes. This gently sloping soil is on broad valley terraces. This soil has a profile similar to the one described as representative of the series, but in about 15 percent of the acreage, there is loamy fine sand substratum at a depth of 30 to 50 inches. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha and Quatama soils, which make up as much as 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Cappability unit Ile-1; wildlife group 2. 31C-Mlleboro loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes. This moderately sloping soil is on brow valley terraces. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha and Quatama soils, which make up about 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit IIe-1; wildlife group 2. 21D-Hillaboro loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. This moderately steep soil is on broad valley terraces. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha and Quatama soils, which make up as much as 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit IIIe-1; wildlife group 2. Huberly series The Huberly series consists of poorly drained soils that formed in mixed silty alluvium on terraces. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 150 to 250 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is ash, willow, hazelbrush, sedges, western redcedar, grasses, and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 52° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark gray silt loam about 8 inches thick. The upper part of the subsoil is grayish-brown, mottled silt loam about 17 inches thick, and the lower ppart is dark grayish-brown, mottled silt loam fragipan about 13 inches thick. The substratum is gra dark grayish-brown, brown, and dark-brown, mottled silt loam fragipan 4 inches thick or more. The profile is medium acid throughout. Permeability is slow. Available water capacity is 5.5 to 7 inches. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 30 inches. These soils are used for irrigated pasture and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Huberly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, located at the end of Swant Road, 25 feet north of road, NW1/4SWl/4 section 15, T. 2 S., R. 2 W.: Al-O to 8 inches, very dark-gray (IOYR 3/1) silt loam, y (IOYR 6/1) dry; few, faint, dark-gray JOOYR R 4/1) mottles; strong, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky • and slightly plastic; many fine roots; many, fine, irregular pores; medium acid (pH .6.0) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 7 to 9 inches thick. B1-8 to 15 inches, grayish-brown (10YR 5/2 silt loam, light grayy (lOYR 4/1) and reddish brown (SYR 4/4) dry; moderate, medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common fine roots; many, medium and fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 10 inches thick. 112-15 to .25 inches, grayish-brown (IOYR 5/2) heavy silt loam, light gray (IOYR 7/2) dry, many, distinct mottles of dark brown (7.5YR 4/2) ; moderate, coarse and medium, subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; common fine roots; many, medium and fine, tubular pores; very thin continuous clay films in some pores; medium acid (pH 5.7) ; clear, smooth boundary. 6 to 15 inches thick. I1Bx-25 to 38 inches, dark grayish-brown (10YR 4/2 silt loam, light brownish gra (10YR 6/2~ dry; grayish brown (IOYR 5/2~ silt and sand coatings on faces of peds; common fine distinct dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) mottles; weak, coarse, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common fine roots; many, medium and fine, tubular pores; few, thin, continuous clay films in some pores; few, fine, manganese stains; medium acid (pH 5.6) ; clear, smooth boundary. 4 to 15 inches thick. IIICx-38 to 42 inches, mottled gray (10YR 511), brown (10YR 513), dark grayish brown (IOYR 4/2) and dark brown .(IOYR 4/3) silt loam; massive; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; few fine, tubular pores; very thin continuous clay films in some pores; few black manganese stains; medium acid (pH 5.6). Faint mottles with chroma of 4 or less may occur throughout the A horizon or only in the lower part. The B horizon is grayish brown, brown, or dark grayish brown. Mottling is distinct to prominent. Texture ranges from silt loam to silty clay loam. The fragipan is at a de th of 20 to 30 inches and has weak, coarse, subangular bloc or prismatic structure or is structureless and has fracture panes forming polygons.. Brittleness ranges from weak to moderate and moist consistence from firm to very firm. 22-Huberly silt loam. This nearly level soil is in concave positions on broad valley terraces. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Verboort, and Quatama soils, which make up as much as 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow to ponded, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit llw-4; wildlife group 1. able to firm and is brittle. The C horizon is silty clay or clay with 3 to 25 percent fine, weathered igneous rock fragments. 28B-Laurelwood silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes. This gently sloping soil is on long, convex side slopes on uplands. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Kinton, Helvetia, Saum, Melbourne, and Jory soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit Ile-3; woodland suitability group 2o2; wildlife group 3. 28C-Laurelwood silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes. This moderately sloping soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Kinton, Helvetia, Saum, Melbourne, and Jory soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit Ile-3; woodland suitability group 2o2; wildlife group 3. 28D-Laurelwood silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. This moderately steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Kinton, Helvetia, Saum, Melbourne, and Jory soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit IIle-2; woodland suitability group 2o2 wildlife group 3. 28E-Laurelwood silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes. This steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Kinton, Helvetia, Melbourne, Saum, and Jory soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. Capability unit IVe-2; woodland suitability group 2o2; wildlife group 3. 29E-Laurelwood silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes. This gently sloping to steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Jory, Kinton, Melbourne, and Saum soils, which make up as much as 20 percent of this mappin& unit. Runoff is medium to rapid, and the hazard of erosion is moderate to severe. Most of this soil is used for timber. The soil is suitable for cropland. Capability unit IVe-2; woodland suitability group 202; wildlife group 3. 29F-Laurelwood silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes. This steep to very steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Jory,. Kinton, Melbourne, and Saum soils, which make up as much as 20 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. Capability unit VIe; woodland suitability group 2r2; wildlife group 3. McBee series The McBee series consists of moderately well drained soils that formed in alluvium on flood plains. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 100 to 300 feet. • Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is ash, cottonwood, and willow. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 60 inches, average annual air temperature is 500 to 540 F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown silty clay loam about 11 inches thick. The subsoil is silty clay loam about 34 inches thick. It is dark brown and has common to many, fine, dark yellowish-brown, gray, and dark grayish-brown mottles. The substratum is dark-gray clay loam about 20 inches thick. The profile is medium acid in the surface layer and slightly acid in the subsoil and substratum Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is 10 to 12 inches. Effective rooting depth is more than 60 inches. These soils are used for irrigated vegetable crops, small grain, irrigated hay, irrigated pasture, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile. of McBee silty clay loam, located about 40 feet south of the road, NWl/4NE1/4SWI/4 section 36, T. 1 S., R_ 4 W.: Ap-0 to 7 inches, dark-brown (10YR 3/3) silty clay loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; many very fine roots; many, very fine, irregular pores; medium acid (pH 6.0 ; abrupt, smooth. boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. A12-7 to 11 inches, dark-brown IOYR 3/3) silty clay loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; few, fine, faint mottles of dark yellowish brown (IOYR 4/4) ; weak, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; many fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; clear, smooth boundary. 0 to 5 inches thick. B1-11 to 24 inches, dark-brown (10YR 3/3) silty clay loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; common, fine, faint mottles of dark yellowish brown (IOYR 4/4) ; moderate, fine subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; common fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.2) ; clear, smooth boundary. 0 to 16 inches thick 132-24 to 38 inches, fine variegated dark-brown, gray, and dark yellowish-brown (IOYR 3/3) silty clay loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.4) , dual, smooth boundary. 8 to 16 inches thick B3-38 to 45 inches, many, fine, distinct mottles of dark grayish brown, gray, and dark yellowish brown lOYR 4/2 51, 4/4) silty clay loam, brown 80YR 6/3) dry; moderate parting to weak, medium, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, s firm, sticky and plastic; very few fine roots; many, very fine, tubular pores and few, fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.4) ; gradual, smooth boundary. 4 to 11 inches thick C45 to 65 inches, dark-gray (10YR 4/1) clay loam, gray (IOYR 511) dry; many, medium and fine, distinct mottles of very dark brown and dark brown (10YR 2/2 and 3/3) ; massive; many, very fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.4). The solum is 30 to 48 inches thick. The A horizon is dark colored to a depth of more than 20 inches. Coarse fragments are commonly absent in the control section, but their content ranges to 20 percent below a depth of 35 inches and to 50 percent below a depth of 40 inches. The B horizon is silty clay loam or clay loam. The C horizon is clay loam to clay. 30-McBee silty clay loam. This nearly level soil is in areas along larger streams (fig. 9). Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Chehalis, Cove, and Wapato soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Flooding is frequent, and the hazard of streambank erosion is high. Capability unit Ilw4; wildlife group 1. • Melbourne series The Melbourne series consists of well-drained soils that formed in residuum and colluvium weathered from sedimentary rock on uplands. Slope is 2 to 60 percent. Elevation is 300 to 800 feet. Vegetation is Douglas-fir, Oregon white oak, poison-oak, wild rose, shrubs, and forts. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 60 inches, average annual air temperature is 51° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown and dark yellowish-brown silty clay loam about 10 inches thick. The upper' art of the subsoil is dark yellowish-brown silty clay loam about 8 inches thick, and the lower part is brown silty clay about 32 inches thick. The substratum is yellowish-brown silty clay about 16 inches thick. The profile is slightly acid and medium acid in the surface layer, medium acid in the upper part of the subsoil, and strongly acid in the lower part of the subsoil and in the substratum. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is 3.5 to 6 inches. Water-sup,plying capacity is 17 to 24 inches. Effective rooting depth is more than 60 inches. These soils are used for timber, irrigated berries, hay, pasture, wildlife habitat, recreation, and water supply. Figure 9: McBee silty clay loam on nearly level flood plain. Laurehvood soils on moderately steep uplands in background. • C-55 to 60 inches, yellowish-red (5YR 518) silty clay loam with streaks of yellowish-brown (10YR 5/6), strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) dry; massive; slightly hard, friable, sticky and plastic; few fine roots; many, very fine, irregular pores; few moderately thick clay films on rock fragments and in pores; 50 percent weathered siltstone fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.4). Depth to fractured, partially consolidated siltstone and shale is 40 to 60 inches or more. The Bt horizon is silty clay loam to silty clay and averages 35 to 50 percent clay.. The C horizon consists of partially weathered, fractured siltstone or shale, with moderately fine textured material filling the fractures. 36C-Pervina silty clay loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes. This strongly sloping soil is on uplands. It has a profile similar to the one described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Melby, Melbourne, Olyic, and Tolke soils, gently sloping Pervina soils, and steeper -Pervina soils. Included soils make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for pasture, timber, water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Capability unit Me-7 ; woodland suitability group 2o1; wildlife group 4. 36D-Pervina silty clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. This moderately steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in ma ping were areas of Melby, Melbourne, Olyic, and Tolke soils. Also included were areas of Pervina soils that are steeper or less sloping than this Pervina soil. Included soils make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for pasture, timber, water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Capability unit Ble-7; woodland suitability group 2o1; wildlife group 4. 36E-Pervina silty clay loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes. This steep soil is on uplands. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Melby, Melbourne, Olyic, and Tolke soils. Also included were areas of Pervina soils that are steeper or less sloping than this Pervina soil. Included soils make up as much as 15 percent of this.rnapping unit. Runoffff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. This soil is used for pasture, timber, water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Capability unit IVe-3 ; woodland suitability group 2ol; wildlife group 4. 36F-Pervina silty clay loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes. This very steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in ma ping were areas of Melby, Melbourne, Olyic, and Tolke soils. Also included are areas of Per-,:_a Y"I Sot1a Ulal arc lvbb J1VF111r, UIQn WIN rerVlna Soil. Included soils make up as much as 20 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is very severe. This soil is used mainly for timber. Other uses include water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat. s Capability unit VIe ; woodland suitability group 2r1; wildlife group 4. Quatama series The Quatama series consists of moderately well drained soils that formed in mixed, loamy alluvium on old terraces. Slope is 0 to 20 percent. Elevation is 140 to 200 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is Douglas-fir, western redcedar, Oregon white oak, ash, Oregon-grape, gasses, and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 520 to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown loam about 9 inches thick. The subsoil is dark yellowish-brown loam and clay loam about 34 inches thick. The substratum is dark yellowish-brown loam about 19 inches thick. The profile is medium acid throughout. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is 8 to 10 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 18 to 20 inches. Effective rooting depth is over 60 inches. These soils are used for irrigated berries, irrigated vegetable crops, orchards, small grain, irrigated hay, imgated pasture, homesites, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Quatama loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, located about 100 feet east of the road in the southeast corner of the SW1/4NW1/4NE1/4 section 9, T. 2 S., R. 2 W.: Ap-0 to 9 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 3/3) loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry, moderate, fine and very fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common fine roots; many, fine and very fine, irregular pores; medium acid (pH 5.6) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 7 to 9 inches thick. B1-9 to 15 inches, dark yellowish-brown (IOYR 3/4) loam, pale brown (1 OYR 6/3) dry, weak, coarse, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, nonsticky and plastic; very few fine roots; many, medium and fine, tubular pores; thin, continuous clay films in root channels and pores; medium and fine, tubular pores; • thin, continuous clay films in root channels and pores; medium acid (pH 5.8 ; clear, smooth boundary. 0 to 7 inches thick. B21t-15 to 21 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) clay loam, pale brown (IOYR 6/3) dry, moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticVU and plastic; few very fine roots; many, e, tubular pores; thin, continuous clay films in ppores and few, thin clay films on neds; medium acid (nH 5.8); clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 10 mcLs thick. B22t-21 to 30 inches, dark yellowish-brown (IOYR 3/4) clay loam, pale brown (10YR 68dry; few, fine, distinct, light brownish-gray l OYR 6/2) and • reddish-brown (5YR 4/3) mottles; weak, hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; very few roots; many, coarse, medium, and fine, tubular pores; continuous clay films in pores and on peds; common manganese stains; medium acid IN 5.9) ; gradual irregular boundary. 6 to 18 inches thick. 13300 to 43 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; common, fine, dark grayish-brown (10YR 4/2) mottles; massive in places parting to weak, coarse, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; com- mon, large and medium, tubular pores; thin continuous clay films on peds and in pores; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; &radual, irregular boundary. 10 to 20 inches thick. C43 to 62 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) loam, yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) dry; common grayish-brown (10YR 6/2 & 5/8 ) mottles; massive; hard, firm, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; common, fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 6.0). The thickness of the solum ranges from 40 to 60 inches. Texture of the A horizon is silt loam to loam. The Bt horizon ranges in texture from loam to clay loam. Structure in the Bt horizon ranges from moderate, coarse to fine, subangular blocky in the upper part and from nearly massive to weak, coarse, subangular blocky in the lower part. Clay films are thin to moderately thick, and they are in channels, in pores, and on vertical and horizontal ped faces. Stratified layers of sandy loam to loamy sand occur below a depth of 40 inches in places. 37A-Quatama loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes. This nearly level soil is on terraces. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit IIw-1; wildlife group 2. 37B-Quatama loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes. This gently sloping soil is on terraces. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit He-2; wildlife group 2. 37C-Quatama loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes. This moderately sloping soil is on terraces. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils, which make up as much as 15 wrrnn} of i,., au i 'apprng uAIAa. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit Ile-2; wildlife group 2. 37D-Quatama loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. This moderately steep soil is on dissected terraces. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. • Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit Hie-5; wildlife group 2. Saum series The Saum series consists of well-drained soils that formed in mixed eolian material, old alluvium, and residuum from basalt on uplands. Slope is 2 to 60 percent. Elevation is 250 to 1,200 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is Douglas-fir, Oregon white oak, hazelbrush, poison-oak, grasses, and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 51 ° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark reddish-brown silt loam and silty clay loam about 14 inches thick. The subsoil is dark reddish-brown and reddish-brown silty clay loam about 18 inches thick. The substratum is yellowish-red silty clay loam about 18 inches thick. Basalt bedrock is at a depth of 50 inches. The profile is medium acid throufhout. .Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is 8 to 10.5 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 16 to.22 inches. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. These soils are used for irrigated strawberries, orchards, small grain, hay, pasture, timber, homesites, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Saum silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes, located about 25 feet north of the road in the SW1/4SE1/4SW1/4 section 7, T. 3 S., R. 1 W.: Ap-0 to 8 inches, dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/2) silt loam, reddish brown (5YR 5/3) dry; moderate, medium, granular structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; many fine roots; many, very fine, irregular pores; 5 percent fine concretions; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 5 to 8 inches thick. A12-8 to 14 inches, dark reddish-brown 5YR 3/3) silty clay loam, reddish brown (SYR 5/4) dry; moderate, medium, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; many fine roots; many, fine, tubular pores; 5 percent fine concretions; medium acrd (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 8 inches thick. 132-14 to 23 inches, dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/4) silty clay loam, reddish brown (5YR 5/4) dry; moderate, medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; many fine roots; many, fine, fi.i...l~r nnrnc• f . ..ol.l.le e.7:. ....7 /..i7 vu, a-- F-v-\ O, 11%,ulul1 al.lu 11 5.8) ; cliar, smooth boundary. 8 to 15 incTes thick. II133-23 to 32 inches, reddish-brown (SYR 4/4) silty clay loam, yellowish red (5YR 5/6) dry, weak, medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; few fine roots; many, fine, tubular pores; 20 percent weathered pebbles and 10 percent stones; few, 0 6/6) dry; weak, medium, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; common fine roots; many, very fine, tubular pores; very strongly acid ((ppH 4.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 10 to 19 incFies thick. B345 to 61 inches, strong-brown (7.5YR 4/6) silty clay loam, reddish yellow (5YR 616) dry, weak, coarse, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; few fine roots; many, very fine, tubular pores; common, moderately thick clay films in pores and on peds; very strongly acid (pH 4.6). Depth to bedrock is more than 60 inches. The A horizon is a silt loam to loam. The B horizon has weak or moderate, very fine to medium, subangular blocky structure. The bedrock is siltstone or basalt. 39E-Tolke silt loam, 5 to 30 percent slopes. This gently sloping to steep soil is on ridgetops and side slopes in the Coast Range. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Olyic, Melby, Goble, and Hembre soils, which make up as much as 20 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium to rapid, and the hazard of erosion is moderate to severe. Capability unit Vle; woodland suitability group 201, wildlife group 4. 39F-Tolke silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes. This steep soil is on side slopes of canyons in the Coast Range. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Olyic, Melby, Goble, and Hembre soils, which make up as much as 30 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. Capability unit Vle ; woodland suitability group 2r1; wildlife group 4. Udifluvents, nearly level 40-Udifluvents, nearly level, are in small, narrow, irregularly shaped areas along stream channels and concave alluvial fans. They consist of a heterogeneous mixture of silt loams, loams, sandy loams, and silty clay loams. A typical area is in the NW1 /4NE1/4 section 17, T. 3 S., R. 5 W. These soils formed in long, narrow bands of 'nixed alluvium along streams and on concave alluvial fans. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 300 to 2,000 feet. Vegetation includes red alder, spruce, western redcedar, Douglas-fir, and low shrubs and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 60 to 100 inches, average annual air temperature is 45° to 50° F, and the frost-free period is 145 to 200 days. The surface layer is comumoruy dark colored. The subsoil is yellowish-brown to stron&-brown gravelly loam to silty clay loam. The surface layer is strongly acid. Water-rounded pebbles or cobbles commonly form thin stone lines or layers in the lower part of the subsoil. These soils are well drained. Permeability is moderate to moderately slow. Available water capacity is variable. Effective rooting depth is 40 inches to more than 60 inches. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. is The soils are subject to overflow; and in places they are ponded during the months of high precipitation. They are subject to deposition of new sediment during periods. of overflow. Udifluvents, nearly level, are used for wildlife habitat, recreation, and water supply. Capability unit VIw; wildlife group 1. Urban Land 41-Urban Land consists of areas that have been altered or obscured by urban works and structures. The areas are so greatly. modified that identification of the soils is not feasible. Soil properties such as drainage, permeability, and degree of compaction vary from place to place. All types of fill material are included. Urban land is used for residential or commercial sites. Verboort series The Verboort series consists of poorly drained soils that formed. in stratified, moderately fine textured and fine textured alluvium on bottom lands. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 150 to 300 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is ash, willow, shrubs, sedges, rushes, and grasses. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 50° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 200 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark brown silty clay loam about 12 inches thick. The. subsurface layer is very dark gray, mottled silty clay loam about 7 inches thick. The subsoil is very dark gray and dark grayish-brown light clay and silty clay about 14 inches thick. The substratum is dark grayish-brown silty clay loam about 17' inches thick. The profile is medium acid in the surface and subsurface layers and neutral in the subsoil and substratum Permeability is very slow. Available water capacity is 3 to 5 inches. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 36 inches. These soils are used mainly for grain, hay, irrigated pasture, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Verboort silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, located about 20 feet west of Helvetia road, in the SEl/4NE1/4NW 1/4 section 10, T. 1 N., R. 2 W.: Ap-0 to 8 inches, very dark brown (10YR 2/2) silty clay loam, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) dry; strong, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, sticky and plastic; many fine roots; many, very Vine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 7 to 8 inches hick. A12-8 to 12 inches, very dark brown (10YR 2/2) silty clay loam, grayish brown (10YR 5/1) dry, moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; many fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 4 to 7 inches thick. • A2-12 to 19 inches, very dark gray (IOYR 3/1) silty clay loam, gray (IOYR /1) dry; many, fine, dark reddish-brown (10YR 3/1) mottles; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. 1113209 to 28 inches, very dark-gray ((~N 3/ ) light clay, grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) dry; weals, medium, prismatic stricture parting to moderate, medium, angt lar blocky; very hard, very firm, very sticky and very plastic; common fine roots along vertical ped faces, and few fine roots within peds; few, fine, tubular res; many pressure faces on peds; neutral (pH 6.6); gradual, smooth boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. IIB3t-28 to 33 inches, dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2) silty clay, light brownish gray (2.5Y 6/2) dry; weak, fine, prismatic structure parting to moderate, fine, angular blocky; very hard, very firm, sticky and very plastic; few fine roots between peds; common, very fine, tubular p° res; many pressure faces on peds; neutral lpH 6.6) ; gradual, smooth boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. IIIC-33 to 50 inches, dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 412) silty clay loam, light gray (2.5Y 7/2) , dry; many, medium, distinct, dark-brown (7.5YR 4/2) mottles; massive; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; few fine roots; few, fine and medium, tubular pores with very dark gray (N 3/ ) clay films; neutral (pH 6.6). Mottles in the A horizon are faint to distinct. The IIB2t horizon ranges in texture from clay to silty clay. The texture of the 11133.t horizon ranges from silty clay to silty clay loam. The IIIC horizon is silty clay loam to silt loam in texture and ranges from neutral to mildly alkaline in reaction. 42 Yerboort silty clay loam. This nearly level soil is in narrow, irregularly shaped, concave areas along drainageways. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Dayton, Wapato, Labish, and Cove soils, which make up as much as 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. This soil is subject to flooding, and the hazard of streambank erosion is severe. Capability unit IIIw-2; wildlife group 1. Wapato series The Wapato series consists of poorly drained soils that formed in recent alluvium on flood plains. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 100 to 300 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is ash, willow, rushes, and grass. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 60 inches, average annual air temperature is is 520 to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark grayish .brown silty clay loam about 14 inches thick. The subsoil is dark grayish-brown silty, clay loam about 28 inches thick The profile is slightly acid in the surface layer and sliQhtiv acid to medium acid in the subsoil. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is 10 to 12 inches. Effective rooting depth in places is limited by a seasonal water table to less than 30 inches. The soils are saturated with water during winter unless artificially drained. These soils are used mainly for pasture, wildlife habitat, and recreation. Other uses are small gram, hay, and late- planted irrigated vegetable crops. Representative profile of Wapato silty clay loam, located southwest of farmstead in NW114SW1/4SW1/4 section 34, T. 1 S., R. 4 W.: Ap-0 to 7 inches, very dark grayish-brown (10YR 3/2) silty clay loam, dark brown (10YR 413) dry; moderate, fine, subangular bloc structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; many fine roots; man verryy fine, irregular pores; slightly acid p 1 6.2) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. A 12-7 to 14 inches, very dark grayish-brown ( l OYR 3/2) silty clay loam, dark grayish rown (10YR 4/3) dry, many, fine, distinct, dark-brown (7.5YR 3/2) mottles; few, fine, black manganese stains; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; many fine roots; many, fine tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.2) ; clear, smooth boundary. 4 to 10 inches thick. B21g-14 to 28 inches, dark grayish-brown (10YR 4/2 silty clay loam, grayish brown (10YR 5/2~ dry; many, fine, distinct, dark-brown (7.5YR 3/2) and gray (10YR 511) mottles; few, fine, black manganese stains; weak, fine, subangu- lar blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; few fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.2) ; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 17 inches thick. B22g-28 to 42 inches, dark grayish-brown (10YR 4/2) silty clay loam, yish brown (10YR 5/2) dry; many; fine, istmct, dark-brown (7.5YR 414) mottles; weak, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common, fine, black stains; medium acid (pH 6.0). The A horizon is slightly acid to neutral. The B2 horizon is dominantly silty clay 1nam but in. p lacess it ranges t:, silty clay below a dept of 30 inches. It is slightly acid to medium acid. The B3 and C horizons, which are below a depth of 30 inches, are commonly silty clay. In some pedons a few water-worn pebbles are embedded in the solum below a depth of 40 inches. 43-Wapato silty clay loam. This soil is on bottom 0 0 APPENDIX D: PARTIAL DETERMINATION By FISHMEN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 0 • Fishman Environmental Services, LLC CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: September 20, 2001 To: Duane Roberts, City of Tigard From: C. Mirth Walker, PWS Subject: Wetland Determination and Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment SITE NAME: Proposed Tigard Library Site (approximately 5.5 acres) SITE LOCATION: East of Hall Boulevard, south of Fanno Creek T2S, R1 W, Section 2 SE 1/4; Tax Map / lots 2S 1 02DA 600 and 02DD 100 & 200. Southern tax lot address is 13560 SW Hall Boulevard OWNER: Fred Fields DATE OF SITE VISIT: September 13, 2001 PROJECT STAFF: C. Mirth Walker, PWS, Wetlands Program Manager Stacy Benjamin, Wetland Ecologist FES PROJECT: 98073A INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Fishman Environmental Services, LLC (FES) was contracted by the City of Tigard to conduct a wetland determination / delineation and vegetated corridor condition assessment as a pre-purchase survey at a site proposed for the new library. The site is located immediately east of Hall Boulevard and south of Fanno Creek in Tigard, Oregon (Figure 1). Fanno Creek flows east and south along the north and east site boundaries. The study area on the site was the area located outside of wetlands mapped in the Local Wetlands Inventory and the floodway along Fanno Creek, per City of Tigard mapping (Figure 2). No wetlands are mapped on the site adjacent to Fanno Creek on the Beaverton, Oregon National Wetlands Inventory Map (Figure 3); Fanno Creek is mapped as riverine, upper perennial, open water, intermittently exposed/permanent (R30WZ). A tributary to Fanno Creek flows east along the southern property boundary. This tributary is mapped as palustrine emergent wetland with persistent vegetation and a saturated / semipermanent / seasonal water regime (PEM I Y). Two ponds have been excavated along its course: the west pond is mapped as palustrine diked / impounded open water wetland, artificially flooded, with an intermittently exposed / permanent water regime (PO WKZh) and is located south of the subject site; and the east pond is mapped as palustrine forested wetland with broad-leaved deciduous vegetation and a saturated / semipermanent / seasonal water regime (PFO I Y) and is located on the southern tax lot, but outside the study area boundary. o 0 0 o~p y 434 NW Sixth Avenue, Suite 304 Portland OR 97209-3600 phone: 303 224 0333 fax: i03 224 1851 www.fishenserv.con, Soils on the site are mapped as Quatama loam with 3-7 percent slopes (unit 37B) in the Soil Survey of Washington County. Oregon (USDA SCS 1982; Figure 4). Soils along Fanno Creek are mapped as McBee silty clay loam (unit 30). A narrow finger of the hydric Verboort silty clay loam (unit 42) is mapped through the center of the site. McBee soils may have hydric Cove and Wapato soil inclusions. Quatama soils are not listed as having hydric soil inclusions on the Hydric Soils List of Washington County Area, Oregon (USDA SCS 1989). The site was identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory (LWI) conducted by FES in 1994-1995 as being bounded on the north, east, and south by Unit 7, Middle Fanno Creek (see Attachment A). Wetlands to the east of the site include sites E-19 and E-20; the tributary and excavated pond to the south of the site include sites E-17 and E-18. No wetlands were determined to be present on the site within the study area boundary. The wetland boundary of the LWI-mapped wetland was flagged along the south edge of the site along the intermittent tributary wetland and the boundary was surveyed by a City survey crew. The pond to the east of the proposed building site was not flagged in the field since it is located outside of the study area boundary. The wetland boundary is shown in Figure 5. The banks of Fanno Creek are very steep (almost vertical and undercut) in some areas along the north and east edges of the property. Wetlands occur along the fringe of Fanno Creek at the toe of slope and .are confined within the steep stream banks. Wetlands occur from the current water level up to about 4 feet above the water level, based on vegetation changes and the observed ordinary high water mark. These wetland fringes were not marked in the field. The vegetated corridor was found to be in a degraded condition and will require enhancement to good condition upon site development to meet Clean Water Services requirements. The required setback for Fanno Creek, for wetlands associated with Fanno Creek, and the tributary south of the site is 50 feet. METHODOLOGY The methods for determining the presence of wetlands follow the routine methodology of the Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) used by both the Corps and the Oregon Division of State Lands. Field work was conducted on September 13, 2001. Soils, vegetation, and indicators of hydrology were observed at 3 sample plot locations to document site conditions (Attachment B). Sample plots were not marked in the field (pasture is currently grazed by horses). The wetland boundary along a portion of the south property line was flagged by FES and surveyed by the City of Tigard survey crew. Vegetation in the 50 foot vegetated corridor setback was sampled at three locations (Attachment C). A map of vegetated corridor communities will be prepared upon request. Site photographs are also available'upon request. Fishman Environmental Services; LLC Project 98073A Tigard Library Site Wetland Determination Page 2 0 0 SITE CONDITIONS The subject site is located on a terrace above Fanno Creek. Residential houses and associated buildings are present on the north tax lot and on the south tax lot. Four horses currently graze the site. The site visit was conducted during the dry part of the year. Wetland Determination Plot 1 was located in a slightly green swale in the north portion of the site on a broad terrace above Fanno Creek. Vegetation was dominated by tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC-), quack grass (Agropyron [[Elytrigia]] repens, FAC-), and bentgrass (Agrostis species, probably FAC), and did not meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. Soils were a dark brown (1 OYR 3/3) silt loam with many coarse light yellowish brown (2.5Y 6/4) redoximorphic concentrations (mottles). The matrix chroma of 3 indicates the presence of non-hydric soils. No indicators of hydrology, such as oxidized root channels around living roots, were observed. Plot 1 was determined to be upland based on vegetation and soils, and lack of any indicators of wetland hydrology. Plot 2 was located in the emergent wetland area south of the subject site. Vegetation was dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW); soils were a gleyed dark greenish gray (IOG 3/1) silty clay laom with few fine dark yellowish brown (1 OYR 4/6) redoximorphic concentrations and were saturated to the surface. This plot displayed all three wetland criteria. It should be noted that purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria, FACW+), a very invasive, and noxious, quarantined weed in the State of Oregon, is present in small populations in the wetland and should be removed and destroyed (Attachment D). Plot 3 was located approximately 15 feet north of Plot 2, about 13 feet north of the wetland boundary. Vegetation was dominated by bentgrass (Agrostis species, probably.FAC), tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC-), and ornamental hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna, FACU+), and did not meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. Soils were only shallowly sampled due to their dry hardness, and were a dark brown (IOYR 3/3) silt loam with no redoximorphic concentrations. No indicators of wetland hydrology were observed. Plot 3 was determined to be upland based on vegetation and soils, and lack of any indicators of wetland hydrology. Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment The 50 foot wide vegetated corridor adjacent to Fanno Creek consists of the steep slope adjacent to the stream and the grazed pasture at the top of the slope. Grazed pasture constitutes the community adjacent to the wetland boundary along the south property as well, with the addition of scattered non- native trees and patches of Himalayan blackberry. Both communities are in a "degraded" condition. Further information about the vegetated corridor is available upon request (maps and photographs). Degraded vegetated corridors are required to be enhanced to a "good" corridor condition under Clean Water Services guidelines as part of any site development. Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 98073A Tigard Library Site Wetland Determination Page 3 0 9 CONCLUSION Wetlands were delineated along a portion of the southern property boundary, outside of the study area boundary. The study area is upland; wetland setbacks and the floodway extend onto the subject tax lots. The 50 foot vegetated corridor is in a degraded condition. The services provided under this contract as described in this report include professional opinions and judgements based on data collected. These services have been provided according to generally accepted practices of the environmental profession. Wetland determination and wetland boundary delineation is an inexact science, and different individuals may disagree on exact boundaries. The conclusions drawn in this report represent our best professional judgement after examination of the site conditions and background information, taking into consideration the time of year of our delineation. This report is not j urisdictional until reviewed and confirmed by the Oregon Division of State Lands and/or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps is currently only reviewing wetland delineations when accompanied by a wetland fill permit application). This report documents the investigation, best professional judgment and conclusions of the investigator. It should be considered a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination and used at your own risk until it has been reviewed and approved in writing by the Oregon Division of State Lands in accordance with OAR 141-090-0005 through 141-090-0055. It should be noted that this technical memorandum does not meet the full requirements of the Division's rules for jurisdictional determinations;. additional information (such as precipitation prior to the site visit) will be required to meet the needs of the Division. Please contact the undersigned with any questions. Report prepared by: C. Mirth Walker, PWS Wetlands Program Manager; V wetland~~+ f am`~ ~a'~N'I o SWS 000415 ~~~?a1 Well an~~ Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 98073A Tigard Library Site Wetland Determination Report reviewed by: y y n 6.:., Stacy N. Benjamin Wetland Ecologist Page 4 0 REFERENCES Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S: Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Fishman Environmental Services. 1994-1997. City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory "Offsite Option" and Wetlands Assessment. Prepared for City of Tigard. FES 94043. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume 1-Checklist and Volume 2-Thesaurus. Second Edition. In association with Biota of North American Program of the North Carolina Botanical Garden. Timber Press, Portland. Kollmorgen Instrument Corporation. 1998 revised washable edition. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Baltimore. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report No. 88 (26.9). Reed, P.B., Jr., et al. 1993. Supplement to List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). USDA SCS. 1982. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. USDA SCS. 1989. Hydric Soils in Washington County Area, Oregon. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. No date. Beaverton, Oregon National Wetlands Inventory map. 1:58,000 CIR, 8/81. USGS. 1961, photorevised 1984. Beaverton, Oregon 7.5' topographic quadrangle. G:\1998\98073\98073a\tigard library wetland memo.wpd Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 98073A Tigard Library Site Wetland Determination Page 5 I inch = 2,000 feet LEGEND irce: USGS Beaverton, Oregon Topographic adrangle, 1961, photorevised 1984. O 0 ° Fishman 0 ° Environmental D Services, LLC CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Proposed Tigard Library Site Wetland Determination SITE LOCATION MAP Figure t# I September 2001 Project # 98073a LEGEND urce: City of Tigard. (WA O \ty 0 Scale Fishman Unknown o °gc Environmental v~ Services, LLC CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Proposed Tigard Library Site Wetland Determination STUDY AREA BOUNDARY Figure # 2 September 2001 Project # 98073a A ~ <ey'. ••1J•'-"„' , 1. ~ lit. w t7?~+" . 551: • : r Green Ztl..._. l :•i ~A ; . . J•+s.-i'..... t .Yi ' • 1 y X,! / cT .-r`ri~.~ •-•Z 27 ` i •~°•t -1~ iSLAf°i~ . 2O _K MID 'i :i•' t'1~.`.. . f`i`g" TIML 1. ;~i •ti`• ~ 'Q ' ~ - -fir I7i%~+:--,rr - Q55 ^ 'c-.-. TNL h ''`:_„eJ-~~N~ •i ,.•.,i`' .~,~.,i•,~y ~~r i.. ' Y" +e++r a~''"~,~1~ ~ ~ t Slp•n~T1 a e3 tt. .011 '.:'i • r . tV 'Bill 4-may-%F... vpw-1a 1•C . ''i." ibl ~ • 1 a ; 1. - •i`s °e'~" .~oni _ Jar; •~p-`` -~,;Fp~' ~ . ~ • ` ' ' _ • G-- • ~ ' ` e'er, , ; r. r~~- -fir,'>y_ _ _ .,.f• 'Y• .S-c •7y Vk , PpWK :a M U r' fd: RonD L 4, t' IT i Aw s`".I, or" mw' tin . d L,ibrarY Site Pr°l a'a l~eterl' i" °n o etl oRY MAI y,ECr~ ~ o Fishman NT ~ ~'II,ANDS ENE + a - Env ironm NATIONAL 01 Project # 9' 0 services, UILC September 20 Pt4o ESpU4 ANAGEMENT Figure#3 GON RSUITpJ4 Ft MECGANA NATURAL 14-90 .fu; ~ `e~ ' `S_•` -SCE ij~A k7l f ii`v ' r t `f t + o 4 L + 1 I ..t..' f ~ '11.2 {ta?~1~~ . y.;.•;+'- 13 J;r : X56 ~w i-- ° - - E S. t 44 13 tom... y 'Pr .K 42 t 7~ t ~s • : 4 1 • Ir, 4 J" ^"f .ti p ' i iY'?r #:.r vfr';U y /.Y Z 5,,~ . - .r -emu ~ ~ • , ' R; r:,. ` • ~,i. !f tea. •:~-jl. t- ~ ~ ;.1';.•:, ~ y* ~ ,37 't T , 3711 •.~1 „ r`.,~` z ::t:. 'yCL.~ ..1 • fr,,~.r.~, '•t:' •'f~... ~ (~'*~T t Y~ `'x~ti.t; a-t• f: • _ ~ t9 , i~• . ' a; fe •-~,yt~_. ~ 1 23 ~~',t ~ . L ? y~ ~ SC gTION r 22 ci3,T ; , ,1w": t;, ? y,y;~} c~!f 378 = Ra' „.'i , • i~ 'jj • _ , 767 :1 14 5 1 See 1 inch " 16611 4-,,•`w Site Ti and Library proposed Bard lnat'1on O wetland Dete a P LF.GtiVU G `oVe -C? Iti~llll~lll cla loam bY~" =~1 SOtL S~}RVEY ~ 4 98 McBee silty Y, o y ,lt~ irc~t~m L+~C ato inclusions? - ~iei iceti• September 2001 PCO)eet & WaP 't loam y AND Fit re # _ Quatam• TS IN ECOLOG D EMENT loam CONSULTRESOURCE MANAG - Verboort salty clay ,on County NATURAt_ zcS Soil Survey Washmt LEGEND H 100-year floodplain :e: Wetland boundary transposed from City of and survey. Sample plot locations approximate. 1 inch= 200 feet O ° Proposed Tigard Library Site Fishman Wetland Determination ~ Environmental J J Services, LLC WETLAND MAP & SAMPLE PLOT LOCATIONS CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND uve: City of Tigard aerial topography base map. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT F7 e#5 September 2001 Project # 98073a • • ATTACHMENT A CITY OF TIGARD LOCAL WETLANDS INVENTORY (I I 11 I All I ! I Tat n CITY O- I iuAt-.ev Wetlands Inventory Unit 7 y Identified Wetlands Streams g Public Land Survey 413 Section IN Resource Unit Boundary Sample Plot Location source: Scientific Resources Inc. and Fishman Environmental Services. Aerial photography from April, 1994 at a nominal scale of 1" - 400'. Information on this map is of a generalized nature. In all cases, actual field conditions determine wetland boundaries. Public Land Survey Information: All Public land survey sections depicted on this map survey are within either T1SRiw or T2SRlw. n. • Unit 7 Middle Fanno Creek • Tigard Wetlands Inventory and Assessment November 1995 Unit 7, Middle Fanno Creek, includes the mainstem of Fanno Creek from S.W. Main St. (south of Highway 99W) southeast to S.W. Bonita Rd., two minor tributaries (E7,8, E17, E37, E38), and the mouth of Red Rock Creek south of the Southern Pacific Railroad line. Unit 7 contains approximately 54 acres of wetlands including 29 acres of forest, 21 acres of emergent, 1 acre of scrub-shrub, and 4 acres of open water. The width of the wetland corridor adjacent to Fanno Creek is approximately 400 feet. The tributary is a narrow wetland corridor approximately 10 to 25 feet wide. The northern third of Unit 7, west of Hall Blvd., is within the greenway of Fanno Creek Park with safe access and a paved trail system. Fanno Creek Park wetlands (E6, E9-13) separate commercial and industrial land uses on the north from residential land use south of the park. East of Hall Blvd., Fanno Creek generally travels through residential and agricultural lands. Agricultural land on the south end of the unit north of Bonita Rd. is being replaced by commercial development. E22 has been filled since the 1989 inventory. Unit 7 provides all 7 wetland functions evaluated for this project and was rated the highest for overall wetland functional values in the City of Tigard with Unit 9 (Tualatin River). The high rating of the wetlands was due to their large size, large adjacent undeveloped uplands, and public access and trail systems (Fanno Creek Park). Fanno Creek Park (E9-13) contains diverse wildlife habitat and access for recreation. Wildlife habitat also occurs in the middle of the unit east of Hall Blvd. and Fanno Creek where expansive uplands occur adjacent to the creek. The uplands include a large pasture and a large diverse mixed deciduous/coniferous woodland with two seasonal streams flowing through it. These large adjacent uplands increase wildlife habitat and aesthetic quality values of sites E14716 and E18-21. Fishman Environmental Services page 33 • 0 Oregon Method Summary Sheet . Unit 7 Middle Fanno Creek and 2 Minor Tributaries Function 6aluation Description iil-* le - Wildlife habitat A Permanent water, diverse habitat & structure, connectivity, interspersion. Fish habitat A Fanno Creek provides fishery; Water quality A Stream corridor with FO (53%), EM (40%), and OW (6%); contiguous wetlands trap sediments & nutrients. Hydrologic control A Stream corridor provides runoff and flood storage opportunities. Sensitivity to impact B Potentially sensitive Enhancement potential A Soil compacted by horsestcattle in places; wetlands connected by stream. Education A Public access in Fanno Creek Park; safe access. Recreation A Developed trails and access at Fanno Creek Park. Aesthetic quality A Stream corridor with limited noise and garbage. CharacterIsfic.:. _ Description.::.:: Physical characteristics of gently sloping topography with approximately 409 wide wetland corridor; includes watershed or basin 29 acres FO, 21 acres EM, 1 acre SS, and 4 acres open water. Biological information provides diverse wildlife habitat with large adjacent undeveloped uplands (E14-16, E18-21). Water quality Fanno Creek has been rated severe WO condition by DEQ (1988); degraded due to runoff from agricultural lands and commercial, industrial, and residential stormwater. Land use existing land uses within 500' of wetland edge include 30% residential, 25% open space, 22.5% commercial/industrial, and 22.5% agricultural. Fishman Environmental Services page 34 Tigard Local Wetland Inventory - Offsite Option WETLAND SUMMARY SHEET UNIT: 7 WETLAND: E 14-16, 18-21, 39 Wetland Acreage: 25 Field Date: 9/13/94 19 ac PFO/0.25 ac PSS/4 ac PEM/2 ac POW) Location: Fanno Ck E of SW Hall & N of Colony Ct Beaverton Quadrangle T2S R1W Sec. 1,2 ITax Map: 25102 DA, DD & 25112 BA, BB. Aerial: NE (E-20, E-20, 21) & SEf R-4.5, I-L, R-12, R-7, NWI Classification: POW, PEM, PSS, PFO VVWHA Score: 80 Mapped Soils: non-hydric, 42 Verboort SiCL, 13 Cove SiCL, 22 Huberly SiL Hydrologic Basin: Fanno Sub-basin: Fanno Creek Hydrologic Source/Comments: Fanno Creek;. perennial stream. Dominant Vegetation: Tuts Shrubs Herbs/Emergents Fraxinus latifolia Alnus rubra Salix lasiandra (Rubus discolor) Crataegus douglasii Spiraea douglasii Phalaris arundinacea Juncus effusus Boundary Information: distinct topographic break; vegetation changes to Himalayan blackberry and pasture grasses. Buffer Information: Standard 25 ft minimum. Comments: Fanno Creek, perennial stream with areas of broad adjacent wetlands including forest, emergent and small pondings. Excellent wildlife habitat with diverse vegetation. Interspersion with stream and upland coniferous woodland. An additional wetland (E-39) between RXR tracks E of E-21 consists of ash/willow/blackcottonwood and seasonal pond. Steep channel banks vegetated with Himalayan blackberry and diverse forest cover. Fishman Environmental Services • • ATTACHMENT B WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEETS WETLANDIE TERMINATION DATA SHEET - 1987 MANUAL SCounty :(.~aS ;n ofrn State: 01? Date: 13/o project #-q6 9- *te:t1C&-->1ib/74 _I Plot: Applicant/Owner:'}~ 6~ Ti rn ar-A Sect.(1/4) 3 Township s Range 4 Wet / U Plot Location: 'c oi :3 -1.•~t' recn 5to.-444, - hA,J At. z 9.1 Topographic Location: a e 9r.-Joal 516cY D e Do normal environmental conditions exist?Y N Explain: Are soils- vegetation- hydrology significantly disturbed? Explain: VEGETATION *Dominant Plant Species % Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species % Cover Ind. Herb Stratum total cover: 160 ) (5 ft. radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum total cover: (10' rad.) 6o FAC - I. ~3!Aorq W. ~v FAG _ 2. Z10 A6 FAC 3. - 4. IC r-ACtA 5• i2C_ Tree Stratum total cover: ) (30 ft. radius) 7 9. 3 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FAC or FAC (excluding FAC-): /3 =D Hydrophytic Vegetation Criterion Met? YES j NWI Class SOILS Mapped unit name: ~~b0- ,51'1~'Lt GIauIC'1Matches Profile? Y© Taxonomy: 7Q 01-C g i Depth Horizon Matrix Color sk4 y 5ar►c as a Abund., Size, Color. Drainage Class: ppo(IL4 on Pores/Peds? Texture,•Struct., Other 2 4/6 MC415 SiL. VS(f-na1Q44CSa-) S J- Histosol Reducing Conditions (test) Histic Epipedon Gleyed Sulfidic Odor Mottled (wh 10") Prob. Aquic Moisture Regime Concretions (wh 3", >2mm) Remarks: -501 *1 S tv-rU earl./ L k rA -}-o A iP) rlc) OfZC Hydric Soil Criterion / Indicators Met? YES NO JV pb51-116 (,QCQ:9 j'P~" / W its HYDROLOGY Depth of inundation 1 ° Indicators Inundated Depth to free water: Depth to saturation: seeps: Saturated in upper 12" Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns Wetland Hydrology Criterion / Indicators Met? YES DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? YES O Comments: , ~ I - ~ - it - Determined by: Spa Fishman Environmental Services rev.aroo 2° Indicators 2° Indicators Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test Recorded Data Available (aerials, gauge)? Explain: Other:_ Remarks: Hi. Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Organic Streaking Organic Pan On Hydric Soils List WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - 1987 MANUAL Project #~aSite:!')Ct,~ libfa~ County in Stater Date: J0 Plot: Applicant/Owner: Ci E Sect.(1/4) ] 363 TownshipA-S Range (9b:1 U D Plot Location: U1 - o rvar1-MaQe- PCOA ^'~60 2a) Topographic Location: e O Do normal environments conditions exist? Y N Explain: ,PA Are soils, vegetation- hydrology significantly disturbed?G Explai VEGETATION *Dominant Plant Species % Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species % Cover Ind. Herb Stratum total cover:) (5 ft. radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum total cover: .s ) (10' rad.) Cl-Rk---vlan'S an_4n linaCea 50 FAC(~p l.PtA_kA5 4,scolor _ 2. 5Q)tCari~N -5 _ FACtc}+ 2. oIa r\ A LA )Camera f =A 3. +r FA_-CO 3. 2oS~ S(a. +r FAC 4. I(~~r~um perS Barra E&UA3 4. 5. 5. 6. Tree Stratum total cover: J) (30 ft. radius) 7. 8. 9. 1. 2. Remarks: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-):_~ _ )00 76 Hydrophytic Vegetation Criterion Met? ES NO NWI Class PEM SOILS Mapped unit name:,3' ' a~ Matches Profile? Y Taxonomy: 'C Drainage Class: (''1 ar.6-&IQ LJL~ 11 Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Abund., Size, Color, on Pores/Peds? Texture, Struct., Otter Ib S ew, dine lby1? /6 Si GL Histosol Reducing Conditions (test) Histic Epipedon Gleyed Sulfidic Odor Mottled (wh 10") Prob. Aquic Moisture Regime Concretions (wh 3 >2mm) Remarks: So i 1S ~~o~ fl o la Hydric Soil Criterion / Indicators Met? E NO Hi. Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Organic Streaking Organic Pan On Hydric Soils List HYDROLOGY _ Depth of inundation: Depth to free water: Depth to saturation:._56Ar a cal seeps: 1 ° Indicators 2° Indicators 2 Indicators Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test Water Marks Recorded Data Available (aerials, gauge)? Explain: Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns Other: Remarks: Wetland Hydrology Criterion / Indicators Met? E NO DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? ES NO r Comments: ~ 10ose5~7. Determined by aC ishman Environmental Services rev.4100 WETLAND TERMINATION DATA SHEET - 1987 MANUAL t Project u:J0e13:3ite:n&L_ lib -4 County: in Stater Date: Plot: 3 Applicant/Owner: Gt' b Sect.(1/4) lSt-) Townshipas Range 11.J Wet U Plot Location: N I- r-)gC o JG D Topographic Location: h o a Do normal environmental con itions exist? N Explain: Are soils- vegetation, hydrology significantly disturbed?Q Explain: VEGETATION *Dominant Plant Species % Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species % Cover Ind. Herb Stratum total cover:) (5 ft. radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum total cover:) (10' rad.) Q1 Ao~to.S) r'S SD vrcC(_1~~ f aeons~n ooi~ _(~f r2 ~s aca a(t~n~in~Ged -E,4C 2. R b(A-S Ai.Sco)o[- 10 FAC 3. e~era kaIiX .5 bPL 3. ZIeX U i ~alt'Uf-n -S LA PL 4. 4. f n 4< t"AaA 5. 5. Pos.:Z1 tab PAC 6. Tree Stratum total cover: ) (30 ft. radius) 7. 1. 8. 2. 9. 3. Depth to free water: Depth to saturation: seeps: 2° Indicators 2° Indicators Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test Recorded Data Available (aerials, gauge)? Explain: Remarks: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-): =moo Hydrophytic Vegetation Criterion Met? YES 8 NWI. Class SOILS ) N Mapped unit name:. f~- Qua~a~.a 16am Matches Profile?C1 Taxonomy: i C h~1~V-3 Drainage Class:('1CU~ ~1 G~II Depth~ Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Abund., Size, Color, on Pores/Peds? Texture, Struct., Other r - O "/1 IOYR;I3CrhaS; 110 fOx S, Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Prob. Aquic Moisture Regime Remarks:.So_i IS Oe 'u ArL4 Reducing Conditions (test) Gleyed Mottled (wh 10") Concretiogs (w/i 3", >2mm) Hydric Soil Criterion / Indicatorrs Met? YES Other: Remarks: -500,5 HYDROLOGY Depth of inundation: I° Indicators Inundated Saturated in upper 12" Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Hi. Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Organic Streaking Organic Pan On Hydric Soils List Drainage Patterns Wetland Hydrology Criterion / Indicators Met? YES DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? YES O Comments: Determined by ~S x nFishman Environmental Services rev.4i00 • ATTACHMENT C i VEGETATED CORRIDOR CONDITION ASSESSMENT DATA SHEETS • Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment for Clean Water Services Natural Resource Assessments Page 1 of 3 Site: City of Tigard potential library site Investigators: Mirth Walker & Stacy Benjamin Date: 9/13101 Community # 1 = 12 - 15 foot tall steep slope south of Fanno Creek % of Corridor XX%o Plot # 1 Tree Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or*Noxious; 30-foot radius: black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), non-native, 10% Shrub Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious; 30-foot radius: Himalayan blackberry (Rubes discolor), invasive, 20% bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamara), invasive, 10% Herb Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious; 10-foot radius: hedge bindweed (Convolvulus [Calystegia] sepium), non-native, 10% poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), noxious, 10% Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), noxious, 5`/0 reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), invasive, 5% campion.(Silene species), non-native(?), 5% birdsfoot-trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), non-native, trace common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus), non-native, trace Remainder of slope is rip rap or bare, eroding soil % Cover by Natives: None % Tree Canopy: 10% % Invasive/Noxious: 50% Corridor Condition (if only 1 plot-, otherwise average plots for each community): Degraded Fishman Environmental Services, LLC G:\1998\98073\98073a\VCCA_form.wpd • • Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment for Clean Water Services Natural Resource Assessments Page 2 of 3 Site: City of Tigard potential library site Investigators: Mirth Walker & Stacy Benjamin Date: 9/13/01 Community # 2 =pasture at top of slope, south of Fanno Creek % of Corridor XX%o Plot # 2 Tree Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious; 30-foot radius: None Shrub Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious; 30-foot radius: black hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii), native, 5% beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), native, 5% snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), native, 5% Herb Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious; 10-foot radius: tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea), non-native, 70% bentgrass (Agrostis species, probably non-native, 30% And likely other grasses such as quack grass (Agropyron [[Elytrigia]] repens), noxious % Cover by Natives: 15% % Tree Canopy: None % Invasive/Noxious: None Corridor Condition (if only I plot, otherwise average plots for each community): Degraded Fishman Environmental Services, LLC G:\1998\98073\98073a\VCCA_forM.%vpd Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment for Clean Water Services Natural Resource Assessments Site: City of Tigard potential library site Investigators: Mirth Walker & Stackk Benjamin Date: 9/1 3/01 Community # 2 = pasture north of wetland in south portion of site % of Corridor XX% Plot # 3 Tree Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious; 30-foot radius: None Shrub Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious; 30-foot radius: ornamental hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), non-native, 60% Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), invasive, 10% English holly (Ilex aqui/olium), non-native, 5% beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), native, trace rose (Rosa species), native, trace Herb Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious; 10-foot radius: bentgrass (Agrostis species, probably non-native, 40% tall fescue.(Festuca arundinacea), non-native, 25% English ivy (Hedera helix), invasive, 5% % Cover by Natives: Trace % Tree Canopy: None % Invasive/Noxious: 15% Page 3 of 3 Corridor Condition (if only 1 plot: otherwise average ge nl_n_tc f_nr each Cnmr„nn;tXr1- Degraded Fishman Environmental Services, LLC GA I 998\98073\98073a\VCCA_fbrm.wpd ATTACHMENT D • PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE INFORMATION Visit a Place Near You: lpp ere We Work Search: (Tips) I~ a Plants Features of the Week Place Plant Animal Home I Careers I Contact Us I Site. Map r,'.. .t.a+s MIR • Become a'.Member ~Mernbershl ReneYtAl • Meke 'a Donation Purple loosestrife Name Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria Range Purple loosestrife is an invasive species in North America that originates from the temperate regions of Europe and Asia where it is generally a minor component of wetland communities. It is believed that it was introduced to northeastern North America in the 1800s, although no one knows exactly how. It currently occurs in most states throughout the U.S. and all Canadian provinces except the Yukon and the Northwest Territories, although infestations are heaviest in the northeastern United States and southern Canada. Habitat Purple loosestrife is found in various types of wetlands. Rivers, streams and lakeshores are all common habitat, as well as ditches and other disturbed wet areas: Key Facts Purple loosestrife is a beautiful menace, with brilliant magenta flowers appearing between July and September. A single purple loosestrife plant can produce up to 2.5 million seeds annually. A single purple loosestrife root system can have 30 to 50 stems rising from it. Loos estrlfe's tiny, light seeds may remain viable for several years in water or soil, and can be distributed long distances by animals, wind and water. The seeds can germinate in acidic, alkaline, nutrient-rich or nutrient-poor soils, and have minimal light requirements. Purple loosestrife is extremely successful in disturbed or degraded wetlands. Threats s 0 http://nature.org/features/plants/art2743.htmi 9119/01 Purple loosestrife is an invasive plant in the wetlands of North America and will crowd or shade out native grasses, sedges and other plants, eventually establishing single-species stands. In its invasive range, it is not desirable to wildlife as habitat or food, and does make for decent spawning habitat. It has been known to drive out some federally endangered orchids and adversely impact waterfowl. Conservation Status Purple loosestrife is extremely difficult to eradicate. Pulling the weed by hand or applying herbicide is effective for small patches but unfeasible for large areas, and experiments with burning and changing the area water level have been relatively unsuccessful. Biocontrol, or the introduction of another nonnative species to control the first, may be the only answer to eradicating large stands - although many argue against this method. The United States and Canada. have both approved several species of beetles for use in the biocontrol of purple loosestrife. Also, many states have legislation against the selling and planting of purple loosestrife to curb its use in landscape plantings and flower gardens. Conservancy Protection The Nature Conservancy is finding ways to deal with purple loosestrife at a number of sites across North America. At Niobrara.. Valley Preserve -one of the premiere biological reserves in the Great Plains - stewards are using the approved beetles to eradicate stands of this noxious weed. For more information, please visit: Dakotas, Idaho, New York, or Wisconsin. To volunteer to help control purple loosestrife at an invasive plant project in New York, please visit the Adirondack Chapter. Privacy Statement II Financiai.lnformation I Legal Disclosure Copyright b 2001 The Nature Conservancy • http://nature.org/features/plants/art2743.htmi 9/19/01 Fr'atures of the Week Plants JkA& Afflw~ ieMNOW MTMIM Cowrivncy. Sotitxg the bait G -ow Mcrs Visit a Place Near You: Where We Work 1 Search: (T.PO EA Plants Put•.oosestrite • Page I of 2 Features of the Week Place Plant Animal Home I Careers I qc About Us 1 Get Involved l Science l News l Travel l Fun Stuff l • 6e Features of the Week Me • Mt Purple loosestrife Name Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicana Range Purple loosestrife is an invasive sp cies in North A \INoh at originates from the t perate regions oand Asia where it is ge erally a minor ct of wetland communiti s. It is believed thintroduced to northea tern North America in 0s, although no one ows exactly how. It cccurs inmost states hroughout the U.S. anadian provinces a cept the Yukon and thest Territories, alt ough infestations are hthe northeastern nited States and sada. Habitat Purple loosestr a is wetlands. Rivers, sti common habitat, Key Facts in various types of IRM and lakeshores are all as ditches and other disturbed wet areas. Purple loose ri is a beautiful menace, with brilliant magenta flowe between Jul and eptember. A single pu le loo strife plant can produce up to 2.5 million seeds A single p ple loos trife root system can have 30 to 50 stems risin Loosestrif 's tiny, ligh seeds may remain viable for several years in and can a distributed ng distances by animals, wind and water. The see s can germinat in acidic, alkaline, nutrient-rich or nutrient- have mi imal light require ents. Purple osestrife is extre ly successful in disturbed or degraded v Threats Purple loos strife is an invasive plant *n the wetlands of North America and shade out tive grasses, sedges and ther plants, eventually establishing stands. In i s invasive range, it is not de irable to wildlife as habitat or food, for decent pawning habitat. It has been nown to drive out some federally orchids a adversely impact waterfowl. Conservation Status Purple loosestrife is extremely difficult to eradi te. Pulling the weed by hat herbicide is effective for small patches but unfe ible for large areas, and E burning and changing the area water level have been relatively unsuccessf the introduction of another nonnative species to control the first, may be th4 eradicating large stands - although many argue against this method. The and Canada have both approved several species of beetles for use in the t http://nature.org/features/plants/art2743.htn~ 9/19/01 I i V r ' . f N 0 WER LLw. .1. - 13xr 't f '1 a I i u• Pill 204 fat _ l inch proposed Tigard Library Site QPrz. Wetland Determillation +.~Et~ ~ ~ man E+sh CpTiONs loo -yam floodPlatn oo Envi~ot+mental N1AP & SAMPLE PLOT LO Services, LLC WETLAND ect # 9g473. nsposed from city of September 2041 Pr01 GONSt1l TA~1TS 1N ECOLOGY AND Flgure # otV Wetland bo ply plot locations approximate_ igard SrtrYeY NATURAL RESOURGE MANAGEMENT nurse: City of Tigard aerial topography base map• i 0 "J r*;e=^A`N^'} Repot for v =mot. 5ii 'PGARD sit $ CITY OF 4itEG014 A =3~=~~~~~t} rd 01 e r d; o w ~ k _ ,Y'?31 F w1 ~tr yalrd Wall Iwo tai. e c„ 1r ~ 'rY i k y f ¢ fi, >i S A ~ ; V j Ff ~'~F a'e 1 ?f t tL=~ fi ♦ 3., t S it4D f-~, ~1 3 l' a prepared by Associates mzc' u2 september 2U eet srer► DKS Associates ~ 1400 SW Avenue, Suite 500 Portland, OR 97201 Phone: (503) 243-3500 Fax: (503) 243-1934 September 26, 2002 Vannie Nguyen, P.E. City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study Dear Vannie: P02190-000 DKS Associates is pleased to present this final traffic impact study for the proposed Wall Street alignment in Tigard. Based on last week's meeting with the City and ODOT, we have incorporated all comments we received on the draft report. Please call Colette Snuffin or me if you have any questions. Sincerely, DKS Associates A Corporation Brian K. Copeland, P.E. Senior Transportation Engineer Cc: Kathleen Freitag, ODOT Sam Hunaidi, ODOT %TDXFILEM-DRNE\ProjectsV.002\P02190 (Tigard Library Traffic Impact Study)\Docs\fmreplet doc E:wp 12-- 31-03 DKS Associates Chapter 1 Introduction and Summary This report evaluates the transportation impacts for the extension of Wall Street from Hunziker Street to Hall Boulevard, and for the proposed Tigard Library to be located on the east side of Hall Boulevard south of O'Mara Street. The study area is shown in Figure 1. The purpose of this study is to identify potential transportation impacts and to address issues identified by staff from the City of Tigard and Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The following traffic analysis considers primarily off-site traffic safety and operating conditions on the surrounding public roadways. Traffic volumes and conditions were evaluated during the weekday morning peak period (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and evening peak period (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) for the current year 2002, for the year 2005 (estimated year of project completion), and for the future year 2017 (as required by ODOT). Existing Intersection Performance The four locations selected for analysis of existing conditions are shown in the vicinity map in Figure 1 and listed below: ■ Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street ■ Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek Drive ■ Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street ■ Wall Street/Hunziker Street The proposed intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street is not included in the analysis of existing conditions, but will be included in future conditions. All of the intersections listed above are located within the City of Tigard. All study intersections except Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street currently operate at LOS D or better during both peak hours. While the eastbound movement at O'Mara/Hall operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour, this eastbound movement accounts for less than three percent of the traffic at the intersection during this time period. The remainder of the movements at this intersection operate at LOS A or B during the PM peak period. Project Impacts There are two components of this project: the extension of Wall Street between its existing terminus south of Hunziker Street and Hall Boulevard, and the proposed Tigard Library located along the east side of Hall Boulevard between O'Mara Street and Regina Lane. The Wall Street alignment is shown conceptually in Tigard's recently-adopted Transportation System Plan (TSP) as intersecting Hall Boulevard at approximately O'Mara Street. However, due to O'Mara's neighborhood status and the potential for large amounts of cut- through traffic, the City has decided against aligning Wall Street with O'Mara Street. Instead, the proposed Wall Street alignment would be approximately 365 feet south of O'Mara Street. A new railroad crossing would be required for the extension of Wall Street. DKS Associates Page 1 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 ~ ~ ~ • The proposed library project consists of a new 47,000 square foot building with access onto the proposed Wall Street. The proposed library project would generate approximately 50 AM peak hour trips (36 in/ 14 out) and 333 PM peak hour vehicle trips (160 in/173 out) onto the adjacent transportation system. The following sections summarize traffic analysis findings for the various future scenarios. Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions This scenario evaluates conditions in year 2005, assuming Wall Street has not been constructed across the railroad tracks. Library traffic has not been added to the transportation network for this scenario. All study intersections experience an increase in delay due to the addition of background growth. The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of 1.0 during the PM peak hour. This exceeds ODOT standards for v/c ratio on a roadway of this type (0.99). The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street would operate at level of service F during the PM peak period; however, this LOS F condition affects less than three percent of the total volume entering the intersection during the PM peak hour. All intersections would operate at acceptable levels during the AM peak period. Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions Plus Proposed Library This scenario evaluates conditions in year 2005, assuming Wall Street has not been connected across the railroad tracks to Hunziker Street. This scenario assumes the southwestern part of Wall Street would be constructed to provide access for the proposed library and the Zander property to the south of the library (across Wall Street). All study intersections experience an increase in delay due to the addition of library traffic. The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of 1.10 during the PM peak hour. This exceeds ODOT standards for v/c ratio on a roadway of this type (0.99). The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street would operate at level of service F during the PM peak period, but this LOS F condition affects less than three percent of the total volume entering the intersection during the PM peak hour. The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would operate at LOS F without a traffic signal. All intersections would operate at acceptable levels during the AM peak period. Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions With Wall Street Connection This scenario evaluates conditions in year 2005, assuming Wall Street is constructed between Hunziker Street and Hall Boulevard. Library traffic has not been added to the transportation network for this scenario. With construction of the Wall Street connection between Hunziker Street and Hall Boulevard, traffic volumes decrease slightly along Hall Boulevard north of Wall Street and increase slightly along Hall Boulevard south of Wall Street. The v/c ratio at Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of 1.01 during the PM peak hour. This exceeds ODOT standards for v/c ratio on a roadway of this type (0.99). The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street would still operate at level of service F during the PM peak period. The westbound (minor) approach at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would operate at LOS E for this scenario. All intersections would operate at acceptable levels during the AM peak period. DKS Associates Page 3 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 Total Traffic (2005) Conditions This scenario evaluates conditions in year 2005, assuming both the Wall Street connection and the Library have been constructed. Delays and v/c ratios (if applicable) increase at all study area intersections with the addition of library traffic. The v/c ratio at Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of 1.10 during the PM peak hour. This exceeds ODOT standards for v/c ratio on a roadway of this type (0.99). The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street would still operate at level of service F during the PM peak period. The side street (minor) movement at Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek Drive would operate at LOS E during the PM peak period. This movement represents less than three percent of the total entering traffic volume at this intersection. The westbound (minor) approach at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would operate at LOS F during the PM peak period without a traffic signal. All intersections would operate at acceptable levels during the AM peak period. Total Traffic (2017) Conditions This scenario evaluates conditions for year 2017 (approximately 15 years into the future) and includes the Wall Street connection, library traffic, and all other improvements outlined in the Tigard TSP for year 2015. In general, traffic volumes decrease along Hall Boulevard due to other improvements and roadway connections in the area. The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street decreases to a v/c of 0.95, which is acceptable by ODOT standards, during the PM peak period. The side street (minor) movements at Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek Drive and Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street continue to operate at LOS F during the PM peak period. However, all other movements at these two intersections operate at LOS B or better. The minor movement (northbound left) at the intersection of Wall Street/Hunziker Street would operate at LOS F during the PM peak period. The side street (minor) movements at Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would operate at LOS F during both the AM and PM peak periods without a traffic signal. With the exception of the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection, all study intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM peak period. The following mitigation measures would be necessary at the study area intersections to maintain acceptable intersection operation in the study area throughout the next 15 years. ■ A traffic signal is needed at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street at the point in time Wall Street is connected to Hall Boulevard (assumed year 2005). Multiple traffic signal warrants are met at this intersection for both year 2005 and year 2017 scenarios. With the construction of this signal, the intersection would operate at v/c ratio of 0.82 during the PM peak hour (LOS C) for the future (year 2017) scenario. ■ The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of over 0.99 for all year 2005 scenarios (with or without the project) during the PM peak period. The addition of a southbound right turn lane at this intersection will return the intersection to a v/c ratio of less than 0.99 during the PM peak period. For the future (2017) scenario, this intersection would remain at acceptable operating conditions with a v/c of 0.86 (LOS C) during the PM peak hour. ■ A traffic signal is needed at the intersection of Wall Street/Hunziker Street in approximately year 2014. Multiple signal warrants are met for the future (year 2017) scenario. With the construction of a traffic signal, the intersection would operate at LOS B with a v/c of 0.46. No signal will be necessary at this intersection in 2005. DKS Associates Page 4 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 • • The City, in its efforts to maximize the distance between O'Mara Street and Wall Street, has indicated that it plans to move Wall Street 35 feet to the south so that the southern half of the Wall Street alignment falls on the Zander property to the south. With this relocation, the proposed Wall Street alignment would intersect Hall Boulevard approximately 365 feet south of O'Mara Street. This would leave approximately 190 feet between the Wall Street alignment and the next driveway to the south along the east side of Hall Boulevard. Based on a preliminary meeting with ODOT', ODOT staff has indicated they would consider granting a temporary deviation to their access spacing standards.to accommodate the Wall Street alignment as long as the two driveways just north of Wall Street are eliminated (these will be eliminated as part of the Tigard Library project) and the driveway to the south of Wall Street would be eliminated at the time the Zander property develops. No additional accesses on Hall Boulevard should be allowed between Wall Street and O'Mara Street. As part of the Wall Street and Library projects, left turn lanes will be required along Hall Boulevard between O'Mara Street and Wall Street (northbound left turn lane at O'Mara and southbound left turn lane at Wall Street). Based on ODOT standards for a 40 mph speed, the tapers transitioning into these left turns would need to be 195 feet 2 Table 9 shows that the required vehicle storage for the northbound left at O'Mara would be 105 feet and the required vehicle storage for the southbound left at Wall Street would be 75 feet. With these two left turn lanes and a 195-foot reverse curve (ODOT standard) between the lanes, a total of 375 feet would be necessary between O'Mara Street and Wall Street to meet storage requirements and ODOT standards for left turn tapers. The total available storage space between O'Mara Street and the proposed Wall Street intersection is approximately 300 feet. In order to accommodate back-to-back left turn lanes on Hall Boulevard between O'Mara Street and Wall Street, it is recommended that the length of the reverse curves be reduced to AASHTO standards. While ODOT's current standard is 195 feet for conditions along Hall Boulevard, AASHTO would allow 120-foot reverse curves. The City of Tigard provided a preliminary site plan for the Library. This site plan shows access onto Hall Boulevard. Based on discussions with ODOT and a review of ODOT's access spacing standards, access will not be allowed onto Hall Boulevard from the library site. Access to and from the library will need to be provided on Wall Street when it is constructed. The Tigard TSP requires minimum access spacing on collectors (such as Wall' Street) of 200 feet. Therefore, the library access on Wall Street should be at least 200 feet (but preferably greater than 200 feet) from Hall Boulevard. An eastbound left turn lane (100 feet minimum length) should be provided along Wall Street for access to the library. 1 Meeting with Oregon Department of Transportation on July 10, 2002. 2 ODOT Standard Drawing TM539. DKS Associates Page 5 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 • • DKS Associates Chapter 2 Existing Conditions This section describes the existing transportation conditions in the study area, including roadway network, intersection traffic controls, traffic volumes, intersection operations, posted speeds, collision history and pedestrian/bicycleltransit facilities. The intersections selected for this study were based on ODOT's scoping letter (dated July 18, 2002) and a follow-up discussion with ODOT3. The four locations selected for analysis of existing conditions are shown in the vicinity map in Figure 1 and listed below: ■ Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street ■ Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek Drive ■ Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street ■ Wall Street/Hunziker Street The proposed intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street is not included in the analysis of existing conditions, but will be included in future conditions. All of the intersections listed above are located within the City of Tigard. Traffic Controls The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is controlled by a traffic signal with a protected left turn on the northbound approach and permitted left turns on the remaining approaches. Wall Street is controlled by a stop sign at Hunziker Street. O'Mara Street and Fanno Creek Drive are controlled by stop signs at Hall Boulevard. Roadway Network SW Hall Boulevard is a two-lane, north-south roadway classified as an Arterial, a Transit/Service Route, a Regional Corridor On-street Bikeway and a pedestrian route by the City of Tigard4. It is also classified as a District Urban highway by ODOT5. The roadway carries approximately 1,500 vehicles (two-way) during the evening peak hour. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour. Sidewalks are provided on the west side and intermittent on the east side of the roadway. On-street bike lanes are provided on both sides of the roadway. SW McDonald Street is a two-lane, east-west roadway classified as a Collector, a Community Connector Bikeway and a pedestrian route by the City of Tigardb. The roadway carries approximately 1,100 vehicles (two-way) during the evening peak hour. The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour. There are no sidewalks on McDonald Street in the vicinity of Hall Boulevard. On-street bike lanes are provided along both sides of McDonald Street west of Hall Boulevard. s Conversation between Brian Copeland (DKS) and Christian Snuffin (ODOT) on July 23, 2002. s Tigard Transportation System Plan, City of Tigard, January 2002. S Oregon Highway Plan, Oregon Department of Transportation, 1999. 6 Tigard Transportation System Plan, City of Tigard, January 2002. DKS Associates Page 6 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 • SW Hunziker Street is a two-lane, east-west roadway classified as a Collector, a Regional Access Bikeway and a pedestrian route by the City of Tigard'. The roadway carries approximately 700 vehicles (two-way) during the evening peak hour. The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour. Sidewalks are present on the north side of the roadway. SW Fanno Creek Drive is a two-lane, east-west roadway classified as a Neighborhood Route by the City of Tigards. The roadway carries approximately 100 vehicles (two-way) during the evening peak hour. Sidewalks are present on both sides of the roadway. SW O'Mara Street is a two-lane, east-west roadway classified as a Neighborhood Route, a proposed bike route and a pedestrian route by the City of Tigard9. The roadway carries approximately 220 vehicles (two-way)'during the evening peak hour. The posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour. Sidewalks are present on the north side of the roadway. SW Wall Street is a two-lane roadway classified as a Collector, a proposed bike route and a proposed pedestrian route by the City of Tigard10. Currently, it is a private drive that runs north-south and dead ends at the railroad, serving a few industrial properties only. The roadway carries approximately 40 vehicles (two-way) during the evening peak hour. The posted speed limit is 15 miles per hour. There are no sidewalks or on-street bike lanes. Existing Intersection Performance Intersection turn movement counts were conducted during the AM and PM peak periods to determine existing levels of service (LOS) based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for signalized and unsignalized intersections." Traffic counts were conducted during July 2002 for the morning peak period (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and evening peak period (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM).12 Figure 2 provides a summary of the existing traffic counts. Level of service (LOS) is used as a measure of effectiveness for intersection operation. It is similar to a "report card" rating based upon average vehicle delay. Level of service A, B and C indicate conditions where vehicles can move freely. Level of service D and E are progressively worse. Level of service F represents conditions where traffic volumes exceed the capacity of a specific movement, in the case of unsignalized intersections, or an entire intersection, in the case of signalized control, resulting in long queues and delays. A summary of the level of service descriptions is provided in the appendix. The unsignalized intersection level of service calculation evaluates each movement separately to identify problems (typically left turns from side streets). The calculation is based on the average total delay per vehicle for stop controlled movements (typically on the minor side street or left turn movements). Level of service (LOS) F indicates that there are insufficient gaps of suitable size to allow minor street traffic to safely enter or cross the major street. This is generally evident by long delays and queuing on the minor street. Level of service F may also result in more aggressive driving, with side street vehicles accepting shorter gaps. It should be noted that the major street traffic moves without delay and the LOS F is for side street or left turns, which may be only a small percentage of the total intersection volume. It is for these reasons that level of service results must be interpreted differently for signalized and unsignalized locations. ' Tigard Transportation System Plan, City of Tigard, January 2002. 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. i 1 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000, Chapters 16 and 17. 12 Intersection turn movement counts conducted by DKS Associates on 7/9/02, 7/30102, and 7/31/02. DKS Associates Page 7 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 i r NOT TO SCALE a ~ Na y~ O N (25)49 ^ (16)32 ;Z10 o a N N Q n v t 40(25) 1~ * 19(15) v co ~o o. ,'o N CD N O. O t0 Cl) ~t (88)197 J (263)470 o 00 N :12 LEGEND - Study intersection - - - - - Proposed Road Extension Awpm) - Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 2 EXISTING (2002) TRAFFIC VOLUMES The City of Tigard's preferred minimum performance level is LOS D for signalized and LOS E overall for unsignalized intersections. ODOT's standard for signalized intersections along Hall Boulevard is a volume-to-capacity ratio of less than 0.99 for the peak hours. 13 The results of the intersection analysis for existing (2002) conditions are shown in Table 1. All study intersections except Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street currently operate at LOS D or better during both peak hours. While the eastbound movement at O'Mara/Hall operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour, this eastbound movement accounts for less than three percent of the traffic at the intersection during this time period. The remainder of the movements at this intersection operate at LOS A or B during the PM peak period. All v/c ratios for existing conditions meet ODOT standards. Level of service descriptions and calculations are provided in the appendix. Table 1: Intersection LOS - 2002 Existing Traffic Volumes Study Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Traffic Signal Control Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street 19.6 B 0.73 40.8 D 0.97 Minor Street STOP Control Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek 18.0 A/C 0.13 16.3 A/C 0.06 Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street 21.6 A/C 0.24 43.6 B/E 0.23 Wall Street/Hunziker Street 12.1 AB 0.03 11.7 A/B 0.03 LOS Level of service Delay For signalized intersections, average vehicle delay in seconds for the intersection is reported. For unsignalized intersections, vehicle delay in seconds for the worst-case movement at the intersection is reported. V/C Volume to capacity ratio of the intersection. For unsignalized intersections, V/C is reported on the worst- case minor street movement. A/A Level of service of left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street. Access Spacing Standards ODOT's access spacing standard for Hall Boulevard is 500 feet minimum. The minor deviation limit is 475 feet. Pedestrian/Bicycle Sidewalks are generally provided throughout the study area. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of Fanno Creek Drive and on one side of Hall Boulevard, Hunziker Street, and O'Mara Street. There are no sidewalks on McDonald Street or Wall Street. On-street bike lanes are provided within the study area on Hall Boulevard, McDonald Street, and O'Mara Street. Pedestrian counts were performed at study intersections to help determine the level of pedestrian activity during the AM and PM peak hours. These counts showed that pedestrian activity at the study intersections is relatively low. 13 Amendment to 1999 Oregon Highway Plan Alternate Highway Mobility Standards Metro Area, Oregon Department of Transportation, December 2000, Table 7. DKS Associates Page 9 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 Public Transit Two bus routes are provided by Tri-Met within the study area. Bus route 76 (Beaverton - Tualatin) provides service between the Beaverton Transit Center, the Tigard Transit Center, and the Tualatin Park & Ride with 30- to 40-minute headways in the PM peak hour. For this route, there are stops on Hall Boulevard at O'Mara Street adjacent to the project site, and at the McDonald Street/Hall Boulevard intersection. Bus route 78 (Beaverton - Lake Oswego) provides service between the Beaverton Transit Center and the Lake Oswego Transit Center with 30-minute headways in the PM peak hour. This route stops on Hunziker Street about 600 feet west of Wall Street. Vehicle Collision History Table 2 summarizes the accident history at the study intersections for the five-year period between January 1997 and January 2002. No fatalities were reported at any of the study intersections for this five-year period. Table 2: Study Area Intersection Accidents (1997-2001) Intersection 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Total Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street 2 3 1 4 5 15 Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek 0 0 0 2 2 4 Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street 2 3 3 2 2 12 Wall Street/Hunziker Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 DKS Associates Page 10 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 • • DKS Associates Chapter 3 Project Impacts This chapter reviews the impacts of the proposed extension of Wall Street from Hunziker Street to Hall Boulevard, and for the proposed Tigard Library to be located on the east side of Hall Boulevard south of O'Mara Street. The analysis includes an assessment of trip generation and trip distribution, capacity analysis of study intersections for existing and future scenarios, signal warrant analysis, an evaluation of turn lane needs, proposed access spacing, pedestrian/bicycle needs and sight distance for the proposed intersection. Project Description There are two components of this project: the extension of Wall Street between its existing terminus south of Hunziker Street and Hall Boulevard, and the proposed Tigard Library located along the east side of Hall Boulevard between O'Mara Street and Regina Lane. The Wall Street alignment is shown conceptually in Tigard's recently-adopted Transportation System Plan (TSP) as intersecting Hall Boulevard at approximately O'Mara Street. However, due to O'Mara's neighborhood status and the potential for large amounts of cut- through traffic, the City has decided against aligning Wall Street with O'Mara Street. Instead, the proposed Wall Street alignment would be approximately 365 feet south of O'Mara Street. A new railroad crossing would be required for the extension of Wall Street. The proposed library project consists of a new 47,000 square foot building with access onto the proposed Wall Street. Proposed Tigard Library Trip Generation The proposed project trip generation for the library site is based on ITE's Trip Generation14. The trip generation rates from the ITE manual are consistent with trip generation data recently obtained at other library sites in the Portland area. The proposed library project would generate approximately 50 AM peak hour trips (36 in/14 out) and 333 PM peak hour vehicle trips (160 in/173 out) onto the adjacent transportation system The estimated trip generation is summarized in Table 3. The detailed trip generation calculations are included in the appendix. Table 3: Project Vehicle Trip Generation Land Use Quantity AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips In Out Total In Out Total Proposed Library 47,000 SF 36 14 50 160 173 333 14 Trip Generation, 6th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Vol. 2, 1997, land use 590. DKS Associates Page I 1 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 Trip Distribution Trip distribution was based on vehicle turn movements observed at study area intersections and information obtained from Metro's regional travel demand model. The trip distribution shows the majority of peak hour traffic is split between Hall Boulevard to the north, Hall Boulevard to the south, and McDonald Street to the west. It was assumed the trip distribution would be approximately the same for both the AM and PM peak hours. The estimated project trip distribution for the proposed library is shown in Figure 3. Traffic Forecasts Traffic volume forecasts for the study area were based on Metro's regional travel demand model as developed for the Tigard TSP and existing vehicle travel patterns. Future traffic volume forecasts were developed for year 2005 (assumed year of completion for the Wall Street extension) and year 2017 (approximately 15 years into the future as requested by ODOT). Study Intersection Performance The forecasted traffic volumes for the baseline and total volume scenarios were evaluated during the morning and evening peak hours to assess the incremental changes to intersection operations within the study area. Specifically, the increment of change in the peak hour level of service attributed to the proposed project was identified. The findings are summarized in Tables 4 through 8 and explained in the following sections. Future traffic volumes for each of these scenarios are shown in Figures 4-8. Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions This scenario evaluates conditions in year 2005, assuming Wall Street has not been constructed across the railroad tracks. Library traffic has not been added to the transportation network for this scenario. All study intersections experience an increase in delay due to the addition of background growth. The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of 1.0 during the PM peak hour. This exceeds ODOT standards for v/c ratio on a roadway of this type (0.99). The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street would operate at level of service F during the PM peak period; however, this LOS F condition affects less than three percent of the total volume entering the intersection during the PM peak hour. All intersections would operate at acceptable levels during the AM peak period. Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions Plus Proposed Library This scenario evaluates conditions in year 2005, assuming Wall Street has not been connected across the railroad tracks to Hunziker Street. This scenario assumes the southwestern part of Wall Street would be constructed to provide access for the proposed library and the Zander property to the south of the library (across Wall Street). All study intersections experience an increase in delay due to the addition of library traffic. The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of 1.10 during the PM peak hour. This exceeds ODOT standards for v/c ratio on a roadway of this type (0.99). The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street would operate at level of service F during the PM peak period, but this LOS F condition affects less than three percent of the total volume entering the intersection during the PM peak hour. The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would operate at DKS Associates Page 12 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 • i DKS NOT TO SCALE 7 21% LEGEND - Trip Distribution Percentage - - - - - Proposed Road Extension Figure 3 TRIP DISTRIBUTION 0 • LOS F without a traffic signal. All intersections would operate at acceptable levels during the AM peak period. Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions With Wall Street Connection This scenario evaluates conditions in year 2005, assuming Wall Street is constructed between Hunziker Street and Hall Boulevard. Library traffic has not been added to the transportation network for this scenario. With construction of the Wall Street connection between Hunziker Street and Hall Boulevard, traffic volumes decrease slightly along Hall Boulevard north of Wall Street and increase slightly along Hall Boulevard south of Wall Street. The v/c ratio at Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of 1.01 during the PM peak hour. This exceeds ODOT standards for v/c ratio on a roadway of this type (0.99). The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street would still operate at level of service F during the PM peak period. The westbound (minor) approach at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would operate at LOS E for this scenario. All intersections would operate at acceptable levels during the AM peak period. Total Traffic (2005) Conditions This scenario evaluates conditions in year 2005, assuming both the Wall Street connection and the Library have been constructed. Delays and v/c ratios (if applicable) increase at all study area intersections with the addition of library traffic. The v/c ratio at Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of 1.10 during the PM peak hour. This exceeds ODOT standards for v/c ratio on a roadway of this type (0.99). The side street (minor) movements at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street would still operate at level of service F during the PM peak period. The side street (minor) movement at Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek Drive would operate at LOS E during the PM peak period. This movement represents less than three percent of the total entering traffic volume at this intersection. The westbound (minor) approach at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would operate at LOS F during the PM peak period without a traffic signal. All intersections would operate at acceptable levels during the AM peak period. Total Traffic (2017) Conditions This scenario evaluates conditions for year 2017 (approximately 15 years into the future) and includes the Wall Street connection, library traffic, and all other improvements outlined in the Tigard TSP for year 2015. In general, traffic volumes decrease along Hall Boulevard due to other improvements and roadway connections in the area. The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street decreases to a v/c of 0.95, which is acceptable by ODOT standards, during the PM peak period. The side street (minor) movements at Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek Drive and Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street continue to operate at LOS F during the PM peak period. However, all other movements at these two intersections operate at LOS B or better. The minor movement (northbound left) at the intersection of Wall Street/Hunziker Street would operate at LOS F during the PM peak period. The side street (minor) movements at Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would operate at LOS F during both the AM and PM peak periods without a traffic signal. With the exception of the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection, all study intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM peak. period. DKS Associates Page 14 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 Table 4: Intersection LOS - Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions Study Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS WC Traffic Signal Control McDonald Street/Hall Boulevard 17.8 B 0.70 47.2 D 1.00 Minor Street STOP Control Fanno Creek/Hall Boulevard 19.3 A/C 0.13 33.6 A/D 0.22 Wall Street/Hall Boulevard 17.6 A/C 0.05 27.5 A/D 0.10 O'Mara Street/Hall Boulevard 22.0 A/C 0.27 > 50.0 B/F 0.38 Hunziker Street/Wall Street 12.2 A/B 0.03 12.8 A/B 0.06 LOS Level of service Delay For signalized intersections, average vehicle delay in seconds for the intersection is reported. For unsignalized intersections, vehicle delay in seconds for the worst-case movement at the intersection is reported. V/C Volume to capacity ratio of the intersection. For unsignalized intersections, V/C is reported on the worst- case minor street movement. A/A Level of service of left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street. Table 5: Intersection LOS - Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions Plus Proposed Library Study Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Traffic Signal Control McDonald Street/Hall Boulevard 18.1 B 0.70 68.0 E 1.10 Minor Street STOP Control Fanno Creek/Hall Boulevard 19.9 A/C 0.14 44.4 A/E 0.28 Wall Street/Hall Boulevard 18.8 A/C 0.08 > 50.0 A/F 1.30 O'Mara Street/Hall Boulevard 22.8 A/C 0.28 > 50.0 B/F 0.48 Hunziker Street/Wall Street 12.3 A/B 0.03 13.2 AB 0.06 LOS Level of service Relay For cionali- intnrcnr6- --p -hirlA AA- in ePrnnAl fnr fhn infnrenrfinn is --rra.l Fnr unsignalized intersections, vehicle delay in seconds for the worst-case movement at the intersection is reported. - V/C Volume to capacity ratio of the intersection. For unsignalized intersections, V/C is reported on the worst-case minor street movement. A/A Level of service of left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street. DKS Associates Page 15 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 I 1 • • Table 6: Intersection LOS - Baseline Traffic (2005) Conditions with Wall St Connection Study Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Traffic Signal Control McDonald Street/Hall Boulevard 16.9 B 0.66 48.1 D 1.01 Minor Street STOP Control Fanno Creek/Hall Boulevard 18.2 A/C 0.12 34.6 A/D 0.22 Wall Street/Hall Boulevard 18.8 A/C 0.16 35.1 A/E 0.29 O'Mara Street/Hall Boulevard 20.1 A/C 0.24 > 50.0 B/F 0.38 Hunziker Street/Wall Street 11.9 AB 0.07 12.9 A/B 0.06 LOS Level of service Delay For signalized intersections, average vehicle delay in seconds for the intersection is reported. For unsignalized intersections, vehicle delay in seconds for the worst-case movement at the intersection is reported. V/C Volume to capacity ratio of the intersection. For unsignalized intersections, V/C is reported on the worst- case minor street movement. A/A Level of service of left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street. Table 7: Intersection LOS - Total Traffic (2005) Conditions Study Intersection . AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Traffic Signal Control McDonald Street/Hall Boulevard 17.2 B 0.67 69.4 E 1.10 Minor Street STOP Control Fanno Creek/Hall Boulevard 18.7 A/C 0.12 45.9 A/E 0.29 Wall Street/Hall Boulevard 20.0 A/C 0.20 > 50.0 A/F 1.35 O'Mara Street/Hall Boulevard 20.3 A/C 0.24 > 50.0 B/F 0.43 Hunziker Street/Wall Street 12.1 AB 0.07 15.6 A/C 0.15 LOS Level of service 71,.1.... C..-..:.~_I.__J._._____.___ __.______._L__I_J_t____-_____.1_ t•___~ t LGtay ['Vl JIKIIQIILG4 I1ILG1JGl:UVIIJ, ilVGlilb'G VCILLGIC LLGIdy IR SCGUIIQ$ IVC the 1RleCSGCQOn is reported. For unsignalized intersections, vehicle delay in seconds for the worst-case movement at the intersection is reported. - V/C Volume to capacity ratio of the intersection. For unsignalized intersections, V/C is reported on the worst- case minor street movement. A/A Level of service of left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street. DKS Associates Page 16 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 1 1 ~ • Table 8: Intersection LOS - Total Traffic (2017) Conditions Study Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C Traffic Signal Control McDonald Street/Hall Boulevard 22.1 C 0.82 34.9 C 0.95 Minor Street STOP Control Fanno Creek/Hall Boulevard 24.2 A/C 0.23 > 50.0 A/F 0.53 Wall Street/Hall Boulevard > 50.0 A/F 0.75 > 50.0 A/F 4.21 O'Mara Street/Hall Boulevard 20.3 A/C .0.26 > 50.0 B/F 0.36 Hunziker Street/Wall Street 15.1 A/C 0.15 > 50.0 A/F 0.46 LOS Level of service Delay For signalized intersections, average vehicle delay in seconds for the intersection is reported. For unsignalized intersections, vehicle delay in seconds for the worst-case movement at the intersection is reported. V/C Volume to capacity ratio of the intersection. For unsignalized intersections, V/C is reported on the worst- case minor street movement. A/A Level of service of left turning traffic from major street and the level of service of traffic turning from the minor street onto the major street. Signal Warrant Analysis Traffic signal warrants were evaluated at all unsignalized study intersections for existing (2002), future (2005) and future (2017) scenarios. 15 The proposed intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street would meet signal warrants 1, 2, and 3 for year 2005 assuming the Wall Street connection and the Library are both built. If the Wall Street connection were not built across the railroad tracks, this intersection would still meet signal warrants 1, 2, and 3 for year 2005. The intersections of Hall Boulevard/Fanno Creek Drive and Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street do not meet any signal warrants for any of the scenarios. The intersection at Hunziker Street/Wall Street would not meet any signal warrants in 2005, but would meet warrants 1, 2, and 3 for year 2017. Based on signal warrant analysis, it is estimated that a signal would be needed at this intersection in approximately year 2014. " MUTCD 2000, Chapter 4C, Federal Highway Administration, December 2000. DKS Associates Page 17 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 DKS Associates • NOT TO SCALE r: o v is c.) M 411 411 (32)63, a N (21)42 7 _ a~ M n t 53(32) l 32(21) y 1 v 0 10 C4 h- o ...K: `r `f 00 `;z:, N! M I,, M 411 41 (105)242. ^ h (284)516 - r,, h` Z ~ ~ ry X91 Q 00 M: !.11(11) f 11(11) ' 1~ 10 C4 v ~o LEGEND Figure 4 ® - study Intersection BASELINE (2005) WITHOUT WALL STREET - Proposed Road Extension CONNECTION AND WITHOUT LIBRARY AM(PM) - Peak Hour Traffic Volume TRAFFIC VOLUMES DKS Assoc,; NOT TO SCALE w M O~O O N ~t (32)60 N -0 (21)40z vro^ S= oy 1s3~4?~ O \,v o. 00 01 M t 50(32) j 30(21) & 00 in ^ 10 N M M 4it N.O O N 1~ M (105)230 J (284)440 7 o ^a v- vl LEGEND - Study. Intersection - - Proposed Road Extension AM(PM) - Peak Hour Traffic Volume • is Figure 5 BASELINE (2005) WITH WALL LSTREET CONNECTION AND WRAFFIC VOLUMES DKS Assod NOT TO SCALE ;z f~ O ^h M ~t (32)63 J a ~ (24)43--+ ^M `o, `o • 3' J>9y~ 14911 1?/ o ~ 10 t 54 35 r ( ) l 32(21) * 1e M O ~N O. M O oho op `7 411 .M..O 1~ M 411 (156)254 ^ ,o (284)516 ~o cti h` v a a in N --8(96) 1(~ ♦ 18(107) 10 C`! M ~O `7 O LEGEND Figure 6 ® - study Intersection BASELINE (2005) WITHOUT WALL STREET - Proposed Road Extension CONNECTION AND WITH LIBRARY AM(PM) - Peak Hour Traffic Volume TRAFFIC VOLUMES DKSAssod NOT TO SCALE -.N M2 Z--n o h M 411 (32)60 -f 0 04 M o. (24)41 i 10 oN zO 00 00 o ~ ;:na Cn N t 51(35) l 4 30(21) t& coo 10- 10 cr O. M M o^. OHO. MN Cl) M v H N M (156)241 J (284)490' ^ a ~O M h VWyI 10 an in r --33(61) l 47(128) 4 1 00, co M 100 vo z0 LEGEND Study Intersection - - - - - Proposed Road Extension AM(PM) - Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 7 TOTAL (2005) TRAFFIC VOLUMES T ~ DKS Associa NOT TO SCALE 0 ~O o M ~t (30)60 J N °,o (40)70 7 0 0 oC', 0 ^ =o a N --110(60) 1 40(30) 4 o_o ^o Q~ h O O O Y1 aO o 10 h r ~ t (130)200.f (340)600 7 o a ^ LEGEND Study Intersection - - - - - Proposed Road Extension AM(PM) - Peak Hour Traffic Volume 0 Af;81 '0 Is, 6p'►r 6 r"Ifob 0) O b0 • O o~O. o ~o M Ul t 30(80) i to. r 160(370) * 00 ^o 00 -fl- Figure 8 TOTAL (2017) TRAFFIC VOLUMES Turn Lane Needs Turn lane needs were evaluated in the vicinity of the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection. Evaluation of left turn lane needs at unsignalized intersections was based on warrants from the Highway Research Record 21116 as well as estimation of maximum queues by Gard's method 17. The evaluation at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street assumes that a traffic signal would be constructed at this location by year 2005. Left turn lanes for the northbound left at O'Mara Street and the southbound left at Wall Street will be back to back. The Gard method estimates a maximum queue of five vehicles for the left turn at O'Mara Street. Ordinarily an average vehicle length of 25 feet is used to account for a mix of passenger vehicles with trucks, but since the left turn at O'Mara includes a very small percentage of trucks, 105 feet should be adequate storage for five vehicles. The Gard methodology also tends to be conservative in its vehicle queue estimates. For example, the HCM method18 yields a vehicle queue of one at the same location. The southbound left at Wall Street is signalized and will require only 75 feet of storage. While this is less than the ODOT minimum of 100 feet, it will be a low volume movement and will not require the full 100 feet of storage. Table 9 summarizes the required left turn lane needs and tapers at the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street and Hall Boulevard/O'Mara Street. Table 9: Left Turn Lane Needs - Future (2017) Conditions Intersection Movement Storage length (ft) Taper (ft) Hall Blvd/Wall Street Southbound left 75* 195 Westbound left 250 90 Hall Blvd/O'Mara Street Northbound left 105 195 *Minimum storage length is 100 feet based on ODOT standard drawing TM539. Intersection Mitigation The following mitigation measures would be necessary at the study area intersections to maintain acceptable intersection operation in the study area throughout the next 15 years. ■ A traffic signal is needed at the intersection of Hall Boulevard/Wall Street at the point in time Wall Street is connected to Hall Boulevard (assumed year 2005). Multiple traffic signal warrants are met at this intersection for both year 2005 and year 2017 scenarios. With the construction of this signal, the intersection would operate at v/c ratio of 0.82 during the PM peak hour (LOS C) for the future (year 2017) scenario. ■ The intersection of Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio of over 0.99 for all year 2005 scenarios (with or without the project) during the PM peak period. The addition of a southbound right turn lane at this intersection will return the intersection to a v/c ratio of less than 0.99 during the PM peak period. For the future (2017) scenario, this intersection would remain at acceptable operating conditions with a v/c of 0.86 (LOS C) during the PM peak hour. ■ A traffic signal is needed at the intersection of Wall Street/Hunziker Street in approximately year 2014. Multiple signal warrants are met for the future (year 2017) 16 Volume warrants for Left Turn Storage Lanes at Unsignalized Grade Intersections, Highway Research Record, 1967. 17 "Young Consultant's Award Paper: Estimation of Maximum Queue Lengths at Unsignalized Intersection", John T. Gard, ITE Journal, November 2001. " MUTCD 2000, Chapter 17, Federal Highway Administration, December 2000. DKS Associates Page 23 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 scenario. With the construction of a traffic signal, the intersection would operate at LOS B with a v/c of 0.46. No signal will be necessary at this intersection in 2005. Site Access and Circulation Figure 9 shows existing lane configurations along Hall Boulevard in the study area. ODOT's access spacing standard for Hall Boulevard is 500 feet19. The minor deviation spacing is 475 feet for Hall Boulevard. As shown in this figure, these standards are currently not met along the east side of Hall Boulevard, with existing adjacent driveways approximately 260 feet apart in the vicinity of the proposed Wall Street connection. The City, in its efforts to maximize the distance between O'Mara Street and Wall Street, has indicated that it plans to move Wall Street 35 feet to the south so that the southern half of the Wall Street alignment falls on the Zander property to the south. With this relocation, the proposed Wall Street alignment would intersect Hall Boulevard approximately 365 feet south of O'Mara Street. This would leave approximately 190 feet between the Wall Street alignment and the next driveway to the south along the east side of Hall Boulevard. Based on a preliminary meeting with ODOT, ODOT staff has indicated they would consider granting a temporary deviation to their access spacing standards to accommodate the Wall Street alignment as long as the two driveways just north of Wall Street are eliminated (these will be eliminated as part of the Tigard Library project) and the driveway to the south of Wall Street would be eliminated at the time the Zander property develops. No additional accesses on Hall Boulevard should be allowed between Wall Street and O'Mara Street. As part of the Wall Street and Library projects, left turn lanes will be required along Hall Boulevard between O'Mara Street and Wall Street (northbound left turn lane at O'Mara and southbound left turn lane at Wall Street). Based on ODOT standards for a 40 mph speed, the tapers transitioning into these left turns would need to be 195 feet. 20 Table 9 shows that the required vehicle storage for the northbound left at O'Mara would be 105 feet and the required vehicle storage for the southbound left at Wall Street would be 75 feet. With these two left turn lanes and a 195-foot reverse curve (ODOT standard) between the lanes, a total of 375 feet would be necessary between O'Mara Street and Wall Street to meet storage requirements and ODOT standards for left turn tapers. The total available storage space between O'Mara Street and the proposed Wall Street intersection is approximately 300 feet. In order to accommodate back-to-back left turn lanes on Hall Boulevard between O'Mara Street and Wall Street, it is recommended that the length of the reverse curves be reduced to AASHTO standards. While ODOT's current standard is 195 feet for conditions along Hall Boulevard, AASHTO would allow 120-foot reverse curves. The City of Tigard provided a preliminary site plan for the Library. This site plan shows access onto Hall Boulevard. Based on discussions with ODOT and a review of ODOT's access spacing standards, access will not be allowed onto Hall Boulevard from the library site. Access to and from the library will need to be provided on Wall Street when it is constructed. The Tigard TSP requires minimum access spacing on collectors (such as Wall Street) of 200 feet. Therefore, the library access on Wall Street should be at least 200 feet (but preferably greater than 200 feet) from Hall Boulevard. An eastbound left turn lane (100 feet minimum length) should be provided along Wall Street for access to the library. 19 Oregon Highway Plan, Oregon Department of Transportation, 1999, Table 15. 20 ODOT Standard Drawing TM539. DKS Associates Page 24 Tigard Wall Street Traffic Impact Study September 25, 2002 T At% Awwww.w~ww NOT TO SG4LE OMARA ST 4 4 nn p N • V u ~ BIKE LANE Proposed SIDEWALK LIBRARY P 01 J- N m 0 j WALL ST (Proposed) 0 REGINA LN ~t1 Q bl Q BIKE LANE 6.5' SHOULDER LANE FANNO REEK DR tJ f LEGEND - Proposed Road Extension Figure 9 - Stop Sign Controlled Intersection EXISTING ROADWAY - Proposed Traffic Signal CONFIGURATION ® - Residential Driveway DKS Assoch NOT TO SCALE OMARA ST 0l 4 li 0 m J A a 41 t 4 0 Proposed) WALL ST r LEGEND Figure 10 - - - - Proposed Road Extension PROPOSED ROADWAY -Stop Sign Controlled Intersection - Proposed Traffic Signal CONFIGURATION Appendix 0 • Traffic Counts INTERSECT TU RN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAF PORT SW BOULEVARD AT SW MCDONALD S.L ET T= 6.6% P=.770 N 342 A DATE OF COUNT: 07/31/02 0 1638 DAY OF WEEK: Wed R 39 303 0 TIME STARTED: 07:00 T TIME ENDED: 09:00 H 4-169 .41 1 4 .4-1 197 J LO T= 1.7% T= 0% 1 - ► .4-0 P=.799 P=.25 470 1 r TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME T=%T RUCKS BY AP PROACH ~l 1 r• P=PHF BY APPROACH 668 1 DJVH 130 774 441 0 A Peak 07: Hour 35-08:35 Traffic Smithy T= 3.5% P=.854 571 TEV=1582 11(503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO 1 .41 I 4 .41 r' r ` ALL 07:00-07:05 19 0 18 1 15 ---0 8 1.9 0 0 0 0 80 07:05-07:10 26 0 16 1 19 0 8 31 0 0 0 0 101 07:10-07:15 31 0 7 2 17 0 6 29 0 0 0 0 92 07:15-07:20 27 0 14 4 25 0 4 35 0 0 0 0 109 07:20-07:25 27 0 17 2 16 0 6 51 0 0 0 0 119 07:25-07:30 49 0 17 2 14 0 7 64 0 0 0 0 153 07:30-07:35 30 0 7 3 25 0 9 22 0 0 0 0 96 07:35-07:40 38 0 21 1 21 0 14 39 0 0 0 0 134 07:40-07:45 45 0 18 5 19 0 16 31 0 0 0 0 134 07:45-07:50 59 0 15 2 25 0 11 54 0 0 0 0 166 07:50-07:55 46 0 22 2 30 0 14 41 0 0 0 0 155 07:55-08:00 45 0 22 4 '31 0 5 32 0 0 0 0 139 08:00-08:05 43 0 16 2 42 0 11 35 0 0 0 0 149 08:05-08:10 35 0 24 1 28 0 9 31 0 0 0 0 128 08:10-08:15 21 0 6 1 17 0 8 38 0 0 0 0 91 08:15-08:20 33 0 14 4 23 0 8 34 0 1 0 0 117 08:20-08:25 28 1 13 2 22 0 11 31 0 0 0 0 108 08:25-08:30 46 0 10 8 20 0 11 30 0 0 0 0 125- 08:30-08:35 31 0 16 7 25 0 12 45 0 0 0 0 136 08:35-08:40 27 0 11 5 19 0 11 28 0 0 0 0 101 08:40-08:45 21 0 12 2 18 0 16 24 0 0 0 0 93 08:45-08:50 31 0 8 7 13 0 10 33 0 0 0 0 102 08:50-08:55 27 0 6 12 21 0 11 29 0 0 0 0 106 08:55-09:00 18 0 14 1 24 0 11 29 0 0 0 0 97 Total Survey 803 1 344 81 529 0 237 835 0 1 0 0 2831 PHF .78 .25 .79 .57 .74 0 .79 .87 0 .25 0 0 .859 % Trucks 1.9 0 1.5 3.7 7 0 3.8 3.4 0 0 0 0 3.4 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 07:00-08:00 442 0 194 29 257 0 108 448 0 0 0 0 1478 07:15-08:15 465 0 199 29 293 0 114 473 0 0 0 0 1573 07:30-08:30 469 1 188 35 303 0 127 418 0 1 0 0 1542 07:45-08:45 435 1 181 40 300 0 127 423 0 1 0 0 1508 08:00-09:00 361 1 150 52 272 0 129 387 0 1 0 0 1353 INTERSECTI MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HO' PORT SW BOULEVARD AT SW MCDONALD S'_ _ r.ET • T= 5% P=.856 N 322 • DATE OF COUNT: 07/31/ 02 0 672 DAY OF WEEK: Wed R 29 293 0 TIME STARTED: 07:00 TIME ENDED: 09 :00 -143 H .41 4 .4-0 199 3 LO T= 2% T= 2.6% 0 - ► r0 P=.794 P= O. 465 ,-p TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • i T=%TR UCKS BY A PPROACH f P=PHF BY APPROACH 664 0 D7VH 114 473 0 Peak Hour 7 58 • 07:15-08:15 Traffic S mithy T= 2.6% P=.878 587 TEV=!573 11 (503)641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • • • FROM - TO 3 ~3 41 t ALL ALL VEHICLES 07:15-07:30 103 0 48 8 55 0 17 150 0 0 0 0 381 07:30-07:45 113 0 46 9 65 0 39 92 0 0 0 0 364 07:45-08:00 150 0 59 8 86 0 30 127 0 0 0 0 460 08:00-08:15 99 0 46 4 87 0 28 104 0 0 0 0 368 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 07:15-07:30 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 07:30-07:45 4 0 0 0 4 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 13 07:45-08:00 4 0 1 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 13 08:00-08:15 1 0 0 0 4 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 9 MEDIUM-TRUCKS (SINGLE UNI T > 2 AXLES) 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 5 07:30-07:45 1 0_ ---.0-- - 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 PEDESTRIANS -CROSSWALK USEAGE--------------------- ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 07:30-07:45 1 0 0 0 1 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour by Movement PHF 77 0 .84 81 84 0 73 79 0 0 0 0 .854 % Trucks(all) 2,6 0 .5 3.4 5.1 0 2.6 2.5 0 0 0 0 2.8 % Trucks (M+H 0 0 0 0 .7 0, 0 .2 0 0 0 0 .2 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 07:00-08:00 442 0 194 29 257 0 108 448 0 0 0 0 1478 07:15-08:15 465 0 199 29 293 0 114 473 0 0 0 0 1573 07:30-08:30 469 1 188 35 303 0 127 418 0 1 0 0 1542 07:45-08:45 435 1 181 40 300 0 127 423 0 1 0 0 1508 08:00-09:00 361 1 150 52 272 0 129 387 0 1 0 0 1353 i ..6 Agbk INTERSECTI TU RN MOVII ENT COUNT SUMMAR_ PORT SW HAL L BOULEVARD AT SW MCDONALD STREET ♦ T= .7% P=.929 N 948 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 07/09/02 0 579 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 262 686 0 TIME START ED: 1 6:00 T TIME ENDED: 18: 00 H A-742 .4-0 88 J LO 0% 0 .4-0 P=.914 P 0.. 263 ~p i TEV=TOTAL %TRUCKS ENTRY VOLUME BY APPROACH ♦ T= ~l 1 F P=PHF BY APPROACH 351 0 MKET 480 491 0 Peak Hour 1949 ♦ 16: 45-17:45 Traffic Smithy 11 T= 1.1% P=.885 971 TEV=2270 (503) 641- 6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ 3 3 4 .4 I -4- FROM - TO .4 1 l r r ALL 16:00-16:05 20 0 7 5 19 0 15 32 0 0 .0 0 98 16:05-16:10 20 0 4 15 59 0 10 26 0 0 0 0 134 16:10-16:15 16 0 7 13 43 0 36 34 0 0 0 0 149 16:15-16:20 17 0 6 18 48 0 48 42 0 0 0 0 179 16:20-16:25 17 0 14 26 58 0 37 42 0 0 0 0 194 16:25-16:30 23 0 5 15 68 0 36 40 0 0 0 0 187 16:30-16:35 17 0 4 15 52 0 35 48 0 0 0 0 171 16:35-16:40 12 0 12 17 53 0 23 33 0 0 0 0 150 16:40-16:45 25 0 10 12 55 0 41 28 0 0 0 0 171 16:45-16:50 18 0 6 25 73 0 44 36 0 0 0 0 202 16:50-16:55 24. 20 0 0 4 7 19 23 .32 52 0 0 42 40 31 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 152 198. 16:55-17:00 17:00-17:05 26 0 9 21 63 0 29 57 0 0 0 0 205 17:05-17:10 24 0 10 30 59 0 30 48 0 0 0 0 201 17:10-17:15 20 0 7 21 50 0 48 55 0 0 0 0 201 17:15-17:20 25 0 7 21 59 0 45 31 0 0 0 0 188 17:20-17:25 24 0 11 15 82 0 37 58 0 0 0 0 227 17:25-17:30 18 0 8 29 34 0 44 25 0 0 0 0 158 17:30-17:35 22 0 5 26 69 0 32 30 0 0 0 0 184 17:35-17:40 19 0 10 14 54 0 40 39 0 0 0 0 176 17:40-17:45 23 0 4 18 59 0 49 25 0 0 0 0 178 17:45-17:50 34 0 8 19 50 0 34 38 0 0 0 0 183 17:50-17:55 21 0 7 14 47 0 35 26 0 0 0 0 150 17:55-18:00 25 0 5 14 52 0 33 34 0 0 0 0 163 Total Survey 510 0 177 445 1290 0 863 914 0 0 0 0 4199 PHF .94 0 .85 .89 .9 0 .92 76 0 0 0 0 .921 % Trucks 1.4 0 1.1 .4 .9 0 .9 1.2 0 0 0 0 1 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 229 0 86 203 612 0 407 448 0 0 0 0 1985 16:15-17:15 243 0 94 242 663 0 453 516 0 0 0 0 2211 16:30-17:30 253 0 95 248 664 0 458 506 0 0 0 0 2224 16:45-17:45 263 0 88 262 686 0 480 491 0 0 0 0 2270 17:00-18:00 281 0 91 242 678 0 456 466 0 0 0 0 2214 F INTERSECTI MOVEMII~IT COUNT PEAK HO PORT k SW HAL L, BOULEVARD AT SW MCDONALD S7 r ♦ T = .7% P=.971 N 948 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 07/09/ 02 0 579 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 262 686 0 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 1-742 I .4-0 88 i LO T= 1.1% T= 0% 0 .4-0 P=.914 P=O. 263 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ + T=%T RUCKS BY A PPROACH ~1 1 r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 351 0 MKET 480 491 0 Peak Hour 9 49 ♦ 16:45-17:45 Traffic S mithy T= .9% P=.909 971 TEV=2270 1 1(503)641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ ♦ ♦ FROM - TO ~l f ALL ALL VEHICLES. 16:45-17:00 62 0 17 67 157 0 126 123 0 0 0 0 552 17:00-17:15 70 0 26 72 172 0 107 160 0 0 0 0 607 17:15-17:30 67 0 26 65 175 0 126 114 0 0 0 0 573 17:30-17:45 64 0 19 58 182 0 121 94 0 0 0 0 538 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 17:00-17:15 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 17:30-17:45 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEDESTRIANS -----------CROSSWALK USEAGE--------------------- ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour by Movement PHF 94 0 85 .91 .94 0 .95 .77 0 0 0 0 .934 % Trucks (all) 1.1 0 1.1 .4 .9 0 1 .8 0 0 0 0 .9 % Trucks (M+H) 0 0 1.1 0 .1 0 .2 0 0 0 0 0 .1 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 229 0 86 203 612 0 407 448 0 0 0 0 1985 16:15-17:15 243 0 94 242 663 0 453 516 0 0 0 0- 2211 16:30-17:30 253 0 95 248 664 0 458 506 0 0 0 0 2224 16:45-17:45 263 0 88 262 686 0 480 491 0 0 0 0 2270 17:00-18:00 281 0 91 242 678 0 456 466 0 0 0 0 2214 l INTERSE TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUNMAFWEPORT SW BOULEVARD AT SW FANNO CREEK 'DRIVE T= 6.6% P=.854 N 311 ♦ DATE OF COUNT.: 07/30/02 0 IG54 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 0 303 8 TIME STARTED: 07:00 T TIME ENDED: 08:50 H .4-0 .41 L► 4-59 0 J L40 T= 0% T= 1% 0 .4-0 P=O. P=.641 0 19 r TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME A T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH I r-10. P=PHF BY APPROACH U 11 DGRG 1 0 322 614 3 ♦ Peak Hour 07:40-08:40 Traffic Smithy i T= 2.6% P=.833 617 TEV=987 11(503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD A ♦ FROM - TO Z -10. 3 .4J .4-- L r 1 •l I r► ` AT J 07:00-07:05 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 34 Q 0 0 3 53 07:05-07:10 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 47 _ 0 4 0 0 66 07:10-07:15 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 45 0 0 0 3 67 07:15-07:20 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 35 0 3 0 2 53 07:20-07:25 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 41 0 J. 0 4 63 07:25-07:30 0 0 0 0 27 1 0 46 1 2 0 5 82 07:30-07:35 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 47 0 1 0 2 72 07:35-07:40 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 67 1 0 0 2 89 07:40-07:45 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 58 0 1 0 6 89 07:45-07:50 0 0 0 0 36 0 0 64 0 2 0 4 1061 07:50-07:55 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 52 1 2 0 8 88, 07:55-08:00 0 0 0 0 -20 2 0 68 0 1 0 2 93'. 08:00-08:05 0 0 0 0 18 1 0 41 1 2 0 4 67 08:05-08:10 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 43 0 2 0 5 68 08:10-08:15 0 0 0 0 22 1 0 34 0 0 0 2 59 08:15-08:20 0 .0 0 0 32 0 0 54 1 2 0 2 91 08:20-08:25 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 43 0 2 0 1 67 08:25-08:30 0 0 0 0 25 4 0 58 0 1 0 3 91. 08:30-08:35 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 76 08:35-08:40 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 58 0 4 0 3 92 08:40-08:45 0 0 0 0 34 1 0 40 0 0 0 7 82 08:45-08:50 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 44 3. 0 0 7 76 Total Survey 0 0 0 0 509 10 0 1060 6 30 0 75 1690 PHF 0 0 0 0 .87 .5 0 .83 .38 .95 0 .56 .859 . Trucks 0 0 0 0 6.7 0 0 2.6 0 0 0 1.3 3.7 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds , 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 Hourly Totals 07:00-08:00 0 0 0 0 253 3 0 604 3 17 0 41 921 07:15-08:15 0 0 0 0 261 5 0 596 4 17 0 46 929 07:30-08:30 0 0 0 0 282 8 0 629 4 16 0 41 980 07:45-08:45 0 0 0 0 313 9 0 596 3 18 0 41 980 IF- INTERSECTHA,_Z BOULEVARD AT SW FANNO CREEK -,RIVE REPORT 11 m_ c 00- D_ Q71 N 290 - - • DATE OF COUNT: 07/30/02 p 670 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 0 282 8 TIME STARTED: 07:00 T TIME ENDED: 08:50 H .4-0 ~3 r57 p J -41 T= 0% T= 1.8% 0 .4-0 P=O. P=.75 p 16 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME CKS BY APPROACH % T= TRU ~l I r P=PHF BY APPROACH I 0 - 12 DGRG , 0 629 4 Peak Hour 1 298 • 07:30-08:30 Traffic Smithy 11 i T= 2.7o P=.855 633 TEV=980 (503)641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO A 3 '41 • L . I r r ALL ALL VEHICLES 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 65 0 0 172 1 2 0 10 250 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 81 2 0 184 1 5 0 14 287 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 58 2 0 118 1 4 0 11 194 08:15-08:30 0 0 0 0 78 4 0 155 1 5 0 6 249 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 11 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 7 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 08:15-08:30 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 12 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 08:15-08:30 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08:15-08:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 08:15-08:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEDESTRIANS ----------------------CROSSWALK USEAGE-------- ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 07:30-07:45 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 1 08:00-08:15 0 1 0 1 08:15-08:30 0 0 1 0 Peak Hour by PHF Movement 0 0 0 0 87 .5 0 85 1 .8 0 73 .853 . Trucks(all) 0 0 0 0 7.1 0 0 2.7 0 0 0 2.4 3.9 1 Trucks(M+H) 0 0 0 0 .7 0 0 .3 0 0 0 0 .4 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 07:00-08:00 0 0 0 0 253 3 0 604 3 17 0 41 921 07:15-08:15 0 0 0 0 261 5 0 596 4 17 0 46 929 07:30-08:30 0 0 0 0 282 8 0 629 4 16 0 41 980 07:45-08:45 0 0 0 0 313 9 0 596 3 18 0 41 980 t f. INTERSEC' TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAF PORT SW HAu1, BOULEVARD AT SW FANNO CREEK IVE ♦ T= .8% P=.870 N 8 32 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 07/30/02 O 6 16 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R. 0 795 37 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18: 00 H •-0 4 .-40 0 J L25 T= 00 T= 1.40 0 .-0 P=O. P= .714 0 r15 ~TR P VOLUME ♦ CKS BY A ROACH .l I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 0 64 DGRH 0 1810 591 2 7 ♦ Peak 16: Hour 40-17:40 Traffic Smithy + L T= 2.2% P=.925 618 TEV=1490 11(503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD FROM - TO 3 1 ~l r L AT T , , 16:00-16:05 0 0 0 0 50 5 0 38 1 1 0 2 97 . 16:05-16:10 0 0 0 0 60 7 0 40 1 0 0 1 109 16:10-16:15 0 0 0 0 51 5 0 50 5 0 0 3 114 16:15-16:20 0 0 0 0 60 4 0 39 4 0 0 1 108 16:20-16:25 0 0 0 0 56 2 0 55 1 1 0 0 115 16:25-16:30 0 0 0 0 62 1 0 28 1 1 0 2 95 16:30-16:35 0 0 0 0 66 1 0 40 O 1 0 4 112 16:35-16:40 0 0 0 0 59 5 0 50 1 2 0 2 119 16:40-16:45 0 0 0 0 59 3 0 45 2 2 0 3 114 16:45-16:50 0 0 0 0 52 2 0 47 3 3 0 2 109 16:50-16:55 0 0 0 0 66 4 0 56 1 2 0 2 131 16:55-17:00 0 0 0 0 .43 3 0 49 1 3 0 1 100 17:00-17:05 0 0 0 0 69 4 0 51 2 0 0 2 128 17:05-17:10 0 0 0 0 75 3 0 46 3 0 0 1. 128 17:10-17:15 0 0 0 0 83 2 0 46 1 2 0 2 136 17:15-17:20 .0 0 0 0 52 3 0 50 4 2 0 2 113 17:20-17:25 0 0 0 0 66 4 0 51 5 0 0 3 129' 17:25-17:30 0 0 0 0 80 3 0 54 3 0 0 2 1421 17:30-17:35 0 0 0 0 71 3 0 41 1 0 0 2 118' 17:35-17:40 0 0 0 0 79 3 0 55 1 1 0 3 142 17:40-17:45 0 0 0 0 57 3 0 40 2 2 0 0 104 17:45-17:50 0 0 0 0 61 4 0 37 3 1 0 4f 110 17:50-17:55 0 0 0 0 57 4 0 45 4 0 0 0 110 17:55-18:00 0 0 0 0 64 3 0 38 1 0 0 5 111 Total Survey 0 0 0 0 1498 81 0 1091 51 24 0 49 2794 PHF 0 0 0 0 .86 .84 0 .95 .56 .47 0 .89 .926 % Trucks 0 0 0 0 .9 0 0 2.2 2 0 0 2 1.4 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 8 0 0 2 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 0 0 0 0 684 42 0 537 21 16 0 23 1323 16:15-17:15 0 0 0 0 750 34 0 552 20 17 0 22 1395 16:30-17:30 0 0 0 0 770 37 0 585 26 17 0 26 1461 16:45-17:45 0 0 0 0 793 37 0 586 27 15 0 22 1480 17:00-18:00 0 0 0 0 814 39 0 554 30 8 0 26 1471 INTERSECT: TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HC REPORT SW HA,_Z BOULEVARD AT SW FANNO CREED , IVE • T= .7% P=.879 N 830 • DATE OF COUNT: 07/3 0/02 0 6 08 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 0 793 3 7 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T H .4-0 .4-37 TIME ENDED: 18 :00 0 J L22 T= 0% T= 2.7% 0 .4-0 P=O. P=.711 0 • r15 'TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME T=%T RUCKS BY A PPROA CH 4-1 I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH ~ 0 64 DGRH 0 586 27 Peak Hour 18 08 • 16:45-1745 Traffic Smithy + T= 2.6i P=.917 1613 TEV=1480 (503) 641- 6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • ♦ • FROM - TO 3 41 L► 41 I r► .4- L : ALL ALL VEHICLES 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 161 9 0 152 5 8 0 5 340 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 227 9 0 143 6 2 0 5 392 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 198 10 0 155 12 2 0 7 384 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 207 9 0 136 4 3 0 5 364 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 8 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 5 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 PEDESTRIANS ---------------CROSSWALK USEAGE--------------------- ALL 16:45-17:00 SOUTH 0 WEST 0 EAST NORTH 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 17:15-17:30 0 1 0 0 1 17:30-17:45 0 0 1 0 1 Peak Hour by Movement PHF o Trucks all ( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .87 .93 0 95 56 .47 0 79 .943 01 Trucks M+H 0 0 0 0 .8 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 .3 3.7 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0 1.6 1 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 0 0 0 0 684 42 0 537 21 16 0 23 1323 16:15-17:15 0 0 0 0 750 34 0 552 20 17 0 22 1395 16:30-17:30 0 0 0 0 770 37 0 585 26 17 0 26 1461 16:45-17:45 0 0 0 0 793 37 0 586 27 15 0 22 1480 17:00-18:00 0 0 0 0 814 39 0 554 30 8 0 26 1471 _T i INTERSECri JOTURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAF PORT I SW L BOULE VARD AT OM ARA STREr, ♦ T= 7.2% P=.693 N 2 80 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 07/31/02 0 1697 DAY OF WEEK: Wed R 6 274 0 TIME STARTED: 07:00 T TIME ENDED: 09: 00 H 4-17 ~3 I L► .4-0 49 J i LO 0°s 0 .4-0 P=.843 P= O. 32 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ + T=%T RUCKS BY AP PROACH . ~1 ( P=PHF BY APPROACH 81 0 GTZK 11 ~306 T= IL 648 2.8% 0 ♦ P=.867 1659 Peak Hour 07:15-08:15 TEV=1020 Traffic Smithy - 11(503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ ♦ • FROM - TO 1 .41 l L► .4-1 I f* s 4- ALL 07:00-07:05 1 0 4 0 12 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 57 07:05-07:10 6 0 3 0 16 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 71 07:10-07:15 2 0 4 0 16 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 58 07:15-07:20 4 0 5 0 20 0 1 44 0 0 0 0 74 07:20-07:25 1 0 6 0 18 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 73 07:25-07:30 1 0 4 0 11 0 2 62 0 0 0 0 80 07:30-07:35 5 0 3 0 23 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 74 07:35-07:40 1 0 6 0 19 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 73 07:40-07:45 1 0 6 0 28 0 0 62 0 0 0 0 97 07:45-07:50 2 0 2 0 17 0 1 54 0 0 0 0 76 07:50-07:55 3 0 3 1 27 0 1 72 0 0 0 0 107 07:55-08:00 2 0 7 0 '32 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 95 08.00-08:05 6 0 3 1 39 0 2 60 0 0 0 0 111 08:05-08:10 5 0 1 2 27 0 1 46 0 0 0 0 82 08:10-08:15 1 0 3 2 13 0 3 56 0 0 0 0 78 08:15-08:20 6 0 3 3 17 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 70 08:20-08:25 2 0 1 1 24 0 2 40 0 0 0 0 70 08:25-08:30 1 0 4 2 27 0 1 49 0 0 0 0 84 08:30-08:35 2 0 6 2 20 0 1 33 0 0 0 0 64 08:35-08:40 2 0 6 1 21 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 75 08:40-08:45 2 0 1 2 21 0 3 36 0 0 0 0 65 08:45-08:50 3 0 4 1 18 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 66 08:50-08:55 2 0 2 2 25 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 67 08:55-09:00 1 0 4 1 28 0 2 34 0 0 0 0 70 Total Survey 62 0 91 21 519 0 20 1124 0 0 0 0 1837 PHF .62 0 .82 .3 .7 0 .46 .86 0 0 0 0 .814 % Trucks 0 0 1.1 0 7.5 0 10 2.7 0 0 0 0 3.9 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds. 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 07:00-08:00 29 0 53 1 239 0 5 608 0 0 0 0 935 07:15-08:15 32 0 49 6 274 0 11 648 0 0 0 0 1020 07:30-08:30 35 0 42 12 293 0 11 624 0 0 0 0 1017 07:45-08:45 34 0 40 17 285 0 15 586 0 0 0 0 977 08:00-09:00 33 0 38 20 280 0 15 516 0 0 0 0 902 INTERSECT) W IUR N MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HC REPORT SW - HALL BOULEVARD AT OMARA STRET T= 5.7% P=.833 N 280 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 07/31/ 02 0 697 DAY OF WEEK: Wed R. 6 274 0 TIME STARTED: 07:00 T TIME ENDED: 09 :00 H .-17 ! 4 .-0 49 J LO .T= 0% T= 0% 0 - ► .4-0 P=.920 P=O. 32 ;0 . TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME A T=%TR UCKS BY A PPROACH ~3 ~ P=PHF BY APPROACH 81 0 GTZK 11 648 0 Peak Hour +3 06 • 07: 15-08:15 Traffic S mithy + T= 1.7% P=.905 659 TEV=1020 11 (503)641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • A A FROM - TO 1 .41 l 4 ~l j f L ALL ALL VEHICLES 07:15-07:30 6 0 15 0 49 0 3 154 0 0 0 0 227 07:30-07:45 7 0 15 0 70 0 0 152 0 0 0 0 244 07:45-08:00 7 0 12 1 76 0 2 180 0 0 0 0 278 08:00-08:15 12 0 7 5 79 0 6 162 0 0 0 0 271 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 9 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 8 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 07:15-07:30 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 5 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 .0 3 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 2 0 0 0 0 2 PEDESTRIANS ----------------------CROSSWALK USEAGE---------------,------ ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 08:00-08:15 0 1 O 0 1 Peak Hour by Movement PHF .67 0 . 82 .3 87 0 .46 .9 0 0 0 0 .917 % Trucks all) % T k (M H) 0 0 0 0 0 5.8 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 2.6 + ruc s 0 0 0 .4 0 0 .2 0 0 0 0 .2 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 07:00-08:00 29 0 53 1 239 0 5 608 0 0 0 0 935 07:15-08:15 32 0 49 6 274 0 11 648 0 0 0 0 1020 07:30-08:30 35 0 42 12 293 0 11 624 0 0 0 0 1017 07:45-08:45 34 0 40 17 285 0 15 586 0 0 0 0 977 08:00-09:00 33 0 38 20 280 0 15 516 0 0 0 0 902 INTERSECT TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAR` PORT SW i.. BOULEVARD AT SW OMA, STFc . T= 1.2% P=.959 ON 944 . DATE OF COUNT: 07/09/02 1574 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 120 824 0 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18:00 H .-181 .J 1 L► .-0 25 J L T= 3.6% 0 T= 0% 0 .-0 P=.788 P=O. 16 TEV-TOT 41 --p- TIME PERIOD FROM - TO 16:00-16:05 16:05-16:10 16:10-16:15 16:15-16:20 16:20-16:25 16:25-16:30 16:30-16:35 16:35-16:40 16:40-16:45 16:45-16:50 16:50-16:55 16:55-17:00 17:00-17:05 17:05-17:10 17:10-17:15 17:15-17:20 17:20-17:25 17:25-17:30 17:30-17:35 17:35-17:40 17:40-17.45 17:45-17:50 17:50-17:55 17:55-18:00 AL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH .41 1 r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 61 549 2 840 T= 2.7% P=.7 EAST BOUND ~ J 0 0 3 1 0 3 0 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 2 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 2 0 2 0 0 2 4 0 2 1 0 3 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 4 1 0 3 1 0 1 5 0 4 0 0 4 1 0 0 2 Peak Hour A, 16:45-17:45 11 Traffic Smithy 76 1612 TEV=1597 (503) 641-6333 SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND J i 4 58 0 0 39 0 0 0 3 37 0 1 39 0 0 0 11 65 0 1 42 0 0 0 7 55 0 2 36 0 0 0 6 75 0 4 45 0 0 0 4 52 0 6 47 2 0 0 7 73 0 0 45 0 0 0 7 53 0 2 49 1 0 0 7 58 0 1 46 1 0 0 6 77 0 1 32 0 0 0 9 71 0 2 38 0 0 0 8 .54 0 2 28 0 0 0 8 73 0 4 54 0 0 0 13 79 0 8 47 0 0 0 10 62 0 5 64 2 0 0 9 73 0 13 58 0 0 0 8 77 0 4 46 0 0 0 6 72 0 6 60 0 0 0 23 60 0 6 36 0 0 0 9 72 0 5 38 0 0 0 11 54 0 5 48 0 0 0 6 70 0 3 26. 0 0 0 7 61 0 4 44 0 0 0 5- 59 0 6 29 0 0 0 WCKF li L ALL 104 84 124 102 131 115 128 115 117 119 123 96 141 153 147 155 139 144 132 128 120 114 120 100 RECEIVES JUL 17 2002 DIES - PORTLAND Total Survey 29 0 55 194 1540 0 91 1036 6 0 0. 0 2951 PHF .57 0 78 .7 93 0 59 81 .25 0 0 0 877 % Trucks 0 0 5.5 1 1.2 0 2.2 2.8 0 0 0 0 . 1 9 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . Peds 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 9 0 30 79 728 0 22 486 4 0 0 0 1358 16:15-17:15 13 0 26 92 782 0 37 531 6 0 0 0 1487 16:30-17:30 15 0 23 98 822 0 48 567 4 0 0 0 1577 16:45-17:45 16 0 25 120 824 0 61 549 2 0 0 0 1597 17:00-18:00 20 0 25 115 812 0 69 550 2 0 0 0 1593 1 E INTERSECTI TURN MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK H REPORT SW M EL BOULEVARD AT SW OMARA STR r • T= .8% P=.963 N 1 944 • DATE OF COUNT: 07/09/ 02 0 574 DAY OF WEEK: Tue R 120 824 0 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-181 1 .-0 25 J LO T= 4.9% T= 0 % 0 .-0 P=.788 P=O. 16 r0 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • i T=%TR UCKS BY A PPROACH N P=PHF BY APPROACH 41 2 WCKF 61 549 2 Peak Hour 18 40 • 16 :45-17:45 Traffic Smithy T= 2.3% P=.818 1612 TEV=1597 1 1(503)641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • • • FROM - TO 3 .1 1 .1 F0. ALL ALL VEHICLES 16:45-17:00 2 0 8 23 202 0 5 98 0 0 0 0 338 17:00-17:15 5 0 7 31 214 0 17 165 2 0 0 0 441 17:15-17:30 4 0 2 23 222 0 23 164 0 0 0 0 438 17:30-17:45 5 0 8 43 186 0 16 122 0 0 0 0 380 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16:45-17:00 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 6 17:00-17:15 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 6 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 8 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 . 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 BICYCLES 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 17:30-17:45 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 PEDESTRIANS --CROSSWALK USEAGE--------------------- ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 1 0 0 1 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 17:30-17:45 0 5 0 0 5 Peak Hour by Movement PHF .8 0 .78 .7 .93 0 66 83 .25 0 0 0 .905 % Trucks(all) 0 0 8 0 1 0 1.6 2.4 0 0 0 0 1.5 % Trucks M+H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 9 0 30 79 728 0 22 486 4 0 0 0 1358 16:15-17:15 13 0 26 92 782 0 37 531 6 0 0 0 1487 16:30-17:30 15 0 23 98 822 0 48 567 4 0 0 0 1577 16:45-17:45 16 0 25 120 824 0 61 549 2 0 0 0 1597 17:00-18:00 20 0 25 115 812 0 69 550 2 0 0 0 1593 INTERSECTly TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAR_ PORT SW WALL STREET AT SW HUNZIKER STREET ♦ T = 0% P=O N ~ 0 . DATE OF COUNT: 07/31/ 02 R 0 0 0 +0 DAY OF WEEK: Wed TIME STARTED: 07:00 H .4-210 Lo- t-224 TIME ENDED: 09 :00 0 ♦ i LO T= 9.3% T= 9.4% 300 .4206 P=.85 P=.777 6 ♦ r18 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME T=%T RUCKS BY A PPROACH ~l I P=PHF BY APPROACH 306 30 2 LTDN 4 0 2 Peak Hour I2 4 ♦ 07:25-08 :25 Traffic Smithy + T=36.4% P=.3 16 TEV=536 (503) 641 -6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ FROM - TO J .41 I i 1 f► r r L ALL 07:00-07:05 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 37 07:05-07:10 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 14 0 33 07:10-07:15 1 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11 0 31 07:15-07:20 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 37 07:20-07:25 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 0 34 07:25-07:30 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 0 40 07:30-07:35 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 3 20 0 49 07:35-07:40 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 0 30 07:40-07:45 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 0 47 07:45-07:50 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 19 0 42 07:50-07:55 2 21 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 16 0 41 07:55-08:00 2 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 26 0 69 08:00-08:05 1 25 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 17 0 49 08:05-08:10 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 24 0 41 08:10-08:15 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 19 0 53 08:15-08:20 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14 0 39 08:20-08:25 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13 0 36 08:25-08:30 1 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 36 08:30-08:35 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 0 35 08:35-08:40 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 0 33 08:40-08:45 2 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 17 0 37 08:45-08:50 0 19 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 14 0 35 08:50-08:55 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 14 0 23 08:55-09:00 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 19 0 46 Total Survey 10 518 0 0 0 0 5 0 6 26 388 0 953 PHF 3 88 0 0 0 0 .25 0 25 .9 77 0 842 % Trucks 10 9.3 0 0 0 0 40 0 3 3.3 1 1.5 9 3 0 . 9 7 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 . Peds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 07:00-08:00 6 270 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 15 196 0 490 07:15-08:15 6 292 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 16 212 0 532 07:30-08:30 7 294 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 17 208 0 532 07:45-08:45 8 276 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 14 206 0 511 08:00-09:00 4 248 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 11 192 0 463 INTERSECTS MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HC 0 REPORT SW 1v STREET AT SW 1 MIKER STRL= • T= 0% P=O. N ~ 0 ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 07/31/ 02 0 10 DAY OF WEEK: Wed . R 0 0 0 TIME STARTED: 07:00 T 1 TIME ENDED: 09:00 H .4-216 .4 I .4-2 2 8 0 ♦ ~ i ~-0 T= 8.4% T= 7.9% 292 ~-212 P=. 876 P= .876 6 r16 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • T=%T RUCKS BY APPROACH ~l r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 298 294 --o. LTDN 4 0 2 Peak Hour ~22 • 07 :15-08:15 Traffic Smithy T= 50% P=.375 16 TEV=532 1 1(503)641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ ♦ ♦ FROM - TO 3 + ~1 r► r L ALL ALL VEHICLES 07:15-07:30 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 44 0 111 07:30-07:45 1 73 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 47 0 126 07:45-08:00 4 81 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 61 0 152 08:00-08:15 1 73 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 5 60 0 143 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 07:15-07:30 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 6 07:30-07:45 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 6 07:45-08:00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 6 08:00-08:15 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 8 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 07:15-07:30 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 08:00-08:15 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 07:15-07:30 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 07:30-07:45 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 8 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 3 08:00-08:15 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 BICYCLES 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 07:30-07:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0---- ---0 - 0 0. 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEDESTRIANS -------CROSSWALK USEAGE--------------------- ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 07:15-07:30 0 0 0 0 0 07:30-07:45 0 0 .0 0 0 07:45-08:00 0 0 0 0 0 08:00-08:15 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour by Movement PHF .38 .9 0 0 0 0 .33 0 5 .8 87 0 .875 96 Trucks(all) 0 8.6 0 0 0 0 50 0 50 18.8 7.1 0 8.6 % Trucks(M+H) 0 4.1 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 12.5 1.9 0 3.8 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 07:00-08:00 6 270 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 15 196 0 490 07:15-08:15 6 292 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 16 212 0 532 07:30-08:30 7 294 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 17 208 0 532 07:45-08:45 8 276 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 14 206 0 511 08:00-09:00 4 248 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 11 192 0 463 INTERSECT_ TUR N MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAR PORT SW W STREET AT SW HUNZIKER STRh ♦ T= 0% P=O. N IO ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 07/31/02 0 + 10 DAY OF WEEK: Wed R 0 0 0 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18: 00 H .4-430 4j .4-417 0 J LO T= 3.9% T= 4.4% 260 .4-416 P=.794 P= .868 7 1 r TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ T=%T RUCKS BY AP PROACH *1 1 r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 267 281 LTDO 14 0 21 Peak Hour 8 ♦ 16: 35-17:35 Traffic Smithy T= 3.2% P=.795 135 TEV=719 11(503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD ♦ 1 1 ♦ L FROM - TO 4 ALL 16:00-16:05 1 12 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 2 32 0 52 16:05-16:10 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 61 16:10-16:15 0 20 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 32 0 55 16:15-16:20 1 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 31 0 59 16:20-16:25 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 32 0 50 16:25-16:30 1 20 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 27 0 51 16:30-1.6:35 0 23 0 0 0 0 5 0 3 0 29 0 .60 16:35-16:40 1 31 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 39 0 76 16:40-16:45 1 25 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 30 0 59 16:45-16:50 0 18 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 26 0 47 16:50-16:55 2 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 29 0 45 16:55-17:00 0 18 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 29 0 51 17:00-•17:05 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 40 0 67 17:05-17:10 1 23 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 23 0 49 17:10-17:15 1 33 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 44 0 82 17:15-17:20 0 14 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 37 0 54 17:20-17:25 0 18 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 39 0 61 17:25-17:30 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 0 62 17:30-17:35 1 18 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 41 0 66 17:35-17:40 0 23 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 34 0 61 17:40-17:45 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 39 0 49 17:45-17:50 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 45 17:50-17:55 .3 14 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 48 17:55-18:00 1 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 32 0 55 Total Survey 14 477 0 0 0 0 28 0 34 7 805 0 1365 PHF .58 .79 0 0 0 0 .58 0 .66 .25 .87 0 .907 % Trucks 7.1 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.9 14.3 4.3 0 4.2 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 7 242 0 0 0 0 14 0 22 5 376 0 666 16:15-17:15 8 271 0 0 0 0 12 0 23 3 379 0 696 16:30-17:30 6 265 0 0 0 0 15 0 22 1 404 0 713 16:45-17:45 5 235 0 0 0 0 16 0 16 2 420 0 694 17:00-18:00 7 235 0 0 0 0 14 0 12 2 429 0 699 INTERSECTI~- MOVEMENT COUNT PEAK HC PORT SW WALL STREET AT SW HUNZIKER STR Er . T= 0% P=O. N ~ 0 . DATE OF COUNT: 07/31/ 02 0 10 DAY OF WEEK: Wed R 0 .0 0 TIME STARTED: 16:00 TIME ENDED: 18 :00 H 4-419 41 1 4 4-40 5 0 J LO T= 3% T= 3.5% 265 4-404 P=.806 P= .880 6 1 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME • T=%T RUCKS BY A PPROACH .41 1 r", P=PHF BY APPROACH 271 287 LTDO 15 0 22 Peak Hour i7 . 16:30-17:30 Traffic Smithy i T= 2.7% P=.578 137 TEV=713 1 1(503)641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD . . . FROM - TO J 43 4 ~3 r► r r L ALL ALL VEHICLES 16:30-16:45 2 79 0 0 0 0 7 0 9 0 98 0 195 16:45-17:00 2 49 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 1 84 0 143 17:00-17:15 2 82 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 107 0 198 17:15-17:30 0 55 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 0 115 0 177 LIGHT TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT 2 AXLES) 16:30-16:45 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 17:00-17:15 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 MEDIUM TRUCKS (SINGLE UNIT > 2 AXLES) 16:30-16:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HEAVY TRUCKS (SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER) 16:30-16:45 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 17:00-17:15 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 17:15-17:30 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 BICYCLES 16:30-16:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PEDESTRIANS ----------------------CROSSWALK USEAGE--------------------- ALL SOUTH WEST EAST NORTH 16:30-16:45 0 0 0 0 0 16:45-17:00 0 0 0 0 0 17:00-17:15 1 0 1 0 2 17:15-17:30 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour by Movement PHF .75 .81 0 0 0 0 .54 0 61 .25 88 0 .900 % Trucks(all) 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0 3.5 0 3.2 % Trucks (M+H 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0 1.2 0 1.4 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 7 242 0 0 0 0 14 0 22 5 376 0 666 16:15-17:15 8 271 0 0 0 0 12 0 23 3 379 0 696 16:30-17:30 6 265 0 0 0 0 15 0 22 1 404 0 713 16:45-17:45 5 235 0 0 0 0 16 0 16 2 420 0 694 17:00-18:00 7 235 0 0 0 0 14 0 12 2 429 0 699 .U ..i 0 Level of Service Descriptions TRAFFIC LEVELS OF SERVICE Analysis of traffic volumes is useful in understanding the general nature of traffic in an area, but by itself indicates neither the ability of the street network to carry additional traffic nor the quality of service afforded by the street facilities. For this, the concept of level of service has been developed to subjectively describe traffic performance. Level of service can be measured at intersections and along key roadway segments. Level of service categories are similar to report card ratings for traffic performance. Intersections are typically the controlling bottlenecks of traffic flow and the ability of a roadway system to carry traffic efficiently is generally diminished in their vicinities. Levels of Service A, B and C indicate conditions where traffic moves without significant delays over periods of peak travel demand. Level of service D and E are progressively worse peak hour operating conditions and F conditions represent where demand exceeds the capacity of an intersection. Most urban communities set level of service D as the minimum acceptable level of service for peak hour operation and plan for level of service C or better for all other times of the day. The Highway Capacity Manual provides level of service calculation methodology for both intersections and arterials.[ The following three sections provide interpretations of the analysis approaches. 1 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2000, Chapters 16 and 17. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (Two-Way Stop Controlled) Unsignalized intersection level of service is reported for the major street and minor street (generally, left turn movements). The method assesses available and critical gaps in the traffic stream which make it possible for side street traffic to enter the main street flow. The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual describes the detailed methodology. It is not unusual for an intersection to experience level of service E or F conditions for the minor street left turn movement. It should be understood that, often, a poor level of service is experienced by only a few vehicles and the intersection as a whole operates acceptably. Unsignalized intersection levels of service are described in the following table. Level of Service Expected Delay (Sec/Veh) A Little or no delay 0-10.0 B Short traffic delay >10.1-15.0 C Average traffic delays >15.1-25.0 D Long traffic delays >25.1-35.0 E Very long traffic delays >35.1-50.0 F Extreme delays potentially affecting >50 other traffic movements in the intersection Source: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board Washington, D.C. • • SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS For signalized intersections, level of service is evaluated based upon average vehicle delay experienced by vehicles entering an intersection. Control delay (or signal delay) includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. In previous versions of this chapter of the HCM (1994 and earlier), delay included only stopped delay. As delay increases, the level of service decreases. Calculations for signalized and unsignalized intersections are different due to the variation in traffic control. The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual provides the basis for these calculations. Level of Delay Service (secs.) Description A <10.00 Free Flow/[nsignificant Delays: No approach phase is fully utilized by traffic and no vehicle waits longer than one red indication. Most vehicles do not stop it all. Progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase- B 10.1-20.0 Stable Operation/Minimal Delays: An occasional approach phase is fully utilized. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within platoons of vehicles. This level generally occurs with good progression, short cycle lengths, or both. C 20.1-35.0 Stable Operation/Acceptable Delays: Major approach phases fully utilized. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted. Higher delays may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level, and the number of vehicles stopping is significant. D 35.1-55.0 Approaching Unstable/%lerable Delays: The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indication. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. The proportion of vehicles not stopping declines, and individual cycle failures are noticeable. E 55.1-80.0 Unstable Operation/Significant Delays: Volumes at or near capacity. Vehicles may wait though several signal cycles. Long queues form upstream from intersection. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are a frequent occurrence. F >80.0 Forced Flow/Excessive Delays: Represents jammed conditions. Queues may block upstream intersections. This level occurs when arrival now rates exceed intersection capacity, and is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. Poor progression, long cycle lengths, and v/c ratios approaching 1.0 may contribute to these high delay levels. Source: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C. • . • ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE Arterial level of service is based on the average travel speed for the segment, section, or entire arterial under consideration. The average travel speed is computed from the running time on the arterial segment(s) and the intersection approach delay. It is strongly influenced by the number of signals per mile and the average intersection delay. On a given facility, factors such as inappropriate signal timing, poor progression, and increasing traffic flow can substantially degrade the arterial LOS.2 Arterial levels of service are summarized in the following table. Arterial Levels of Service Arterial Class - "I II III Range of Free Flow Speeds (mph) 45 to 35 35 to 30 35 to 25 Typical Free Flow Speed (mph) 40 mph 33 mph 27 mph Level of Service Average Travel S eed (m h) A 35 30 25 B 28 24 19 C 22 18 13 D 17 14. 9 E 13 10 7 F <13 <10 <7 2 1994 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 1994, Chapter 11. • • The three arterial classes (I, II, and III) used to find the appropriate level of service are based on design and functional characteristics shown in the table below. Definition of functional categories Functional Category Characteristics • Mobility very important • Heavily restricted access • Connected to freeways, important activity centers, major traffic generators Principal • Relatively long trips between above points and through trips entering, Arterial leaving,and going through the city. Minor • Mobility important Arterial • Substantially restricted access • Connected to principal arterials • Trips of moderate lengths within relatively small geographical area Design Characteristics Category • Low access density • Multilane divided; undivided or two-lane with shoulders arterial • No parking • Separate left turn lanes • 1 to 5 signals per mile • 40 to 45 mph speed limits • Little Pedestrian activity Suburban • Low to medium roadside development density Intermediate • Moderate access density • Multilane divided or undivided; one way or two lane arterial • Some parking • Usually separate left turn lanes • 4 to 10 signals per mile • 30 to 40 mph speed limits • Some pedestrian activity • Medium to moderate roadside development density Urban • High access density • Undivided one way; two way, two or more lanes arterial • Much parking . • Some separate left-turn lanes • 6 to 12 signals per mile • 25 to 35 mph speed limits • Usually pedestrian activity • High density roadside development Once the arterial is classified using the functional and design categories, the table below can be used to find the associated arterial class. Arterial Class According to Design and Functional Categories FUNCTIONAL CATEGORY DESIGN CATEGORY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL MINOR ARTERIAL TYPICAL SUBURBAN I II INTERMEDIATE II II OR III TYPICAL URBAN II OR III III :n ~h i • Level of Service Calculations Existing AM Tue Aug 20, 2002 09:32:47 Page 1-1 - Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions , AM Peak Hour Scenario Report Scenario: Existing AM Command: Existing AM Volume: Existing AM Geometry: Existing AM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration Existing AM - Tue Aug 20, 2002 09:32:48 Page 2-1 _ Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour - - - Impact Analysis Report - Level of Service Intersection Base Fut ure Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LO S Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall B 19.6 0.732 B 19.6 0.732 + 0.000 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall c 18.0 0.000 C 18.0 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall C 21.6 0.000 C 21.6 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 12.1 0.000 B 12.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Existing AM Tue Aug 20, 2002 09:32:48 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) •ffffffffw}ffff if«f lffffffffwff}fffwwwf}ffff 11f 11ff}tfffffflfflwRfffff lff if Rlff« Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall ♦!!!!!ffff llf!}!!ffff«}}ffflwfwRwf lffftft}fRfff if f♦!!!!!!ffff ffff!!!!}ffff! 11ffw Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.732 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 19.6 Optimal Cycle: 55 Level Of Service: B ffff if ffffffffwwR}ffffff}fffffwfR«fffff•wwf if lwfffffRwlff if fffRf}fffffRlwww♦«11f Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I---------------II---------------11---------------II---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 ------------I---------------II---------------11---------------II---------------I Volume Module: Count Date: 31 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 120 508 0 0 344 32 236 0 600 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 120 508 0 0 344. 32 236 0 600 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 120 508 0 0 344 32 236 0 600 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 120 508 0 0 344 32 236 0 600 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 120 508 0 0 344 32 236 0 600 0 0 0 I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.91 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.71 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 0.09 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1736 1828 0 1900 1604 149 1357 0 1615 0 1900 0 I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: " ffff Green/Cycle: 0.09 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.41 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.73 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.73 0.42 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 42.0 19.2 0.0 0.0 24.5 24.5 13.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 42.0 19.2 0.0 0.0 24.5 24.5 13.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 4 11 0 0 9 1 5 0 11 0 0 0 ......}f•ff•f•«♦ffw••fff•♦ff«Rf«••••ff••••}f•••«♦ff•••«w}....}««•}f•••ff lw•••••f Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Existing AM Tue Aug 20, 2002 09:32:48 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) ffffff:w««««wRlff iffwf««.wffffifw•wwwrwwww««fre«wfw«r•wf}}•lffff+. Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall Average Delay (sec/veh): 18.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: C !ffff:fwwwww«fffwfewwwwffff:wwwflfff:wwwwwf}wffffww•w•:}lfffffwfwfwr••••}•ffff w• Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 l' 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Volume Module: Count Date: 30 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 0 736 4 8 324 0 0 0 0 20 0 56 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 736 4 8 324 0 0 0 0 20 0 56 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 736 4 8 324 0 0 0 0 20 0 56 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 736 4 8 324 0 0 0 0 20 0 56 I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 740 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1078 xxxx 738 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 876 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 244 xxxx 421 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 876 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 243 xxxx 421 I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 353 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 18.0 xxxxx Shared LOS: C ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.0 ApproachLOS: C Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • i Existing AM Tue Aug 20, 2002 09:32:48 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) ffff•fffffff if ffff•fwf wffffflfflfff•xw•wf wffwfffffffwfffffff•lfffflf •fwflf♦if lww Intersection #3 Omara/Hall wfff!!!lffflfffff if♦txf♦wfffffffff lff lwfffwffffrlfflf wwfffff!lfftf wfffwflff lff•R Average Delay (sec/veh): 21.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: C Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include include Include Include Lanes: 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Count Date: 31 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 12 744 0 0 392 8 52 0 44 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 12 744 0 0 392 8 52 0 44 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 12 744 0 0 392 8 52 0 44 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 12 744 0 0 392 8 52 0 44 0 0 0 II II ---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 11--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 400 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1164 xxxx 396 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1170 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 217 xxxx 658 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1170 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 215 xxxx 658 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I II II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 8.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A " • " • " ' ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR = RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 311 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel: 8.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 21.6 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: A • • " • ' C ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 21.6 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: • • C ' Existing AM Tue Aug 20, 2002 09:32:48 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) •rffflfw•ff•w•wfffflfff•f•wwrfffwaww•wfwxwwwwrfwlww.•w.•f xwxx:xwww.ww ww w•ww•rr•. Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall •lffffffwwwwrwfffff:lf ww xwff•ffflxfwfww•wx:wfwffwwlffwwfwe••f fffff r•wwf w••wx.•.w Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.1 Worst Case Level of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 12 0 8 0 0 0 0 316 12 20 268 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 12 0 8 0 0 0 0 316 12 20 268 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 12 0 8 0 0 0 0 316 12 20 268 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 12 0 8 0 0 0 0 316 12 20 268 0 II--------------- ---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 630 xxxx 322 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 328 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 449 xxxx 724 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1243 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 443 xxxx 724 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1243 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • ' • ' • ' ' ' A ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 525 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 12.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ' B ' • * ` • ' ' ` ' ApproachDel: 12.1 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B 0 • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:43:15 Page 1-1 - - - Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library ,AM Peak Hour - - Scenario Report Scenario: 2005 AM Command: 2005 AM Volume: 2005 AM Geometry: 2005 AM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library AM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM - - - - - Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:43:15 - - - Page 2-1 - - - Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/ o Libr ary - AM Peak Hour - - Impact Analysis Report - Level Of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall B 17.8 0.696 B 17.8 0.696 + 0.000 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall C 19.3 0.000 C 19.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall C 22.0 0.000 C 22.0 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 12.2 0.000 B 12.2 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 5 Wall/Hall C 17.6 0.000 C 17.6 0.000 + 0.000 V/C Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • 0 R", f .rfJ txvri;:) 1=w. ~i t. rrh t . ...u w -...y as-i- h+•-•t.rf WY!+.4 2005 AM Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:43:15 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ♦f•f•ff•fftffffffflf lfffR••f tff•f 111t1ff RfffRff••••1lffffffffff ltd Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.696 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 17.8 Optimal Cycle: 51 Level Of Service: B ♦f+f+fffflfl+tf♦f•ffffff♦f+f+lft+••f rffflfff+fff•ffffr lfff tfffllfffftf lfff 11f11f Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II II I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 '1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 if 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 170 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 170 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 170 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 179 453 0 0 337 74 242 0 516 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 179 453 0 0 337 74 242 0 516 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.-: 179 453 0 0 337 74 242 0 516 0 0 0 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.91 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.71 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.82 0.18 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1736 1828 0 1900 1418 310 1357 0 1615 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.18 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **;4 Green/Cycle: 0.15 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.31 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.70 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.57 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 32.4 10.9 0.0 0.0 20.7 20.7 19.3 0.0 15.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 32.4 10.9 0.0 0.0 20.7 20.7 19.3 0.0 15.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 5 8 0 0 8 2 6 0 10 0 0 0 ••f•••.111f•f••fffRlff lffrf+lf+••11f♦f+••f11ff+•ft11f •f•11f 11 tf •f11f +Rtfflf lRfff 2005 AM Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:43:15 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall .++r+fR•1f1f+1f+f••••fR•rfrf+Rf•ffR••••lf fff•r1f.•.R.R•fflflff •f ••f•.....••••:.. Average Delay (sec/veh): 19.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: C +++•fff:+t++Rrf••r•1f+:♦♦+f••e•f rlf lt♦+••.•..+tt•1r11f t•R+•+••.•+•••f+1f•fflf•+. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 650 10 20 340 0 0 0 0 30 0 - 50 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 650 10 20 340 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 650 10 20 340 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 684 11 21 358 0 0 0 0 32 0 53 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 684 11 21 358 0 0 0 0 32 0 53 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 695 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1089 xxxx 689 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 910 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 240 xxxx 449 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 910 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 236 xxxx 449 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' • ` A • ' ' " ' ' ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 336 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 19.3 xxxxx Shared LOS: C ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 19.3 ApproachLOS: C 0 • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:43:15 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) .«....1f•♦ff}f}}1f11ff}}1ff«f«:111ff«.«.1f 1f««fR«f }fff lfffffff«Rfffff} Intersection #3 Omara/Hall Average Delay (sec/veh): 22.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: C •fff•lfff}♦}R1f•1ff♦}}f lfff}lfff}fflfff11f 1ffff1f1f 1f 1ff 11}fflf lff}1R1f 1f 1f 1f«RR Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 It 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 21 726 0 0 337 11 63 0 42 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 21 726 0 0 337 11 63 0 42 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 347 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1111 xxxx 342 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1223 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 234 xxxx 705 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1223 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 230 xxxx 705 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 8.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx'xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A ' ' ' • " ' " f } w ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 315 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 22.0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • • • ' ' " C } f f ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 22.0 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C ' Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:43:15 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 340 10 30 230 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 340 10 30 230 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 340 10 30 230 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 358 11 32 242 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 358 11 32 242 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 668 xxxx 363 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 368 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 426 xxxx 686 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1201 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 418 xxxx 686 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1201 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • ' • ' " ' « " " A • " Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 519 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 12.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • B • ' « • • ' ' ' ApproachDel: 12.2 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • • -:d •,r.,a,! t.~.. «a t ..mow n.,-...~,.n Fc:o: f~ :J r-.. 2005 AM Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:43:15 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 Wall/Hall Average Delay (sec/veh): 17.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: C Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 690 10 10 350 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 690 10 10 350 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0 690 10 10 350 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 726 11 11 368 0 0 0 0 11 0 it Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 726 it 11 368 0 0 0 0 it 0 it Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 737 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1121 xxxx 732 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 878 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 230 xxxx 425 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 878 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 228 xxxx 425 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 21.5 xxxx 13.7 LOS by Move: • A C " B Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xx.x xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 17.6 ApproachLOS: C • • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 Page 1-1 - Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (200,5) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour - Scenario Report Scenario: 2005 AM Command: 2005 AM Volume: 2005 AM Geometry: 2005 AM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library AM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 - Page 2-1 - Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service In tersection Base Fut ure Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall B 17.8 0.696 B 18.1 0.702 + 0.260 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall C 19.3 0.000 C 19.9 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall c 22.0 0.000 C 22.8 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 12.2 0.000 B 12.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 5 Wall/Hall C 17.6 0.000 C 18.8 0.000 + 0.000 V/C Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • r-. ....-d r...--.-~ k-.-~.,....1 a,..-•i~.i c..a- ~ t• .era _ .:a c_ ~ 2005 AM Fri Aug 23, 2002 11:43:15 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ffff♦fff lfffffffff 1f11ff►ffffffffwfffflff if lfffYffffffffflff if wwff if lfffffwfffff Intersection NS Wall/Hall fflf♦}fffff♦}fff lfffiffff}fflffffffffffff lffffffffffff}fffffwf lfffwfffffllfff}f} Average Delay (sec/veh): 17.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: C ..fffff.ffffffffff lffflf♦ffffffwfff lfffff♦fwfffffffffff♦}ff lff lffffffwffllfffflf Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume module: Base Vol: 0 690 10 10 350 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 690 10 10 350 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 690 10 10 350 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 726 11 11 368 0 0 0 0 11 0 11 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 726 11 11 368 0 0 0 0 it 0 11 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 737 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1121 xxxx 732 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 878 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 230 xxxx 425 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 878 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 228 xxxx 425 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 21.5 xxxx 13.7 LOS by Move: • ` ' A ' ` ` ' • C f B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ` • ' ' ' ' ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 17.6 ApproachLOS: C • 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour Scenario Report Scenario: 2005 AM Command: 2005 AM Volume: 2005 AM Geometry: 2005 AM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library AM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 - Page 2-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour - Impact Analysis Report - Level of Service In tersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall B 17.8 0.696 B 18.1 0.702 + 0.260 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall c 19.3 0.000 C 19.9 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall C 22.0 0.000 C 22.8 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 12.2 0.000 B 12.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 5 Wall/Hall C 17.6 0.000 C 18.8 0.000 + 0.000 V/C Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR .._~--r tea.. Y_-'++~^4K P5-•^^~^+.! cui~ f;~•~x*m+s:I ~in"*q*..:..~ G^~•"P~a4 4^'K :Y.j ta. G. _'t! 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) •ffffff4ff}fffffffffffffffllff♦1f}}ff4lffflf lfff 11f 1f 14ff }fffff1ff11fff}ff4ffflf Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall fffffffff fffff.. }fffffff lff4ffffffffff}f fffff lfffffff44ffffff►fff}f4}fff fffff!!! Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.702 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 18.1 Optimal Cycle: 52 Level Of Service: B ffffffffffffffffffff4ff if♦fffflfff iffff}f}fffflffff4f }f kffff}fffff lffffff11ff1ff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 170 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 170 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 8 0 0 3 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 170 438 0 0 323 74 241 0 490 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 179 461 0 0 340 78 254 0 516 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 179 461 0 0 340 78 254 0 516 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 179 461 0 0 340 78 254 0 516 0 0 0 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.91 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.71 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.81 0.19 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1736 1828 0 1900 1405 322 1357 0 1615 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.19 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: " " " Green/Cycle: 0.15 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.31 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.70 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.61 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 32.8 10.9 0.0 0.0 20.7 20.7 20.2 0.0 16.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 32.8 10.9 0.0 0.0 20.7 20.7 20.2 0.0 16.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 5 8 0 0 8 2 6 0 10 0 0 0 ♦11ff 1f fffff lflffffffff1141fffffffff }fffffffff}fffffl4}fffff}}fff11ff4f}If 1f}4}} 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ffffffff4flll}ffffffffff}}.fffff./fffff.♦♦♦fl4fff}}f}f 111ff1ffffffffffffffffffff Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall ff,}.fff..f:f..},f,4f.ff....ff14}..ff}}.f.fffff..fllfff..f.fff}1f.11f.11f111f.ff Average Delay (sec/veh): 19.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: C ff if ff}fff#fff}ff4ffff♦fffff}.fff}ffffffffffffff4ff}fff}♦f lfffffflf lfffffffff eff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II ---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 650 10 20 340 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 650 10 20 340 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Added Vol: 0 18 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 668 10 20 347 0 0 0 0 30 0 51 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 703 11 21 365 0 0 0 0 32 0 54 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 703 11 21 365 0 0 0 0 32 0 54 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 714 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1116 xxxx 708 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 896 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 232 xxxx 438 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 896 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 228 xxxx 438 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: " • • A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 326 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 19.9 xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' C ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 19.9 ApproachLOS: C • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) rwwrrrwwwwa rr ra• w wra r wwwrw r wrwrraww►rwrar rrwrwwerrrraaawwrrwrrr rrwrwarrr wrrrw Intersection A3 Omara/Hall wrrwrawarwwrrrawarrra wwrrrrwwrr»wrwwrawwrrwwrw wrrrwawwwrwwwrrrw rrwwwrrraww+wrra♦ Average Delay (sec/veh): 22.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: C raawwr+arrrrrrarrrrrw err rawwwwrwrwrrarwrrrawrrrrrrwrawrwrawlaar awrrrrrrwwrrrrawa Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L- T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 6 0 0 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 20 696 0 0 336 10 60 0 41 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 21 733 0 0 354 11 63 0 43 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 21 733 0 0 354 11 63 0 43 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 364 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1134 xxxx 359 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1206 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 226 xxxx 690 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1206 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 223 xxxx 690 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 8.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A • • • • * w a w Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 308 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:x)c= xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 22.8 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • • C + . r ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 22.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: • • C Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) »awwaw:wwwrrrr wwwwwwwrraawwwr►rrwwrawwr awr+wawwwwraawwrww:www+raaaww.w•:.wr•arar Intersection 84 Hunziker/Wall •rwarrrrwwrwrwrwarrrrw rrrr•wwrrr•+w rrrwa•*awwrwrswwrwwrawwaawrww.+r awawa a>w+waw> Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: B rwrrwrrrwrrrrrwr•wr♦wrrrrrrrrwwrrrrarrr+wrrwwwwrarwr»rwwwra•••wew•r•wwwwa•w>rwr• Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 340 10 30 230 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 340 10 30 230 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 PasserByVOl: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 341 10 30 234 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 359 11 32 246 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 359 11 32 246 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx II II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 674 xxxx 364 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 369 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 423 xxxx 685 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1200 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 415 xxxx 685 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1200 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- II--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: + * • • • » . A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 517 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 12.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * B • * • + • . . w w ApproachDel: 12.3 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B + a Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • 0 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:37:55 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ...ff lfflfffffffffffffffffffffflffffffffffffffffff♦fffffffffffffffffffffffffffff Intersection i5 Wall/Hall ffffffffffffffflffffffffff♦ffffffff♦fffffffffflfffflfff lffffffffffffff lfffffffff Average Delay (sec/veh): 18.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: C ffflffffffffffffffffffffflffffffffffffffffffff 11f 11fffitffffffffflffffffffffffff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 690 10 10 350 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 690 10 10 350 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Added Vol: 0 0 19 17 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0 690 29 27 350 0 0 0 0 17 0 17 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 726 31 28 368 0 0 0 0 18 0 18 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 726 31 28 368 0 0 0 0 18 0 18 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 757 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1167 xxxx 742 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 863 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 216 xxxx 419 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 863 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 211 xxxx 419 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 23.7 xxxx 14.0 LOS by Move: • • A C " B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • " ' ' • " ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.8 ApproachLOS: C 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:46:21 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Con ditions (200,5) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library AM Peak Hour - - Scenario Report Scenario: 2005 AM command: 2005 AM Volume: 2005 AM Geometry: 2005 AM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library AM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:46:21 - - Page 2-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library AM Peak Hour Impact Analysis Report - Level Of Service In tersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall B 16.9 0.661 B 16.9 0.661 + 0.000 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall C 18.2 0.000 C 18.2 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall C 20.1 0.000 C 20.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 11.9 0.000 B 11.9 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • # 5 Wall/Hall C 18.8 0.000 C 18.8 0.000 + 0.000 V/C 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:46:21 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) lfftfffff♦♦ff ffffff♦ffffffffff if lff1ff11fff 1ffrffffllffflffffffffflf fff}f}ffffff Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall fffffffff iff♦fff}f lffffff ffffff}ff lfffffft♦1t}f}fff lfflfffffflffffff♦ffff}ffffffR Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.661 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 16.9 Optimal Cycle: 48 Level Of Service: B fff }f lfff}rfffrffflf lff}ff}1f:ffffff}}11fff/ffffffff lffftltf if}ffffff }}ffffflfff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: include include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes : 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 180 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 180 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 180 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 180 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 180 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 180 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.91 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.71 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.82 0.18 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1736 1828 0 1900 1418 310 1357 0 1615 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.17 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.16 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.66 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.56 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 29.7 10.3 0.0 0.0 19.6 19.6 19.4 0.0 14.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 29.7 10.3 0.0 0.0 19.6 19.6 19.4 0.0 14.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 5 8 0 0 7 2 6 0 9 0 0 0 ♦11fff•fff.......}..fff♦•f ffllfff•ffffflf tf}ffflf}ff 1f 11fffffffl if lffffff♦}fffl♦ 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:46:21 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) lffffff♦1fff11ffffflff♦fff if iffff♦ffffff}1f11ff1rf lffffrrRff•f fff•ff•ffffffftff• Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall frffff 1f 1411f1•tfffflf ltflfftf if•lffff•1f1f 1ffff1lfffffr••t1t•ffffffff••f ♦•ffff• Average Delay (sec/veh): 18.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: C 111t1fff1f11fl1flr rffff}fff1111ff}ffff11111fffffffffff1rf 11f•ff•fffff•f•.f •f w••• Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I--------------- ---------------II---------------II---------------' Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Volume module: Base Vol: 0 650 10 20 360 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 650 30 20 360 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVOl: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 650 10 20 360 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 650 10 20 360 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 650 10 20 360 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Critical Gap Module: J Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FolloWUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 660 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1055 xxxx 655 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 938 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 252 xxxx 470 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 938 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 248 xxxx 470 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level of service module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: " • ' A • " • ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 352 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 18.2 xxxxx Shared LOS: ' • " " ' ' ' ' ' ' C ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.2 ApproachLOS: " C • 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7. 5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:46:21 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) r•♦wwww•w•♦rwwwwrwr•wrww•waw•rrrwrrrww•wwwrw rw rrw rr rawraawww wrwwawrr•ww♦wrrrw:wr Intersection E3 Omara/Hall ♦•w•www••r•rww wwwrw•r rrrw waarwwrrwraawaw:ww•ww arwwrawrrwwrwrwrww•wwrr r•r•w•a rw•w Average Delay (sec/veh): 20.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: C ♦••www•••ww•w♦ww•♦rwwwaw•••rwaraw►a ww wrrwraawwrwaw••f www•••r•w►frwwww•rwrr:wa♦ww Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume module: ' Base Vol: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 initial Bse: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 330 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1055 xxxx 325 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1241 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 252 xxxx 721 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1241 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 249 xxxx 721 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 7.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A • r r w w • w r w w w Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT -.LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 337 xxxxx xmm xxxx x3o= Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 20.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' C ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 20.1 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C ' Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:46:21 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwrw•:rrrrww•rwwwawewwr•r rrrrraa.w:••rrrawwww•wwrw•rr•www.w•. rw ww Intersection A4 Hunziker/Wall wwwwrrwrwwwwwwr•wrwrrwrwrwwwwww•wwaaawwwrrwrrwwrawwwwwrarwa•awawwwrrr •awar ww wrr. Average Delay (sec/veh): 11.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: B ar••wr••w wa wawwwr wrrwwrwawwww•w•wwrwwwwwwwwwrrrrrarwrrrrwrrawwrw wwwr •rrwwwwwww•r Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 330 10 80 210 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 Initial Bse: 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 330 10 80 210 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 330 10 80 210 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 330 10 80 210 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 330 10 80 210 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 705 xxxx 335 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 340 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 406 xxxx 712 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1230 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 386 xxxx 712 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1230 xxxx xxxxx i--------------- ---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • • ' • A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 555 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 11.9 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • B ApproachDel: 11.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B • ' ' Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • • 2005 AM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:46:21 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on wall & w/o Library AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) f.f}♦ffrrr:fffffr:rf}}}rff}rffrff}}r}rf}rffrffrrrf rffrf:r}rrrrrf rffrrrfrrrf rrf}f Intersection M5 Wall/Hall frfrrrrf♦•ffffrfffrfrfrf♦ff♦f}f}rf}f}}ff}ff}fllfrf lrfrf♦}}♦}}f lrrrrffffrffffff}} Average Delay (sec/veh): 18.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: C r.....f....ef rfff}}}}♦}ff}}..}fr}ff}fffffffffrrf}... }}}}}frf rffrfffrf rff}}}ff}}r Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 680 20 20 340 0 0 0 0 40 0 30 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 680 20 20 340 0 0 0 0 40 0 30 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0 680 20 20 340 0 0 0 0 40 0 30 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 680 20 20 340 0 0 0 0 40 0 30 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 680 20 20 340 0 0 0 0 40 0 30 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 700 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1070 xxxx 690 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 906 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 247 xxxx 449 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 906 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 243 xxxx 449 I--------------- ---------------il---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 22.7 xxxx 13.6 LOS by Move: • } • A " • • ' • C • B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • • ' * • • ' ` ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.8 ApproachLOS: C • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:47:55 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) AM Peak Hour - - Scenario Report Scenario: 2005 AM Command: 2005 AM Volume: 2005 AM Geometry: 2005 AM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library AM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration 2005 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:47:55 - Page 2-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) AM Peak Hour Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Fut ure Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall B 16.9 0.661 B 17.2 0.667 + 0.224 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall C 18.2 0.000 C 18.7 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall C 20.1 0.000 C 20.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 11.9 0.000 B 12.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 5 Wall/Hall C 18.8 0.000 C 20.0 0.000 + 0.000 V/C 16 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7. 5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR [ r. ...:..y ,wvw 1.+... M..-, rw.. w~.r Cr....c:nH c..-r,~. r r,~....j o~'.- ~ 1 n •.1 . - . 2005 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:47:55 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) w♦wwffff}}ww}f wff }fffwwfffwwfff}fffflwfrr:rw}w}f}lwwrwr}}f ♦aff ♦fffr}fflw:fwwr waw Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall }wff}ff}}fff}fflfwwwfwrwf}}:}wawwwwwwwerf if if wawwf}}afwlf♦wf }fffafw♦wff}f}}a♦wff Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.667 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 17.2 Optimal Cycle: 49 Level of Service: B fff♦afff llfffff if}ff}ffffffffwwff}}faf}fflfff♦}ffffwfww}fff lff lfffffaf afffff}ft} Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 it 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 180 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 180 430 0 0 320 70 230 0 490 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 8 0 0 3 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 180 438 0 0 323 74 241 0 490 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 180 438 0 0 323 74 241 0 490 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 180 438 0 0 323 74 241 0 490 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 180 438 0 0 323 74 241 0 490 0 0 0 II II II ---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.91 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 0.71 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.81 0.19 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1736 1828 0 1900 1405 322 1357 0 1615 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.18 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.16 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.67 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.59 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 30.1 10.2 0.0 0.0 19.6 19.6 20.2 0.0 15.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 30.1 10.2 0.0 0.0 19.6 19.6 20.2 0.0 15.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 5 8 0 0 7 2 6 0 10 0 0 0 ff}•fffwfww}ffffwfw}fffffwww}fa}ffffwfrflwf:}a}fww}ffrwf wffffwf waft wffffaffwfa}f 2005 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:47:55 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) wfw}fffawf wfff afffwra}wff:ffwwfe}a}wwfrwff•::wwfrwf}wf }wwe ww.wrfrwrrw wwww ww.wwww Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall ♦fwrwww}}}ff}w ww ww}f}}fw:..fffwr: www w.rw:}ww wr wr}fr:ww }wwwwwr:rwwwwwwwww.wrw.wrw Average Delay (sec/veh): 18.7 Worst Case Level Of Service: C .fa♦f wffwwr}}}fff}wrwrw}af♦w}wf}wfwwwwwrfw:}f ww wwwwwwf}wwwwwwww:wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 650 10 20 360 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 650 10 20 360 0 0 0 0 30 0 50 Added Vol: 0 18 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 668 10 20 367 0 0 0 0 30 0 51 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 668 10 20 367 0 0 0 0 30 0 51 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 668 10 20 367 0 0 0 0 30 0 51 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------i Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 678 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1080 xxxx 673 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 923 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 244 xxxx 459 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 923 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 240 xxxx 459 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' A Movement: IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 343 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 18.7 xxxxx Shared LOS: C ` ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.7 ApproachLOS: C t Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:47:55 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) f}•fffffff wfflffrffffff♦1tf•♦fflffffffff•r♦fffffff}}•fffffff}ff fffffff• fffff♦ftt Intersection #3 Omara/Hall ffffff}1f wf 1f lffwffffllf fff}1t lfft•ffrwfff wfff lff lffftifRRr lf♦}fffffff}fff}fffff Average Delay (sec/veh): 20.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: C lfffffflffffff if lffff11f 1fff}1f ffffff }fffff lw if }fffffffff}fffffff}fffffffff }fffl Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 20 690 0 0 320 10 60 0 40 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 3 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 20 693 0 0 327 10 60 0 41 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 20 693 0 0 327 10 60 0 41 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 20 693 0 0 327 10 60 0 41 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxx= xxxx xxxx= Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 337 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1065 xxxx 332 xxxx xxxx xxxx= Potent Cap.: 1234 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 249 xxxx 714 xxxx xxxx xxxx= Move Cap.: 1234 xxxx xxxx= xxxx xxxx xxxxx 246 xxxx 714 xxxx xxxx xxxx= I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 8.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 335 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx= Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx= xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 20.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • • • • ` ' ' C f ' f w ApproachDel: ==xxxx xxxxxx 20.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C ' Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:47:55 . Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) }f}f}}twfffff}f}f fffffff wf ffrrrfffltwww•fffw}w•ffrfwwww•www•ffwfw•••••ww•w•••••• Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall }frff twfff}fffffffwff}ff}ff}ffftrwtww wfffwwwwwwefffw}wwffffff te••wwfwww•w••wffff Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B f}}ff}}fffff}}w}fffffff}}}ff}lwwwffflfrfwwffffwwwwrw}f}fww•f wffff.•.wffff wf ••w.• Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 330 10 80 210 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 330 10 80 210 0 Added Vol: 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 12 0 21 0 0 0 0 330 15 84 210 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 12 0 21 0 0 0 0 330 15 84 210 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 12 0 21 0 0 0 0 330 15 84 210 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 716 xxxx 338 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 345 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 400 xxxx 709 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1225 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 379 xxxx 709 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1225 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.2 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' • • ' ' ' ' ' • A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 539 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 12.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ' B ApproachDel: 12.1 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B ' Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 0 6 . r.. r+. e , a ,re s.o-...-, y. -:r.' , ~ 2005 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:47:55 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) .....•.".w:wwwwwwwww••ww wwww:..•rwwswww wwwwwwwwwwww wwwwwewwwwww wwwwww www •...wwww Intersection M5 Wall/Hall Average Delay (sec/veh): 20.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: C ••..wwwwwwwwwwww ww:www wwwww wwwwwww ww www wwwwwwwwwwww wwww ww www ww w♦ww wwwwww wwwwwwww Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 680 20 20 340 0 0 0 0 40 0 30 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 680 20 20 340 0 0 0 0 40 0 30 Added Vol: 0 0 19 8 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 3 PasserByVOl: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 680 39 28 340 0 0 0 0 47 0 33 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 680 39 28 340 0 0 0 0 47 0 33 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 680 39 28 340 0 0 0 0 47 0 33 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FolloWUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 719 xxxx_xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1095 xxxx 700 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 892 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 238 xxxx 443 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 892 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 233 xxxx 443 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 24.3 xxxx 13.8 LOS by Move: • • ' A • • " • • C • B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • • ' • " ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 20.0 ApproachLOS: C • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DRS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2017 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:51:17 Page 1-1 - Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) AM Peak Hour Scenario Report Scenario: 2017 AM Command: 2017 AM Volume: 2017 AM Geometry: 2017 AM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library AM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration 2017 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:51:17 Page 2-1 Tigard Wall'Street Future conditions (2017) AM Peak Hour Impact Analysis Report - - Level Of Service In tersection Base Fut ure Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall C 21.9 0.813 C 22.1 0.819 + 0.277 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall C 23.2 0.000 C 24.2 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall C 20.1 0.000 C 20.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 14.6 0.000 C 15.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 5 Wall/Hall F 52.6 0.000 F 62.2 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7. 5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR rc x u:..sm-.. ,-r . ice. _ .-...._,e. ..--•_.`y _ t-.; ~..r - , ~..a ~e .H ~t 2017 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:51:17 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) •wrwrwrrww•w•w•wwwwwwwwwrwrwrrwww:w rrwrwww wwrw•r:rrwrw rwwr•ww rwwwwwww•:wwwwwwwww intersection M1 McDonald/Hall www•w•••••rwr•r••wwe:wwrwrw♦:www+w••w•www•ww:w•wwwww:rrwrwwrrrrrwrwrwwrww•ww•www Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.819 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 22.1 Optimal Cycle: 66 Level of Service: C rwwrwrw wwwww wwwwwwrwr rw rwrwwwwwww wwwrrw rwrwww•rwwwww wwwwwwrwwwwrrrwrr►wrwwr:rww♦ Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Volume Module: Count Date: 31 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 200 520 0 0 450 40 180 0 600 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 200 520 0 0 450 40 180 0 600 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 8 0 0 3 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 initial Fut: 200 528 0 0 453 44 191 0 600 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 200 528 0 0 453 44 191 0 600 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 200 528 0 0 453 44 191 0 600 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 200 528 0 0 453 44 191 0 600 0 0 0 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.91 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.71 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 0.09 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1736 1828 0 1900 1598 155 1357 0 1615 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.12 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.14 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: w•*• w*** Green/Cycle: 0.14 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.31 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.82 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 0.45 0.00 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 44.2 12.2 0.0 0.0 26.5 26.5 17.2 0.0 21.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 44.2 12.2 0.0 0.0 26.5 26.5 17.2 0.0 21.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 6 10 0 0 11 1 4 0 12 0 0 0 •••w•wwwww•rww:w•wwwwrwwrrwxwwwwwwewrrw:xwww••ww•wwrwwwwwwwwwrwwwr:wwwwwwwwww www 2017 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:51:17 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection @2 Fanno Creek/Hall rrwwww wwwrwrwrxr•ww rrrrrww♦ww wr•w rww.••wwxww•wwww•ww•www•wwwww•wwwwww•w••w. Average Delay (sec/veh): 24.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: C rww♦rwww rr:ww••www•wwwww www•e rwrrwrwwwwwwrrrwww.rw.••••••.•••••••••••w••••••••.• Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ---------------II---------------II---------------' Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Volume Module: Count Date: 30 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 0 690 10 20 450 0 0 0 0 40 0 100 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 690 10 20 450 0 0 0 0 40 0 100 Added Vol: 0 18 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 708 10 20 457 0 0 0 0 40 0 101 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 708 10 20 457 0 0 0 0 40 0 101 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 708 10 20 457 0 0 0 0 40 0 101 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 718 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1210 xxxx 713 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 892 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 204 xxxx 435 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 892 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 200 xxxx 435 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' • • A • • • ' • ` Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 326 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 24.2 xxxxx Shared LOS: C ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 24.2 ApproachLOS: • ' C 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5. 1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2017 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:51:17 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) AM Peak Hour Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) fffflffffff11f 1f wfff1ff11f♦1}1f 11fff1tfff}R}ff 1111 111111 ff 11111111 11«ffR11f 11111 Intersection #3 Omara/Hall 1111♦111Rf 1f♦♦1lffff lffwRflf1fx11111flf11f1fff♦fflf }f Rfff 1111 ♦Rxwllfffllfff}f1}f Average Delay (sec/veh): 20.3 Worst Case Level of Service: C lffftf11f1ff1111 tf1Rff11f 11111 1ffff11R11Rf 111111}t1f♦R11ffR11xf1w1}1111111 1R1x Af Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L- T - R L- T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include include Include Include Lanes : 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 it 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Count Date: 31 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 20 750 0 0 300 10 60 0 60 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 20 750 0 0 300 10 60 0 60 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 3 0 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 20 753 0 0 307 10 60 0 61 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 20 753 0 0 307 10 60 0 61 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 20 753 0 0 307 10 60 0 61 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 317 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1105 xxxx 312 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1255 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 235 xxxx 733 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1255 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 232 xxxx 733 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del: 7.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A • • ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 354 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 20.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: f 1 w 1 f C 1 « } ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 20.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: ' C Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2017 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:51:17 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) RR11RfR}♦111111«wlfflffff1111«RR1RlffxfllRffffwwxffxfllffRffw11f1ff11f wffx lRff if Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall Rff}fffwffff}RRf 1f 11t 1x11111 1111 111«}}f Rff♦Rfxff}ff111ff1ffffx♦«1111x}xxff♦♦1ff1 Average Delay (sec/veh): 15.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: C .}R}f 1ff111xx1«1fR1R11r 1f1111fffwff«««.Rfffflw♦wf11f 1f ff 111w11111R1ff«:111111:w1 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: include Include include Include Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume module: Base Vol: 10 0 50 0 0 0 0 510 50 150 250 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 10 0 50 0 0 0 0 510 50 150 250 0 Added Vol: 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 12 0 51 0 0 0 0 510 55 154 250 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 12 0 51 0 0 0 0 510 55 154 250 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 12 0 51 0 0 0 0 510 55 154 250 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1095 xxxx 538 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 565 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 238 xxxx 547 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1017 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 211 xxxx 547 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1017 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------i Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.2 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * ' ' ' • ' ' " A ' Movement: IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 420 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 15.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • C * • " ' ' ' " " ApproachDel: 15.1 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 0 2017 AM Thu Aug 22, 2002 15:51:17 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) •.......wwwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwe.e.www♦wwwrw♦www www:wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww:wwwww ineersection f5 Wall/Hall .....w:w ...............:.•....:www wwwww wwwrw wwwwrwwwewwww wwwwwwwwwww♦www+....... Average Delay (sec/veh): 62.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: F Approach. North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 750 40 40 320 0 0 0 0 150 0 20 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 750 40 40 320 0 0 0 0 150 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 19 8 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 3 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 750 59 48 320 0 0 0 0 157 0 23 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 750 59 48 320 0 0 0 0 157 0 23 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 750 59 48 320 0 0 0 0 157 0 23 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict.Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 809 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1196 xxxx 780 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 825 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx x3cx 208 xxxx 399 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 825 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 198 xxxx 399 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 69.2 xxxx 14.6 LOS by Move: • ' • A ' • " F • B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 62.2 ApproachLOS: * * w F • S Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Existing PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:13:48 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour - - Scenario Report Scenario: Existing PM Command: Existing PM Volume: Existing PM Geometry: Existing PM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration Existing PM - - Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:13:49 Page 2-1 - Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour - Impact Analysis Report - Level Of Service Intersection Base Fut ure Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall D 40.8 0.973 D 40.8 0.973 + 0.000 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall C 16.3 0.000 C 16.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall E 43.6 0.000 E 43.6 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/wall B 11.7 0.000 B 11.7 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • 46 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Existing PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:13:49 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) f•••••fff••fw•}e•rfflffR}1•f lflrrfff•ff11ff1f 1f 1fff 1f 1f 1•w••wffflfRw:ffwfffffffr Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall 1f 1ff•w•111ff11•w•efffw•ff1lRRf wfRfwtff•ffwff•fffffffwt•f••f •f lwfffllfffw•r•ffff Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.973 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 40.8 Optimal Cycle: 159 Level Of Service: D fe♦f••••••ff•fff•r•f 11f1w•ffw•ff•fff•f 1f1f••ff•rrt lff •r rr♦•.}••wfflr•f rf •f•f ttrf Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovi Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 it 0 0 I II II II ---------------I Volume module: Count Date: 9 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 520 576 0 0 764 228 100 0 276 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 520 576 0 0 764 228 100 0 276 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 520 576 0 0 764 228 100 0 276 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 520 576 0 0 764 228 100 0 276 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 520 576 0 0 764 228 100 0 276 0 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.95 0.91 1.00 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.76 0.24 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1893 1862 0 1900 1459 435 1728 0 1583 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.06 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.28 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.06 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.97 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 67.5 2.5 0.0 0.0 44.2 44.2 126.8 0.0 27.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 67.5 2.5 0.0 0.0 44.2 44.2 126.8 0.0 27.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 22 6 0 0 23 7 5 0 10 0 0 0 fflf•R}1.1f 1f♦1118}•fff llRft•1w•tfRw}f•11ff111t1t1ffR•}f••1RRf}R•fflwRff •f 1RwtRf Existing PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:13:49 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) 1wR1wwflf•ffwrfl♦•wffe••ff lw•f if wwf••:feflf flffrffffffff•w:lwwf.ff..fffffff lweff Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall Rfffwf•f•••fwrlwR•fffffffwf♦fffwfflf ffffffffwfffffffffffffffffffffffffflff lffeff Average Delay (sec/veh): 16.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: C Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Volume Module: Count Date: 30 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 0 600 20 36 920 0 0 0 0 4 0 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 600 20 36 920 0 0 0 0 4 0 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 600 20 36 920 0 0 0 0 4 0 28 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 600 20 36 920 0 0 0 0 4 0 28 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 620 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1602 xxxx 610 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 970 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 118 xxxx 498 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 970 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 114 xxxx 498 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A • ' ' ' ' ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 351 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 16.3 xxxxx Shared LOS: C ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 16.3 ApproachLOS: C 0 • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.5. 1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Existing PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:13:49 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) r••••••••••r•wwr••••rr••w•••ww••ww•r••••••r••w••••••••r•w•••••r•••r•r•••r•w••••• Intersection #3 Omara/Hall ••♦•w•••••••r•+wr•••rrr•r•wr•:r••www••••rr♦•••♦r••r••r••••►•r••r•rr•r•r•w••w••wr Average Delay (sec/veh): 43.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: E r••••••••e•we••••••••rrre•w•rwr••+ww•••••••••r•rw••w•••w•w•rr•r•r•rr•rrrrr•r•w•r Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T R II--------------- ---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11--------------- Volume Module: Count Date: 9 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 104 676 8 0 856 128 20 0 28 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 104 676 8 0 856 128 20 0 28 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 104 676 8 0 856 128 20 0 28 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 104 676 8 0 856 128 20 0 28 0 0 0 II--------------- ---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 984 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1808 xxxx 920 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 710 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 88 xxxx 331 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 710 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 77 xxxx 331 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 10.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: B ' ' ' • ' ' ' Movement: IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 140 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 43.6 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • • ' E ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 43.6 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: E ' Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Existing PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:13:49 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) •r••rr••w••wwr••••••••••r••r•r•w•ww wwwr•w••rw•••w•ww••w ••••w•ww•••. •••rw•• Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall rr:•rrrrrr•••wr••••r••r••••••wrw•www•••ww•r•r••••r•••••:w•wwww•.•.••w••••••••••• Average Delay (sec/veh): 11.7 Worst Case Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include include include Lanes : 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Count Date: 31 Jul 2002 << Base Vol: 8 0 20 0 0 0 0 328 8 0 428 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 8 0 20 0 0 0 0 328 8 0 428 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 8 0 20 0 0 0 0 328 8 0 428 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 8 0 20 0 0 0 0 328 8 0 428 0 II--------------- ---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 760 xxxx 332 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 377 xxxx 714 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 377 xxxx 714 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' ' ' • ' " ' ' • ' ' Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 569 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 11.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ' B ApproachDel: 11.7 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • 2005 PM Fri Aug 23, 2002 10:06:08 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Scenario: 2005 PM Command: 2005 PM Volume: 2005 PM Geometry: 2005 PM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library PM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration 2005 PM Fri Aug 23, 2002 10:06:09 - - Page 2-1 - - - - Tigard Wall Street - Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/ o Library PM Peak Hour Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service In tersection Base Fut ure Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall D 47.2 1.004 D 47.2 1.004 + 0.000 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall D 33.6 0.000 D 33.6 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall F 68.3 0.000 F 68.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 12.8 0.000 B 12.8 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • # 5 Wall/Hall D 27.5 0.000 D 27.5 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 23, 2002 10:06:09 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library FM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report , 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) •w•lwffflww•fff if wf wffffwfffffffwfR}ffff11f 1f ifffl•lffwfflfffffllwtf}f Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.004 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 47.2 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: D s}:••fffw}f•f if of:ffflf wfffff•f wwfffflf♦}f Rffff••wf wfffffww wf }fffflffwffffwwffff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L- T - R L - T - R I II II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 490 510 0 0 710 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 490 510 0 0 710 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 490 510 0 0 710 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 .0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 516 537 0 0 747 284 105 0 284 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 516 537 0 0 747 284 105 0 284 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 516 537 0 0 747 284 105 0 284 0 0 0 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1:00 0.71 0.29 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1893 1862 0 1900 1358 516 1728 0 1583 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.06 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.27 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.06 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 1.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 77.2 2.4 0.0 0.0 51.7 51.7 136.0 0.0 28.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 77.2 2.4 0.0 0.0 51.7 51.7 136.0 0.0 28.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 22 6 0 0 22 8 6 0 11 0 0 0 ♦wfffwfff•wf•fwff•lfffffff}•fff•f•lwfffflf lff}f•ff lwwlfffffwff•fffRffff xfffff}ff Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 23, 2002 10:06:09 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall ffwwfR}f•rwwwxffffffffwfffwf•flfwwwf rffww}wff•xwwwwfflflf}fwxfffffx.•f•fff:wfRwf Average Delay (sec/veh): 33.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: D fwfRwfffeffwxwewf}r•♦♦ww}ffRff lf•}f}rff lffffwfflw wffffffrff•wffRRf•.w lfff•f.f•ff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 620 30 50 920 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 620 30 50 920 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0 620 30 50 920 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 653 32 53 968 0 0 0 0 21 0 32 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 653 32 53 968 0 0 0 0 21 0 32 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 684 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1742 xxxx 668 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 919 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 96 xxxx 461 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 30D= 919 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 92 xxxx 461 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * • ' A • • • • • . : f Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 177 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 33.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: D ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 33.6 ApproachLOS: D • • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 23, 2002 10:06:09 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) .RRR11f11Rf RRRRfffffffffRRlRRf IRfRf Rf eR RRR1RfRf♦RfRRf RRfff♦t1fRRRf RffIRRRfRRRfff Intersection #3 Omara/Hall fffffffffffffRRffRf if Rfffff RR R}RfRRRRffRRRffffffllf♦1tRfRffiff 11 tfRRfRRfRfffRf if Average Delay (sec/veh): 68.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I--------------- ---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 70 580 0 0 960 140 30 0 20 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 70 580 0 0 960 140 30 0 20 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 70 580 0 0 960 140 30 0 20 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 74 611 0 0 1011 147 32 0 21 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 74 611 0 0 1011 147 32 0 21 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx 3o= xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1158 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1842 xxxx 1084 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 611 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 84 xxxx 266 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 611 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 76 xxxx 266 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 11.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: B ' • " ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 106 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 68.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' " F ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 68.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: " • F " 2005 PM Fri Aug 23, 2002 10:06:09 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) .f♦fRRff♦f RffRRRRf Rf 1ff11fRRRRRRf1fRRRRRRRRRIRR IR♦1f RfRf R.R.. RRfRRRRRRRRff RRRRR♦ Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall .RRffRRffff♦RffffRlRlf RffffRRRRRRRfllff lffffRIRRRRRfRIff RffRRRfRRRR♦fRRRRRRRRRfR Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.8 Worst Case Level of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 20 0 30 0 0 0 0 290 10 10 450 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 20 0 30 0 0 0 0 290 10 10 450 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 20 0 30 0 0 0 0 290 10 10 450 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 21 0 32 0 0 0 0 305 11 it 474 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 21 0 32 0 0 0 0 305 11 11 474 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 805 xxxx 311 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 316 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 354 xxxx 734 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1256 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 352 xxxx 734 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1256 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • • R f R . . . A R Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 512 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 12.8 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: B • * • * • • f ApproachDel: 12.8 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B • ' • 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 23, 2002 10:06:09 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall and w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ff rffff#fafff#ffaf of#r#fffat###}ffftf#}♦#ffffat}f }t 1f#}ff lfffa♦a#afaaaf fft}#}faf Intersection $5 Wall/Hall #f aftfa#af lfff rfffaa:aff#ffftf a}}#effafr#affaafa#ff#a#lffaaaarf #aaffaataa}r►rlfa Average Delay (sec/veh): 27.5 Worst Case Level Of Service: D lfffrflffff#}fflfflfffafff♦#•#f 111 t}#ffffaffa##}1111 1111♦ar#faf 111 1tf###lffaff}t Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 640 10 10 900 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 640 10 10 900 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVOl: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 640 10 10 900 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 674 it 11 947 0 0 0 0 11 0 11 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 674 11 11 947 0 0 0 0 11 0 11 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 684 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1647 xxxx 679 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 909 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx X=0= 109 xxxx 452 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 909 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 108 xxxx 452 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 41.9 xxxx 13.2 LOS by Move: • • ' A E ' B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx JOat]OC xxxxx x)= xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' ' ' ' f ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 27.5 ApproachLOS: D Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR i • -xv ba-..-~ ,h.. .+m s..:. .v .-n 4 --~...w 2}:-+.:~ i ba~..w.-..j c:.. - ;.y p.._...ti ro b: 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:41:18 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Scenario: Command: Volume: Geometry: Impact Fee: Trip Generation: Trip Distribution: Paths: Routes: Configuration: 2005 PM 2005 PM 2005 PM 2005 PM Default Impact Fee Library PM Library Default Paths Default Routes Default Configuration 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:41:18 - - Page 2-1 Tigard Wall Street - - Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library PM Peak Hour Impact Analysis Report - Level of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall D 47.2 1.004 E 68.0 1.098 +20.804 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall D 33.6 0.000 E 44.4 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall F 68.3 0.000 F 99.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 12.8 0.000 B 13.2 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 5 Wall/Hall D 27.5 0.000 F 192.8 0.000 + 0.000 V/C 9 is Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:41:18 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) •fff«fffffffrwwwf wf•ffffffwrrfff♦wwffffw}wrfffrf•wfrrfffffw}wwf rffwwfw+wwf •fff:w Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall fwffffffwr♦fff.:wfff♦(fff}:.fwfrfffffffwrfffwf:wwfffff««w♦r«««ffffwf«wfff«ff}. wr Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.098 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 68.0 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level of Service: E ♦fffwf •fff«ffwf♦f}ffffffffff•w♦wfffffwfffff if wfff iffff }fffflwf «f (fff lffwf!«•lwfw Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 I II II ---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 490 510 0 0 710 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 490 510 0 0 710 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 34 0 0 36 52 48 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVOl: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 490 544 0 0 746 322 148 0 270 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 516 573 0 0 785 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 516 573 0 0 785 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 516 573 0 0 785 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.68 0.32 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1893 1862 0 1900 1302 562 1728 0 1583 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------il---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.09 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.25 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.08 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 1.10 0.39 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.00 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 108.3 3.1 0.0 0.0 81.3 81.3 150.0 0.0 28.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 108.3 3.1 0.0 0.0 81.3 81.3 150.0 0.0 28.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Design0ueue: 23 7 0 0 23 10 8 0 11 0 0 0 .....•fff••(:ff•fff•rrff••rrf •w w••rf w•.•r•fff•rw•r•fr•wwf wf w•rrfwfrwwfw•wr w:.. Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:41:18 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) •rfwfwf«w wwwff•«ff:fwwwwf•frwwww•f wffww••••wfww•.••«••«••••••. Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall .««.««««fwfff«r«wfffffrwf«}}rf•ff«wwrff•wwwwrrrrw•:wwrrfwwrfww•r••••««••.•...fww Average Delay (sec/veh): 44.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: E ww wf w•«wwwwwwwww«wffffffr«f rrffwfwwwwwrrfwwr•rwrwwwww•wfwrwwww•w.••rrw•••.•rffw• Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 ---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 620 30 50 920 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 620 30 50 920 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 Added Vol: 0 82 0 3 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 PasserByVOl: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 702 30 53 1008 0 0 0 0 20 0 33 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 739 32 56 1061 0 0 0 0 21 0 35 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 739 32 56 1061 0 0 0 0 21 0 35 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 771 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1927 xxxx 755 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 853 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 74 xxxx 412 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 853 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 70 xxxx 412 I--------------- ---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' A ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 145 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 44.4 xxxxx Shared LOS: E ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 44.4 ApproachLOS: E Traffix 7.5. 1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR i • 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:41:18 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) •lffffaa•f waaf♦wfaffaaffff lffaawf fff 11111111 1111 if ffaftf ♦fawwf wlwwafffaffffffff♦ intersection #3 Omara/Hall fffffff 1f 11wfw1fff4afaf♦1♦1111 1af11ff1 if 1fff111f}lfff}}f if ffffwfaflflfflffflffff Average Delay (sec/veh): 99.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: F ffffff111f1f 1fafl•fflfffffffl if fffffff 1f wf}1f }fff wff of of lfffflwf }fflffaafwaafllw Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 70 580 0 0 960 140 30 0 20 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 70 580 0 0 960 140 30 0 20 0 0 0 Added Vol: 3 78 0 0 72 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 73 658 0 0 1032 140 30 0 23 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 77 693 0 0 1086 147 32 0 24 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 77 693 0 0 1086 147 32 0 24 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1234 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 2006 xxxx 1160 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 572 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 66 xxxx 240 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 572 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 59 xxxx 240 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 12.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: B • • * ' • • ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 88 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 99.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * • w ' F ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 99.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: ' • F ' 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:41:18 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) fffllfff♦fffftfwffwfwatfff fffff lffffflf lfff}ff lfffffw 1f 1111 fff lffwffff if fwf 1f 111 Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall f}fffffff}ffffwawfffff lwffffll}}fffff}ff♦f♦ffffff}e}fffff lffffff}ffff}f }f }fffflf Average Delay (sec/veh): 13.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: B wfffffffll}}f♦}ffffaffff lw1fw11ffff}f iffffffff♦lf fffff tffffffffffeffffffffffeff♦ Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 20 0 30 0 0 0 0 290 10 10 450 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 20 0 30 0 0 0 0 290 10 10 450 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 16 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 20 0 30 0 0 0 0 307 10 10 466 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 21 0 32 0 0 0 0 323 11 11 491 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 21 0 32 0 0 0 0 323 11 11 491 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 840 xxxx 328 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 334 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 338 xxxx 718 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1237 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 336 xxxx 718 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1237 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • ' ' ` • ' ' ' A ' Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 493 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 13.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: B ApproachDel: 13.2 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B 0 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:41:18 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/o RR X-ing on Wall & w/ Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ♦1111ff11Rffffff 1ff11ffffflf lff 1ff11fff1f♦11f R1ffff111fR111f 1ff1111ff}}♦1ff lffRR Intersection M5 Wall/Hall 1111}}1ff 1fflfffffRR}fffffff}Rflfff}RRfRR}f 1RfRf Rf if}lffffffflffffflfffRff 1111 1f Average Delay (sec/veh): 192.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: F 11111 1f 11111 111111111 1ff111RR1ff♦ffRf 11111.1 1Rf 11fff1fllf}1f 1f 1f /f1f}1111♦:}Rf}. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 640 10 10 900 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 640 10 10 900 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 Added Vol: 0 0 85 75 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 81 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 640 95 85 900 0 0 0 0 102 0 91 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 674 100 89 947 0 0 0 0 107 0 96 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 674 100 89 947 0 0 0 0 107 0 96 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowupTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 774 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1850 xxxx 724 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 842 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 82 xxxx 426 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 842 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 75 xxxx 426 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 350.6 xxxx 15.9 LOS by Move: A ' ' • ' f F ' C Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' ' ' " ` ` ' " ` ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 192.8 ApproachLOS: F Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • • 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 1-1 - - - - Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (20Q5) w/ RR X-ing on wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour - Scenario Report Scenario: 2005 PM Command: 2005 PM Volume: 2005 PM Geometry: 2005 PM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library PM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 - Page 2-1 - - Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall D 48.1 1.011 D 48.1 1.011 + 0.000 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall D 34.6 0.000 D 34.6 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall F 68.1 0.000 F 68.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 12.9 0.000 B 12.9 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • # 5 Wall/Hall E 35.1 0.000 E 35.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c)_2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ♦tff•wwwfff 11 wfwfftllwfffwrf wrr if wffwfrlfwfffllf♦f Rffr 111f }ffw}f 11111wf 1fw11wwf♦ Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall ♦ffftffflftffffltftfffwffttwffffft}rf lrlf tff if tflfff lwf}ww if wf wfffflrflff if }f rff Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.011 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 48.1 Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: D f:ff:fffffftf wfffrwffflff♦wffffflwf erfffwwffllwwrwrff wwwwwfflfwww wffrww♦rw lwf ffw Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: include include Ovl include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes : 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 490 520 0 0 720 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 490 520 0 0 720 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 490 520 0 0 720 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 516 547 0 0 758 284 105 0 284 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 516 547 0 0 758 284 105 0 284 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 516 547 0 0 758 284 105 0 284 0 0 0 I--------------- ---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.71 0.29 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1893 1862 0 1900 1364 511 1728 0 1583 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.06 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.27 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.06 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 1.01 0.36 0.00 0.00 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.00 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 79.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 53.1 53.1 138.0 0.0 28.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 79.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 53.1 53.1 138.0 0.0 28.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 23 6 0 0 22 8 6 0 11 0 0 0 frffff♦}f if lfwf♦wffffffwwefff if wf 1f 11ffffw}fff:w♦f♦r♦:wwewwwwfftwwrf wf wff twfflww Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) f}wwf.f ffwwwttwwffff lwwwwwffffwlwrlrf ltwwfrlf xww wwwf:wwtwrwfff:ffwwwr wff wx wffwllw Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall wwfffffffttfflfffff tffwf wfrlfwt}ffflffwwllffwfwwwffflffwwffrfffffwwwllf♦wwrlf lfw Average Delay (sec/veh): 34.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: D wf♦1fw14 wfw1r if wwwff}1ffflf w}ffffwf lw}f wf wfwlwwrlwwfwwwfffwwwfflrrffwwffffwfffff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I---------------II--------------- Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 620 30 50 940 0 0 0 0 20. 0 30 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 620 30 50 940 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 620 30 50 940 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 653 32 53 989 0 0 0 0 21 0 32 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 653 32 53 989 0 0 0 0 21 0 32 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 684 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1763 xxxx 668 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 919 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 94 xxxx 461 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 919 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 89 xxxx 461 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • ' • A • ' ' • ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 173 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 34.6 xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' ' " ' ' ' • ' D ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 34.6 ApproachLOS: D Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Is • 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ff#♦lffffffff#tfffllfffffffflffafff tff♦1lffaffff#fff lffaffff if }ffffftffRffaf:fff Intersection #3 Omara/Hall .fff.f.ff►ffffffffflfffffffffffaff ffffff#fff#Rf }affflaffffffflfff}1f lfaff#fff:.. Average Delay (sec/veh): 68.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: F lfafffffffffffffffffffffff#111f#fffaf aflfffffff11ff1f aff1f11f ♦1fff 1ff111ff}}}fff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 80 580 0 0 940 130 30 0 20 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 80 580 0 0 940 130 30 0 20 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 80 580 0 0 940 130 30 0 20 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 84 611 0 0 989 137 32 0 21 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 84 611 0 0 989 137 32 0 21 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1126 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1837 xxxx 1058 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 628 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 84 xxxx 276 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 628 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 76 xxxx 276 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 11.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: B • • ' ` ` ' ` ' ` Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 106 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 68.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' • F ApproachDel: xxxxxx X)=XX 68.1 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: F ` 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) fYf1f 1f 1ff#tfffff}faaaff}#f#f fffffflfffff#f#fffffffflfffffRff111f1fffff lffffffff Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall aff11f 1R#faffafffff..:fffff}ffffff♦f}f}}ffffff ffff#fff}f}fff}}}af 111f }ffffffff## Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: B fffff##lf of afff#ff#f #f if affff if ffffaf#11f 11 ffff#}f♦fffff}fffff}f of if♦fffffffffff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume module: Base Vol: 20 0 40 0 0 0 0 280 10 50 420 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 20 0 40 0 0 0 0 280 10 50 420 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 20 0 40 0 0 0 0 280 10 50 420 0 Use Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 21 0 42 0 0 0 0 295 11 53 442 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 21 0 42 0 0 0 0 295 11 53 442 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 847 xxxx 300 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 305 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 335 xxxx 744 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1267 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 324 xxxx 744 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1267 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.0 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 520 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 12.9 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • B ' * • ' ' ' ' ApproachDel: 12.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B • • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (200) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alter native) fffRfff•f♦f#ffff AffR♦RlfffffRf#}ffffff#Rf#lfffAR#}f♦f lff#f lfffAA#fRfffffff♦}ff}} Intersection A5 Wall/Hall ffffAfffffffAf#ffffffAf}f#f lffAf•fff lRf♦fff lfffffRA#f##f }ffffffA}R}fffA Af#R♦#f}# Average Delay (sec/veh): 35.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: E ♦ffff lfffffffff##f1lffAff l}f1flfAffff111fffffifff#f}ffffffffA~ffflffffAfffffff Rf Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement- L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes- 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 640 10 10 880 .0 0 0 0 30 0 20 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 674 11 11 926 0 0 0 0 32 0 21 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 674 11 11 926 0 0 0 0 32 0 21 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 684 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1626 xxxx 679 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 909 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 112 xxxx 452 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 909 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 111 xxxx 452 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 49.6 xxxx 13.4 LOS by Move: • • • A # ' ' • • E ' B Movement: IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xc= xxxx Shrd StpDel:)Oo= xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ' • ' ` ` ` ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 'c=xx 35.1 ApproachLOS: ' E Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • • n r .r M-. ir» :P.+f v«. x....-.-.a f.wv.-M~ r 11. '.+'J i. > i ~t y ~ -.j .'.4 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ff 11ff1fffftfff lff lfltffff if lffffffflfff}Rf}Rffff}tf}ff♦if fffffRf}}t}1f if lffffff Intersection N3 Omara/Hall 1ff111tf 1ff1f 1f 111tffft}ff 1f111f 11f 111f tffffRft}111tfffftffffff Rfft}t}1fff1f11}f Average Delay (sec/veh): 68.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: F .ff111f11f ♦fflffff}ffffflfffffflffffffflf:}}.}t1ff111fff1f fff1lf}ffffllfffffff}. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 80 580 0 0 940 130 30 0 20 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 80 580 0 0 940 130 30 0 20 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 80 580 0 0 940 130 30 0 20 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 84 611 0 0 989 137 32 0 21 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 84 611 0 0 989 137 32 0 21 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1126 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1837 xxxx 1058 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 628 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 84 xxxx 276 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 628 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 76 xxxx 276 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 11.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: B • • ' ' " * • ' ' • ' Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 106 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 68.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • • • ' ' ' ' F ApproachDel: XXXXXX xxxxxx 68.1 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: F ' 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall & w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection A4 Hunziker/Wall fflf}1f1f11f1f Rffff}}fffff11ff1tfffff}ffffff 111fffffff}}}}ffff11f 1ffff1111f 1f 1ff Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 20 0 40 0 0 0. 0 280 10 50 420 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 20 0 40 0 0 0 0 280 10 50 420 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 20 0 40 0 0 0 0 280 10 50 420 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 21 0 42 0 0 0 0 295 11 53 442 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 21 0 42 0 0 0 0 295 11 53 442 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity module: Cnflict Vol: 847 xxxx 300 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 305 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 335 xxxx 744 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1267 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 324 xxxx 744 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1267 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.0 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' ' • * f ' ' " A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 520 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 12.9 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ' B ' • ' ' ApproachDel: 12.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B • • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Fri Aug 30, 2002 08:49:24 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) w/ RR X-ing on Wall 6 w/o Library PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ffllfff1w11frw11f:wff♦lwwwf}11ww 1ff w11rwww}1wf 111ww+}}}+1l wf wrff x1111rf :fww wl rf♦ Intersection @5 Wall/Hall r♦1wlfwff 1r1f 11frrfxfllfrxff1ff11f wff11w 1w1wf}ffff lww1f 1f11f xffwrfflx}1f11rww}ff Average Delay (sec/veh): 35.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: E 1lf wffflrww}•1lwrwwlrf:ffwlw lwwwwf wwfff}1wr:fw}efff}w♦♦wxwf wxfwwwwlrwwxfllf wx w+w Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 674 11 11 926 0 0 0 0 32 0 21 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 674 11 11 926 0 0 0 0 32 0 21 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 684 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1626 xxxx 679 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 909 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 112 xxxx 452 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 909 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 111 xxxx 452 I--------------- ---------------i Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 49.6 xxxx 13.4 LOS by Move: A • • ' ' ' E ' B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xx)= Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: f ' ' . f f } ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 35.1 ApproachLOS: ' E Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • • 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:00 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Scenario: Command: Volume: Geometry: Impact Fee: Trip Generation: Trip Distribution: Paths: Routes: Configuration: 2005 PM 2005 PM 2005 PM 2005 PM Default Impact Fee Library PM Library Default Paths Default Routes Default Configuration 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:00 Page 2-1 Tigard Wall Street - Future Conditions (2005) PM Peak Hour impact Analysis Report Level of Service Intersection Base Fut ure Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall D 48.1 1.011 E 69.4 1.104 +21.242 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall D 34.6 0.000 E 45.9 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall F 68.1 0.000 F 80.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall B 12.9 0.000 C 15.6 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • # 5 Wall/Hall E 35.1 0.000 F 222.7 0.000 + 0.000 V/C 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:00 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Future conditions (2005) PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) ♦••••www••wwww•ww«•w••w♦ewe••«w«ww••«♦•w•w•:•ww••«««•ww••wwww••••w«•••••••«f Intersection k1 McDonald/Hall ♦•••w••w•♦•w♦•••wwe••ww•ww•••wwww••ww•w•:••w•w••wwf••••w•ww•••••w•••••w••w••«•w• Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (K): 1.104 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y.R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 69.4 Optimal cycle: 180 Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II ---------------I Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 I--------------- ---------------i Volume Module: Base Vol: 490 520 0 0 720 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 490 520 0 0 720 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 34 0 0 36 52 48 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 490 554 0 0 756 322 148 0 270 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 516 583 0 0 796 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 516 583 0 0 796 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 516 583 0 0 796 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.69 0.31 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1893 1862 0 1900 1307 557 1728 0 1583 0 1900 0 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.09 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.25 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.08 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 1.10 0.39 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 110.7 3.1 0.0 0.0 83.5 83.5 152.3 0.0 28.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 110.7 3.1 0.0 0.0 83.5 83.5 152.3 0.0 28.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Design0ueue: 23 7 0 0 24 10 8 0 11 0 0 0 ......".....«.•.ww:•«w«•••w♦w•....:...w«••w««•w•««««w•www•w•w•ww••w«••ww•••w«w•w Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:00 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) PM Peak Hour Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) w•w••:ww•••••«w♦www••••ww•••••«w•••••:.«••..ww«.••««w•w•••♦«««••."•«....•.. Intersection 82 Fanno Creek/Hall •••w«ww•••w««w••••••«w•w••••«wwwww•«««•ww•«.ww••ww.«w•••««wwww•"««rw•:..«w«w w«•• Average Delay (sec/veh): 45.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 620 30 50 940 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 620 30 50 940 0 0 0 0 20 0 30 Added Vol: 0 82 0 3 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 702 30 53 1028 0 0 0 0 20 0 33 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 739 32 56 1082 0 0 0 0 21 0 35 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 739 32 56 1082 0 0 0 0 21 0 35 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowupTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 771 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1948 xxxx 755 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 853 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 72 xxxx 412 Move.Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 853 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 68 xxxx 412 I--------------- ---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 142 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 45.9 xxxxx Shared LOS: • " " ' ' ' ' ' E ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 45.9 ApproachLOS: E 0 • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:00 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) PM Peak Hour Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection A3 Omara/Hall Average Delay (sec/veh): 80.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 80 580 0 0 940 130 30 0 20 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 initial Bse: 80 580 0 0 940 130 30 0 20 0 0 0 Added Vol: 3 35 0 0 32 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 83 615 0 0 972 130 30 0 23 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 87 647 0 0 1023 137 32 0 24 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 87 647 0 0 1023 137 32 0 24 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1160 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1914 xxxx 1092 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 610 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 75 xxxx 263 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 610 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 67 xxxx 263 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level of Service Module: Stopped Del: 11.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: 8 ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 99 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 80.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' ' ' ' ` ' F ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 80.1 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: F ' 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:00 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection A4 Hunziker/Wall Average Delay (sec/veh): 15.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: C Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include include include Include Lanes : 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 20 0 40 0 0 0 0 280 10 50 420 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 20 0 40 0 0 0 0 280 10 50 420 0 Added Vol: 26 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 24 16 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 46 0 57 0 0 0 0 280 34 66 420 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 48 0 60 0 0 0 0 295 36 69 442 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 48 0 60 0 0 0 0 295 36 69 442 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 894 xxxx 313 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 331 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 314 xxxx 732 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1240 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 301 xxxx 732 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1240 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------i Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 446 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 15.6 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * C • ' " " ApproachDel: 15.6 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C • ' • • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:00 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ....f+f +fffff+fff+ff+f }fff++fff}f+fffff+.+..+++w}f 1f+f+.+fff+f +fffllff+fff}..... Intersection #5 Wall/Hall ffffflff+}f+ff 111}fffffff+f +lf ff+f++}f+f+fff+f++ffllf+ff+f♦♦ff+fffyff++++f11Rff+ Average Delay (sec/veh): 222.7 Worst Case Level of Service: F flffffflff+llff♦fflf++f1}}ffflfff++ff}f+1ff11111f111f 1f1ff}f♦f+}f lfl++fff+llf fff Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume module; Base Vol: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 85 35 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 38 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Put: 0 640 95 45 880 0 0 0 0 122 0 58 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 674 100 47 926 0 0 0 0 128 0 61 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 674 100 47 926 0 0 0 0 128 0 61 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 774 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1745 xxxx 724 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 842 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 95 xxxx 426 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 842 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 91 xxxx 426 I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 321.5 xxxx 14.9 LOS by Move: • * A * w + + + F + B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ' ' + } + } • + + } + f ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 222.7 ApproachLOS: F Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • • ,.,....,,.d ~c~...-..vie o. ~~...3 ..i 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:35 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) PM Peak Hour Scenario Report Scenario: 2017 PM Command: 2017 PM Volume: 2017 PM Geometry: 2017 PM Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Library PM Trip Distribution: Library Paths: Default Paths Routes: Default Routes Configuration: Default Configuration 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:36 - - - Page 2-1 Tigard Wall Street - - - Future Conditions (2017) PM Peak Hour Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Fut ure Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C # 1 McDonald/Hall c 25.8 0.855 C 34.9 0.946 + 9.126 D/V # 2 Fanno Creek/Hall F 55.4 0.000 F 86.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 3 Omara/Hall F 53.2 0.000 F 61.3 0.000 + 0.000 V/C # 4 Hunziker/Wall D 27.7 0.000 F 66.1 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • # 5 Wall/Hall F 765.0 0.000 F OVRFL 0.000 + 0.000 V/C • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:36 Page 3-1 Tigard Wall Street Futu;e Conditions (2017) PM Peak Hour Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations method (Future Volume Alternative) •...+wwwwaawwwwwaawwwwawwwwwaawww ww wa wwwwww aawwwwwwwwa ww wwwaawwwwwaaaaww:. as aaww Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall a ww waaewawawwewaaaw wwwwwwwwwaawww ww wwaww wwwaaawaww wawaaaww ww aawwwwwwwawwwwwwa... Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.946 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 34.9 Optimal Cycle: www136...www Level Of Service: C wwwwaww•:.w wwwwaa wwwwwwwwwwwwwwww:www wwwww:w aaww wwwwwwawww w:aawwwwwa Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I--------------- II---------------II---------------1 Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes : 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 I 11--------------- ---------------I Volume module: Base Vol: 504 636 0 0 999 91 76 0 332 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 504 636 0 0 999 91 76 0 332 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 34 0 0 36 52 48 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 504 670 0 0 1035 143 124 0 332 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 504 670 0 0 1035 143 124 0 332 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 504 670 0 0 1035 143 124 0 332 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 504 670 0 0 1035 143 124 0 332 0 0 0 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.14 1.20 1.22 1.22 1.17 1.17 0.92 1.22 1.02 1.22 1.22 1.22 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.88 0.12 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 2158 2272 0 2318 1960 271 1747 0 1931 0 0 .2318 I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.23 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.07 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: ww " Green/Cycle: 0.25 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.08 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.95 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 63.1 2.8 0.0 0.0 35.2 35.2 108.0 0.0 28.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del/Veh: 63.1 2.8. 0.0 0.0 35.2 35.2 108.0 0.0 28.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 23 8 0 0 30 4 6 0 13 0 0 0 wawwwwwawaww.wwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwawaawww wwwwwwwwwwaa:e wwwww wwwaw wwwwaawwwwaww www wwa Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:36 Page 4-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) www ww wwwwwwwwww:♦wwwwwwwwwwwawwaewwwawwwwwwawwwwwwwwwawwww.waw....... Intersection #2 Fanno Creek/Hall wwrawawwwawwaww wwwww wwawwweww:aawwwwwwww+::wawwwwwwwawawwwwwwwwww ww:aw wrwwww+www Average Delay (sec/veh): 86.3 Worst Case Level of Service: F ...wawawww♦w:waww wwawaaawwwwwwawawwwwwwawwwwwwaw:wwwww+wwwwwww. wwwwew..a Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I--------------- ' ---------------I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: include Include include include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 658 40 87 1082 0 0 0 0 30 0 57 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 initial Bse: 0 658 40 87 1082 0 0 0 0 30 0 57 Added Vol: 0 82 0 3 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 740 40 90 1170 0 0 0 0 30 0 60 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 740 40 90 1170 0 0 0 0 30 0 60 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 740 40 90 1170 0 0 0 0 30 0 60 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowupTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I--------------- ---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 780 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 2110 xxxx 760 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 846 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 57 xxxx 409 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 846 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 52 xxxx 409 I--------------- ---------------i Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: • ' ' A ' • w ' Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 125 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 86.3 xxxxx Shared LOS: • ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' F ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 86.3 ApproachLOS: ' F Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • • + 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:36 Page 5-1 Tigard Wall Street Futu;e Conditions (2017) PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection A3 Omara/Hall •..w•w•••••••••••••••w:•wwwwww••w•ww•ww•www••w••ww•w••••••••ww••w•ww•w♦wwww•w:w• Average Delay (sec/veh): 61.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 100 630 0 0 898 80 30 0 30 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 100 630 0 0 898 80 30 0 30 0 0 0 Added Vol: 3 35 0 0 32 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 103 665 0 0 930 80 30 0 33 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 103 665 0 0 930 80 30 0 33 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 103 665 0 0 930 80 30 0 33 0 0 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1010 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1841 xxxx 970 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 694 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 84 xxxx 310 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 694 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 74 xxxx 310 xxxx xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del: 11.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move:. B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 123 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 61.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: F • ' ' ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx X.== 61.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: F ' 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:36 Page 6-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ...••w......w..ww...w.•...•....•........•w•.w....wwwwww.w...•..w•...••......w... Intersection R4 Hunziker/Wall ww••ww:•••w•♦••w:♦w♦www.w•••w.••••••wwww••••w•:••••••••wwww+w•ww•••.rr••. Average Delay (sec/veh): 66.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes : 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 30 0 120 0 0 0 0 440 50 290 490 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 30 0 120 0 0 0 0 440 50 290 490 0 Added Vol: 26 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 24 16 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 56 0 137 0 0 0 0 440 74 306 490 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 56 0 137 0 0 0 0 440 74 306 490 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 56 0 137 0 0 0 0 440 74 306 490 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1579 xxxx 477 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 514 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 122 xxxx 592 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1062 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 94 xxxx 592 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1062 xxxx xxxxx I--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.8 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' " • ' ' ` ' " A ` Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 234 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 66.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ' F • • * ` * ' ' ' ApproachDel: 66.1 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: F ` • • Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR I Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 11:14:36 Page 7-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) a.ww.wwaw♦waaawawwwaw awwwaaaaawaawaaaeaw wwwa ww aw wwwawwawwwwwwwwwwaaawaw a♦waaw waa Intersection #5 Wall/Hall wwww aaawwwaaaawawaaawwwwwra wwaa♦sw♦aawawwaaaawwswawaaaaa awwwwwwwwwasa waawaa":waa Average Delay (sec/veh): 1370.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: F ...........awaaa w:awaaawaaaaawaaa awwaaaaaaww♦waaaw aaawwwwf wwawww•sa aw wwwwwaawaaw Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 700 15 20 958 0 0 0 0 270 0 40 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 700 15 20 958 0 0 0 0 270 0 40 Added Vol: 0 0 85 35 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 38 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 700 100 55 958 0 0 0 0 362 0 78 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 700 100 55 958 0 0 0 0 362 0 78 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 700 100 55 958 0 0 0 0 362 0 78 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 I------------- --II--------------- ---------------I Capacity module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 800 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1818 xxxx 750 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 823 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 86 xxxx 411 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 823 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 81 xxxx 411 I--------------- II--------------- ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 1662 xxxx 15.8 LOS by Move: A F • C Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 1370.1 ApproachLOS: F Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • • , h:. n u>...-.v cr-,~.., n. .o-~,...... _ e. o..._.-r.+1 a n.- ,%h r-•. .q e s • MITIG8 - 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 20:31:37 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) - Mitigated PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 McDonald/Hall Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.866 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 28.4 Optimal Cycle: 96 Level Of Service: C Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I--------------- II--------------- I1--------------- Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Ovl Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes : 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 I--------------- Volume module: Base Vol: 490 520 0 0 720 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 490 520 0 0 720 270 100 0 270 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 34 0 0 36 52 48 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 490 554 0 0 756 322 148 0 270 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 516 583 0 0 796 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 516 583 0 0 796 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 516 583 0 0 796 339 156 0 284 0 0 0 I--------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.05 0.83 0.91 1.00 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1893 1862 0 1900 1992 1583 1728 0 1583 0 1900 0 I--------------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.21 0.09 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.31 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.10 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.87 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.46 0.87 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 45.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 32.9 18.9 77.0 0.0 21.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 45.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 32.9 18.9 77.0 0.0 21.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 21 8 0 0 27 11 8 0 10 0 0 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR MITIG8 - 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 20:34:09 - Page 1-1 r Tigard Wall Stre et - Future Conditions (2017) - Mitigated PM Peak Hour 5 Level Of Service Computa tion Report 2000 HCM Operati ons Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 McDonald/Hal l Cycle (sec): 100 Critica l Vol ./Cap. (X): 0.864 Loss Time (s ec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Dela y (sec/veh): 26.6 Optimal Cycl e: 95 Level O f Service: C 7. Approach: No rth Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound ) Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I---- -----------I Control: P rotected Protec ted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Ovl Ovl Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes : 1 I---- 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Volume module: -----------I Base Vol: 504 636 0 0 999 91 76 0 332 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 504 636 0 0 999 91 76 0 332 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 34 0 0 36 52 48 0 0 0 0 0 ? PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 504 670 0 0 1035 143 124 0 332 0 0 0 a User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ! PHF Volume: 504 670 0 0 1035 143 124 0 332 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Reduced Vol: 504 670 0 0 1035 143 124 0 332 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 504 670 0 0 1035 143 124 0 332 0 0 0 Saturation Flow Module: -----------I Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.14 1.20 1.22 1.22 1.20 1.02 0.92 1.22 1.02 1.22 1.22 1.22 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: I 2158 2272 0 2318 2272 1931 1747 0 1931 0 0 2318 i Capacity Analysis Module: ----II -----------I Vol/Sat: 0.23 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.27 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.08 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.86 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.14 0.86 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' Delay/Veh: 47.4 3.0 0.0 0.0 27.2 12.1 83.6 0.0 25.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ? AdjDel/Veh: 47.4 3.0 0.0 0.0 27.2 12.1 83.6 0.0 25.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 DesignQueue: 22 8 0 0 32 4 6 0 13 0 0 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR ` • • MITIG8 - 2005 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 20:31:19 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2005) - Mitigated PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 Wall/Hall Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.648 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9.8 Optimal Cycle: 53 Level of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I--------------- 11--------------- 11---------------~ Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I--------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 640 10 10 880 0 0 0 0 30 0 20 Added Vol: 0 0 85 35 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 38 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 640 95 45 880 0 0 0 0 122 0 58 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 0 674 100 47 926 0 0 0 0 128 0 61 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 674 100 47 926 0 0 0 0 128 0 61 PCE Adj: 1.00'1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 674 100 47 926 0 0 0 0 128 0 61 I--------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.53 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.83 Lanes: 0.00 0.87 0.13 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 1594 237 1002 1862 0 0 0 0 1769 0 1583 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.05 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.04 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.11 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.06 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.34 Delay/Veh: 0.0 5.1 5.1 2.9 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.8 0.0 42.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 5.1 5.1 2.9 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.8 0.0 42.2 DesignQueue: 0 10 1 1 14 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • MITIG8 - 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 20:34:59 Page 1 -1 i Tigard Wall Stree t Future Conditions (2017) - Mitigated PM Peak Hour ..a Level Of Service Computat ion Report 2 000 HCM Operation s Method (Future Volume Alternative) i Intersection #5 Wa ll/Hall Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.817 Loss Time (se c): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 21.7 Optimal Cycle : 81 Level Of Serv ice: C Approach: Nor th Bound South Bound Ea st Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Z I 11 i Control: Permitted Permitted Pr otected Protected Rights: Include Include Includ e Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes : 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I----- Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 700 15 20 958 0 0 0 0 270 0 40 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 700 15 20 958 0 0 0 0 270 0 40 Added Vol: 0 0 85 35 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 38 £ PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 700 100 55 958 0 0 0 0 362 0 78 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 700 100 55 958 0 0 0 0 362 0 78' Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 700 100 55 958 0 0 0 0 362 0 78 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 700 100 55 958 0 0 0 0 362 0 78 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.49 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.83 Lanes: 0.00 0.87 0.13 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 1602 229 925 1862 0 0 0 0 1769 0 1583 ~ I s Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.06 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.05 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.69 0.69 0.09 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.00 0.20 n n , e n , e n , fl8 0 n 1 n 0 n 7 4 0n 0 n 0n 0 n 0n 0 n d6 6 F n 0n 29 _ R 29 8 Lj Q]Y/v=- V V 1 .v 1`sv Y . . . . . . . . _ . . User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 14.0 14.0 7.4 18.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 46.6 0.0 29.8 ' DesignQueue: 0 16 2 1 23 0 0 0 0 16 0 3 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR • MITIG8 - 2017 PM Thu Aug 22, 2002 20:37:27 Page 1-1 Tigard Wall Street Future Conditions (2017) - Mitigated PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #4 Hunziker/Wall Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.459 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 10.6 Optimal Cycle: 38 Level of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T R L - T - R 11---------------~ Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes : 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 11---------------~ Volume Module: Base Vol: 30 0 120 0 0 0 0 440 50 290 490 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 30 0 120 0 0 0 0 440 50 290 490 0 Added Vol: 26 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 24 16 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 56 0 137 0 0 0 0 440 74 306 490 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. PHF Volume: 56 0 137 0 0 0 0 440 74 306 490 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 56 0 137 0 0 0 0 440 74 306 490 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 56 0 137 0 0 0 0 440 74 306 490 0 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.51 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.14 1.00 1.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 0 1596 268 960 1900 0 I--------------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.32 0.26 0.00 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.18 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.00 Volume/Cap: 0.17 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.46 0.37 0.00 Delay/Veh: 34.5 0.0 37.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 6.6 7.3 6.4 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 34.5 0.0 37.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 6.6 7.3 6.4 0.0 DesignQueue: 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 8 1 5 9 0 Traffix 7.5.1115 (c) 2001 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Vehicle Trip Calculator Project: Tigard Wall Street AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Description ITE Code Quantity Units Daily Rate Daily Trips In Out Total In Out Total Library 590 47 KSF 54.00 2,538 36 14 50 160 173 333 Total Project Trips 2,538 36 14 50 160 173 333 0 • DKS Associates, Inc. 8/30/02 Page 1 0 Turn Lane Warrants Unsignalized Intersection Queue Estimate' Tigard Wall Street PM Peak Hour 2017 Type Definition: 1= Major Street LT, 2= Minor Street LT, 3= Minor Street RT, 4 = Minor Street Shared Cnr RAinnr Chsrnrl (lnly No. Intersection Movement Type AppVol PHF ConflVol LT-TH ConflVol RT ConfVol RT% Traffic Signal Lanes Speed Max. Queue O'MaraMali NB LT 1 103 1 1010 1 1 35 5 Wall/Hall SB LT 1 55 1 800 1 1 35 4 Wall/Hall WB LT 1 362 1 1713 1 1 35 14 ' "Young Consultant's Award Paper: Estimation of Maximum Queue Lengths at unsignalizea intersection--, ,tonn T. tiara, i i r joumat, rvovemuer cw i . 0 Tigard Wall Street PM Peak Hour 2017 Left Turn Lane Warrant Analysis LT Va Warrant HRB Warrant Max. Est. Storage Length Intersection Movement PHF Va Volume Vo LT % Threshold Met?' LOS Queue Length (ft) (ft) O'Mara/Hall NB LT 1.00 768 103 1010 13.4% 181 Yes F 5 125 195 Wall/Hall SB LT 1.00 1013 55 800 5.4% 319 Yes F 4 100 195 Wall/Hall WB LT 1.00 440 362 1713 82.3% 153 Yes F 14 350 195 Note: 75 feet was the minimum storage length recommended based on the HRB warrant guidelines 195 feet is the standard deceleration distance (taper length) for a design speed of 65 km/hr (40 mph) based on ODOT standard drawing TM539. 1 Volume warrants for Left Turn Storage Lanes at Unsignalized Grade Intersections, Highway Research Record, 1967. • 0 0 Signal W_~-~~ 0 • TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS PROJECT LOCATION/CHARACTERISTICS Major Street: 4. Minor Street: T--~VA yt10 C-V" Number of lanes on each approach of major street: Number of lanes on each approach of minor street: 85th percentile speed of major-street traffic > 40 mph ❑ -or- In built-up area of an isolated community of < 10,000 pop. then use Rural Requirements Analysis Scenario (Year): ?,,o (2 Date of Analysis: -O ~ LJ~G~I i43't- V • , O SUMMARY OF RESULTS WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ YES NO WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ YES NO WARRANT 3: Peak Hour ❑ YES ~K NO WARRANT 4: Pedestrian Volume ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 5: School Crossing ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 7: Crash Experience ❑ YES NO WARRANT 8: Roadway Network ❑ YES ❑ NO TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION RECOMMENDED ❑ YES Other Outstanding Issues ❑ NO Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 1 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates • 0 WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume CONDITION A: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES * NO CONDITION B: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES fir NO CONDITIONS A & B: 80% SATISFIED ❑ YES 19 NO f nnditinn A - Minimum Vphicnlnr Vnlnme Vehicles per hour on higher- Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street volume minor-street approach moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 100%a 80%b 70W . 1 1 400 350 150 120 105 or more 1 600 480 420 5 150 120 105 2 or more 2 or more 600 480 420 200 160 140 1 2 or more 500 400 350 200 160 140 C Note: Circle the row used in analysis Cnnrlitinn R - interruntion of Continuous Traffic Vehicles per hour on higher- Number of lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major street volume minor-street approach traffic on each lane approach (total o f both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 100%a 80%b 70%c 1....... 750 600 525 75 60 53 2 or more 1 900 720 630 75 60 53 2 or more 2 or more... 900 720 630 100 80 70 1 2 or more... 750 600 525 100 80 70 Note: Circle the row used in analysis `Basic minimum hourly volume. bUsed for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. `May be used when the major street speed exceeds 70 km/h (40 mph) or in an isolated community with a population less than 10,000. III..........f / lll....Lol.eeF Eight Highest Hours (I" - 8a) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) 12D,r ~ Minor Street (Highest Approach) 7~) 7) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 2 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume SATISFIED ❑ YES -Yi NO Warrant 2 Worksheet Approach Lanes Four Highest Hours (1" - 4 h) 1 2or more 1 2 3 4 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) ~j ('D Minor Street (Highest Approach) (0-1 * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-1 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-2 (Rural Areas) WARRANT 3: Peak Hour SATISFIED ❑ YES NO Warrant 3 Worksheet / Approach Lanes Peak Hour Volumes 1 2 or more AM Peak PM Peak Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) i' D Minor Street (Highest Approach) 14t 1 0 * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-3 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-4 (Rural Areas) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 3 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates December, 2000 Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume = 500 0- 400 FU W Q °C a - CL E- a rn Q O 2 200 z::) J 0 100 _ (071 0 Page 4C-7 *115 *80 I 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH *Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) z 400 0- > = 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES Q 300 W 0 2 OR MORE LANES I& 1 LANE D: COD Q 200 1 LANE & 1 LANE OW z~ J O 100 '8C 0 *6C 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH *Note: 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. •c z x suet. 4CO4 0 December, 2000 Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour 600 > 500 W Q 400 w0 o~ CO a 300 a: Q Z w j 200 o 141 > 100 '150 '100 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100k1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 P'M MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) x CL _ 400 ~a Cr a 300 ~a o: Q Z 2 200 ~O > 100 t7 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES- 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE ,1 LANE & 1 LA 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Page 4C-9 '100 '75 Sea 4C.o5 0 0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS PROJECT LOCATION/CHARACTERISTICS M a j o r Street: A l l Ul Vot Minor Street: w-11 5&V444- Number of lanes on each approach of major street: Number of lanes on each approach of minor street: 85th percentile speed of major-street traffic > 40 mph ❑ -or- In built-up area of an isolated community of < 10,000 pop. then use Rural Requirements Analysis Scenario (Year): O'S f v Date of Analysis: 2 2.02 G SUMMARY OF RESULTS WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume )6-YES ❑ NO WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume -V- YES ❑ NO WARRANT 3: Peak Hour i3~ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 4: Pedestrian Volume ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 5: School Crossing ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 7: Crash Experience ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 8: Roadway Network ❑ YES ❑ NO ja TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION RECOMMENDED ❑ YES ❑ NO Other Outstanding Issues r Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 1 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates • • WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume CONDITION A: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES Xl~ NO CONDITION B: 100% SATISFIED )4 YES ❑ NO CONDITIONS A & B: 80% SATISFIED ❑ YES ',X NO Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) Vehicles per hour on higher- volume minor-street approach (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%a 800/." 70%c 100%a 80%b 70%° 1 1............. 500 400 350 150 120 105 2 or more 1 600 480 420 150 120 105 2 or more 2 or more... 600 480 420 200 160 140 1 2 or more... 350 200 160 140 Note: Circle the row used in analysis Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic Number of lanes for moving traffic on each lane approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) Vehicles per hour on higher- volume minor-street approach (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 100%a 80%b 70%c 1 1............. 750 600 525 75 60 53 2 or more 1 900 720 630 75 60 53 2 or more 2 or more 900-1 720 630 100 80 70 1 2 or more... 750 600 5 00 80 70 Note: Ciid lily row usa`m analysis 'Basic minimum hourly volume. bused for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. May be used when the major street speed exceeds 70 km/h (40 mph) or in an isolated community with a population less than 10,000. Warrant 1 Worksheet Fioht Hiohect Hrnlrc Wt - Rib) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) '(77j Minor Street (Highest Approach) ( 2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 2 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume SATISFIED YES ❑ NO Warrant 9 Wnrlrchaaf Approach Lanes Four Highest Hours (1" - 4`") 1 2or more 1 2 3 4 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) ✓ 12-95 Minor Street (Highest Approach) (qQ * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-I (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-2 (Rural Areas) WARRANT 3: Peak Hour SATISFIED YES ❑ NO Warranf 1 WMA-chanf Approach Lanes Peak Hour Volumes 1 2 or more AM Peak PM Peak Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) Minor Street (Highest Approach) l V - f * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-3 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-4 (Rural Areas) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 3 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume CONDITION A: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES ;d NO CONDITION B: 100% SATISFIED )4 YES ❑ NO CONDITIONS A & B: 80% SATISFIED ❑ YES X NO Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on higher- volume minor-street approach moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 100%a 80%b 70%` 1 1............. 500 400 350 150 120 105 2 or more... 1 600 480 420 150 120 105 2 or more 2 or more... 600 480 420 200 160 140 1 2 or more... 350 200 160 140 Note: Circle the row used in analysis Condition R - interruntion of Continuous Traffic Number of lanes for moving traffic on each lane approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) Vehicles per hour on higher- volume minor-street approach (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 100%a 80%b 70%c 1 1............. 750 600 525 75 60 53 2 or more 1 900 720 630 75 60 53 2 or more 2 or more... 9 720 630 100 80 70 1 2 or more 750 600 00 80 70 NO[e: -HUIC Inc row nscu m analysis 'Basic minimum hourly volume. bused for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. `May be used when the major street speed exceeds 70 km/h (40 mph) or in an isolated community with a population less than 10,000. Warrsint 1 Wnrkchppt Eight Highest Hours (I" - 8th) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) ID-9?( Minor Street (Highest Approach) 1(2. D Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 2 2000 MUTCD Criteria OKS Associates WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume SATISFIED zP1 YES ❑ NO Approach Lanes Four Highest Hours (1" - 4m) 1 2or more 1 2 3 4 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) ✓ i2q~j Minor Street (Highest Approach) * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-1 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-2 (Rural Areas) WARRANT 3: Peak Hour SATISFIED YES ❑ NO 1x1..........F Z WnrUal~nn+ Approach Lanes Peak Hour Volumes 1 2 or more AM Peak PM Peak Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) Minor Street (Highest Approach) t 59 1 * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-3 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-4 (Rural Areas) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 3 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates December, 2000 Page 4C-7 Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume = 500 a. _ 400 < Q a 300 ~a Q O ~ 200 z iqo O too x 0 2 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. '115 .80 )0 Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) z 400 a > = 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES Q 300 W 2 OR MORE LANES I& 1 LANE °C a Q 200 1 LANE & 1 LANE OW z~ gJ L O> 100 •T V '80 W 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Sea 4004 December, 2000 Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour 600 a 500 Q 400 w0 Cr d 300 a m 200 ZD ~o t > 100 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 7~7 'Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) 0. _ 400 a 300 0)0- CC a Z_ ~ 200 ~O > loo LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE -1 LANE & 1 LANE 3W 4W bW ow /W 8w V! ~wv ~w ~cw .w MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Page 4C-9 '100 '75 yes 3em 4C05 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS PROJECT LOCATION/CHARACTERISTICS Major Street: [4 /A([ V) (V e Minor Street: O 1 H lAV 0, Number of lanes on each approach of major street: 1 Number of lanes on each approach of minor street: 85th percentile speed of major-street traffic > 40 mph ❑ -or- In built-up area of an isolated community of < 10,000 pop. then use Rural Requirements Analysis Scenario (Year): 2,01-7 Date of Analysis: 4.~. . C-1 y~ SUMMARY OF RESULTS WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ YES NO WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ YES NO WARRANT 3: Peak Hour ❑ YES NO WARRANT 4: Pedestrian Volume ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 5: School Crossing ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 7: Crash Experience ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 8: Roadway Network ❑ YES ❑ NO TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION RECOMMENDED ❑ YES ❑ NO Other Outstanding Issues Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 1 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates A WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume CONDITION A: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES M NO CONDITION B: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES 6Q NO CONDITIONS A & B: 80% SATISFIED ❑ YES NO Pn. A;I-inn A _ Minimum Vehirular Volume Vehicles per hour on higher- Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street volume minor-street approach moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street '100%4 80%b 70W 100%& 80%b 70%` 1............. 500 400 350 150 120 105 2 or more... 1 600 480 420 150 120 105 2 or more... 2 or more... 600 480 420 200 160 140 1 2 or more... 500 400 350 200 160 140 Note: Circle the row used in analysis n.,AMnn R _ intPrrnntinn of Cnntinuans Traffic Vehicles per hour on higher- Number of lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major street volume minor-street approach traffic on each lane approach (total o f both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%' 80%b 70%° 100%' 80%b 700/o` . 7 750 600 525 75 60 53 r more... o 900 720 630 75 53 2 or more 2 or more... 900 720 630 100 80 70 1 2 or more... 750 600 525 100 80 70 C Note: Circle the row used in analysis 'Basic minimum hourly volume. bused for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. Way be used when the major street speed exceeds 70 km/h (40 mph) or in an isolated community with a population less than 10,000. II r...-...~~ 1 II1....1 ..l Eight Highest Hours (1" - 8`b) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) l7 Minor Street (Highest Approach) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary 2000 MUTCD Criteria Page 2 DKS Associates e WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume SATISFIED ❑ YES K NO Warrant 2 Worksheet Approach Lanes Four Highest Hours (1 s` - 411) 1 2or more 1 2 3 4 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) Minor Street (Highest Approach) I V/ rl'r * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-1 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-2 (Rural Areas) WARRANT 3: Peak Hour SATISFIED ❑ YES NO Warrant 3 Wnrksheet Approach Lanes Peak Hour Volumes 1 2 or more AM Peak PM Peak Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) 109o 1-7179 Minor Street (Highest Approach) to 3 * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-3 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C4 (Rural Areas) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 3 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates 0 0 December, 2000 Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume = 500 a z 400 ~U Q cr 0- 300 W a Q o 2 200 z=) J O 100 C7 Page 4C-7 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH* 'Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) z 400 0- r Q 300 w0 0C Q a Q Q 200 OW z~ ~ J O 100 U '115 W -An .60 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Sat 4G04 c J •4 b December, 2000 Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour 600 x a 500 x Q 400 W w 0 0 ` a 300 Qa Z W 2 200 ~O > 100 M X03 0 x Page 4C-9 '150 '100 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. 2 OR MORE LANES 8 2 OR MORE LANES 20R MORE LANES& 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) x a. _ 400 U Q ¢ 300 ~a tr Q ~ 200 Z W ~O > loo x O x '100 75 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Sea 40.05 • TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS PROJECT LOCATION/CHARACTERISTICS Major Street: U V% Minor Street: U V 0'(1 Number of lanes on each approach of major street: Number of lanes on each approach of minor street: 85th percentile speed of major-street traffic > 40 mph ❑ -or- In built-up area of an isolated community of < 10,000 pop. then use Rural Requirements Analysis Scenario (Year): C9 Date of Analysis:, A 22 , G G-I s SUMMARY OF RESULTS WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ YES t NO WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ YES NO WARRANT 3: Peak Hour ❑ YES NO WARRANT 4: Pedestrian Volume ❑ YES O NO WARRANT 5: School Crossing ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ YES O NO WARRANT 7: Crash Experience ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 8: Roadway Network ❑ YES ❑ NO TRAFFIC SIGN AL INSTALLATION RECOMMENDED ❑ YES ❑ NO Other Outstanding Issues Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 1 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates il c • 0 WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume CONDITION A: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES NO CONDITION B: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES NO CONDITIONS A & B: 80% SATISFIED ❑ YES NO Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on higher- moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) volume minor-street approach (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%' 80%b 70%c 100%& 80%b 70%e 1 500 _ 400 350 150, 120 105 2 or more 1 600 480 420 150 120 105 2 or more... 2 or more... 600 480 420 200 160 140 1 2 or more... 500 400 350 200 160 140 Note: Circle the row used in analysis Condition B - Interruation of Continuous Traffic Number of lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on higher- traffic on each lane approach (total of both approaches) volume minor-street approach (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%° 80%b 76%e 100%' 80%b 70%e 1........... 750 600. 525 60'' 53 -75 2 or more 1 900 720 630 75 60 53 2 or more 2 or more... 900 720 630 100 80 70 1 2 or more... 750 600 525 100 80 70 C Note: Circle the row used in analysis 'Basic minimum hourly volume. bused for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. 'May be used when the major street speed exceeds 70 km/h (40 mph) or in an isolated community with a population less than 10,000. Warrant 1 Worksheet Eight Highest Hours (1st - 8tb) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time Period(Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) Minor Street (Highest Approach) b Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 2 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates • WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume SATISFIED ❑ YES ~ NO • Approach Lanes Four Highest Hours (1 u - 4d') 1 2or more 1 2 3 4 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) ff lD2 Minor Street (Highest Approach) * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-1 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-2 (Rural Areas) WARRANT 3: Peak Hour SATISFIED ❑ YES / NO 1 12 Approach Lanes Peak Hour Volumes 1 2 or more AM Peak PM Peak Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) V ~2 Minor Street (Highest Approach) O > * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-3 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-4 (Rural Areas) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 3 2000 MUTCD Criteria OKS Associates December, 2000 Page 4C-7 Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume = 500 0- 400 ~U Q Q a 300 C0 a Q a 2 200 z=5 J O 100 Z tV 0 2 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LAN I I 1 LANE & 1 L E ANE '115 W 300 400 500 600 '700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) z 400 IL > = 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES Q 300 W 0 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE °C a Cl) Q 200 1 LANE & 1 LANE O W z 2 J 0 100 C7 '80 '60 200. 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Sea 40.04 • • December, 2000 Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour a w0 ¢ Cr H n. CO a rr Q Ow z2 ~o >t s c~ x •150 •100 4ou boo 60o 7oo 88 goo 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 2 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Figure 4C4. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUN(TY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) a = 400 U a 300 ~a ¢a Z 200 R J O > 100 L^ 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE ,1 LANE & 1 LANE 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Page 4C-9 `100 75 Sou. 4CO5 • • TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS PROJECT LOCATION/CHARACTERISTICS Major Street: H U vt -2,; k-ei Minor Street: w6-41 Number of lanes on each approach of major street: Number of lanes on each approach of minor street: 85th percentile speed of major-street traffic > 40 mph ❑ -or- In built-up area of an isolated community of < 10,000 pop. then use Rural Requirements Analysis Scenario (Year): 7i0 ( -7 Date of Analysis: . ( . C)-2i c=~E SUMMARY OF RESULTS WARRANT l: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume YES ❑ NO WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume )i~t- YES ❑ NO WARRANT 3: Peak Hour -X YES ❑ NO WARRANT 4: Pedestrian Volume ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 5: School Crossing ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 7: Crash Experience ❑ YES ❑ NO WARRANT 8: Roadway Network ❑ YES ❑ NO TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION RECOMMENDED ❑ YES Other Outstanding Issues ❑ NO Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 1 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates 0 • WARRANT 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume CONDITION A: 100% SATISFIED ❑ YES $ NO CONDITION B: 100% SATISFIED K YES ❑ NO CONDITIONS A & B: 80% SATISFIED ❑ YES ) NO ley 1- v ~v y ~i(o 5~-- I'--A;+:nn A - Minimum Vahirular Volume Vehicles per hour on higher- Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street volume minor-street approach moving traffic on each approach (total o f both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%& 80%b 70%c 100%a 80%b 70%e 1 1............. 500 400 350 150 120 105__- 2 or more... 1 600 480 420 150 120 105 2 or more 2 or more... 600 480 420 200 160 140 1 2 or more... 500 400 350 200 160 140 Note: Circle the row used in analysis !`....d:+:.... A - Tn+nrrun+inn of f nntinnnnC Traffic Vehicles per hour on higher- Number of lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major street volume minor-street approach traffic on each lane approach (total of both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100% 80%b 70%c 100%a 800/6 70%c 1 7501E 600 525 75 60 53, 1 -or more 1 900 720 630 75 60 53 2 or more 2 or more 900 720 630 100 80 70 1 2 or more... 750 600 525 100 80 70 Note: Circle the row used in analysis 'Basic minimum hourly volume. "Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. "May be used when the major street speed exceeds 70 km/h (40 mph) or in an isolated community with a population less than 10,000. llr..........A. 1 AU 1_h + -fist 0th. Eight Highest Hours k i - o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) I Q 77 CJ Minor Street (Highest Approach) I Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 2 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates 1 i WARRANT 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume SATISFIED ~ YES ❑ NO Warrant 2 Worksheet Approach Lanes Four Highest Hours (V - 4 h) 1 2or more 1 2 3 4 Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) 1 0 ~oq Minor Street (Highest Approach) V/ M3 j * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-1 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-2 (Rural Areas) WARRANT 3: Peak Hour SATISFIED J % YES ❑ NO Warrant I Wnrkchpet Approach Lanes Peak Hour Volumes 1 2 or more AM Peak PM Peak Time Period (Hour) Major Street (Both Approaches) Minor Street (Highest Approach) V/ 3 * Refer to MUTCD Figure 4C-3 (Urban Areas) or Figure 4C-4 (Rural Areas) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Page 3 2000 MUTCD Criteria DKS Associates December, 2000 Page 4C-7 Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume = 500 j 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES U 400 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE Q W 00 300 1 LANE & 1 LANE a ;Q e O 2 200 g =3 143 O 100 '115 > '80 2 _U 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 79000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH `Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) z 400 a U 300 O W a: °C a f- Q 200 Ow z2 ~ J > 100 t'3 2 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE I LAN E & 1 LANE 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. sat 40.04 • • December, 2000 Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour 600 a 500 Q 400 WD Qir n 300 a . Qa z j 200 O > 100 2 0 Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h (40 mph) ON MAJOR STREET) a = 400 ¢ a 300 ~a ~a z g 200 ~a > 100 O 2 Page 4C-9 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE BS '150 •100 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 13Wd 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE ,1 LANE & 1 LANE 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 'Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. •100 '75 Sea. 4C-05 • • Library Site Plan I - Li ?t 'Grove @wy.. I - c Exist bur g I i I 19.1 I0±00 1+00 1+00 42.29' Z • - ~ l 0 1 / / r I ~ I l ' I ` f ~22r hz r 48 6SW I l rues ~ r ' \ r 701ROW I ' f - - - - - - - urys ! \ ~ ~..__._.._.1 Exist 30'~Ar\cess Tsement Exist 40' Utility e xii feriae asement 1 .I~ 1 _ - - I ---------------SS----------- Exis' 40`Ut'1't - - - / W L. / 149.1 / I' ' , A Y • C Ow rr y eosemen( - -TSS - - - Exist building VQ~ / + I I / i EI) I i ~ L~~ I ~ w 1 go- New Tigard Library 3/19/2003 Tree Summary Caliper Caliper Tree # Species Size Preserved or Removed Tree # Species Size Preserved or Removed 1 birch 14 preserved 51 ash 24 preserved 2 willow 60 preserved 52 maple 15 preserved 3 alder 16 preserved 53 ash 20 preserved 4 alder 16 preserved 54 hawthorn 12 preserved 5 alder 16 preserved 55 ash 60 preserved 6 alder 12 preserved 56 hawthorn 12 preserved 7 alder 12 preserved 57 ash 36 preserved 8 alder 12 preserved 58 ash 18 preserved 9 alder 12 preserved 59 alder 15 preserved 10 alder 12 preserved 60 ash 20 preserved 11 not on site 0 61 hawthorn 12 preserved 12 not on site 0 62 hawthorn 12 preserved 13 not on site 0 63 hawthorn 12 preserved 14 fir 40 preserved 64 hawthorn 12 preserved 15 fir 18 preserved 65 hawthorn 12 preserved 16 not on site 0 66 ash 20 preserved 17 not on site 0 67 ash 24 preserved 18 not on site 0 68 ash 24 preserved 19 not on site 0 69 ash 28 preserved 20 not on site 0 70 ash 24 preserved 21 ash 12 preserved 71 ash 24 preserved 22 ash 18 preserved 72 ash 30 preserved 23 dec 20 preserved 73 ash 24 preserved 24 dec 15 preserved 74 ash 24 preserved 25 dec 20 preserved 75 ash 30 preserved 26 cedar 40 preserved 76 ash 20 preserved 27 cedar 32 preserved 77 hawthorn 24 preserved 28 dec 20 preserved 78 alder 16 preserved 29 holly 15 preserved 79 ash 20 preserved 30 holly 15 preserved 80 ash 30 preserved 31 holly 15 preserved 81 ash 14 preserved 32 holly 15 preserved 82 ash 18 preserved 33 maple 14 removed 83 alder 12 preserved 34 maple 38 preserved 84 alder 15 preserved 35 maple 24 preserved 85 willow 20 preserved 36 maple 14 removed 86 ash 20 preserved 37 maple 22 preserved 87 dec 12 preserved 38 maple 14 removed 88 locust 15 preserved 39 pine 36 preserved 89 locust 15 preserved 40 apple 14 removed 90 hawthorn 14 removed 41 maple 22 removed 91 hawthorn 16 removed 42 maple 22 removed 92 dec 12 removed 43 maple 20 removed 93 hawthorn 12 preserved 44 dec 22 removed 94 hawthorn 12 preserved 45 oak 24 removed 95 hawthorn 12 preserved 46 dec 24 preserved 96 hawthorn 12 preserved 47 locust 28 preserved 97 hawthorn 12 preserved 48 alder 20 preserved 98 willow 18 preserved 49 ash 12 preserved 99 hawthorn 12 preserved 50 maple 18 preserved 100 locust 24 removed i, Tree # Species 101 hawthorn 102 hawthorn 103 fir 104 poplar 105 poplar 106 poplar 107 poplar 108 poplar 109 poplar 110 poplar 111 poplar 112 poplar 113 poplar 114 poplar 115 poplar 116 poplar 117 poplar 118 poplar 119 sequioa 120 fir 121 cedar 122 cedar 123 fir 124 dec 125 cedar 126 fir 127 cottonwood 128 locust 129 alder 130 oak 131 oak 132 oak 133 dec 134 alder 135 alder 136 hawthorn 137 decidous 138 hawthorn 139 hawthorn 140 maple 141 birch 142 birch 143 hawthorn 144 oak 145 oak 146 oak 147 oak 148 oak 149 oak 150 decidous New Tigard Library Tree Summary Caliper Size Preserved or Removed 15 removed 15 removed 20 removed 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 18 not counted in removal 15 removed 12 removed 12 removed 20 removed 15 not counted in removal 12 not counted in removal 15 not counted in removal 24 not counted in removal 15 removed 20 removed 12 preserved 24 preserved 24 preserved 24 preserved 24 preserved 24 preserved 12 preserved 12 preserved 12 preserved 12 preserved 18 preserved 12 preserved 12 preserved 12 preserved 27 preserved 24 preserved 22 preserved 28 preserved 20 preserved 26 preserved 12 preserved Tree# Species 151 decidous 152 decidous 153 decidous 154 decidous 155 cottonwood 156 cottonwood 157 cottonwood 158 holly 159 holly 160 cedar 161 cedar 162 apple 163 cedar 164 apple 165 cedar 166 decidous 167 apple 168 magnolia 169 cedar 170 sequoia 3/19/2003 Caliper Size Preserved or Removed 12 preserved 12 preserved 12 preserved 12 preserved 22 removed 14 removed 22 removed 24 preserved 16 preserved 24 preserved 27 preserved 12 preserved 20 preserved 16 preserved 24 preserved 12 preserved 13 preserved 16 preserved 20 preserved 67 preserved 162 Total number of trees on site 25 Number being removed w/ library 137 Number being retained 84.57 Percent retained i I r, ~ i3 2"NAB✓rrl~R,, I 12"DEC a'/6HAwrHG-era 6"NAWTHORr~ ' r0"HAwTHORu 12"NA~NTuO,oy 13 7"HAwThGpA~ I ~~h"FrAWr,~c v 12"Hi h'iHC~*~I "NAfY~1 Y^R 1 8 ~ ~.m I 10°GEC r,"CEC ~ 18 ~A~ct 9"✓~°CEC I 9•'~fA~! E tA~ r2"~,PC'~ 1 l ,.,~a yr4 0 ~r2'B 4C_ I ~~Z ~ , ~L "Ar/ Nay a✓rT-~=~', 8"DEC ~ I 6"DEC b, 10"DEC I ~ , i 1~ PP " 27 OA „n FOUND 3/4 ~ ND TRUCKS SIGN 24 ''AK 21 „A~ ~ "„A,tiryGR~,, IRON PIPE ! X28 OAk + i iG OAK "FANNO CREEK ~ ~ SANITARY SEWER MH pARK" SIGN 1 RIM 142.35 I i "FANNO CREEK ~ ~ , ~ZD°CA~ PARK° SIGN ~ SANITARY SEWER M ~ ~ ~ 26"CAr RlM 139.35 X10"DEC 6"HA4YTNOR"~ FOUND 3/4" ~ IRON PIPE TCN BASIN ~ ~ CA ~ GRATE 141.59 I ~ i / ~lO.HER~rY W000 BARRICADE ' 6",yA~vrHORrJ ~ ' AT END OF SIDEWALK--.._ ~ ~ ~7"DEC "FANNO CREEK" ~7"DEC i ~ ~7"NOLL Y ~ SIGN ~ C> I ~ 5"DEC ~ ~ 10°HO,LL Y 'A 12" CONC CULVERT lE 136.71 ®CV i '(n GUARD RAIL ' PHONE MH Z i ~ RIM 4258 0 ~ ~ 10"CEC TELEPHONE MN 2"DEC I I ~ RIM 14 , 80 0 ~ 14 GUARD R,41L ~ r2"/aDEC BRIDGE ~ 8"GEC SIDEWALK ~0"CEC I - BRIDGE 24" CMP CULVERT ~ SIDEWALK r IE 138.76--~'' ~ V_GE'ATiOrd ~Fc FTgT }g 1 I M~ j ~ r6"ALDER w~ ~ ! I ~ ~ ~ ,At CV ~ ~ ~ m I T , " II M ~ ~ EO {M1'~LLON o" LCE >J r,~ ~ W000 EIARRICADE A~ END OF S10EWALK fANNO CREEK z. ~ ~ --1 5 rb"4[D ,4 SIGN CATCH ErASIN ~ PP 't~i,QCH ~ a r2'ALCEr7S ~ ~ u ~~`CErgr,, GRATE- 144,29 TELEPHONE MH ~ \ ~r~ 6" STE ,CULVERT a , lE 24" 138,70 S ~ RIM 144.73 \ ~ q ~ ~-w~ "lE J30, r . lE 24° 138.50 (N) iii--~' ~ ~ ' , TOP OF K \ `t 7~ " 57'sE000~A 1`~ ~ ~ , \ 12'ALDE~ \ ~ ~ ~ 03 ' 5 EC Z~ ~ \ ~ a~ ~ , m r d, ~ / Wl „CEvAF ! ❑ ~ } ~ z5 HOUSE ` 2C 'DES ~ I ~E~ TATION ~ v ~1 I IE 131.4 c4~ CtuAK "~VAFLE " att ' 'g - - - - ~f0 GEC ! \ ~ 12'~EC . "`~`L: r OVA ± ~5„~'/[L.11✓ ~ ~ ~ M- : r ~ - rb7 , - - ro HUNDRED i. "DC_ BOG _ 7-°~- - y - fI00D P hJ z"Ij ( ~ ._:a- ~ .a Z; ',ECG Z„~- = BOUNDARY ~ ~ a _ l~Z 15 HOLLY r. -:a 0 a'~ ~ ~ INC ~ - 3 ` 3z 59 , RETAIN , ti pp WALL TECEPHON H ~ ~ RIM 149 34 w ~V i _ _ \ \ DATE 'f0 20 ~v~ April 29, 2002 k~ FILE 10 SCALE 1"=40' 597Topo2.dwg ~ sHEEr Q 1 OF A2 m m srnEEr NAME 1 ~ . sIGN I . No TRUCKS Q I ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , SIGN ~ ' I ~ II II ~ CATCH BASIN G24TE 151J6 , . E~" . lE 8" 14g 09 N I tl ! ti I I STORM DRAIN I I , lE 18" 146.82 (E} ~ , ~ * + ~ lM 151,36 ~ + I r © ~ Il f ~ ~4G Firi 1 x2 PGE RISER ~ ~ ~ ~ _ I TE PHONE MH ~ IJ PP ~ _ , FI I I' R/ 151.44 ~ ~ r ~ FC Gf/ ~ I STR£ E I ~ ~ ,ti ~ , N ~,ti ~ ' ~ ' PP. S/GN ~ ! ~ I I t II y I U I ~ ~ 41 O ARA T. ~ ~ r q/ I I , 1 ~ II ~ ~w y ~ L M H, I I ~ [ , 1 "MAP/ E , , ~ E ~ 1 " PPLE ~ ! ' ~ 5`8" ! N ROD W! 14'MAP ' '`ti ~ ~ ~ AP O ,I o , r I I rELLOw LASrIG ~ , STOP SIGN 1N MON ENT BOX 3~ 3 ~ II ' o, b CATCH BASIN ~ 38 MAC E N ~ i 2 ,.M ~ , ~ 24"DES c~ ~ I ~ 24 M'APL 22"MAP ~ ~ 2 APCE k GRATE 152.04 ~ n l v^"l~ ~PLE ' II ~ 3~1 i~i- r_ lE 12" 148.68 (S} I ~ 75 22"M LE ~ , " ~ I 31 E ' lE 12 148,2f (NJ I I 3~ l ' j~ ' i ~fl ~ o I ~ ~ 36°P~NE ~Q Q I ; ' ~ HU RED Y . I' ~ P I ' i , p ~+o- ~ I ' I I o 8"h I o P OF NK . I~ ~ o L, I N ,0 3 , II ~ o POSTED SPEED I Q „ I O 0 S/GN b FIR ~ 0 24" AK ~ ' ~ o , i o G4rcH BASIN I ' ~ ~ ' 'a ER GRATE 154.12 I ~ ~ 20 LD 1E 12 150.73 (S) I Z ' _ ~ ~ . IE 10" 150.68 N ~ i 133 , ~ r S PP ~ ~ I 'A DE4 1 ~ 131 12 ~ ~10 ALDER 24"D ~ 15"FIR ~ ~ ~ ' ~ _ i2"OA ~ I- ~ 10' „ OR " F 7 f0"~ff~lATi'S 24"OAK 24"OA 4'AL ,4 1 I P S 4 A DER ~ ~ ~~,2 28 LOC ~ j i w~~_ f ~ 15» ~ ~ - ~I f- ' o - E - ~ I p 5 1 "HA RP 3 ~ i I ~ z ,yE p V wk ~ FIR 1 H I ( ~ I Z" EC 8 L R ~ ~ ~ EC ~ 5 ~ r , S 10"FI 4 DA 4' 0 w0 8"H WTHORN - A ~ Ip = 1 , ~ CO l NwOQO ~ 20"AS ~ M I V: h ~ OFII~ r----♦ "c rroN ao~ I ~ ~ ~ I ~ J Q~ ~'~1 ~EGETAT/ON f ~ I ~ TOP 0 B,4NK 1 ~ 1 "F/ ry I ~ 1 ti4., W ~ f I ~ ~ I~ 1 ~ r` ~ W ~ \ i~ Q 88 1 / i I ~ H US 15"LOC Sr 1 ~ 1 I ~ M ~ 18" EO lA ~ ~ l ' I ~ ~ 15"LO T I' ~ h 3 ~ S W 1 - qQ 1 I ~ ~r A STER ~-I ~ ~ 1 I r" 1 " ~ ~ i WETL4ND ~ 1 PP ~ I 5 ® 2 BOUNDARY I 'i I / of I ~ Q ~ 3 ~I / n ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~18 wp ow I' o ~ 1 I I W RO OF J' P RS p I ~ 1~ ~ WM I ~y~ ~ os I r ~ 5"HAWTHORN eit ~t °HA H ~ ! ~ ~ ~ 15"HAWTHORN) L ~ ' ~~A/ i / 1~ US Fig 1 1 V ' I~ II ( erg ♦ ~ 4 I I f STORM DR,4IN MH MB; I ~ ~~J r ~ 0 LOCUS " ocu LO R/M 15807 i 14 DEC ~ ~ ~ ~ M I ~ ~ i Ise 1 32"CEDAR 0 ~ , 1 J k I ~ f ST ' ~ I I f ~ 1 "LO U ~ 1 CATCH BASIN ppl I ~ 1 ~ f - GRAT£ 156.23 I I ~ / 1 IE 12" 154.82 (S} I I ~ ~ 10' L 1 lE 12" 154,72 (NWJ I ; , 1 1 U , ~ 0 CEDAP~ ~ ~ I~ ~i ~ CATCH BASIN I i ~~14"FIR ~ ~ " ~ ' GRATE 158.18 I , P IE 12" 154.82 (S} ~ ~ ~ ( ° " I I' IE 12 154.82 N I I ~ 10'APPLE ! ~ r . ~ ~ / I CATCH BASIN I ~ too I lE 150. w°,.-- ~ ! GRATE 156.16 I ~ , / ! I ~ IE 12" 154.92 (N) I E 1 .82 . - - • 8" STS ~ctiL~ERT / ° 24 CONC. CULVERT . 5 t ~ ° ! , lE 152.09 ~ ~ ~ . a / s ~ lE 151.93 t .go 1 ' ~ TELEPHONE MH 1 I RIM 156 55 J 1 i STREET NAME I ~ ~ SANITARY SEWER MH SIGN 50'a I /M 155.45 ~ Fr- q ~ r WM p I " 0 1 wM ~ ' ~ 12 CONC. CULVERT ~ 1 rc * IE-1521-=T----- _ ° n i~a 31dn ~~d o ° I N - _ o p 1 ZO t I TELEPNON ~ ~ L RIM 157, ~ 3 ~ i r ~ II ° ° ° ~ ~ ~ I ° ° ° 1 I ° ~ ~ L, TELEPHON ~ RIM 157.9 I , ,}LIB t ~ ~ n V L r r ~ ` 1 ~ I 2 I AT END F /DEWALK ~ 65~ , I ° r I wM ~Q STORM GRAIN MH ' I ~ FH 1 r RlM 160.21 ~ ~ Q i CATCH BASIN VR) WY GRATE 159 03 PP V 1,1 W DATE April 29, 2002 CATCH BASIN ao ao o fo GMTE 162.60 FILE X12"15914(N) SCALE.' 1 ==40*' 597Topo2. dwg ~ X 12" 159.40 (S) SHEET a 2 OF2 G, ~ r,~ ~ i ,il - ~i i ~ ~ i',~~~4'~~1% 4u r . ~ ri; ~ + i i \ ) ( J ~ - l 1 %~%r-ii:~ ~ I~ ~ ~V ~ f l~(~ ~")i- i r ~ _ ~ ~I ~ v ! _ ~ ~ TOP OF BANK r _ J_.✓.~.. i , ~ r ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ . ,t 1 ~ i i \ ~ f I i r ~ I i~ ~ i•.~ , ~ _ < i ~ it ~ , . ~ - ~~Q i~~> G ~ ,i ~ L i ~ i _~,-,,,r, ~ -'l , r, ~ V ~ „w I -_'1~ i L I ~~i 1 i ~ i i '~i. I h ! i ' . ~ ~ ~ ~%t - a ~ % 1~ ~ ~ ii ;i~ ,~~r, ~ ' ~ \ , ~ t, ~ ~I _ J-, I \ ~ .T ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i I ~ ~ v~' t ~ ~ . 'u~q r ,-~i, ~i ~ ~ _ nor, i ~ I y ~ ~ ~ ,J ~I I ~ - t ~ i t ~ ~ ti ~ xa. ~ ~ i;~ ~~~'i+t i ~V 7 ~ t~_~/ _ ~ i 1 i id~ , ~ ~ ~ - a- ip n.~ , .'r i (i I ~ a , ~r~, , / a~ i ~ ~ ~ ~l~ ~I i ~ ~ ;I' ~ ~ i,~ i~ r , i6 j 1 ~n i PLANTIN( ~ ii , ~ ~ , II ~ I l GARDEN ii I ''I ~ - . Y~ ! 1 I 1. i i if r . i ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ I 1 ! ,I 'I I~~I) ~ ~ 'I ~ ~ ~ 11 i! ~i 1 ~ ~ / i~ u I i F `,d i I ii ~ ~ ri f I ~I ~ ~ I i ~ 1 ~ i ~ , i ~ ~ I ~ I, ~ - r ~ I. ' COI~f~YARa ' - 1 ~ f. - - I~ ~ COMMUNITY ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3~.~ i i s t _ ~j , ~ I ~ BUILDING ~ _ ~ I ry I ~ ~ t , , ~ ! ~ I , ,i ~ „ - ~ ! ~ s , A 24 CONCRETE =X , ~ ; RETAINING W L ~ ; ~ , i ~ ~ p 4 «w ~ ~ ~ tl ~ ~ ~ s~ q~sf F ~ + s i ,.mow,>',~ f ~ , _ ~ ~ ~ , r r ~ . C~ k 'rw ~ - a ~ " , .y~~u~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ i 1 ~ ~t r+7,.,~f ~ ~ ' w tom, 34 BI YCLE PARKI G 1 - I i "r1~ ~ ~ ON ~ USH~D GRAVEL i s-»~~, ~ - ~ - ti L ~ I, ~ r-~ i I ( ~ ~ i ; DONOR E i~ ~ ~ ~ (1186 BI i i i ~ c i ~ : - ~ ~-BENCHE.. ,i ; ~ ;.-,~EI~TR~~ ~ I ~ ~ I i I~ ~ ~dAZA , . :1 I ~ ~ 7 ~ I - - J I i I i_ ~ill'~ ~ i ~ ► ~ .I i i i I i j ~ j 2 ~ I ; ! i ~ I __~~__I I~ n i ~ i i I ~il 8.00 I,~~~ I I i; I ~ 8.' - F ~ ~ I ! i ~ RAISED _ . i i r i; ~ CROSSWALK ~ i ~ S~ Q I ! i. f ~ ~ C ~!I .,,,~,r,~r_h ~ ~ ~ u ~ u ~ ~ C I~ i j ~ 7.00 \ ~ i\ ~ I II l r ~ 1 fn lJ r, IT ~ ,fir( i 1 I ~ ` I I i ~ I' 'i I ~ \ ~ ~ ~ - 1 I ~ ll ~ ~ Q - _ ._Gt„~---- - ~ is - t ~yl J ~\J t. 1 ~ I~~ I I 26.00 SS ~ I ~ _.i, , _ i ~ ~ ' ( l a,~,~i~,ll I ~ CRUSHED GRAVEL PATHS 1 li ~ ! ~ I 1 ~ STORMINATER SW i I ~ ~ I ~ ALE I I 1 ~ ~ i ! ~ ` I I I ~l I I I I ~ ~ SS ! ~ 1 i ~ i~ ~ Il ; , i i ~ 'I I I J I ~ i I I S I li I ~ ry l u ~ ~ l i I II I r ,t, I ~ i ~ I' I ~ ~ ~ L II ~ ~ I 3 I I r.. I I I~ ~ ~ ~ I ! ! ~ ~ ~;~i i 20~ SET 1 1 L.~ACK -TI! i I ~ , ~ ,zi ~ i ~'r~~l I _ _ !I~ ~ I ~ J - {i, r ~I ! I { . ~ r:,lry ~ ~ l ~ ~ l I r ~ i ~ ~ ~ - - 9 I 1~-- it I ~ ---1~--~-- i ~I i _ -z----az ~ -y- ~ ~ i I _ it i ~ ~ ENTRY DRIV i E I I 1 i ~ ~ - , ! 1 r ~ ~ I I ,r i I i; ~ _ .1 ~ 1 ~ , I r I ! i it , i ' ~ - \ i I I I ~ ~ / - - - ~ ~ i 1 I I ~ ~i 7 ~ ,_I~ ~I i ~ ~ _ A2.1 SCALE: 1 = 30 -0 1 e t1 rv S .'r r ` =Oda awing Title ~ Architecture D ~ Plannin o g co l r~~ N Interiors PLAN 0 0 E v 2 )rawing No SRG PaS`tnership, PC 621 SW Momson St Swte 200 Portland, Oregon 97205-3894 T 503.222-1917 ~ F 503-294-0272 E srg@srgpaztoerslnp.com L Q __*O r fig - u LEGEND E , . m~ TREES ; _ E~ ~ - + ~ + + + + + r ~i, , + + + + + + + + ~ 4, ~ ~ "l~~ + r + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ' ~I ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + - " " f ; ; 1 EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN rE h ~ - - i ~ ! i t. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + r: , + + + + +r+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 'a ~ 1 + + ~ + ,++++++I+~++++++++++++++++++ ~ .c - - ~ L 1 ri + + + + , + + + ~-t ~ i STREET TREES ~ ~3 + + + + + + + + + +s'~„{+ + ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ ~ E + + + + + + + + + + Q~+ + + + + + + + + + + + + i + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + .~t~, ~ ~ N.LC. + + + + + + + + + + - ,1 ~ ~ ~ E\ 1 I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + a ~j, ~ + + + + + + + + + ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + a 1 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + IV ~ ~ + + + + + + + + + ~ ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Y. + + + + + + + + a ~ ~ Ssra~INTERIORTHEMETREES + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ ~ . , r,,r ~ , - ~ TILIACORDATA-Little-Leaf Linden II s k ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ j - ~-n ~ QUERCUSGARRYANA-White Oak ~ E ( + + + + + + + + ~ fl + + + + + + + + + + a ~r~h" L~~I~'~ + ~ + + + + + + + + + + + +~t - I~ 'T ~ + + + + 3___~-- + , 2•Cal PARKING LOT TREES 'a i Ir ' , I I +++++++++++++;+1++++++ ~ ~ • ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + +-+nk;,~~,;~ ~ TILIA CORDATA -Little-Leaf Linden ~I~~ ,I f ~4N I ~+++++++++++++~+~f~,~.~cr~~uv~ UER S + + + + + + + + + + + ~ ~ Q CU GARRYANA -White Oak ~ ~'~,4 I , r + + + + + + + + + + + '~I N 'I~ ~ 1 ~'L ; ~ ~ I ~ + + + + + + + + ~P + + + + ~ + + + + + + + + + - I ~ 2' Col. CONIFEROUS ACCENT TREES ~ ~ I y;;;,} , G C 1 ~ ~ i /f ~ f ~ + 1 ~ _ ~ PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII -Douglas Fir i ~ ~ ~I ! ~i ~ ~,~~r,- + + + + + + + ~ THUJA PLICATA FASTIGIATA -Hogan Cedar + + + + + + f,"~,+ r ' 2• INTERIOR ACCENT TREES +++++++~+~t ~ - ~ . ~l ~ ~ ~i ' ~ W, W ~l + + + + + + ~ ~ ",.;a-~, i 1 ALNUS RUBRA -Red Alder W W W ~ r7 r , ' - ~ ~ _ _ ~'~~i ~ w y' ~ ~I + + + + + + + + / ; { ter, ACER CIRCINATUM -Vine Ma le ~ , l p J ~ I ~ ~ 7 , ~~u'i~ i % ;'1~~~~ _ + + + + + + + + ~ + + + CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS -Western Redbud I E ~j ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + ,~y POPULUS TREMULOIDIES -Quaking Aspen i v.,~_ III ( I W W ~'W7 _~l ~W'~=\ ~i/a' .i 1. ni ""Ti'=! i I I4 ( i~,, ;C,"t,,~y, BUFFER LINE `++++++++++++++++++++;++~++++++++++1, ,1 (4 ~ I ` i W W W W W W W ?I~~ I I •~y,~, W W W W W W W v I + + SHRUBS GROUNDCOVER ~j~ ~ I i W W W W W W W ~ (I~ 9 I I ~ W W W W W W W W , ; ~"k' I t, ~ NATNEAC~ENT PLANTING ++++++++++++++++++++i+++++++;+r;.+ ~ ~ , i ~ ~ ~ W W W W W W W W I~ I. I ~E{ ~ E~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + : + ' CORNUS SERICEA 'KELSEYI -Kelsey Dogwood + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + - 1-5 gal, Nei ~ , ; i W W W W W W W W W E + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ + + + + + 1 POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM -Western Swordfern ~ ~ ~ W W W W W W W W W I h~l MAHONIA NERVOSA -Dull Oregon Grape ¢ t W W W W W W W W W W ~ l+ I E i + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ ARCTOSTAPHYLLOS UVA-URSI -Kinnikinnick + + + + + + ; FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS -Coast Strawber " it I W W W W W W W W W W W W ~ E ""^a ' ! W W W W W W W W W W W W W ry 1 W W iIt ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tl v I ~ t r5 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W + + + + ~ + i+ + + + + + `a \ ORNAMENTAL GRASSES -Varies + + r + + + + + + + + + ~ + II i~ r ~I ~ ~ E ~ W W W W W W W W W W W W W~ W W W W 550 SF -WATER QUALITY FACILITY + + + + + +'1 + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ + + + + + + 4 NATNE TRANSITION PLANTING I , ~ ~"'E"'" ~ W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W OUTFACE MITIGATION AREA + + + + + + + + ~ I ~ ~ / W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W + + + - ~ ~_3 a,, ROSA NOOTKANA - Nootka Rose + + + + + + + + + _ + + + I g SPIREA DOUGLASII - Dou las S irea I I~ ~f W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W- W v ;If ~ ~I ~ / ~ 9 P ~~I i y t ~ W W W W W W W W W W W ~ W W W W W W W W + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ CORNUS SERICEA ISANTI - Isanti Redosier Dogwood + + + + + ; - ~ + + + + + + ~i+ ~ SYMPHORICARPOS ALBA - Snowberry i-'~i ~ I r .E J' i i}~.~ ~ W W W W W W W W W W i W W y W W W 1 ++i++ + + + +i { + + + + + ( ` MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM -Ore on Gra e 'I~` ~ ~ ~ W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W J 9~ i ~ ~ 1L ~ g p + + + + ~ + + + + - ~ CORNUS SERICEA -Red Osier Do wood ~'~~4r" w,,,,w W W W W W W W W W W t" ~ ~ W W W W y ~ - + + + + + + + + + + ~ I g I~ E ~ W W W W I W W W i ~ ~ w ~ W W W W + + + + + + + ` RIBES SANGUINEUM -Red Flowering Currant W W W ~Y W W ~Y W W W - \ ~ M ~ I ~ y I W W W W W W W W I II i I / W W 'r - ~ y W W W W W W W ~ y y y y y y y y y y y y y + + + + + + + + + _ = UNDERSTORY PLANTING r-i { ~ w,,,,,, ~ ( ~ ~ - ~ d W W W W W W "N W ~Y y W W ~Y ~ W W W W W +,E, - - ~ - - - ARCTOSTAPHYLLOS UVA-URSI -Kinnikinnick j I ~ ; ~7 1-3 al. a 1 1 1 i y i y L +~~"Grl +;-~I' - 1' ~ g IIAI IAAl1A A/1111rAI 11111 I~ ~ W ~ ~ e I ~ ~ ~ W W W W W i i l W W f ta' W W W 1 ~ . r' r il~ ! t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W W - _ _ _ - . W ~ ~ ~ , ~ Y E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' - 1~4 ~ i `"^v`~,'`±ra5 ~ i ,A- 'rte 'f . - _ - 1, y f ~ ~ ~ _ i W a °4. f'. ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ y E 6 .I au ~ r M ~l R ~ 1 S ~ ~ • s ~ f~ 1~ _ ~ x } ~ iq I W W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "ws ~t " , n + g^'^ ".,tea`.,` e""`"' r~m'°~;~ n~w ~ l _ ~,i,. ~3q .)'~4y'~` ~ ' haw,' I ~ W W W ! 1 ~ ~ (~~+y` -ti ~ 4~' I I F zLFtff' L7~ , ti~ bi rte, ' W T }t p~~ W , W W W W r ; r s ~ " ~ ~ ti i ~ s-~--- s'~ ~ i `1( W W W , 3` , ~ ~a ' E I i I E W W i-t-1-~ I ""^.,.v.. ~wr f " ii I ~ i.. I - - - 4 - - _ ~~R 'I - - ~ I ~ sw~~-, 1 ~ ~ - ~ - - i f ~ ~ ~ I i ~ I i -~-a- - I l l l f l I I .,~E ~ ~ - . E ~ III 1_l_, - - - ~ - IE ~ e, E ~ E , 1' ~T f 1 ~ 1 f i ~ i c ~ I. C . I ~ I v / ~ ~ ~ tmer ents b1 1.~L r' "i ,P I ~ ~ ~ C r1 ti,~ b Q y Achillea millefolium Western Yarrow 2 0.07 1 Ib acre I t' t~ r + + + + ~ Bromus carinatus Native California Brome 17 0,61 10 lbs. acre ' W i i + + + + + + + + +i + i ~ . , r:. I acre ~ ,,q a~~?, ~ Elymus glaucus Blue Wildrye 15 0,54 9 bs./ ~ r-1 i y (~l ~'f~~ t _ _ - ~F E 1 ,P \ _ _ _ - ~ ( ~ y - - ~r _ _ _ - _ - 1 - - - _ ..F - - - II - - - _ t - _ H.- J • ~ - - - SYI~- - - - - 15 rl,° a~ ~ y r - - - - - - - -=,t - - - - ,3 I ~ ~ - ---.,1; r - 3 li - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - e' i 'ii _a ~ r - 9 li I t`t ~ ~ ~ d '4 \ I'~ ; _ ~ j'1' ~3J~ ~ rr ~ ~ ~ r i ~ ~,j 't.~ ~ l ~r~ „ i ,i ~ i I'1 ( 4~ 1~ 1~ Y ~ J ■ 1. J j y ~ r ~ /1 i d I ( ~ i ~ i. I f I ~ % r~i^' s : ; ~ ~ N ~ f y ~ , \ ; ~ I a y ~ \ r L r.vv, w' ~p ~ ~ y ~ y ~y y~ ~ ~ f a ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ d y ~ y y W y F I ~ ~ . 4. y, .a~~ y } ..s >l , / I I ~ J I • ~%+C~s5~i~ ' ; 4 • y,,•,,.a~,,.-~ , ~ ~ -•,d..~h..W, s n. • Tm;+ ,I 1 ( ~ y~ y ~Y y W ~Y ~Y y y ~Y ~Y J~ ~Y ~Y J' `Y i y( y y y y ~ y ~Y y J~ J~ y y y ~Y Jr y i y y y +i : ~ I Q 1 ~i ~E I I I ~ y, W W W y y~ W W W y y y W W ,W J y ~ ~ i- - y ~ ~Y W W ~Y Q 1 y ~ W W y y ~Y W y. J J y + + 4~ + ~ + 1 I / i + + + i ~ , ~ i ~ '4 I - ~ ~ k7 ~ ~ W y y y y ~ y y y y y i + iX~ +i~ia/~}yet ~M ~;~+%`fi=~+~' ' I I i , I f ~ , i i ! WP y ~Y ~Y ~Y y y y y + i + + i + + ~ + + + + + + + % „r + + i + + + + + + + i + + + ~ ~I „y,,~ ~ I u a ~ ~ + + + + + ~ f + + + + + + + + + 1'- ~ ~ t 1 ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ' II ~ ~ ~ i +-fi- ± + + + + + _ - R I ~ , - I i ( ~V y%~ y y ~ + + + + + + ~ ~ y J✓+ + + + + + + + + + +,i~+ + ~ ~1 t 3 F ~ ~ .n 1, i ;~''CT a:+ + +1 "it~~vi~~✓J~ i \ t ~ I 1 : a i, ~ , f' ,;,tc r ~ ~ i ~ - ~I - ~ - ~ , r - ~j _ti ~ t.~E A2.1 SCALE: 1 = 30 -0 t '-r ~ _j~..._ r sir 3/19/03 ~ Architecture I V Drawing Title 0 ~ Planning 0 i. PE PLAN r N Interiors O r i r 4! Drawing No 0 Z SRG Partnershi ~ PC 621 SW Momson St Suitc 20Q Portland, Orcgon 972D5-3894 T 503.222-1917 F 503.2940272 E srg(asrgpartncrship.com P .3 v i1.. i ~ ti - - - ~ _ s• - , _L - - - - _ - ~