Loading...
Hearings Officer Packet - 10/29/20010 0 CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development *ping ,4 Better Community C TY OF T GARD HEAR NGS OFF CER OCTOBER 29,2001-7:00 PM AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 APPEAL OF DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION - "URBAN SERVICE AREA" SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2001-00004 ITEM ON APPEAL: On September 14, 2001, the Director issued a decision to approve a request for an 18-lot subdivision of 3.16 acres. The lots are to be developed with detached single-family homes. The lot sizes for this development would range from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. On September 28, 2001 an appeal was filed pertaining to Condition of Approval No. 9 that calls for an eight-foot-wide public bicycle/pedestrian pathway connection from SW Leah Terrace to SW Bull Mountain Road, to be located along a side lot line of one of the future lots. LOCATION: 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109BA, Tax Lot 1400. ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390 and 18.810. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 2 OF 2 10/29/2001 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER OCTOBER 29, 2001 - 7:00 PM TOWN HALL TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223 • M,ovol Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item must sign-in on the appropriate sign-in sheets. PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on the Friday prior to the meeting. Please call (503) 639-4171, Ext. 320 (voice) or (503) 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).. Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: ➢ 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. OVER FOR HEARING AGENDA ITEM(S) CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 1 OF 2 10/29/2001 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA • AGENDA ITEM NO. ai I • • Depending on the number of people wishing to testify, the Tigard Hearing's Officer may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Hearing's Officer may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Hearing's Officer to supplement oral testimony. AGENDA ITEM NO.: 2.1 DATE: OCTOBER 29, 2001 FILE NAME: APPEAL OF DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION - "URBAN SERVICE AREA" CASE NO.: SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2001.00004 APPLICANT: Bill McMonagle OWNER: George Marshall 12555 SW Hall Boulevard PO Box 91249 Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97291 ITEM ON APPEAL: On September 14, 2001, the Director issued a decision to approve a request for an 18-lot subdivision of 3.16 acres. The lots are to be developed with detached single-family homes. The lot sizes for this development would range from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. On September 28, 2001 an appeal was filed pertaining to Condition of Approval No. 9 that calls for an eight-foot-wide public bicycle/pedestrian pathway connection from SW Leah Terrace to SW Bull Mountain Road, to be located along a side lot line of one of the future lots. LOCATION: 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109BA, Tax Lot 1400. ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390 and 18.810. PLEASE SIGN IN TO TESTIFY ON THE ATTACHED SHEETS FOR THE AGENDA ITEM INDICATED DIRECTLY ABOVE. GENUS A ITEM NO. 2.1 (PIPE ~ of ~ #E: OCTOBER 29.2001 PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND INCLUDE YOUR ZIP CODE Proponent - (Speaking in Favor) Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 4&0ae-_ 4AAl 4a-3o V 1. 01 q`7ZZ~' N me, Address Zip ode and - hone No. Oj//~- Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No.~ Opponent - (Speaking Against) Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. =Ta 1. g> t 3 8 `l S ~u L e ~A- 'T'2 ele-9- z 2- S'a 3- -790-o3R Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone N r, k S~je Iyy93 SW 1y SZ~ Cc- C-, ck4- A- , ulz- 1~ ?v2 02y 9(51 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. r Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. F Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 0 0. COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)684-0360 Legal Notice i T 9 9.5 6 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising •cj.ty of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice 1.3125 STS IIal1. r1_vd.. •Tigard.,Oregon 97223 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Accounts Payable AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, SS. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) I Kathy gnx.?rlar being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of tho' i qa rrl -Tn a 1a at i n Tj.me s a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published of T i cra rd in the aforesaid county and state; that the w/1.4ap 1nea1 of Daffodi 1 T?i 11 quhrlivi Ginn a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for OTlE Successive and consecutive in the following issues: October 11,2001 &'-v jl-'~ 19- Subscribed a wor to before me this1 1 t1, rlav of nr-t-ober, 2001. OFFICIAL SEAL l ~Notgry Pub c for Oregon JOHN D GERTZ NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON . My Commission Expires: COMMISSION NO. 311234 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 2, 2002 AFFIDAVIT- • • CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer on Monday, October 29, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, 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: "URBAN SERVICE AREA" SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2001-00004 >APPEAL OF DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION < ITEM ON APPEAL: On September 14, 2001, the Director issued a decision to approve a request for an 18-lot subdivision of 3.16 acres. The lots are to be developed with detached single-family homes. The lot sizes for this development would range from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. On September 28, 2001, an appeal was filed pertaining to Condition of Approval No. 9 that calls for an eight-foot- wide public bicyclelpedestrian pathway connection from SW Leah Terrace to SW Bull Mountain Road, to be located along a side lot line of one of the future lots. LOCATION: 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S 109BA, Tax Lot 1400. ZONE: R-7, Medium-Density Residential. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390 and 18.810. WORM n" =FM JULIA- SUB2001-00004 - i DAIM11 HI LL SUBDIVISION _L N TT9956 - Publish October 11, 2001. • 0 BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an appeal of a condition of approval of an ) FINAL ORDER administrative decision approving an application for an ) 18-lot subdivision to be known as Daffodil Hill at ) SUB 2001-00004 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road in the City of Tigard ) (Daffodil Hill-Appeal) A. SUMMARY 1. On September 14, 2001 the City issued a Type II decision conditionally approving a preliminary plan for an 18-lot subdivision of a 3.16-acre parcel at 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road; also known as TL 1400, WCTM 2S 109BA (the "site"). 2. On September 28, 2001 the applicant filed an appeal of condition of approval no. 9 of the administrative decision, which provides as follows: The applicant's construction plans shall show a public bicycle/pedestrian path connection between SW Leah Terrace and SW Bull Mountain Road. This connection shall be a minimum of 8 feet in width, located in an 8-foot wide public easement or a tract conveyed to the City, and can be located between any of the Lots 1 through 6. The pathway shall be constructed of either concrete or asphalt per the City's public improvement design standards. The applicant argued such a pathway is precluded by topographic conditions: a 6- to 12-foot high hillside parallel to and adjoining Bull Mountain Road.. Also it would be unsafe, because people on bicycles, skateboards or skates coming down the path (from north to south) would intersect Bull Mountain Road too quickly to stop or would intentionally enter the roadway at a location where drivers would not expect them, creating a hazard. Therefore it should not be required under City law or Oregon Administrative Rules implementing Statewide Planning Goal 12 (Transportation). 3. A City Hearings Officer conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal. City staff recommended the hearings officer deny the appeal. The applicant continued to dispute the appealed condition. No one else participated in this appeal. The hearings officer held open the record for one week to allow the applicant to introduce a final argument. The principal issues in this appeal include the following: a. Whether the slope adjoining Bull Mountain Road is a topographic condition that preclude the pathway required by the condition of approval. TDC 18.810.040.B.2; b. Whether such a pathway could or would be unsafe, and, if so, whether that is a basis for not imposing the condition of approval; and c. Whether the City sustained its burden of proof under Dolan v. City of Tigard, 114 S Ct 2309 (1994) and TDC 18.810.020.A that the condition of approval is roughly proportionate in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development on the need for the pathway required by the condition of approval. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions contained herein and considering the testimony and evidence in the public record, the hearings officer denies the appeal and affirms the administrative decision with minor modifications for the reasons provided herein. • • B. HEARING AND RECORD 1. Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") received testimony at the public hearing about this application on October 29, 2001. 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 pane contacts, bias or conflicts of interest, other than a site visit, about which he invited questions and replies. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected testimony and evidence offered at the hearing. 2. City planner Brad Kilby identified the site, the condition that is the subject of the appeal, and the basis for that condition in Tigard Development Code ("TDC") section 18.810.040.B.2. He testified that stairs could be used if the topography is too steep for a pathway per se. In response to the appeal he acknowledged that the cost of a path or stairway is not certain. But, he argued, the Dolan analysis shows the subdivision will have unmitigated transportation impacts of more than $10,000, substantiating that the condition does not impose a disproportionate exaction. He argued that the safety of Bull Mountain Road is no different than other, similarly classified street. It is common to have a pedestrian pathway through a subdivision to a major collector street from an interior local street. He acknowledged that there is always some risk that people will not be prudent when they use such a pathway, but there is nothing inherently unsafe about it. Reasonably prudent people, even children, can use the pathway safely. In the future a bicycle lane will be established adjoining the travel lanes of Bull Mountain Road, as provided in the City's transportation system plan and public improvement design standards. Therefore a pathway on the subject site will provide a direct connection to a bicycle path in the future. Although he acknowledged the issue of the pathway may not have been raised in the pre-application conference for the subdivision, such a conference is not intended or required to identify every applicable standard; the focus of a conference is more on process. 3. Professional engineer Bill McMonagle and applicant George Marshall testified in support of the appeal. a. Mr. McMonagle argued the grade of the site abutting Bull Mountain Road is too steep to accommodate a safe pathway. Some number of users of the pathway or stairs (i.e., particularly children on bicycles, skateboards, etc.) would be unable to stop before continuing into the street or would intentionally enter the street in mid-block where drivers are not reasonably likely to anticipate or see them before it is too late. He also argued that the pathway would be expensive to build and would interfere with use and privacy of the adjoining yards. He acknowledged that a stairway could climb the hillside using a switch-back design, reducing the potential for a steep pathway to propel users into the street. However such an approach would be even more expensive because of extensive grading and retaining structures that would be needed, and because it would consume much of the abutting lots. He argued $10,000 would not go very far toward building a pair of retaining walls. The applicant would need to fence the pathway to prevent people on adjoining lots from falling into the pathway or stairs. He also argued that walking down Bull Mountain Road is not safe, because of the absence of sidewalks. In closing he argued that the TDC does not anticipate every circumstance in which it must be applied. The code requirements need to be determined on a case-by-case basis. In this case, a pathway is not economically and legally sustainable or safe and should not be required. b. Mr. Marshall argued the disputed condition was a surprise, because it was not raised during pre-application review. He opined that the City will have to accept responsibility for the pathway/stairs once completed and liability for harm if use of the path leads to an accident. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) page 2 • • 4. In rebuttal, city development review engineer Brian Rager noted the City has required mid-block pedestrian pathway to SE Gaarde Street west of 121st Avenue where steep slopes required use of a switch-back stairway. He noted City public improvement standards allow a pedestrian pathway to have a 20% slope. If the grades are steeper, a stairway or switch-back pathway or stairs can be.used. 5. The hearings officer held the record open until November 7 to allow the applicant to submit a final argument. The record in this case closed at 5:00 p.m., November 7, 2001. C. DISCUSSION 1. Nature and scope of the appeal. TDC 18.390.040.G authorizes the hearings officer to hear appeals of Type II decisions, such as the city's decision conditionally approving the subdivision application. a. TDC 18.390.040.G.2.b says the scope of an appeal is limited to the specific issues raised during the written comment period unless the hearings officer provides otherwise. In this case, because the disputed condition was not raised in the pre- application conference or in other preliminary contacts, the hearings officer finds that the applicant can raise issues regarding condition no. 9 that were not raised during the written comment period. The applicant could not reasonably have known the city would impose the disputed condition based on preliminary contacts. Therefore it would be unfair to prevent the applicant from raising the issue now. However the fact that the city did not raise the issue in preliminary contacts in no way estops it from raising the issue in the decision. b. Also, pursuant to ORS 215.416(11)(a), appeals of administrative decisions must be reviewed as a de novo matter. The hearings officer is required to conduct an independent review of the record. He is not bound by the administrative decision and does not defer to that decision in any way. New evidence may be introduced in an appeal. The hearings officer must decide whether the applicant has carried the burden of proof that the application complies with all applicable approval criteria in light of all relevant substantial evidence in the whole record, including any new evidence, and whether the city has carried its burden of proof for disputed conditions of approval. 2. Selected applicable local land use law. a. TDC 18.810.040.B.2 provides as follows: Bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of- ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in LI1V VVLLV. `Lilll~/I1QJ1J 0.LLLLliLLf b. TDC 18.810.020.A provides as follows in relevant part: Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. ' TDC 18.120.020.D says the word "shall" is mandatory. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) Page 3 • • c. TDC 18.810.110 provides as follows in relevant part: A. Bikeway extension. Developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or rights-of-way, provided such dedication is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. B. Cost of construction. Development permits issued for subdivisions which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements in an amount roughly proportional to the impact of the development. C. Minimum width. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. 3. Applicability of TDC 18.810. The hearings officer finds, based on the plain meaning of the words, that the pedestrian pathway requirements in TDC 18.810.040 and 18.810.110 apply to the subdivision in this case, based on the findings at pages 15 to 20 of the administrative decision. a. That is, the proposed subdivision adjoins a proposed bikeway identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan (i.e., adjoining Bull Mountain Road), incorporated herein by reference. Therefore, if it complies with TDC 18.8 10.1 IO.B, the applicant is required to dedicate an easement or right of way for such a pathway under TDC 18.810.110.A. Given the pathway will be perpendicular to and separated from the road, the pathway must be at least eight feet wide, based on TDC 18.8 10.1 10.C. b. Also the distance between intersections along the north side of Bull Mountain Road in the vicinity of the site is far more than 330 feet; it is more than 1300 feet. Therefore, if it complies with TDC 18.810.020.A, the applicant is required to dedicate an easement or right of way for such a pathway and to build that pathway. 4. Interpretation of TDC 18.810.040.B.2. The hearings officer finds that the TDC does not define nor describe in any greater detail than the words used what topographic conditions do or may preclude the pedestrian pathway or stairway required in this case. a. The hearings officer relies on Webster's NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF THE AMERICAN LANGUAGE, (College ed., 1966), to define the term "preclude" to mean "prevent or make impossible", because it is consistent with the context of the term (e.g., two sections require the path, suggesting narrow exceptions) and with the dictionary mnn_;- of the ro,-,,, :~*o„r •rr~n ~o~ n ni n 1111,"111115 Vl 1111, 11,1111, consistent ..Vith LIDIC 100.11~10.1010. b. The hearings officer further finds that, based on that definition, the grade of the hillside adjoining Bull Mountain Road does not preclude the required pedestrian path, because it is possible to overcome the slope in question. The applicant can steepen the grade of the pathway to as much as 20%, can excavate for the pathway starting further north on the site (to provide a longer and shallower-sloped pathway), can provide a switch-backed route and/or can build a stairway to overcome the grade change at the south edge of the site. All of these designs are feasible as a matter of engineering and available land area. No existing physical or environmental circumstance precludes the granting of an easement for Hearings Offtcer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) Page4 • • the pathway or the improvement of the pathway consistent with city standards or permitted variations to those standards. Therefore: i. If dedicating an easement for the pathway and improving the easement comply with TDC 18.810.020.A and TDC 18.810.110.13, the applicant is required to do so. ii. If dedicating an easement for the pathway and improving the easement comply with TDC 18.810.020.A and TDC 18.810.110.13 only if limited in scope, then the applicant is required to do so to the extent of those limitations. iii. If dedicating an easement for the pathway and improving the easement violates TDC 18.810.020.A or TDC 18.810.110.13, then it is impossible to build the pedestrian path or stairway, and the disputed condition should not be imposed. 5. Relationship of TDC 18.810.040.B.2 and 18.810.110.A. TDC 18.810.040.B.2 and 18.8 10.1 10.A are inconsistent with each other in that the latter does not include the exception in the former. That is TDC 18.8 10.1 10.A does not waive extension of a bikeway due to topographic circumstances that preclude such a path. TDC 18.810.040.13.2 does so. However, because the hearings officer holds that topographic conditions on the site do not preclude such a pathway, the inconsistency is not material. 6. Applicability of Statewide Planning Goal 12. The administrative rules for Statewide Planning Goal 12 (Transportation) describe when local land use regulations are and are not required to provide streets and accessways.2 2 For instance OAR 660-12-045(3) provides the following: (3) Local governments shall adopt land use or subdivision regulations for urban areas and rural communities as set forth below. The purposes of this section are to provide for safe and convenient pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular circulation consistent with access management standards and the function of affected streets, to ensure that new development provides on-site streets and accessways that provide reasonably direct routes for pedestrian and bicycle travel in areas where pedestrian and bicycle travel is likely if connections are provided, and which avoids wherever possible levels of automobile traffic which might interfere with or discourage pedestrian or bicycle travel... (b) On-site facilities shall be provided which accommodate safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle access from within new subdivisions to neighborhood activity centers within one- half mile of the development... (E) Streets and accessways need not be required where one or more of the following conditions exist: (i) Physical or topographic conditions make a street or accessway connection impracticable. Such conditions include but are not limited to freeways, railroads, steep slopes, wetlands or other bodies of water where a connection could not reasonably be provided; (d) For purposes of subsection (b) "safe and convenient" means bicycle and pedestrian routes, facilities and improvements which: (A) Are reasonably free from hazards, particularly types or levels of automobile traffic which would interfere with or discourage pedestrian or cycle travel for short trips; (B) Provide a reasonably direct route of travel between destinations such as between a transit stop and a store; and Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) Page 5 • • a. However those rules do not apply to this application, because the city comprehensive plan and land use regulations have been acknowledged to comply with Statewide Planning Goal 12 since it was last significantly amended. b. Even if they did apply, the disputed condition of approval does not violate the OARs for Goal 12. i. The operative words in OAR 660-12-045(3)(b)(E)(i) are whether the connection could "reasonably be provided." The hearings officer finds a connection can be reasonably provided based on finding CA.b above. The is nothing inherently hazardous about the required pathway. It will not be steeper than permitted by city standards. If a staircase is built instead of a pathway, as the applicant argued, it will not encourage imprudent behavior by design or purpose. That people can use a public improvement for an imprudent purpose is not a basis for waiving that public improvement when otherwise required for a legitimate public purpose, particularly in the absence of express authority in the law for so doing. ii. Of course, adolescents and teens may feel challenged by a staircase or may feel that it amounts to an invitation to engage in imprudent behavior. But nothing about a staircase compels or is reasonably likely to lead to imprudent behavior. The city is not at fault if people of any age behave stupidly, and no amount of public infrastructure investment can prevent people from being stupid. It would be stupid to launch oneself down a staircase toward a major collector street. Perhaps it can be argued the staircase provides the opportunity to be stupid, but the same argument could be made for every street and pathway ever built. Drivers can be just as stupid as pedestrians, cyclists and skateboarders, but that is not a reason to stop building streets. Neither is it a reason not to build the pathway or staircase required in the disputed condition.3 c. The hearings officer concludes the required pathway is safe and convenient, because it is reasonably free from hazards if used prudently, it provides a direct connection between destinations on and off the site, and it significantly reduces the distance between homes on the site and possible destinations along Bull Mountain Road including transit access, compared to the situation without such a connection. d. The sidewalk along the frontage of the applicant's site will connect to the sidewalk west of the site and will be separated by only one lot from a sidewalk developed as part of the adjoining subdivision to the east. Other sidewalks are built abutting Bull Mountain Road and others streets in and abutting more recent subdivisions. Therefore it is safe to direct people to the sidewalk along Bull Mountain Road abutting the site by means of the required pathway, particularly over time as other properties in the area are developed and/or road projects complete sections of Bull Mountain Road that lack sidewalk. There will be a significant destination about one-half mile east of the site when the school district builds a new elementary school on a parcel it owns and has identified for that purpose. The required pathway will significantly shorten the walking/biking distance to the school for residents of the site and homes northeast. (C) Meet travel needs of cyclists and pedestrians considering destination and length of trip; and considering that the optimum trip length of pedestrians is generally 1/4 to 1/2 mile. 3 Of course, public and private streets must meet certain standards so they do not pose an inherent hazard. The design standards for a pathway are not as well refined as for streets. But that is proportionate with the role of pathways in the transportation network (i.e., given the relatively low volume and the relatively light loads of travel by foot and personal-powered devices such as skates, boards and bicycles). Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) Page6 • • 7. Safety. Although safety is one of the purposes of the TDC in general and one of the purposes of public improvement standards, the hearings officer finds it is not an approval standard for the application in this case. When used in the code, the term safety is general. It is not identified as an approval standard. Even if it is an approval standard, the hearings officer finds the pathway will be reasonably safe if used prudently based on finding 6.b above. 8. Dolan. Under Dolan and implementing provisions of the TDC quoted in finding C.2 above, conditions of approval can be imposed only if reasonably related to the impacts of the conditioned use and only if proportionate in nature and extent to the impact of a proposed development on the need for the condition. The city bears the burden of proof under this standard. a. As it relates to the disputed condition of approval, the administrative decision is a little light on rationale.4 The October 9, 2001 Memorandum from Brad Kilby to the hearings officer contains additional rationale for the disputed condition of approval, and the hearings officer adopts the findings in that Memorandum as his own except as inconsistent with this final order. b. Based on the administrative decision, the Memorandum and this final order, the disputed condition of approval is designed to address a public problem resulting from the absence of vehicular and non-vehicular connectivity north of Bull Mountain Road in the vicinity of and including the site. Unless the subdivision is approved subject to the disputed condition of approval, it will make that problem worse by adding more vehicular and non-vehicular traffic to area streets without facilitating the interconnection of those streets in a manner that disperses traffic and reduces congestion and contributes to community interaction. The site is the last piece of undeveloped property on the north side of Bull Mountain Road between SW Benchview Terrace and 133rd Avenue, a distance of more than 1300 feet, and it is nearly centrally located along that frontage. Therefore there is an essential nexus between the proposed subdivision and the connectivity provided by the disputed condition of approval, and providing the pathway on this site will best reduce the lack of connectivity at least for non-vehicular traffic (travel by foot and personal-powered devices such as skates, boards and bicycles) as a result of the subdivision. c. The city addressed its burden of proof on proportionality principally at page 9 in the administrative decision, where it presents a mathematical analysis of the proportionate impact of the subdivision on the transportation system, based on the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance and Tigard Resolution 95-61, and computes an unmitigated impact of $10,331.92.5 The City computed the value of the easement for the disputed pathway and its improvement to the satisfaction of the city engineer to be $4480. Thus, the city argues, as long as the value of the easement for the a The analysis supporting the disputed condition of approval consists of the following paragraph: In the previous section, Staff recommended against a public street connection. However, it is appropriate to require a bicycle/pedestrian connection in accordance with 18.180.040.B.2. A feasible connection could be found between Lots 1 through 6. s This unmitigated impact is reasonable given the applicant is not required to complete a grid of streets extending south or east of the site, (i.e., Leah Terrace does not extend to the east edge of the site; the north- south street does not extend south of Leah Terrace to Bull Mountain Road), as would be likely to be required in the absence of existing development. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) page 7 • • disputed pathway and its improvement to the satisfaction of the city engineer is less than the computed value for the path plus the value of the unmitigated traffic impact (i.e., $4480 + $10,332 = $14,812), the city has sustained its burden of proof that the disputed condition of approval does not require the applicant to bear those costs, which, in fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole. d. The hearings officer finds the computation by the city of the. subdivision's traffic impact shows that a condition of approval requiring the applicant to dedicate and improve a public pathway or alternative design such as a staircase is roughly proportional to the traffic impact of the subdivision in general and is specifically suited to remedy the public harm to which the subdivision contributes due to its lack of connectivity in the absence of such a pathway. The city has undertaken an individualized determination based on a generalized protocol that the hearings officer finds meets the requirements of Dolan, and the hearings officer adopts that protocol as applied in this case. e. By meeting its burden of persuasion, the city shifts the burden of coming forward to the applicant to show that the it failed to meet its burden of proof. Now the applicant is a little light in its rationale. Mr. McMonagle, who is known to the hearings officer and the city as an eminently competent engineer, testified the cost of a staircase would exceed $10,332.6 However he did not provide substantial evidence to support his statement. Neither did Mr. Hultberg, counsel for the applicant, although he also argued a staircase or other alternative would be excessively costly. f. In the absence of sufficient substantial evidence to support their testimony, the hearings officer is not persuaded by the arguments of Mr. McMonagle and Mr. Hultberg that the cost of the pathway or alternative would exceed $14,812. g. However the city has not sustained a burden of proof that the cost of the pathway is roughly proportional to the traffic impacts of the subdivision if that cost exceeds about $14,812. As it stands now, the disputed condition is open-ended; there is no limit to the cost of a pathway or alternative that would be acceptable to the city engineer. Therefore the condition of approval should be amended so that the cost to the applicant of the pathway or alternative, including associated earthworks, does not exceed about $14,812. i. If actual costs exceed about that amount, the city could contribute the public's proportionate share to complete the improvement or could accept the easement and retain the funds earmarked exclusively for use to improve that easement. ii. The applicant should be required to consult with the city engineer before designing improvements to the easement (i.e., before determining how much improvements will cost) in an effort to match the cost of improvements to the resources available to improve it and the physical conditions on the site. For instance, by placing the pathway nearer the west end of the frontage, where the hillside is somewhat shorter and the distance between Leah Terrace and Bull Mountain Road is least, cost savings could be realized. Although the path would have to be longer at the east end of the site's frontage, the grade difference there also is less than elsewhere on the frontage, and it would be more centrally located between 133rd Avenue and SW Benchview Terrace. 6 Mr. McMonagle did not note the additional $4480 the city had allocated toward the pathway. His testimony was not specific enough for the hearings officer to determine whether the $4480 difference would make a difference to the applicant's analysis. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) Page 8 9. Incorporation of administrative decision. The hearings officer incorporates the findings in the administrative decision as his own except as inconsistent with the findings in this final order. D. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings adopted and incorporated herein, the hearings officer concludes that the appeal should be denied, because the applicant failed to persuade the hearings officer that topographic conditions preclude the pathway that is the subject of the disputed condition of approval, that the pathway is unsafe, or that the condition of approval imposes a disproportionate burden on the applicant, provided the condition of approval is amended consistent with the discussion herein. E. DECISION In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained and incorporated herein, the hearings officer hereby denies the appeal of the administrative decision in the matter of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) and affirms that decision with the following amendment: Condition of approval 9 is hereby amended to read as follows: 9. Before the city approves a final plat for the subdivision, the applicant shall: A. Meet with the city engineer to discuss the location, nature and cost of an easement and its improvements for a pedestrian pathway or equivalent non-motor-vehicle connection from SW Leah Terrace to Bull Mountain Road. The applicant shall provide information to evaluate alternative locations for the easement and different approaches to its improvement, including locations and improvements that minimize or reduce the cost of the connection. Unless the applicant agrees to accept costs in excess of $14,812, the city engineer may do one or both of the following to reduce costs: (1) Require the easement to be situated at a location between lots on the site; and/or (2) Require certain improvements within the easement, consistent with the city road standards and variations thereto permitted by law. B. Provide construction plans for review and approval showing a public pedestrian pathway or equivalent non-motor-vehicle connection from SW Leah Terrace to Bull Mountain Road consistent with the results of compliance with condition 19.A; Provided, if the value of the easement required in condition 19.C plus the cost of improvements to the easement exceeds roughly $14,812, and the applicant does not volunteer to accept those costs, then the following apply: (1) The city engineer may require the applicant to make approved improvements to the easement, provided the cost Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) Page 9 • • of those improvement plus the value of the easement does not exceed roughly $14,812; provided further, (2) The city engineer may enter into an agreement with the applicant in a form approved by the city attorney to accept a contribution equal to or greater than the difference between $14,812 and the value of the easement, less improvements required pursuant to condition 19.B(1). The city shall hold such funds in an account created for that purpose and earmarked exclusively for improvement of the easement. C. Grant to the city a minimum 8-foot wide public easement for a pedestrian pathway or equivalent non-motor-vehicle connection from SW Leah Terrace to Bull Mountain Road consistent with the results of the contact required in condition 19.A and the plans required in condition 19.B. DATED this 13th day 0f~vember, 2001. a Larry Epstei C City of Tigad'He r gs Officer Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SUB 2001-0004 (Daffodil Hill) Page 10 0 0 "EXHIBIT A" PARTIES OF RECORD (Written Public Testimony received at the hearing) 01- - • • PERIUNS COIE LLP November 7, 2001 TO FROM: RE: Introduction additional written argument. RECEIVED PLANNING NOV 0 0 2001 ClTy OF MARD We represent George Marshall. Mr. Marshall has appealed Condition #9 on the Daffodil Hill Subdivision Approval. A public hearing was held on October 29, 2001 and the record was held open until November 7, 2001 for additional written argument. We are submitting this memorandum for inclusion in the record as Larry Epstein City of Tigard Hearings Officer Steven Hultberg , 449: Daffodil Hill (SUB2001-00004) Appeal Staff Cannot Condition Approval on Dedication of the Path Because the Path: is "Precluded by Topographical Constraints" Condition #9 requires that an 8-foot wide public easement or tract be conveyed to the City of Tigard for a public bicycle/pedestrian path. Staff claims that authority for such a condition exists under Tigard Development Code §18.810.040.B.2. This subsection provides that "bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or rights-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing betwv er. ~-.onnecti ons shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code." (emphasis added). Under this subsection, the City cannot require a connection where precluded by topographical constraints. Connection of S.W. Leah Terrace to Bull Mountain Road is precluded by a topographical constraint. As our client's project engineer stated, there is a 45 to 50 degree slope between Leah Terrace and Bull Mountain. Road. This topographic constraint makes it infeasible to construct a path at this location. At the hearing, the project engineer described the constraints and costs associated with trying to construct a pathway on such a steep slope. Construction of switchbacks is simply not feasible because they would take too much land and would [ 14530-0001 /PAO 13110.039) 11/7/01 be excessively costly, as would starting the path further up the slope and grading down into the hillside to make the path slope more gentle. It is doubtful that the City would be able to support such an expenditure under Dolan. Moreover, there is no evidence in the record which would support adequate Dolan fmdings. Staff Cannot Condition Approval on Dedication of the Path Because the Path will be Unsafe The bicycle/pedestrian path would be unsafe and, therefore, contrary to the Tigard Development Code. Any bicycle/pedestrian path between Leah Terrace and Bull Mountain Road would be unsafe because of the steep slope leading down to Bull Mountain Road. As the project engineer indicated, any bicyclist, skateboarder, or in- line-skater using the path could potentially approach Bull Mountain Road at a high rate of speed and at a right angle. Given the amount of traffic on Bull Mountain Road, this would create a very dangerous situation. Tigard Development Code §18.810.040.A requires that blocks "shall be designed with due regard ...to control and safety of street traffic and the limitations and opportunities of topography." (emphasis added). Staff s requirement that the Daffodil Hill block include a bicycle/pedestrian path that will shoot bicyclists into Bull Mountain Road at a high rate of speed is contrary to § 18.810.040.A. Therefore, it is also contrary to §18.810.040.B.2, which states that bicycle and pedestrian access spacing "shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by strict adherence to other standards in the code." Here, the "safety" element. of § 18.810.040.A is the "other standard in the code" and Condition #9 is contrary to that requirement. In addition, § 18.110.020(8) provides that one of the purposes of Title 18 is to "provide for and encourage a safe, convenient, and economic transportation within the city." (emphasis added). The Path is Contrary to Goal 12 and Will Not Advance Goal 12's Purpose Because it is unsafe, the bicycle/pedestrian path is also contrary to Goal 12's requirement that local governments adopt transportation plans which, "provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." (Emphasis added) The purpose of requiring a bicycle/pedestrian easement is to facilitate alternative forms of transportation. Although some pedestrians might use such steep path, the slope is too great to permit bicycle travel. Therefore, the condition will not advance the purpose of Goal 12. Conclusion The only evidence in the record support's the appellant's position that a bicycle/pedestrian path would be dangerous. The Tigard Development Code does not [14530-0001/PA013110.0391 -2- 11/7/01 mandate pedestrian connections in this instance and, in fact, specifically provides that such connections are not required due to topographical constraints. Here safety and topographical constraints preclude the proposed connection. Consequently, because the only evidence in the record supports the appellant's position that the connection would be unsafe, the Hearings Officer should uphold the appeal and delete Condition #9 from the approval. AHS:ahs [14530-0001/PA013110.039] -3- 11/7/01 Suhn~~~~e~ sfa~ 0 0 0 0 4 3 r ~ x> Y ^r' i t "wry { ~ " ~ z t ~ . f. 4 le i , x - 0 0 0 9 0 "EXHIBIT C" WRITTEN TESTIMONY (Applicant's materials and pertinent correspondence filed with Hearings Officer prior to Public Hearing.) 0 0 CITY OF TIOARD Community Development ShapingA Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 Fax 684-7297 TO: Larry Epstein, City of Tigard Hearings Officer FROM: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner DATE: October 9, 2001 SUBJECT: Daffodil Hill (SUB2001-00004) Appeal Harris-McMonagle Associates Inc., project engineers and agents for the proposed Daffodil Hill Subdivision, and George Marshall, owner and developer of the proposed Daffodil Hill Subdivision, have filed an appeal with the City of Tigard in regard to a condition of approval of the aforementioned subdivision. The appellants have requested your review of the City's condition that, "The applicant's construction plans shall show a public bicycle/pedestrian path connection between SW Leah Terrace and SW Bull Mountain Road. This connection shall be a minimum of 8 feet in width, located within an 8-foot-wide public easement or a tract conveyed to the City, and can be located between any of Lots 1 through 6. The pathway shall be constructed of either concrete or asphalt, per the City's public improvement design standards." The subject site is located on the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road and south of SW Alpine View. Southwest Leah Terrace is proposed to extend into the project and loop into SW Alpine View. It is an 18-lot subdivision surrounded by existing and relatively recent residential development. The site and surrounding properties are within the R-7 medium-density residential zoning district. The Notice of Decision and record is attached for your review. 10/29/2001 Public Hearing - Memo to the Hearings Officer Page 1 of 3 RE: SUB2001-00004/Daffodil Hill Subdivision Appeal 0 • The appellants argue that this condition should not apply to their development because it . presents a potential safety hazard for pedestrians and bicyclists that may utilize the pathway and that topographical constraints are reasons for exemption from the standards. The appellants contend that the frontage along SW Bull Mountain Road is faced with a 2:1 cut slope which would be too steep for a pathway, so it would have to be a stairway. The appellants further contend that block length is not measured along the right-of-way line of arterials, highways, major collectors, or railroads. The appellants allude to the point that the City's code is inconsistent with the Oregon State Transportation Planning Rule. The City's position is as follows. The Tigard Development Code (TDC) Sections 18.810.040(B)(1) and (2) states: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that, "the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access." Staff concedes and in fact agrees with the appellants that since the block abuts a major collector, it could be found acceptable. The block formed by SW Leah Terrace, SW Alpine View, SW Benchview Terrace, SW Bull Mountain Road, and SW 133rd exceeds 1,800 lineal feet, but Bull Mountain Road is a major collector and staff agrees that the block length requirement can be exempted and therefore meets 18.810.040.B.1. However, the proposals inability to meet one standard does not preclude the need for it to meet the other standard. Section 18.810.040.B.2 states that, "bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code." While the property abuts a major collector, it should also be noted that the major collector must someday facilitate the movement of all modes of transportation including bicyclists and pedestrians. In fact, Bull Mountain Road has been designated to accommodate bicycle lanes on both sides of the road in the City of Tigards' future bicycle and pedestrian map. Staff recommended against a public street connection. However, it is appropriate to require a bicycle/pedestrian connection in accordance with Section 18.180.040.B.2., and staff believes that a feasible connection could be found between Lots 1 through.6. 10/29/2001 Public Hearing - Memo to the Hearings Officer Page 2 of 3 RE: SUB2001-00004/Daffodil Hill Subdivision Appeal 0 Staff believes that the applicant could design the connection such that it could be safe with stairs, a landing, or even an alternate design that would make the path safer. It has been past City practice to allow paths up to 20% grade to be constructed. Beyond 20%, staff requires that stairs are constructed to the standards within the Oregon State, one and two family dwelling code. In summary, The Tigard Development Code implements the Oregon State Transportation Planning Rule in Chapters 18.810 (Street and Utility Design Standards), 18.705 (Access, Egress, and Circulation), 18.720 (Design Compatibility Standards), and 18.765 (Off-Street Parking and Loading). The implementation of the rule is to help meet Statewide Planning Goal #12. Under Goal 12, local governments must adopt transportation plans which, "provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." This goal applies to bicyclists and pedestrians as well as automobile traffic. Staff believes that the argument to appeal Condition #9 of the Notice of Decision for the Daffodil Hill Subdivision is without substance and should apply to the approval of this subdivision. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Notice of Decision Exhibit B - Agency Comments Exhibit C - Neighborhood Comments Exhibit D - Appeal Filing Form 10/29/2001 Public Hearing - Memo to the Hearings Officer Page 3 of 3 RE: SUB2001-00004/Daffodil Hill Subdivision Appeal EXHIBIT A (Notice of Decision) 0 r ' i 'k1 .4 I . ;C} s s k ~ wr i rt f r ' ' k~ NO,TICE° OF' TYPE II-'DECISION *Y . , ,s rya ` ' " " URBAN SERVICE} AREA y;;~ My of noaaur, , - DAFFODIL'`HILL SUBDIVISION coniuncty:,Development f 00004, Shaping 8etterCommun~i SUBDIVISIONA(SUB)2001 , .e~a...W .M_1 a., ..u ~ 120 DAYS =11 /14/2001 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY "URBAN SERVICE AREA" FILE NAME: DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION CASE NO.: Subdivision (SUB) Type 11 SUB2001-00004 REQUEST: Approval of an 18-lot subdivision of 3.16 acres. The lots are to be developed ily h th d f t h d i l s Th l t i f thi d l t ld wi e ac e s ng e- am ome . e o s zes or s eve opmen wou range from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. APPLICANT: Bill McMonagle 12555 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 OWNER: George Marshall PO Box 91249 Portland, OR 97291 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium-Density Residential. ZONING DESIGNATION: The subject property is within the R-7 Medium-Density Residential zoning di t h di i Th R 7 i t i t i d i d d tt d ac str ct. e. - zon ng s r c s es gne to accommo a e a e single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and l bdi i i l i d h S i i i i i i uses are v s ons are a so perm tte outr g t. ome c v nst tut ona su c and also permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 13735. SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109BA, Tax Lot 1400. The project is located on the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road and south of SW Alpine View. Southwest Leah Terrace is proposed to extend into the project and loop into SW Alpine View. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.420, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720 18.725, 18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.775, 18.795, 18.790 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION °e #~4~ ~~ygiven'Kfhat the Ci{'~ otr TI arc Commun Deve{o meet Director's`desi ne°ex dNOdtic ~ISi here pr r A ny rg 7., `1' p.. QT kahasAPQROVED sub ecta'to certama<ondions; ahe request:for Subdivision approval Theufncingsy r~,an 4 conclusions on w~ich<ttie decision is based are noted In Sectior VI ,,b, ti r NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 1 OF 26 E FOLL011 ~;TFI a 4 , COMMEIV~ ~''TO ~ submit one Engineering approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL rian Rager, r ° v •5-0 RIOR~ 1DING or review an Prior to commencing onsite improvements, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project to cover all onsite infrastructure improvements, the half-street in SW Bull Mountain Road, and any other work in the public right-of-way. Eight (8) sets of detailed public improvement pans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tiaard.or.us). 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance, agreement (if one is required) and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 3. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking Ian for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic con rol during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to ark on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 4. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Division which indicate that they will construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of SW Bull Mountain Road. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for a major collector street from curb to centerline equal to 22 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. 6 foot concrete sidewalk; F. street trees behind the sidewalk 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 ap licable); K. driveway apron (I applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Bull Mountain Road in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 5. The applicant's public improvement construction drawings shall indicate that full width street improvements, including traffic control devices, mailbox clusters, concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement; sanitary sewers, storm drainage, street trees, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed within the interior subdivision streets. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to local street standards. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 2 OF 26 • • 6. 8. A profile of SW Bull Mountain Road shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. The minimum paved widths of the local residential street extensions shall be 32 feet. The applicant's construction plans shall show that the eyebrow comer at SW Leah Terrace and the north/south segment will meet the Washington County detail No. M-405.5. The applicant's construction plans shall show a public bicycle/pedestrian path connection between SW Leah Terrace and SW Bull Mountain Road. This connection shall be a minimum of 8 feet in width, located within an 8-foot wide public easement or a tract conveyed to the City, and can be located between any of Lots 1 through 6. The pathway shall be constructed of either concrete or asphalt, per the City's public improvement design standards. 10. The applicant's construction plans shall provide specific detail for the proposed stormwater detention pipe system. The applicant's engineer shall coordinate with the City Engineer and Public Works Director in developing a plan that will ensure ease of maintenance and accessibility for City staff. 11. Any extension of public water lines shall be shown on the proposed public improvement construction drawings and shall be reviewed and approved the City's Water Department, as a part of the Engineering Department plan review. N)b11 : An estimated 12% of the water system costs must be on deposit with the Water Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans from the Engineering Department and construction of public water lines. 12. Final design plans and calculations for the proposed public water quality facility shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) as a part of the public improvement plans. Included with the plans shall be a proposed landscape plan to be approved by the City Engineer. The proposed facility shall be dedicated in a tract to the City ofTigard on the final plat (unless the facility is constructed within Jack Park, as proposed). As a part of the improvement plans submittal, the applicant shall submit an Operations and Maintenance Manual for the proposed facility for approval by the Maintenance Services Director. The facility shall be maintained by the developer for a three-year period from the conditional acceptance of the public improvements. A written evaluation of the operation and maintenance shall be submitted and approved prior. to acceptance for maintenance b the City. Once the three-year maintenance period is completed, the City will inspect the facility and make note of any problems that have arisen and require them to be resolved before the City will take over maintenance of the facility. In addition, the City will not take over maintenance of the facility unless 80 percent of the landscaping is established and healthy. If at any time during the maintenance period, the landscaping falls below the 80 percent level, the developer shall immediately reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity. 13. If the applicant's proposal for the Jack Park water quality facility is not approved, then they shall provide a facility onsite. 14. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, December 2000 edition." 15. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of all lots, and show that they will be graded to insure that surface drainage is directed-to the street or a public storm drainage system approved by the Engineering Department. For situations where the back portions o . lots drain away from a street and toward adjacent lots, appropriate private storm drainage lines shall be provided to sufficiently contain and convey runoff from each lot. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 3 OF 26 16. The design engineer shall indicate, on the grading plan, which lots will have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that will have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections and/or permits will be necessary when the lots develop. ~ r~,~~TtjE FOLLOWIN~G,CONDLITIONS SHA(~L BE~rSAT1SFIED ~ f 'a?RIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL'PLAT. b V'~ Submit to the~ngineering Cepartment Han Rager, G8~7~, ext. 3goor review and approval: 17. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $540.00. STAFF CONTACT: Kit Church, Engineering). 18. The final plat shall show a minimum 44-foot ROW. width for the new internal street extensions. 19. The final plat shall show a separate landscape easement for the street trees. The landscape easement shall be in addition to the standard 8-foot public utility easement. 20. The final plat shall contain a restriction whereby Lots 1 through 6 shall not be permitted to access directly onto SW Bull Mountain Road. 21. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall demonstrate that they will form and incorporate a homeowners association. They shall also develop CC&R's for this project that clearly indicate the association will be responsible for the perpetual maintenance of the planter strip along the frontage of SW Bull Mountain Road. 22. The north/south local street segment must be given a different name. The preference would be to designate it with a number. However, if a number can not be assigned that fits well with the City's address grid system, then the applicant shall propose a name to be approved by the City Engineer. 23. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic control network. These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. 24. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. B. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. C. The right-of-way dedication for SW Bull Mountain Road shall be made on the final plat. D. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive a letter from the City Engineering Department indicating: 1) that the City has reviewed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's surveyor, and 2) that the applicant has either completed any public improvements associated with the project, or has at least obtained the necessary public improvement permit from the City to complete the work. E. Once the City and County have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final plat for City Engineer's signature. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 4 OF 26 Submit to the Planning Division (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 388) for review and approval: 25. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit a tree mitigation plan which provides information showing a reasonable similarity between the species of trees to be removed and the species to be planted. In addition to providing the required species information, the plan shall also indicate the caliper size for the proposed trees to be planted, as well as indicate the location of the proposed plantings. The applicant shall provide information showing that the proposed spacing and location of the trees in relation to each other, existing trees, and proposed structures will allow the trees to thrive. Prior to the issuance of final occupancy permits of dwellings on the lots, the proposed mitigation trees shall be planted. s ,fir ~ TH FOLLOWINGa CONDITfQNS SHALL BE SATISFIED k s~ IN, ;PR I. , TO,ISSl1i4NCE OF BUILDING.v.~ERMITS4f sd •.i. ..t Submit to tffe-]F-ngineering Department (Brian Mager, bi ext. 3T8)-tor review and approval: 26. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 27. The City Engineer may determine the necessity for, and require submittal and approval of, a construction access and parking plan for the home building phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary, the applicant shall provide the plan prior to issuance of building permits. 28. Prior to issuance of building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: 1) all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities, 2 all local residential streets have at least one lift of asphalt, 3 any off -site street and/or u .ility improvements are substantially completed, and 4) all street lights are installed and ready to be energized. (NOTE: model home permits may be issued by the City apart from this condition, and in accordance with the City's model home policy). Submit to the Planning Division (Brad Kilby, 6394171, ext. 388) for review and approval: 29. At the time of building permit review, plans for the construction of individual homes on individual lots in the subdivision shall demonstrate compliance with lot coverage, landscaping, and building height requirements, per Table 18.510.2. 30. At the time of application for building permits for individual homes, .the applicant shall demonstrate that each site will be accessed by a minimum 10-foot-wide paved access. 31. At the time of application for building permits for individual homes, each applicant shall demonstrate that each site will be landscaped to the required 20% minimum. 32. At the time of submittal for building permits for individual homes within the development, the developer shall submit materials demonstrating that one (1) off-street parking space: which meets minimum dimensional requirements and setback requirements as specified in Title 18, will be provided on-site for each new home. 33. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a complete street tree Plan showing the required plantings on SW Leah Terrace and Alpine View 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. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 5 OF 26 34. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any lot, the applicant shall submit financial' surety in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit or pay a fee in-lieu of planting for proposed on-site tree mitigation for 100% of the caliper inches to be removed (110.70 Inches). 35. The developer shall provide financial surety in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit from an approved financial institution for the cost of all required street trees. No release of credit shall occur until all street trees are in place. Submit to the Building Division (Bob Poskins, 639-4171, ext. 392) for review and approval: 36. The developer shall submit a geo-technical report for soil stability and liquefaction potential to the City of Tigard Building Division. 18.430.080 Imorovement Aareement: Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: 1. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and 2. Include in the agreement provisions that if such work is not completed within the period specified, the City may complete the work and recover the full cost and expenses from the subdivider. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to be paid and may also provide for the construction of the improvements in stages and for the extension of time under specific conditions therein stated in the contract. 18.430.090 Bond: As required by Section 18.430.080, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: 1. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; 2. A surety bond executed by a surety compan authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon which remains in force until the surety company is notified by the City in writing that it maybe terminated; or 3. Cash. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Engineer an itemized improvement estimate, certified by a registered civil engineer, to assist the City Engineer in calculating the amount of the performance assurance. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. 18.430.100 Filina and Recordinq: Within 60 days of the City review and approval, the applicant shall submit the final plat to the County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS Chapter 92. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.430.070 Final Plat ADOlication Submission Reguirements: Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 6 OF 26 and necessary data or narrative. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: Centerline Monumentation, In accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes 92.060, subsection (2), the centerline of all street and roadway rights-of-way shall be monumented before the City accepts a street improvement. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 1. All centerline-centerline intersection points; 2. All cul-de-sac center points; and 3. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. Monument Boxes Required Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.810 Street & Utilitv lmarovement Standards: 18.810.120 Utilities A(I utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground,. except for surface- mounted transformers, surface-mounted connection boxes, and meter cabinets which may be laced above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric placed operating at 50,000 volts or above. 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required All improvements installed by the subdivider shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.810.180. 18.810.150 Installation Prereauisite No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except' after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 18.810.180 Notice to Citv Required Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 18.810.200 Engineer's Certification The land divider's engineer shall provide written certification of a form provided by the City that all improvements, workmanship and materials are in accord with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade, prior to the City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for operation and maintenance. THIS~APPROVAL SHALL BE.,NALID FOR 18 MONTHS r - ~YT FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE*OF THIS DEC1S1rON NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 7 OF 26 0 0 SECTION Ill. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Vicinitv Information: The site is located north of SW Bull Mountain Road and south of SW Alpine View. The site is the surrounded by subdivisions that were developed for single-family housing and are situated on lots that are much larger than those proposed in Daffodil Hill. There is an existing single-family home and a large barn located on the property. Both structures will be removed to accommodate the layout of the new proposed subdivision. Site Information and ProDosal Description: The site is described as tax lot 1400 in Washington County Tax Map 2S109BA. The proposal is an 18-lot subdivision on 3.16 acres of land. The lots are to be developed with detached single-family homes. The lot sizes for this development would range from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to construct 18 new single-family dwellings on Tax Lot 1400. Detached single-family dwellings are permitted outright in the R-7 zoning district. Decision Makina Procedures: Chapter 18.390 Describes the decision-making procedures. Type 11 procedures apply to quasi judicial permits and actions that contain some discretionary criteria. Type II actions are decided by the Director with public notice, and appeals are heard by the Hearing's Officer. SECTION V. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal and be given the opportunity.to provide written comments prior to a decision being made. Seven letters were received from surrounding property. owners and two homeowner's associations. Their concerns were generally tied to four main issues. The issues are: • Traffic, including the extension of Leah Terrace to Alpine View and the potential for additional accidents as a result of more traffic. • The size of the lots in relation to the surrounding neighborhoods and the potential for loss of value on existing developed parcels. • The lack of covenants that would enforce design restrictions that would be compatible with construction types of the existing neighborhoods. • Drainage and the transport of excess stormwater to a collection system. The traffic, density, drainage, and covenants and restrictions will be addressed in discussion of the application and how it addresses the standards and criteria set forth in the Tigard Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. As for the loss of value, the City of Tigard is charged with providing a variety of housing opportunities for all levels of income as long as the development adheres to the relevant code sections. The developer and the market dictate the type of construction and costs of develo ment. There is nothing in the code that allows the city to require construction of homesphat are "compatible" with the neighborhood. "Compatibl" construction is subjective and would not be an appropriate standard. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION. PAGE 8 OF 26 01 0 SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS IMPACT STUDY: Section 18.390.040.B.e Requires that the applicant shall include an impact study. 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 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 of real property interest, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Rough Proportionality Analysis Based on a transportation impact study prepared 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 each residential trip that is generated is $226. According to the Washington County TIF ordinance, 32 percent of a projects impacts are met by its TIF assessment in Tigard. This leaves 68 percent 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): $226 divided by .32 equals $725. ($226 is the residential use trip rate per trip TIF assessment according to the Washington County TIF ordinance). According to the ITE manual figures and the TIF ordinance, a single-family residential unit generates 10 average weekday trips per dwelling unit, per day. As there are eighteen dwelling units proposed, 180 trips are generated per day for this site. Less Mitiaated Costs The applicant is required to make half-street improvements to the right-of-way along 375.04 feet of the projects frontage on Bull Mountain Road. At an approximate cost of $200 per linear foot, this is valued at approximately $75,000.08. The applicant is also required to build a bicycle pedestrian access through one (1) of the lots that backs Bull Mountain Road (between Lots 1-6). The longest distance would be 140 feet. The shortest distance would be 113 feet. At an approximate cost of $32.00 a linear foot and going with the longer route, the improvement would be valued at $4,480.00. Estimate of unmitigated impacts Full Impact is equal to 180 daily trips x $725 = $130,500 Less TIF Assessment 180 daily tops x $226 = $ 40,680 Less Mitioated costs = $79.488.08 Equals the unmitigated Impact of $10,331.92 FINDING: Using the above cost factors, it can be determined that the unmitigated impacts of the development exceed the costs of the conditions imposed and, therefore, the conditions are roughly proportionate to the impacts sustained and thereby justified. LAND DIVISIONS - SUBDIVISONS: CHAPTER 18.430 Subdivision Aauroval Criteria (Preliminary Plat): 18.430.040 The proposed preliminary plat complies with the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations The proposal, as conditioned, will comply with the applicable zoning ordinance and all other applicable regulations. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 9 OF 26 0 • The pro osed plat name must not be duplicative and must otherwise satisfy the provisions of ORS Chapter 92. The applicant has provided materials demonstrating that the proposed subdivision name has been reserved with Washington County, thus insuring that the name.is not 'duplicative. This criterion is met. The streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of major partitions or subdivisions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern. The applicant has proposed to extend SW Leah Terrace to SW Alpine View. The City Engineer, in his discussion of this proposal finds that there are no other potential street connections to be considered in this area. This criterion has been met. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. The applicant has provided an explanation for all common improvements as required and, therefore, satisfied this criterion. Specific details of the proposed improvements are discussed later in this decision under the Street and Utility Improvement Standards, Section 18.810. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the proposal meets, or will be conditioned in this decision to meet, the preliminary plat approval standards for subdivisions. ZONING DISTRICT Residential Zoning District: Section 18.510.020 The R-7 Medium Residential zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family units at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. This proposal fits this criteria and is discussed in the following section of this decision. Development Standards: Section 18.510.050 States that Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2 below: The subject site and the surrounding properties are all designated R-7 Medium-Density Residential. EXCERPT FROM TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES I-2l R35 ' I R 5 Minimum Lot Size - Detached unit - Duplexes - Attached unit [11 Average Minimum Lot Width - Detached unit lots - Duplex lots - Attached unit lots Maximum Lot Coverage Minimum Setbacks - Front yard - Side facing street on corner & through lots - Side yard - Rear yard - Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district - Distance between property line and front of garage Maximum Height Minimum Landscape Requirement 30,000 sq.ft. 20,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 7,500 sq.ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 5,000 sq.ft. 100 ft. 100 ft. 65 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft.. 90 ft.. 90 ft. 50 ft. 40 ft. - - - 80% 12] 30 ft. 30 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 10 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. . 25 ft. 25 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. 30 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 30 ft. I 30 ft. I 30 ft. 30 ft. ( 35 ft. I - t - I - I 20% NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 10 OF 26 [1] Single-family attached residential units permitted at one dwelling per lot with no more than five attached units in one grouping. [2] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. Since the proposed development is a subdivision, in which lots will be developed individually at a later time, it is not possible to demonstrate compliance with lot coverage, building height, and landscaping requirements at this time. The proposal is to create 18 lots that vary in size from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet. The proposed lot widths range from 55 to 64 feet. FINDING: The proposed project complies with all development standards in residential zones, with the exception of lot coverage, landscaping, and building height regulations, which cannot be evaluated at this time. To ensure that all code requirements are satisfied, the following condition shall apply: CONDITION: At the time of building permit review, plans for the construction of individual homes on individual lots in the subdivision shall demonstrate compliance with lot coverage, landscaping, and building height requirements, per Table 18.510.2. ACCESS. EGRESS. AND CIRCULATION: CHAPTER 18.705 Minimum access requirements for residential use: Section18.705.030H. Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units on individual lots and multi-family residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2; TABLE 18.705.1 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: RESIDENTIAL USE (6 OR FEWER UNITS) umb' r Dwelling Minimum l4_ Mber: mur 'Access iniinum pavement 1-3Unit/Lots","of DArivewya s Vllidth Widths uh` 41 1 or 2 1 15 feet 10 feet 3-6 1 20 feet 20 feet FINDING: All proposed lots will have more than the required 15 feet of access frontage required for single-family dwellings. To ensure that the minimum width pavement requirement is met at the time of development of each parcel, the following condition shall apply: CONDITION: At the time of application for building permits for individual homes, the applicant shall demonstrate that each site will be accessed by a minimum 10-foot-wide .paved access. Vehicular access to multi-family structures shall be brought to within 50 feet of the ground floor entrance or the ground floor landing of a stairway, ramp, or elevator leading to the dwelling units. This is a proposal for a single-family development. This standard does not apply. Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code. The individual homeowners will maintain the access drives once the property is developed and sold. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue district has reviewed the proposal and the comments have been incorporated where necessary. This criterion is satisfied. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus by one of the following: NOTICE OF. TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION . PAGE 11 OF 26 a. A circular, paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured from center point to outside edge of 35 feet; b. A hammerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet;. C. The maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%. No access drives in this proposal will exceed 150 feet in length, therefore, this criterion does not apply. Vehicle turnouts, (providing a minimum total driveway width of 24 feet for a distance of at least 30 feet), may, be required so as to reduce the need for excessive vehicular backing motions in situations where two vehicles traveling in opposite directions meet on driveways in excess of 200 feet in length. There are no proposed driveways in this development that exceed 200 feet in length, therefore, this criterion does not apply. Where permitted, minimum width for drivewayy apppproaches to arterials or collector streets shall be no less than 20 feet so as to avoid fraffic turning from the street having to wait for traffic exiting the site. This standard does not apply to this proposal. FINDING: As conditioned, the proposed development will comply with all applicable access, egress, and circulation requirements of Chapter 18.705. DENSITY COMPUTATIONS: CHAPTER 18.715 Densitv Calculation: 18.715.020 A. Definition of net develoument area. Net development area, in acres, shall be determined by subtracting the following land area(s) from the gross acres, which is all of the land included in the legal description of the property to be developed: All sensitive land areas: a. Land within the 100-year floodplain; b. Land or slopes exceeding 25%; c. Drainage ways; and d. Wetlands. All land dedicated to the public for park purposes; All land dedicated for public rights-of-way. When actual information is not available, the following formulas may be used: Single-family development: allocate 20% of gross acreage; Multi-family development: allocate 15% of ross acreage. II land proposed for private streets; and A lot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an existing dwelling is to remain on the site. B. Calculating maximum number of residential units. To calculate the maximum number.of residential units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of square feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district. The net development area is determined by subtracting from the gross area, the land needed for public streets. The calculations are as follows: Gross lot area 135,137 square feet Street dedication 20.804 saiuare feet NET DEVELOPABLE AREA 114,333 square feet To calculate the maximum allowed density, net developable area is. divided by the minimum allowed square footage within the zone, as follows: R-7 zone 114,333/5,000=.22.86 dwelling units NOTICE OF TYPE If DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 12 OF 26 01 .0 FINDING: The proposed eighteen dwelling units do not exceed maximum density of twenty two, therefore, this standard is met. C. Calculatina minimum number of residential units. As required- by Section 18.510.040, the minimum number of residential units. per net acre shall be calculated by multi lying the maximum number of units determined in Subsection B above by 80% (0.8). The minimum required density is determined by the following calculation: 22.86 X 0.80 = 18.28 FINDING: The standard for minimum density is met. 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 7.40.210 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 o her point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam' which is visible from a properr line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ_ rules for visible emissions (340-21-0 5 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 (34028-090) apply. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. FINDING: As this is a typical detached single-family project, which is a permitted use in the R-7 zone, none of the environmental conditions that have been listed above will be compromised beyond allowable levels. The above performance standards are met. These standards would be subject to code enforcement investigation if for some reason the above standards were in question. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING: CHAPTER 18.745 Establishes standards for landscaping, buffering and screening to enhance the aesthetic environmental quality of the City. The R-7 zoning district requires that each lot maintain a minimum of 20% landscaping independent of required plantings for tree mitigation and street trees. This proposal calls for the division of 3.16 acres into 18 building sites. FINDING: There is no proposed landscaping for this project. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 13 OF 26 CONDITION: At the time of application for building permits for individual homes, each applicant shall demonstrate that each site will be landscaped to the required 20% minimum. Section 18.745.040. states that all development projects fronting on a public street, private street, or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length after the adoption of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040C. FINDING: The applicant has not provided a street tree plan for the development, but has indicated in the protect narrative that subdivision improvements will include the planting of street frees in conformance with the Tigard Development Code standards. CONDITIONS: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a complete street tree plan showin the required plantings on SW Leah Terrace and Alpine View for the CI 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. The developer shall provide financial surety in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit from an approved financial institution for the cost of all required street trees. No release of credit shall occur until all street trees are in place. Bufferina and Screeninq: Section 18.745.050 Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). The subject site is surrounded by single-family developments, therefore, there is no requirement for buffering and screening for this project. FINDING: As conditioned, the proposed. development will comply with all applicable Landscaping and Screening requirements of Chapter 18.745. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS: CHAPTER 18.765 This Chapter is applicable for development projects when there is new construction, expansion of existing use, or change of use in accordance with Section 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements. The proposed project will create 18 lots for single-family dwellings. Submittal of detailed plans for the construction of homes within the development are not necessary at this time. Table 18.765.2 iI_ /I% _l____ 1_'_ L_ _•J_J - J_ i_ _ -1 J---- 11'__- -'1 TL.-. requires that one l k on-street parking space be provided er detached dwelling unit. I nere ks no maximum limit on parking allowed for detached single-family dwellings. There is also no bicycle parking requirement for single-family dwellings. Staff notes that there is a 20-foot required setback from Me face of garages to property lines in all residential zones. To ensure that homes constructed in this development comply with these standards, the following condition shall apply: CONDITION: At the time of submittal for building permits for individual homes within the development, the developer shall submit materials demonstrating that one (1) off-street parking space, which meets minimum dimensional requirements and setback requirements as specified in Title 18, will be provided on-site for each new home. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 14 OF 26 0 • TREE REMOVAL: CHAPTER 18.790 A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 2 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The applicant, in his proposal has indicated that all trees will more than likely be removed to accommodate the development. As this is the case, the applicant will be required to mitigate for. 100% of those trees that are to be removed. According to the Arborist's report, there are seven trees over twelve inches. The applicant will be required to mitigate a total of 110.70 caliper inches. CONDITIONS: • Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit a tree mitigation plan which provides information showing a reasonable similarity between the species of trees to be removed and the species to be planted. In addition to providing the reqquired species information, the plan shall also indicate the calipr size for the proposed trees to be planted, as well as indicating the locateion of the proposed plantings. The applicant shall provide information showing that the proposed spacing and location of the trees in relation to each other, existing trees, and proposed structures will allow the trees to thrive. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any lot, the applicant shall submit financial surety in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit or pa a fee in-lieu of planting for proposed on-site tree mitigation for 100% of the caliper inches to be removed (110.70 inches). Visual Clearance Areas: Section 18.795 Clear vision area shall be maintained -on the corners of all property adjacent to intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedgge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height, measured from the top of the curb or where no curb exists, from the street center grade, except the trees exceeding this height may be located in this- area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. For arterial streets the visual clearance shall not be less than 35 feet on each side of the intersection. No specific plans for the construction of structures are required through the subdivision process. Compliance with vision clearance requirements shall be confirmed through the building permit process for all homes to be constructed within the development. This standard is met. Street And Utilitv 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. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 15 OF 26 Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires a local residential street to have a 42 to 50-foot right-of-way width and a 24 to 32 foot paved section. A major collector roadway should have a right-of-way width of 60 to 80 feet and a paved width of 44 feet. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. SW Bull Mountain Road This site lies adjacent to SW Bull Mountain Road, which is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 35 feet of ROW north of the centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. No further ROW dedications are needed on this roadway adjacent to this site. SW Bull Mountain Road is currently paved, but not fully improved to meet City standards. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should complete a half-street improvement across the frontage of this site. The applicants plans indicate they will provide this improvement as a part of the development. The Public Works Department raised a valid concern with regard to the future maintenance of the planter strip that will reside between the back of the new sidewalk and the property lines of Lots 1 through 6. The zone of ROW that includes the curb, sidewalk and planter strip is to be maintained by the adjacent property owner(s) in accordance with TDC 18.810.070.D. On collector and arterial streets, where subdivision lots back up against the roadway, this zone of ROW is often neglected by property owners for various reasons. For instance, back yard fences without gates would preclude easy access to the planter strip and sidewalk area. Often, property owners are not aware that this zone of ROW is theirs to maintain. Planter strips that are not maintained become a nuisance that requires City action by its Code Compliance Officer. The follow-up time involved with each violation exacts a significant amount of City resources. To prevent this from occurring in this development, Staff recommends the applicant be required to form a homeowners association and develop CC&R's that specifically address the routine maintenance of the sidewalk and planter strip on SW Bull Mountain Road. The formation of the homeowners association and adoption of CC&R's must"be completed'prior to recordation of the final plat. New Local Street Connections This development will include the extension of SW Leah Terrace into the development, and a north/south segment that will connect into SW Alpine View. SW Alpine View was fully improved as a part of the Hillshire Summit development. The existing paved widths of both SW Leah Terrace and SW Alpine View is 32 feet curb-to-curb. The new roadway segments must also be constructed to have a paved width of 32 feet. The applicant is proposing a 44-foot ROW width for the new roadway segments, while still providing the 32-foot paved width. This would necessitate placing the future street trees outside of the ROW. This concept is acceptable, provided the applicant dedicate a separate landsca e easement behind the ROW, in addition to the standard 8-foot public utility easement (PUE~ With a landscape easement in. place, the 44-foot ROW width will function well. The new north/south local street segment must have a different name than SW Leah Terrace. Since it is a north/south segment, a number should be assigned. If a suitable number can not be assigned due to address grid limitations determined by the City, then the applicant will need to choose a name that can be approved by the City Engineer. The proposed "eyebrow" corner at SW Leah Terrace and the north/south segment does not appear to meet Washington County road design standards. The City has allowed these eyebrow corners within subdivisions, provided they meet the County design standards (County Detail #M-405.5). Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit a revised plan that shows the eyebrow in compliance with the County standard. Staff finds that it is feasible for the applicant to meet this standard, based upon the lot sizes and layout. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 16 OF 26 • i Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030(F) states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized b the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. A street stub is not required to the east due to the fact that there is one parcel that could be served (Tax Lot 1300, 2S1 09BA). This parcel has one large singgle-family dwelling situated in the middle; approximately 45 feet back from the edge of SW Bull Mountain Road. The home is currently accessed from an existing driveway ontoW Bull Mountain Road, and there is a turnaround area that allows cars to exit face-forward onto the roadway. It appears very unlikely that the parcel would be partitioned in the future, due to the location of the existing house. Even if two addtional lots could be partitioned, a full-width public street stub would preclude effective development of the parcel. It would be more feasible and practical to allow a joint private access onto SW Bull Mountain Road in the future, should this parcel be divided. As stated previously, the existing home sits back far enough from the roadway that a vehicular turnaround area can be provided such that cars will not be required to back out into the roadway. Cul-de-sacs: 18.810.030.K states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not _ provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental. or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and through circulation: • All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other than circular, shall be approved by the City Engineer; and • The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured along the centerline of the roadway from the near side of the intersecting street to the farthest point of the cul-de-sac. • If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street may be required to be provided and dedicated to the City. There are no cul-de-sacs proposed with this development. One of the comments received from the neighborhood suggest terminating SW Leah Terrace in a cul-de-sac. This comment will be addressed later in the decision. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030(G) requires all local streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. Astreet connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. The applicant's plan properly shows the extension of SW Leah Terrace into the development, and provides for a local street extension to SW Alpine View. This criterion is met. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.M states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet), and: 1. Centerline radii of curves shall not be less than 700 feet on arterials, 500 feet on major collectors, 350 feet on minor collectors, or 100 feet on other streets; and NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 17 OF 26 • 1 2. Streets intersecting with a minor collector or greater functional classification street, or streets intended to be posted with a stop sign or signalization, shall provide a landing averaging five percent or less. Landings are that portion of the street within 20 feet of the edge of the intersecting street at full improvement. The steepest grade along the new local street extension is just over 7%. Therefore, this criterion is met. Access to Arterials and Major. Collectors: Section 18.810.030.P states that where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing or proposed arterial or major collector street, the development design shall provide adequate protection for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic, or if separation is not feasible, the design shall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall include any of the following: • A parallel access street along the arterial or major collector; • Lots of suitable depth abutting the arterial or major collector to provide adequate buffering with frontage along another street; • Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a nonaccess reservation along the arterial or major collector; or • Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection; • If a lot has access to two streets with different classifications, primary access should be from the lower classification street. The applicant's plan shows that all lots will be served from the local residential street network. No direct access to SW Bull Mountain Road is proposed. Therefore, this criterion is met. Private Streets: Section 18.810.030.S states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a recorded maintenance agreement. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned developments, mobile-home parks, and multi-family residential developments. No private streets are proposed.- Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall ' be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by- streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or - ! l roa's ranrva as. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. The block formed by SW Alpine View-SW134th Avenue-SW133rd Avenue-SW Bull Mountain Road-SW Benchview Terrace measures approximately 3,800 lineal feet. This block perimeter clearly exceeds the standard, but since the block abuts a major collector, it could be found acceptable. Staff considered whether or not another street connection would be feasible, and found that the only feasible connection would be a street connection to SW Bull Mountain Road. A connection to the east is not feasible due to the presence of existingg homes. A street connection to SW Bull Mountain Road, however, would yield at least two lots with street frontage on three sides due to the location of SW Leah Terrace. Double-frontage lots are to be avoided, according to 18.810.060.C, except where essential to provide separation between residential development and larger streets. All double-frontage lots are required to have front yard setbacks on each street. A triple-frontage lot would be even more cumbersome and undesirable. For this reason, Staff recommends against a public street connection. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-"04 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 18 OF 26 i • The block formed by SW Leah Terrace-SW Alpine View-SW Benchview Terrace measures approximately 1,520 lineal feet, which meets the standard. Section 18.810.040.6.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. In the previous section, Staff recommended against a public street connection. However, it is appropriate to require a bicycle/pedestrian connection in accordance with 18.180.040.8.2. A feasible connection could be found between Lots 1 through 6. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. All proposed lots have lot depths which are less than 2.5 times their average lot widths. Consequently, the above criterion is met. Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(8) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single- family dwelling unit, the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. Lot frontage varies from 26 feet to 64 feet on the proposed lots. All proposed lots have more than the required 25 feet of frontage on a public street. This criterion is met. 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 constructing sidewalks along all local residential street extensions and SW Bull Mountain Road, the applicant will meet this criterion. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existin 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 are existing 8-inch main lines located in SW Alpine View and SW Leah Terrace. The applicant intends to extend new 8-inch main lines from each of these existing lines to serve the lots within this development. The preliminary plan meets this criterion. 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, wffether inside or outside the development. The City Engineers all approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards Tor Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 19 OF 26 • • This parcel is located at the top of the local drainage basin. There are no upstream flows that must be accommodated. 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). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant is proposing to detain the onsite stormwater in a large pipe with a flow control structure. Such a system is acceptable, provided the applicant meet specific detailed design criteria by the City, pertaining to accessibility for maintenance. Prior to construction, the details of the detention pipe system shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. The applicant also proposes to extend an existing public storm line from SW 134th Avenue to this site in SW Alpine View. This concept is acceptable to Staff. Bikewavs and Pedestrian Pathwavs: 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. The applicant is required to do half-street improvements on Bull. Mountain Road. These improvements will bring the road to a width that can adequately accommodate the bike lane that is planned for Bull Mountain Road. This criterion has been met. 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 bike lane will be essentially constructed as part of this subdivision, the only remaining costs will be directly tied to the costs of striping. There is no known estimate for the costs associated with striping, so this criteria cannot be applied as worded. In this case a partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards throughout the length of the proposed lane. Bull Mountain Road has not been striped and in many cases the necessary right of way has not yet been acquired to construct the improvement completely. Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.C states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bic cle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight Yeet. As was stated previously, a bicycle/ pedestrian connection will be required between SW Leah Terrace and SW Bull Mountain Road, somewhere between Lots 1 through 6. The width of this connection shall be eight feet, per Section 18.810.110.C. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 20 OF 26 • 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 Bull Mountain Road. However, if the new lots will be served from existing underground utilities in either SW Leah Terrace or SW Alpine View, the applicant would not need to address this section. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Neighborhood Comments: Neighbors in the vicinity of this proposed development submitted several letters. Below is a summary of comments pertaining to public facilities, with Staff responses: SW Alpine View is a cut-through now, with speeding problems. Motorists are cutting through between SW Bull Mountain Road and SW Benchview Terrace, to avoid the speed humps on SW Benchview Terrace. The development will make this condition worse. Staff ResDonse: The City Engineer is not aware of a significant cut-through problem on this street. Nor is he aware of a significant speeding problem. Staff personally visited the site during the PM peak period on September 4, 2001, and the AM peak period on September 5, 2001. In a 30 minute Period during the AM peak periog, Staff counted four vehicles traveling eastbound on SW Alping View, turning south on SW 134 Avenue, and two vehicles traveling northbound on SW T34 Avenue, turning west on SW Alpine View. It is possible that these seven vehicles cut through, but this number of vehicles would not be considered a significant problem given the capacity of the street. During a 45-minute session during the AM peak period, Staff counted vehicles at both the intersection of SW 134 Avenue/SW Alpine View and at SW Alpine View/SW Ejenchview Terrace. Staff counted a total of three vehicles that traveled northbound on SW 134 Avenue, west on SW Alpine View, then north on SW Mistletoe Drive. Staff assumed these three vehicles drove on to SW Benchview Terrace, and further assumed that they originated from SW Bull Mountain Road attempting to avoid the speed humps as suggested by the neighbors. Staff also NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 21 OF 26 • • counted 78 vehicles traveling northbound on SW Benchview Terrace, passing by the intersection at SW Alpine View. Based uon these number with the assumptions made, only 3.8% of motorists might use SW 133u Avenue-SW 134 Avenue-SW Alpine View as a cut-through. Staff finds this is not a significant issue given the street capacity. In 1999, thq Engineering Department was asked to investigate a potential clt-through problem on SW 134 Avenue. The thought was that vehicles were using SW 134' Avenue and SW Alpine View as a cut-through. The neighbors were also complaining about speed. The City conducted their intestigation during the first week in September 1999, after school began. They found that the 85 percentile speed was 23.5 MPH northbound, and 24.6 MPH southbound; clearly not a speeding problem. The City also found that the total volume on SW 134 Avenue (south of SW Alpine View) was 271 vehicles per day. Given that the average single family residence generates approximately 10 vehicle trips per day, and given that there are at least 27 homes in the area of SW 134 Avenue, SW Mountain Ridge Court and SW Alpine View, that volume makes sense. Therefore, the City confirmed that there was not a cut-through problem. In addition, since a local residential street is designed to carry up to 1,500 vehicles per day, Staff finds that there is not a capacity issue here either. Staff also finds that this development will not create d cut-through, nor will it make any cut-through problem worse, as trips generated by this development will be either leaving or entering the site. • There is a safety problem at the intersection of SW Alpine View/SW 134th Avenue. Vehicles are driving over the bumps placed by the City. Staff Response: The City instglled small yellow bumps down the centerline of SW Alpine View at the intersection withSW 134 Avenue, to assist in marking the two travel lanes. Motorists turning left from SW 134u' Avenue tend to cut the corner. Staff witnessed a small percentage of vehicles cutting the corner during a site visit. It. is not apparent that there is a significant safety issue at that intersection. However, if such a condition were to develop there, the City Engineer could review other options at that time. Staff is not convinced this development will create a safety problem at the intersection. • SW Leah Terrace will become a cut-through, if connected. This street should be terminated with a cul-de-sac. Staff ResDonse: Staff does not agree that SW Leah Terrace would become a cut-through. The number of turns a vehicle would nave to make would most certainly require more time than would be required to use SW Benchview Terrace from SW Bull Mountain Road. SW Leah Terrace will likely see 50% of the new site-generated trips using that roadway. The site should generate an average of 180 trips per day. Therefore, there may be an increase of approximately 90 vehicle trips on SW Leah Terrace, due to this development. That is not a significant increase. In addition, the volumes on SW Leah Terrace will be well under the maximum capacity of 1,500 vehicles per day. The length of SW Leah Terrace, from SW Bull Mountain Road, is presently 430 feet. This roadway could not be terminated with a cul-de-sac due to the maximum cul-de-sac length standard of 200 feet, required by Section 18.810.030.K. • Make sure this development does not create a downstream stormwater problem. Staff Response: As was stated previously in the report, the developer will provide onsite detention via a large pipe. The preliminary calculations for the detention pipe show that there will be plenty of capacity to handle the flows from this development. • Where will construction vehicles park? NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 22 OF 26 Staff Response: The applicant will be required to provide onsite parking for construction vehicles. This condition will also apply throughout the home construction phase. Construction vehicles will not be permitted to park on existing local residential streets. Enforcement of the condition during the public improvement phase could include a Stop Work Order. Enforcement during the home construction phase could include withholding of inspections, withholding issuance of further permits or fines levied by the Code Compliance Officer. Public Water System: This site will be served from the City's public water system. There are existing 8-inch water lines located in SW Leah Terrace and SW Alpine View. The Public Works Department commented that the applicant will need to pay for the removal of the existing water service from SW Bull Mountain Road. The applicant will be required to either cut in or live tap the public line in SW Alppine View. The City will tap the line in SAlpine View for water services for Lots 11 through 14. All other water services must be installed by the applicant's contractor. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Des!gn 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 applicant has proposed to construct a vegetated swale offsite in Jack Park, which is a City park located downstream of this development, north of SW Walnut Street, and east of SW 128 Avenue. The applicant, CWS and the City have met to discuss this proposal, and Staff believes it is a feasible solution. A two-stage approach has been suggested where the applicant would construct a vegetated Swale of a size that would equate to what is needed to treat the stormwater from this development. They would remove the existing blackberry growth along the riparian area adjacent to the main stream channel and enhance the stream buffer, as a part of the project. Stage .2 would include the conceptual design of a larger regional facility(ies) that could be developed within the City owned park and greenspaces downstream. The City would be able to use the conceptual plan to develop additional facilities or expand the one to be constructed by the applicant. Staff is in support of this concept and recommends the City continue to work with the applicant and CWS. If the Jack Park concept is not approved, the applicant will need to provide an onsite water quality facility. The applicant's plan does not show how an onsite facility could 'be accommodated, but Staff believes it is feasible for the applicant to accommodate such a facility. It may require the applicant to lose one lot (perhaps Lot 10). Prior to the City accepting the applicant's water quality facility as a public facility, the developer shall maintain It for a minimum of three years after construction is completed. The facility shall be located in a tract and conveyed to the City on the final plat. The developer will be required to submit annual reports to the City which show what maintenance operations were conducted on the facility for that year. Once the three-year maintenance period is completed, the Cityy will inspect the facility and make note of any problems that have arisen and require them to be resolved before the City will take over maintenance of the facility. In addition, the City will not take over maintenance of the facility unless 80 percent of the landscaping is established and healthy. If at any time during the maintenance period, the landscaping falls below the 80 percent level, the developer shall immediately reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 23 OF 26 0 • Gradin4 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 CW 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 shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of all lots, and show that they will be graded to insure that surface drainage is directed to the street or a public storm drainage system approved by the Engineering Department. For situations where the back portions of lots drain away from a street and toward adjacent lots, appropriate private storm drainage lines shall be provided, to sufficiently contain and convey runoff from each lot. The design engineer shall also indicate, on the rading plan, which lots will have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that MY, have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections and/or permits will be necessary when the lots develop. This site is less than five acres, so a NPDES permit is not required. 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 approval of the final plat. For this project, the addressing fee will be.$540.00 (18 lots X $30/address = $540.00). Survev Reauirements The applicant's final plat shall contain State. Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic control network. These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. By random traverse using conventional surveying methods SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS City of Tigard Police Department offered no comments on the proposal. City of Tigard Property Manager/ Operations Department has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: According to the code, the property owners would be responsible for maintaining the sidewalk and vegetation management wltFiin the right-of-way. How will this be ensured? City of Tigard Building Official has reviewed the application and has offered the following comments: TVFR approval for access and hydrant location. Geo-technical report for soil stability and liquefaction potential. The City of Tigard Operations Department has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: Developer to be invoiced for removal of existing water service off of Bull NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 24 OF 26 9 • Mountain Road. Double up all lots with water services, install air release at high point. Attach all details and construction notes. Adhere to water line offset from curbs. Tigard to tap services for lots 11-14 only. Contractor to dig and string services after tops provided by Tigard. (Contact Rich Sattler for items related to public services. Contact Eric Hand for items related to stormwater disposal and sanitary sewer). The City of Tigard Urban Forester has reviewed this application and offered comments regarding tree species selection and planting which are incorporated into this decision under Chapter 18.790. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services indicated that the applicant shall contact clean water services about sewer/water services unless they intend to annex into the city. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue staff provided the following comments: Public streets shall have a maximum grade of 15%. Private fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed an average grade of 10% with a maximum grade of 15% for lengths of no more than 200 feet. Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 51/6) with the exception of crowning for water run-off. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.6) 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. roadway 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) Approved fire apparatus access roadways and firefighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to stockpiling combustibles on-site or the commencement of combustible construction.. (UFC Sec: 8704) Tri-Met, PGE, NW Natural Gas, Verizon, and TCI Cable were notified but no comments were provided. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owners of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: Appeal: The decision of the Director (TyII Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Tye III Procedure) is final )Zr opurposes of appeal on the date that it is malted. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 -DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 25 OF 26 Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Directoris Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues property raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. 3, T d4rr?,~,,`rfs~~~,~``~'R~j3~" THE DEADLINE FhOR FILING AN APPE 'k, , AL IS AT 500 PWOWSEPTEMBER 28, 00 11 ° v Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 6394171: PREPARED BY. Brad JCilby Associate Planner Alp APPROVED BY: Richard Bewer~d Planning Manager September 14. 2001 DATE September 14. 2001 DATE NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUB2001-00004 - DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION PAGE 26 OF 26 t I ~ I aw ~uM I v 1 ~ MTN RD O ~ 1 (I I a I ~ I I I I- I I ~ 9 ;ommunity Development u~ i' • 800 feel Information on this map Is for general location only and should be verHied with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503)839.4171 http:/A~.cl.tlgard. or. us Plot date: Jul 18, 2001; C:lmagicWIAGIC03.APIR / Of OORAVMIC INFORMATION SY&TIM VICINITY MAP "URBAN SERVICE AREA" SUB2001-00004 DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION APO / _T- / 25 LOT 1 23 j 24 ~I SOT II - . ' / ' 11 r~ 1 !i (1 Y~\ 24 I SU M "11 T N 0 2 L HILLSN~RE ALPINE Navaoa' t `T LOT48 b` ~ rs ~.,u ` t c'ar h 1.~9 s' r6' ~Rwo. x?_!. 23'. a ° 10 l& w I ' N .LOT II 1<~/ 10 t LO 14 a~a u. aua sr. 9 I$ 51 T 13 l / aH9 at, a9a~ sr. aooo sr.I w I LOT ss, ss JP 50 --jLA1 z f ' r 17 4N st, LOT I& 49 ,B ss' e• t.6' Ssol S.F. m TAX LOT I Z y / ~~Q _ t-a' • ' .F ! 3 W 1300 _ / - TERRACE ~ '1r 6 L- I j( ; 1., `jT - -r- - = a.,o• r 5 9,,u s.r. I i ! I / ! aa22 sr. ST. 4L j t / LOT 1 ~1 %/jt 11 tt 58 ao' aios w t504' ROAD I I 1 1 t s asUN ~A1N_ - - I ` CJ W• - LLA III6 I'I SUB2401'44SUBDIYISI0N DAFFODIfL lil"- ~Ar~a G of lS"- ~ om ono p . - --4- +r, scale) EXHIBIT B • (Agency Comments) MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: September 7, 2001 TO: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner • FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SUB 2001-00004, Daffodil Hill Subdivision 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 a local residential street to have a 42 to 50-foot right-of-way width and a 24 to 32-foot paved section. A major collector roadway should have a right-of-way width of 60 to 80 feet and a paved width of 44 feet Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. SW Bull Mountain Road This site lies adjacent to SW Bull Mountain Road, which is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 35 feet of ROW north of the centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. No further ROW dedications are needed on this roadway adjacent to this site. SW Bull Mountain Road is currently paved, but not fully improved to meet City standards. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should complete a half-street improvement across the frontage of this site. The ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 1 i • applicant's plans indicate they will provide this improvement as a part of the development. The Public Works Department raised a valid concern with regard to the future maintenance of the planter strip that will reside between the back of the new sidewalk and the property lines of Lots 1 through 6. The zone of ROW that includes the curb, sidewalk and planter strip is to be maintained by the adjacent property owner(s) in accordance with TDC 18.810.070.D. On collector and arterial streets, where subdivision lots back up against the roadway, this zone of ROW is often neglected by property owners for various reasons. For instance, back yard fences without gates would preclude easy access to the planter strip and sidewalk area. Often, property owners are not aware that this zone of ROW is theirs to maintain. Planter strips that are not maintained become a nuisance that requires City action by its Code Compliance Officer. The follow-up time involved with each violation exacts a significant amount of City resources. To prevent this from occurring in this development, Staff recommends the applicant be required to form a homeowners association and develop CC&R's that specifically address the routine maintenance of the sidewalk and planter strip on SW Bull Mountain Road. The formation of the homeowners association and adoption of CC&R's must be completed prior to recordation of the final plat. New Local Street Connections This development will include the extension of SW Leah Terrace into the development, and a north/south segment that will connect into SW Alpine View. SW Alpine View was fully improved as a part of the Hillshire Summit development. The existing paved widths of both SW Leah Terrace and SW Alpine View is 32 feet curb-to-curb. The new roadway segments must also be constructed to have a paved width of 32 feet. The applicant is proposing a 44-foot ROW width for the new roadway segments; while still providing the 32-foot paved width. This would necessitate placing the future street trees outside of the ROW. This concept is acceptable, provided the applicant dedicate a separate landscape easement behind the ROW, in addition to the standard 8-foot public utility easement (PUE). With a landscape easement in place, the 44-foot ROW width will function well. The new north/south local street segment must have a different name than SW Leah Terrace. Since it is a north/south segment, a number should be assigned. If a suitable number can not be assigned due to address grid limitations determined by the City, then the applicant will need to choose a name that can be approved by the City Engineer. The proposed "eyebrow" corner at SW Leah Terrace and the north/south segment does not appear to meet Washington County road design standards. The City has allowed these eyebrow corners within subdivisions, provided they ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 2 a • meet the County design standards (County Detail #M-405.5). Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit a revised plan that shows the eyebrow in compliance with the County standard. Staff finds that it is feasible for the applicant to meet this standard, based upon the lot sizes and layout. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030(F) states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de~sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. A street stub is not required to the east due to the fact that there is one parcel that could be served (Tax Lot 1300, 2S1 09BA). This parcel has one large single-family dwelling situated in the middle, approximately 45 feet back from the edge of SW Bull Mountain Road. The home is currently accessed from an existing driveway onto SW Bull Mountain Road, and there is a turnaround'area that•allows cars to exit face-forward onto the roadway. It appears very unlikely that the parcel would be partitioned in the future, due to the location of the existing house. Even if two additional lots could be partitioned, a full-width public street stub would preclude effective development of the parcel. It would be more feasible and practical to allow a joint private access onto SW Bull Mountain Road in the future;. should this parcel be divided. As stated previously, the existing home sits back far enough from the roadway that a vehicular turnaround area can be provided such that cars will not be required to back out into the roadway. Cul-de-sacs: 18.810.030.K states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and through circulation: • All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other than circular, shall be approved by the City Engineer; and • The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured along the centerline of the roadway from the near side of the intersecting street to the farthest point of the cul-de-sac. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 3 • If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street may be required to be provided and dedicated to the city. There are no cul-de-sacs proposed with this development. One of the comments received from the neighborhood suggest terminating SW Leah Terrace in a cul- de-sac. This comment will be addressed later in the report. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030(G) requires all local streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. The applicant's plan properly shows the extension of SW Leah Terrace into the development, and provides for a local street extension to SW Alpine View. This criterion is met: Grades and Curves:.- Section 18.810.030.M states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet) 'and: 1. Centerline radii of curves shall not be less than .700 feet on arterials, 500 feet on major collectors, 350 feet on minor collectors, or 100 feet on other streets; and 2. Streets intersecting with a minor collector or greater functional classification street, or streets intended to be posted with a stop sign or signalization, shall provide a landing averaging five percent or less. Landings are that portion of the street within 20 feet of the edge of the intersecting street at full improvement The steepest grade along the new local street extension is just over 7%. Therefore, this criterion is met. Access to Arterials and Major Collectors: Section 18.810.030.P states that where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing or proposed arterial or major collector street, the development design shall provide adequate protection for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic, or if separation is not feasible, the design shall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall include any of the following: ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 4 • A parallel access street along the arterial or major collector; • Lots of suitable depth abutting the arterial or major collector to provide adequate buffering with frontage along another street; • Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a nonaccess reservation along the arterial or major collector; or • Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection; • If a lot has access to two streets with different classifications, primary access should be from the lower classification street. The applicant's plan shows that all lots will be served from the local residential street network. No direct access to SW Bull Mountain Road is proposed. Therefore, this criterion is met. Private Streets: Section 18.810.030.S states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a recorded maintenance agreement. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned developments, mobile home parks, and multi-family residential developments. No private streets are proposed. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use ' contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of- way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. The block formed by SW Alpine View-SW134th Avenue-SW133rd Avenue-SW Bull Mountain Road-SW Benchview Terrace measures approximately 3,800 lineal feet. This block perimeter clearly exceeds the standard, but since the block abuts a major collector, it could be found acceptable. Staff considered whether or not another street connection would be feasible, and found that the only feasible connection would be a street connection to SW Bull Mountain Road. A connection to the east is not feasible due to the presence of existing homes. A ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 5 • • street connection to SW Bull Mountain Road, however, would yield at least two lots with street frontage on three sides due to the location of SW Leah Terrace. Double-frontage lots are to be avoided, according to 18.810.060.C, except where essential to provide separation between residential development and larger streets. All double-frontage lots are required to have front yard setbacks on each street. A triple-frontage lot would be even more cumbersome and undesirable. For this reason, Staff recommends against a public street connection. The block formed by SW Leah Terrace-SW Alpine View-SW Benchview Terrace measures approximately 1,520 lineal feet, which meets the standard. Section 18.810.040.6.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. In the previous section, Staff recommended against a public street connection. However, it is appropriate to require a bicycle/pedestrian connection in accordance with 18.180.040.B.2. A feasible connection could be found between Lots .1 through 6. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. (TO BE FILLED IN BY PLANNING) Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(8) requires..that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. (TO BE FILLED IN BY PLANNING) 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 constructing sidewalks along all local residential street extensions and SW Bull Mountain Road, the applicant will meet this criterion. Sanitary Sewers: ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 6 0 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 are existing 8-inch main lines located in SW Alpine View and SW Leah Terrace. The applicant intends to extend new 8-inch main lines from each of these existing lines to serve the lots within this development. The preliminary plan meets this criterion. 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). This parcel is located at the top of the local drainage basin. There are no upstream flows that must be accommodated. 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). ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 7 0 0 In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant is proposing to detain the onsite stormwater in a large pipe with a flow control structure. Such a system is acceptable, provided the applicant meet specific detailed design criteria by the City, pertaining to accessibility for maintenance. Prior to construction, the details of the detention pipe system shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. The applicant also proposes to extend an existing public storm line from SW 134th Avenue to this site in SW Alpine View. This concept is acceptable to Staff. 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.. 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. 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. As was stated previously, a bicycle/pedestrian connection will be required between SW Leah Terrace and SW Bull Mountain Road, somewhere between Lots 1 through 6. The width of this connection shall be eight feet, per 18.810.110.C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 8 9 0 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 Bull Mountain Road. However, if the new lots will be served from existing underground utilities in either SW Leah Terrace or SW Alpine View, the applicant would not need to address this section. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 9 • Neighborhood Comments: Neighbors in the vicinity of this proposed development submitted several letters. Below is a summary of comments pertaining to public facilities, with Staff responses: SW Alpine View is a cut-through now, with speeding problems. Motorists are cutting through between SW Bull Mountain Road and SW Benchview Terrace, to avoid the speed humps on SW Benchview Terrace. The development will make this condition worse. Staff Response: The City Engineer is not aware of a significant cut-through problem on this street. Nor is he aware of a significant speeding problem. Staff personally visited the site during the PM peak period on September 4, 2001, and the AM peak period on September 5, 2001. In a 30-minute period during the AM peak period, Staff counted four vehicles traveling eastbound on SW Alpine View, turning south on SW 134th Avenue, and two vehicles traveling northbound on SW 134th Avenue, turning west on SW Alpine View. It is possible that these seven vehicles cut through, but this number would not be considered a significant problem. During a-45-minute * session during the AM peak. period,. Staff counted vehicles at both the intersection of SW 134 h Avenue/SW Alpine View and at SW Alpine View/SW Benchview Terrace. Staff counted a total of three vehicles that traveled northbound on SW 134th Avenue, west on SW Alpine View;, then north on SW Mistletoe Drive. Staff assumed these three vehicles drove on to SW Benchview Terrace, and further assumed that they originated. from SW Bull Mountain Road attempting to avoid the speed humps as suggested by the neighbors. Staff also.counted 78 vehicles ..traveling northbound on SW Benchview Terrace, passing by the intersection at SW Alpine View. Based upon these numbers, with the assumptions made, only 3.8% of motorists might use SW 133rd Avenue-SW 134th Avenue- SW Alpine View as a cut-through. Staff finds this is not a significant issue. In 1999, the Engineering Department was asked to investigate a potential cut-through problem on SW 134th Avenue. The thought was that vehicles were using SW 134th Avenue and SW Alpine View as a cut-through. The neighbors were also complaining about speed. The City conducted their investigation during the first week in September 1999, after school began. They found that the 85th percentile speed was 23.5 MPH northbound, and 24.6 MPH southbound; clearly not a speeding problem. The City also found that the total volume on SW 134th Avenue (south of SW Alpine View) was 271 vehicles per day. Given that the average single family residence generates approximately 10 vehicle tri~s per day, and given that there are at least 27 homes in the area of SW 1341 Avenue, SW Mountain Ridge Court and SW Alpine View, that volume makes sense. Therefore, the City ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 10 0 0 confirmed that there was not a cut-through problem. In addition, since a local residential street is designed to carry up to 1,500 vehicles per day, Staff finds that there is not a capacity issue here either. Staff also finds that this development will not create a cut-through, nor will it make any cut-through problem worse, as trips generated by this development will be either leaving or entering the site. • There is a safety problem at the intersection of SW Alpine View/SW 134th Avenue. Vehicles are driving over the bumps placed by the City. Staff Response: The City installed small yellow bumps down the centerline of SW Alpine View at the intersection with SW 134th Avenue, to assist in marking the two travel lanes. Motorists turning left from SW 134th Avenue tend to cut the corner. Staff witnessed a small percentage of vehicles cutting the corner during a site visit. It is not apparent that there is a significant safety issue at that intersection. However, if such a condition were to develop there, the City Engineer could review other options at that time. Staff is not convinced this development will create a safety problem at the intersection. SW Leah Terrace will become a cut-through; if connected. This street should be terminated with a cul-de-sac. ..Staff Response: Staff does not agree that SW Leah Terrace would become a cut-through. The number of turns a vehicle would have to make would most .certainly require more time than would be required to use SW Benchview Terrace from SW Bull Mountain Road. SW Leah Terrace will likely see 50% of the new site-generated trips using that roadway. The site should generate an average of 180 trips per day. Therefore, there may be an increase of approximately 90 vehicle trips on SW Leah Terrace, due to this development. That is not a significant increase. In addition, the volumes on SW Leah Terrace will be well under the maximum capacity of 1,500 vehicles per day. The length of SW Leah Terrace, from SW Bull Mountain Road, is presently 430 feet. This roadway could not be terminated with a cul-de-sac due to the maximum cul-de-sac length standard of 200 feet, required by 18.810.030.K. • Make sure this development does not create a downstream stormwater problem. Staff Response: As was stated previously in the report, the developer will provide onsite detention via a large pipe. The preliminary calculations for the detention pipe show that there will be plenty of capacity to handle the flows from this development. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 11 9 0 • Where will construction vehicles park? Staff Response: The applicant will be required to provide onsite parking for construction vehicles. This condition will also apply throughout the home construction phase. Construction vehicles will not be permitted to park on existing local residential streets. Enforcement of the condition during the public improvement phase could include a Stop Work Order. Enforcement during the home construction phase could include withholding of inspections, withholding issuance of further permits or fines levied by the Code Compliance Officer. Public Water System: This site will be served from the City's public water system. There are existing 8- inch water lines located in SW Leah Terrace and SW Alpine View. The Public Works Department commented that the applicant will need to pay for the removal of the existing water service from SW Bull Mountain Road. The applicant will be required to either cut in or live tap the public line in SW Alpine View. The City will tap the line in SW Alpine View for water services for Lots 11 through 14. All other water services must be installed by the applicant's contractor. Storm Water Qualitv: . 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 applicant has proposed to construct a vegetated swale offsite in Jack Park, which is a City park located downstream of this development, north of SW Walnut Street, and east of SW 128th Avenue. The applicant, CWS and the City have met to discuss this proposal, and Staff believes it is a feasible solution. A two-stage approach has been suggested where the applicant would construct a vegetated swale of a size that would equate to what is needed to treat the stormwater from this development. They would remove the existing blackberry ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 12 0 growth along the riparian area adjacent to the main stream channel and enhance the stream buffer, as a part of the project. Stage.2 would include the conceptual design of a larger regional facility(ies) that could be developed within the City- owned park and greenspaces downstream. The City would be able to use the conceptual plan to develop additional facilities or expand the one to be constructed by the applicant. Staff is in support of this concept and recommends the City continue to work with the applicant and CWS. If the Jack Park concept is not approved, the applicant will need to provide an' onsite water quality facility. The applicant's plan does not show how an onsite facility could be accommodated, but Staff believes it is feasible for the applicant to accommodate such a facility. It may require the applicant to lose one lot (perhaps Lot 10). Prior to the City accepting the applicant's water quality facility as a public facility, the developer shall maintain it for a minimum of three years after construction is completed. The facility shall be located in a tract and conveyed to the City on the final plat. The developer will be required to submit annual reports to the City which show what maintenance operations were conducted on the facility for that year. Once the three-year maintenance period is completed, the City will inspect the facility and make note of any problems that have arisen and require them to be resolved before the City will take over maintenance of the facility. In addition, the City will not take over maintenance of the facility unless 80 percent of the landscaping is established and healthy. If at any time during the maintenance period; the landscaping falls below the 80 percent level, the developer shall immediately reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity. 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. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 13 • 0 A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of all lots, and show that they will be graded to insure that surface drainage is directed to the street or a public storm drainage system approved by the Engineering Department. For situations where the back portions of lots drain away from a street and toward adjacent lots, appropriate private storm drainage lines shall be provided to sufficiently contain and convey runoff from each lot. . The design engineer shall also indicate, on the grading plan, which lots will have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that will have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections and/or permits will be necessary when the lots develop. This site is less than five acres, so a NPDES permit is not required. Address Assianments: 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 approval of the final plat. For this project, the addressing fee will be $540.00 (18 lots X $30/address = $540.00). Survev Reauirements The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic control network. These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the. subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: • GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. • By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS. INCLUDING GRADING, EXCAVATION AND/OR FILL ACTIVITIES: ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 14 • • Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to commencing onsite improvements, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project to cover all onsite infrastructure improvements, the half-street in SW Bull Mountain Road, and any other work in the public right-of-way. Eight (8) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tiaard.or.us). As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement (if one is required) and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include-the vehicles of any contractor or. subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Division which indicate that they will construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of SW Bull Mountain Road. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for a major collector street from curb to centerline equal to 22 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; ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 15 • • E. 6 foot concrete sidewalk; F. street trees behind the sidewalk 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 Bull Mountain Road in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. The applicant's public improvement construction drawings shall indicate that full width street improvements, including traffic control devices, mailbox clusters, concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement, sanitary sewers, storm drainage, street trees, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed within the interior subdivision streets. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to local street standards. A profile of SW Bull Mountain Road shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. The minimum paved widths of the local residential street extensions shall be 32 feet. The applicant's construction plans shall show that the eyebrow comer at SW Leah Terrace and the north/south segment will meet the Washington County detail No. M-405.5. The applicant's construction plans shall show a public bicycle/pedestrian path connection between SW Leah Terrace and SW Bull Mountain Road. This connection shall be a minimum of 8 feet in width, located within an 8- foot wide public easement or a tract conveyed to the City, and can be located between any of Lots 1 through 6. The pathway shall be constructed of either concrete or asphalt, per the City's public improvement design standards. The applicant's construction plans shall provide specific detail for the proposed stormwater detention pipe system. The applicant's engineer shall coordinate with the City Engineer and Public Works Director in developing a plan that will ensure ease of maintenance and accessibility for City staff. Any extension of public water lines shall be shown on the proposed public improvement construction drawings and shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Water Department, as a part of the Engineering Department plan ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 16 i • review. NOTE: An estimated 12% of the water system costs must be on deposit with the Water Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans from the Engineering Department and construction of public water lines. Final design plans and calculations for the proposed public water quality facility shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) as a part of the public improvement plans. Included with the plans shall be a proposed landscape plan to be approved by the City Engineer. The proposed facility shall be dedicated in a tract to the City of Tigard on the final plat (unless the facility is constructed within Jack Park, as proposed). As a part of the improvement plans submittal, the applicant shall submit an Operations and Maintenance Manual for the proposed facility for approval by the Maintenance Services Director. The facility shall be maintained by the developer for a three-year period from the conditional acceptance of the public improvements. A written evaluation of the operation and maintenance shall be submitted and approved prior to acceptance for maintenance by the City. Once the three-year maintenance period is completed, the City will inspect the facility and make note of any problems that have arisen and require them to be resolved before the City will take over maintenance of the facility. In addition, the City will not take over maintenance of the facility unless 80 percent of the landscaping is established and healthy. If . . at any time during the maintenance period, the landscaping falls below the 80 percent level, the developer shall immediately reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity. If the applicant's proposal for the Jack Park water quality facility is not approved, then they shall provide a facility onsite. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment. Control Design and Planning Manual, December 2000 edition." A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of all lots, and show that they will be graded to insure that surface drainage is directed to the street or a public storm drainage system approved by the Engineering Department. For situations where the back portions of lots drain away from a street and toward adjacent lots, appropriate private storm drainage lines shall be provided to sufficiently contain and convey runoff from each lot. The design engineer shall indicate, on the grading plan, which lots will have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that will have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections and/or permits will be necessary when the lots develop. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 17 0 • THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $540.00. (STAFF CONTACT: Kit Church, Engineering). The final plat shall show a minimum 44-foot ROW width for the new internal street extensions. The final plat shall show a separate landscape easement for the street trees. The landscape easement shall be in addition to the standard 8-foot public utility easement. The final plat shall contain a restriction whereby Lots 1 through 6 shall not be permitted to access directly onto SW Bull Mountain Road. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall demonstrate that they will form and incorporate a homeowners association. They shall also develop CC&R's for this project that clearly indicate the association will be responsible for the perpetual maintenance of the planter strip along the frontage of SW Bull Mountain Road. The north/south local street segment must be given a different name.. The preference would be to designate it with a number. However, if a number can not be assigned that fits well with the City's address grid system, then the applicant shall propose a name to be approved by the City Engineer. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic control network. These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: • GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. • By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 18 i • A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. B. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. C. The right-of-way dedication for SW Bull Mountain Road shall be made on the final plat. D. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive a letter from the City Engineering Department indicating: 1) that the City has reviewed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's surveyor, and 2) that the applicant has either completed any public improvements associated with the project, or has at least obtained the necessary public improvement permit from the City to complete the work. E. Once the City and County have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final plat for City Engineer's signature. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED-PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 6394171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to.: issuance of building permits, the applicant. shall provide the Engineering Department with a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. The City Engineer may determine the necessity for, and require submittal and approval of, a construction access and parking plan for the home building phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary, the applicant shall provide the plan prior to issuance of building permits. Prior to issuance of building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: 1) all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities, 2) all local residential streets have at least one lift of asphalt, 3) any off-site street and/or utility improvements are substantially completed, and 4) all street lights are installed and ready to be energized. (NOTE: model home permits may be ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 19 • • issued by the City apart from this condition, and in accordance with the City's model home policy). IN,;ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF,.THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT- CODE; THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LISTF 18.430.080 Improvement Aareement: Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: 1. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and 2. Include in the agreement provisions that if such work is not completed within the period specified, the City may complete the work and recover the full cost and expenses from the subdivider. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to be paid and may also provide for the construction of the improvements in stages and for the.extension of time under specific conditions thereimstated in the contract. 18.430.090 Bond: As required by Section 18.430.080, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: 1. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; 2. A surety bond executed by a surety company authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon which remains in force until the surety company is notified by the City in writing that it may be terminated; or 3. Cash. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Engineer an itemized improvement estimate, certified by a registered civil engineer, to assist the City Engineer in calculating the amount of the performance assurance. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 20 18.430.100 Filina and Recordinq: Within 60 days of the City review and approval, the applicant shall submit the final plat to the County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS Chapter 92. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.430.070 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: Centerline Monumentation In accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes 92.060, subsection (2), the centerline of all street and roadway rights-of-way shall. be monumented before the City accepts a street improvement. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 1. All centerline-centerline intersection points; 2. All cul-de-sac center points; and 3. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. Monument Boxes Reauired Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 21 18.810 Street & Utility Imnrovement Standards: 18.810.120 Utilities All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface-mounted transformers, surface-mounted connection boxes, and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above. 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required All improvements installed by the subdivider shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.810.180. 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 18.810.180 Notice to City Required Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 18.810.200 Engineer's Certification The land divider's engineer shall provide written certification of a form provided by the City that all improvements, workmanship and materials are in accord with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade, prior to the City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for operation and maintenance. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 22 • THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS, FROM THE `EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS'DECISION; . . istengXbdanA=mentslsubXsub2001-00004. doc ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision PAGE 23 R • MEMORANDUM TO: Brad Kilby FROM: Matt Stine, City Forester RE: Daffodil Hill Subdivision DATE: July 26, 2001 • As you requested I have provided some comments on the "Daffodil Hill Subdivision" project. If you have any questions or concerns regarding my comments please contact me anytime. 1. TREE PROTECTION DEVICES 18.745.030 0 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 20% 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. The details and specifications are included in this memo. 1.3. Provide a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, or installation of sediment and t • • 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. ■ Well-anchored. ■ 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. All tree protection devises shall be constructed according to the attached illustrations (Figures D-5 and D-6). 1.7. 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" 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. 1.8. Identify, on the Tree Protection Plan, the location of the stockpile area and the staging area (if different from the stockpile area). 1.9. All of this information must be included in the final plan's notes or drawings. • 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 maturitv. 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 anyone 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. i Bradley i(6 - Daffodil, Hill Subdiv_ision.d Page 1 t TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE SOUTH DIVISION COMMUNITY SERVICES • OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION July 30, 2001 Brad Kilby, Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: SUB 2001-00004 Daffodil Hill Subdivision Dear Brad, I have reviewed the submittal for the above named project and have the following comments: 1. Public streets shall have a maximum grade of 15%. Private fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed an average grade of 10% with a maximum grade of 15% for lengths of no more than 200 feet. Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 5%) with the exception of crowning for water run-off. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.6) 2. 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 roadway 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) 3. Approved fire apparatus access roadways and firefighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to stockpiling combustibles on-site or the commencement of combustible construction. (UFC Sec. 8704) Please contact me at (503) 612-7010 with any additional questions. Sincerely, Eric T. McMullen Deputy Fire Marshal k 7401 SW Washo Court, Suite 101 • Tualatin, Oregon •d(9. (503) 612-7000 • Fax (503) 612-7003 • www.tvfr.com • • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE July 19, 2001 TO: Jim Wolf. Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: 90 of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Brad Kilby. Associate Planner [x3881 Phone: [5031639-4171/Fax: [5031684-7291 "URBAN SERVICE AREA" SUBDIVISION [SUB] 2001-00004 ➢ DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION Q CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development S(raping A Better Community RECEIVED PLANNING SEP 11 2001 CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of an 18-lot subdivision of 3.16 acres. The lots are to be developed with detached single-family homes. The lot sizes for this development would range from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. LOCATION: 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109BA, Tax Lot 1400. The project is located on the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road and south of SW Alpine View. Southwest Leah Terrace is proposed to extend into the project and loop into SW Alpine View. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single- family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.420, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720, 18.725, 18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: AUGUST 2. 2001. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING'ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: (,Please provide tf fofrowing information) Name ofPerson Ms ommentmg: ~ . Ao\:F I Fhone Number. of our office. *-"o • • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE Iu~119.2001 TO: John BoV. Property Manager/Operations Department FROM: M of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Brad Mlb2. Associate Planner [13881 Phone: 150316394171/Fax: 15031684-1291 "URBAN SERVICE AREA' SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2001-00004 ➢ DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION Q CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development Shaping A Better Community RECEIVED PLANNING JUL202001 CITY OF DGARD REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of an 18-lot subdivision of 3.16 acres. The lots are to be developed with detached single-family homes. The lot sizes for this development would range from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. LOCATION: 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109BA, Tax Lot 1400. The project is located on the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road and south of SW Alpine View. Southwest Leah Terrace is proposed to extend into the project and loop into SW Alpine View. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single- family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.420, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720, 18.725, 18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: AUGUST 2. 2001. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: _ We have reviewed the o al d have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. /Written comments provided below:. P F of -lv lJ, l~ i i'i►.~ ,~~a~? 4~1cJD~ ~✓fF dry ~1G F~ ~o ~5 --A 40 atc 44 d- A66 w(Please provide thefomwing information) Aame ofPersontsTCoIn menhng: ~ Phone "umber. (d~9 c/ REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community (Development ShapingA Better Community DATE: 1019, 2001 TO: §0 Lampella. Building Official RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: 0 of Tigard Planning Division J U L 2 3 2001 STAFF CONTACT: Brad Kilby. Associate Planner [x3881 CITY OF TIGARD Phone: [5031639-4171/Fax: [5031684-1297 "URBAN SERVICE AREA" SUBDIVISION [SUB] 2001-00004 ➢ DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION Q REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of an 18-lot subdivision of 3.16 acres. The lots are to be developed with detached single-family homes. The lot sizes for this development would range from 5,464 square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. LOCATION: 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109BA, Tax Lot 1400. The project is located on the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road and south of SW Alpine View. Southwest Leah Terrace is proposed to extend into the project and loop into SW Alpine View. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single- family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet: Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.420, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720, 18.725, 18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: AUGUST 2. 2001. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to resoond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE'CHECK=THE-FOLLOWING~ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: >.t.IT Coc.~oa of our office. i 4 Q uE PA,-_ I &l 44~ Z"4r_ ft(ease provide the foaowing infomatYon) Name ofFersonfinommentmg: I Phone Number. ~~Z. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community Development Shaping.A Better Community DATE 1 ►19.2001 TO: Dennis Koellermeier, Operations Manager RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: 0 of Tigard Planning Division J U L 31 2001 STAFF CONTACT: Brad KilbV. Associate Planner [x3881 CITY OF TIGARD Phone: [503163941111Fn (5031684-7297 "URBAN SERVICE AREA' SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2001-00004 ➢ DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION Q REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of an 18-lot subdivision of 3.16 acres. The lots are to be developed with detached single-family homes. The lot sizes for this development would range from 5,464 . square feet to 9,152 square feet in size. LOCATION: 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109BA, Tax Lot 1400. The project is located on the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road and south of SW Alpine View. Southwest Leah Terrace is proposed to extend into the project and loop into SW Alpine View. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single- family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.420, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.720, 18.725, 18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: AUGUST 2. 2001. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. I,PLEASE CHECK'THE,FOLLOWINGITEMS.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: '~*6a AQ b2 (Nfoit~il raryw~,~.~.~p~a rs dcu olD LJ2.1 ML 9 A... Lf. OL ?110 f-d, ~ WAXY u o 10 ` A) l i_b ~i ►~'d l L/n ~!'t S 4r IL[L>!~ 4t__1 t!iLi~ L[.~c (c~E~",~'---y~=~~'7 t.►a Mf~ i e*rJ 74 Av /JA kj,, 91 &_14 ( ` 0 ~"a,c r lC~o 1 d / acef a -d ~P4 ai l ' - a6l old (T&ze pmae thefo[Imcving infomwtion) Name ofPersonlMommenhng: I N Phone Numlber. • • EXHIBIT C (Neighborhood Comments) RECEIVED PLANNING AUG 0 8 2001 CITY OF TiGARI) August 1, 2001 City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 To whom it may concern: I am writing concerning the proposed subdivision on Bull Mountain to be called Daffodil Hill, your case number 2001-00004 and tax lot number 1400. My family and I are neighbors of this proposed subdivision and reside at 13656 S.W. Alpine View. We have been residents of the Three Mountains Estate subdivision for 10 years, first living in a home along 134th Drive. In fact, we are the family with the second longest tenure in that neighborhood. I am sure that most of our neighbors would agree that it has always been our neighborhood's expectation that this property would some day be developed for residential housing. Yet is with surprise and dismay that we have learned that the proposed subdivision plan calls for an 18-home development on this 3.16-acre parcel with lot sizes beginning at just under 5,500 square feet. Despite meeting Metro 80 percent density requirements, such density is far out of character from existing, encircling neighborhoods. But out-of-character density is but one concern shared by many. I am confident that all adjoining neighbors and many residents of the area some distance away believe that this development will only add to serious, unresolved traffic safety issues. The proposed Daffodil Hills Subdivision, with a street emptying onto Alpine View, greatly elevates serious traffic problems along Alpine View and 134th Drive. These issues have been previously brought to the city of Tigard's attention, including to deceased Mayor Jim Nicoli. This traffic problem was escalated b, the addition of speed bumps on Benchview several years ago. Today, many motorists use 1341 and Alpine View has a cut-through traffic "Bonsai Pipeline" extension from Bull Mountain Road to Benchview, thereby avoiding at least one of the speed bumps the city has placed along Benchview. The natural incline and decline of Alpine View only adds to these motorists' traveling speed and propensity for either cutting the corner at 134th and Alpine View with too great of speed or too 0 sharp of an angle. Considering the blind nature of this corner due to the location of a home near the street, this is a serious accident location waiting to happen. The safety of this corner transcends auto or motorist safety. That section of 134th is a natural (flat) play area for the many neighborhood children, who are in danger of being struck by a car going to fast or cutting the corner. Some time ago, in respond to neighborhood concerns, the city rejected the request for a traffic stop sign and instead placed traffic control elevated nipples on Alpine View and its intersection with 134th. Instead of following the line of those street nipples, most motorists drive over them and cut the corner too fast. The addition of this new overly dense subdivision with a street emptying onto Alpine View will only mean more traffic along Alpine View, at the dangerous 134th/Alpine View corner and along 134th Drive as it curves over to Bull Mountain Road. Please come evaluate this area yourself. You will find that the new street from the proposed development will enter Alpine View just east of a crest in the hill of Alpine View. This will mean traffic leaving the new subdivision will enter onto Alpine View below the line of sight of drivers sailing along from Benchview to Bull Mountain Road. The result?A serious accident. I believe you will also find that the cut-through traffic along 134th and Alpine View is not immediate neighborhood traffic and that this local, neighborhood street is being used as a collector street in lieu of Benchview. In evaluating the acceptance of this proposed subdivision, please consider the following safety issues: ■ the cut-through traffic from Benchview to Bull Mountain Road through Three Mountains Estates; ■ the line of sight issue due to the incline of Alpine View that will imperil motorists leaving the new subdivision and entering onto Alpine View; ■ the safety of neighborhood children who play in the street; ■ the corner safety issues at 134`h and Alpine; ■ and the increased traffic generated by the density of the proposed development. I believe if you review these matters in person (and not in the slower dog days of August traffic), you will agree that there are serious traffic issues. And I hope that you will agree these issues are greatly exacerbated by the creation of this proposed development with its higher proposed density and plan to dump traffic along Alpine View. We strongly request that the proposed density of this subdivision be decreased and that the traffic pattern for the subdivision not be allowed to include a street entering onto Alpine View. Any other decision will greatly add to an already dangerous public safety and traffic problem. If I can be of any assistance or to discuss our concerns further, you may reach me at 503-670- 2814. Sincerely RECEIVED PLANNING 6/3/01 City of Tigard, RE: Proposed "Daffodil Hill" Subdivision - 3.06acres 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road Developer: George Marshall Tax Lot ID - 2S 109BAO 1400 JUL ' _ ? 2001 CITY OF TIGARD The undersigned have objections to and concerns about the potential extension of Leah Terrace and the 18 lots that would be placed there. Some of the signers below attended a meeting with the future developer of the property on 5/29. Basically, we were told nothing except that "you the City" turned down a "14 lot" proposed development and this I was out of their control. They took "no minutes". Also I would like it to be known that some residents as far away as 1 mile attended this meeting, thereby showing that this is not ',lust a concern of the immediate neighborhood BUT rather how the city is responding to the citizens in general on Bull Mountain. Concerns: No CCRs: the developer didn't say there would be none BUT he wasn't sure if there would be some. From the meeting these questions were asked: What are setbacks? What type of roofs? What type of siding? How many square feet? Parking? Other CCR issues that the entire hill is bound by (ie antennas / clothes lines/ etc.) Traffic: we already have a big traffic concern on most of this hill and this will aggravate it. Number 1 - too many additional lots Number 2 - being made a through street to Alpine this will now be used as a cut-through from Rill Mt Rol anal RenchviPw to threw Mnnntaine thereby avoiding the speed bumps on BenchvieW. The egress from Leah Terrace onto Benchview South is already a disaster due to design and allowing the erection of a wall - Compatibility: this proposal "changes the character of the neighborhood" and potentially "devalue" our property. All (>95%) of the homes within %2 mile in any direction are on a lot of at least 10,000sf / they were required to be 2500sf minimum / they have three car garages / they were required to have shake or tile roofs / they were required to have cedar siding, brick, stucco or stone fronts / they were required to be setback 25-30ft from the curb / they were required to abide and follow the CCRs. Construction: nothing is in writing about the impact to the streets and potential dangers to the children in the surrounding area while large equipment is brought and stored on-site for use. What happens when they tear up the street they use as access - will the City repave it afterward? Where is the equipment going to sit? On Leah Terrace / on Alpine? These are the concerns brought about at the initial meeting by the developer and are not intended to address all issues of all concerned parties. Attached is a short list of signatures that wish to oppose this development as currently proposed. A more extensive signature campaign is in force and will be presented within the week. We were restricted by the short time frame we felt, in order to address some issues. Attached is a revised plot (not an engineered drawing) that would be more livable to those concerned, if other issues (i.e: CCRs) were also addressed. Thank You, John Naegeli 13 874 SW Leah Terrace Tigard, OR 97224 See attached signatures: ppOSptL To C~V T pR S OF THESE OpRPpSB DApFO LL S IG THE DNICK pRppE To 433u - ~e§, ,~y►~ t 1- t ~51 1-3 Sj r L6 per.' ✓ N mil ~ c ~ f.ffzcs v T pR~ppSAL N E 3ppQSED TCFOR ILI- 5 TpIO _ D SIGN TURES DNICK 1) TY TD THE ADDRESS Vre.~ ~ 3 Y6 4 g, NAME _ ~ . n61~. ~ Z UV ' s - RECEIVED PLANNING AUG 01 2001 Mr. Brad Kilby, Associate Planner CITY 0r' TIGARD Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Kilby, July 30,2001 RE> OPPOSITION TO THE DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION AS PROPOSED Building 18 homes on 3.16 acres works out to about 5500 sq. ft. per home site. We built our home five years ago at 13791 SW Alpine View. We paid more than we wanted to at the time, but did so knowing (or thinking) all properties adjacent to Hillshire and Three Mountain developments would be approxamately 11,000-16,000 sq. ft. Since all the lots around us are this size, we expected the "Zednic Property" (Daffodil Hill) which is across the street from us, to be the same as the surrounding lots. There are four telephone and utility hook up poles established and sticking out of the ground along Alpine View on the empty lots, with a distance of 320 ft. totally. We were under the assumption that four houses would be built across the street from us, facing Alpine View and each lot would be around 8000-10,000 sq. ft. We therefore picked our lot and proceeded to build our home across the street. The smallest home allowed in Hillshire development is 2500 sq. ft. With the 5000 sq. ft. lots proposed for Daffodil Hill, that would mean that probably all 18 homes built there would be 2500 sq. ft. OR LESS. We are concerned this will reduce our property values greatly. I truly do not feel that if on this proposed property, only 13-14 homes are built, it is going to be such a great deviation from what the Metro Plan is trying to instill. It will however, be a very equitable meeting halfway with homeowners and current TAXPAYERS to not hurt them financially and it will finish oilthe "Hillshire Development" on Bull Mountain Road, thus making the "ENTIRE" area look like it belongs. V Also, we submit a suggestion to be considered so as not just to complain to you without an alternative.. All of us, when we moved into our homes on Alpine View, knew about Leah Terrace being extended someday, but not one of us felt it would EVER end up coming out onto Alpine View, thus adding even more traffic than we have now (which is a real problem right now) We have discussed this with each other and felt that Leah Terrace would be extended and become a cul de sac at the end. With 14 home sites this could easily be done with lots 7000-10,000 sq. ft. This would also allow the developer to build four homes on Alpine View in the $500-600K price range on 10,000 sq. ft. lots. (with a view) Obviously, the other sites would be more in the $400K price. It seems that the main controvercy in this whole Daffodil Hill sub-division is the construction of four homes. Current residents want fourteen homes built where the plan calls for eighteen. We ask that you please reconsider and build fourteen homes in a cul de sac, thus keeping speeding traffic off our streets in Hillshire and making our streets safe for our children. We realize the Metro Plan is trying to stop the growth of urban sprawl and the shrinking of our farmlands, but these four homes in the Daffodil Hill sub-division are not going to make or break this plan, but it will make a heavy impact on "OUR NEIGHBORHOOD." Thank you for listening to our concerns. J Gretchen Drennen Hillshire Residents' Association, President \ t On ~~IAJ 9 Y mac, , 10 c G : 5-h Oj 00 00 M q a W lsY-' -^t• O J 11D~ t 'rye. (h 1 O O v / 4 b ( \ 1 a t^ 1 00 ~~A + e o Q t t 43 ~ .S f 44 I 1~1 0 you THREE MOUNTAINS ESTATES OWNERS ASSOCIATION July 31,2001 RECEIVED PLANNING Brad Kilby AUG 01 2001 Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd CITY OF TIGARD Tigard, OR 97223 Re:Your file #SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2001-0004 DAFFODIL HILL Dear Mr. Kilby: Three Mountains Estates is located adjacent to the east and downhill from subject subdivision. We have a number of concerns. First where the proposed lot size is so much smaller than those of the surrounding developments, it is a very real possibility that smaller and less expensive houses will be built on them reducing the property values of adjacent home owners. If that reduced lot size is required by regulation claims by injured homeowners could arise. Second, we understand that protective covenants which could assure quality construction and maintenance have not been proposed by the developer. Adequate covenants alone would go a long way to assuage the concerns of the surrounding homeowners and quite possibly be beneficial to the developer if the development or sale of lots is prolonged. Finally,we have received complaints that drainage from earlier uphill developments have adversely affected plantings and lawns in some of our lots and we ask that provision be made to assure that no aciVdiWIW surface or ground water escapes the subdivision by reason of the development other than to an adequate storm water disposal system. ncerely, ,G Thoma E. Withycom esi ent Three Mountains Estate Owners Association 13441 SW Mountain Ridge Ct. Tigard, OR 97224 • July 30, 2001 Brad Kirby City of Tigard - Associate Planner 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Daffodil Hill Subdivision 0 V/ RECEIVED PLANNING AUG 0 2 2001 CITY OF WARD Mr. Kirby, We are writing to you to express our concerns about the Daffodil Hill Subdivision as presently planned by the developer. We understand that this property is within the urban growth boundary and support a housing development project. Our concerns in order of importance to us are: 1. The development as presently planned does not fit with the surrounding neighborhoods. The lot sizes are approximately half the size of the surrounding homes. This does not leave adequate space to build a home of equal.w -greater value to the existing homes. It does not seem to us that the land use needs in this area have changed so significantly in the past 5 years since our home was built and do not want to be financially penalized by urban boundary politics. 2. We believe there is a better way to provide access to the homes in this new development without creating a through street. We are concerned that making Leah Terrace a through street will increase traffic turning left onto Benchview will increase the number of traffic accidents there due to the poor visibility which exists at this intersection today. We have signed a counter proposal which John Naegeli has already submitted. 3. The developer has not committed to CCR's which would help to maintain building standards (minimum square feet of livable home, construction materials, etc.) consistent with the neighboring developments. We hope that you take these concerns as seriously as we do. As citizens of Tigard, we look for the people responsible for the planning the growth or our city to protect our interests and the Bull Mountain area within the city of Tigard a better place to live. Developments which do not match with the surrounding neighborhoods, on lots as small as 5000 square feet will not protect the interests of the citizens who live next to this development. We ask that you take our counter proposal under consideration and move this matter before the planning commission Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Concerned Citizens, 'ga" 1Ralph and Nancy Elam 14355 SW Racely PL Tigard, OR 97224 13855 SW Alpine View Tigard, OR 97224-1790 July 27, 2001 RECEIVED PLANNING Mr. Brad Kilby, Associate Planner Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Kilby: JUL 3 0 2001 CITY OF TiGARD We object to the Daffodil Hill Subdivision as proposed for the following reasons: - Building eighteen homes on 3.16 acres with 5-7000 square foot lots will reduce the value of homes in the adjacent Hillshire Summit No. 2 and Three Mountain developments. Most of our lots are 2 to 3 times this size, with homes ranging from $400,000 to over $1,000,000 in value. - The proposal to exit the traffic from the Daffodil Hill subdivision onto Alpine View is unsatisfactory. This street already has very serious speeding problems and is used by through traffic to avoid the speed bumps on Benchview. Truck traffic appears to increase daily as more drivers discover this short cut. - Children use Alpine View to play in because there are no parks in this area. In no way should an already serious problem be compounded by designing another street to empty onto it. SW Leah Terrace could be extended with a cul de sac at the end. This would not facilitate the placement of 18 lots, but there could be 12 to 14 and the area would not invite additional "cut through" traffic. Let's give the good people (who are, of course, taxpayers) in the existing neighborhoods in this area a break. Thank you for your serious consideration of our deep concerns. Sincerely, Caroly . 0 E Ned now J Brad Kilby Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Kilby: July 23, 2001 RECEIVED PLANNING JUL 2 4 2001 CITY OF TIGARD This is in response to your file number SUBDIVION (SUB) 2001-00004. Developing this 3.16 acres into residential plots certainly seems appropriate; however, there are issues that need to be considered. First, the size of the lots proposed at 6000 square feet, more or less, are not in keeping with the lot sizes in the surrounding developments. A group of 18 lots bounded on three sides by much larger lots can do nothing but reduce property values of the surrounding area. The 18 houses to be built are forced to be smaller and of less value due to the size of lots. Second, all of the surrounding developments have well defined CC&Rs, whereas the developer indicated at a neighborhood meeting he did not intend to have restrictions. IA,my9vdgment the lot sizes should be increased to reflect those of the surrounding area and restrictions should be defined for those who intend to build. Anything less is unfair treatment for all of us who have invested substantially in our homes and do not expect to have the values eroded by substandard lot sizes and associated smaller homes. / Sincerely yours, Robert Hanson 14341 SW 134'x' Drive Tigard, OR 97224 Cc: Three Mountain Estates WO Board i r RECEIVED PLANNING OCT 11 2001 CITY OF TIA% October 9, 2001 Brad Kilby 13125 SW Hall Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Brad Kilby: Concerning Daffodil Hill, Where are the children going to play? Every piece of land on Bull Mountain and the surrounding areas have been slated for crammed in housing. The last homes are family-affording homes, with children and there has been no consideration for a place for them to play. I know that Metro has bought property supposedly for parks, but not for play areas. They are " preserves". TIGARD MUST PLAN FOR CHILDREN. Does every community surrounding us has a park and rec program? We pay some of the highest taxes in the Metro area, but as far as services, especially for families, I don't see them. Doesn't anybody in City Hall have children? You are really just creating a future ghetto here and on Gaarde. I hope in 20 years when you look back you will be proud of what you have created. Kathy Najdek 9 0 EXHIBIT D (Appeal Filing Form) 4I APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS TYPE II CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX. (503) 684-7297 The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate in local government. Tigard's Land Use Code, therefore, sets out specific requirements for filing appeals on certain land use decisions. The following form has been developed to assist you in filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what filing fees will be required or to answer any questions you have regarding the appeal process, please contact the Planning Division or the City Recorder at the phonelfax listed at the top of this form. GENERAL INFORMATION Property Address/Location(s) aRd Name(s) of the Application Being P Appealed:,Pf~iO'-~rv-t~iz/-, 13 7357- .4v11 How Do You Qualify As A Party?: Appellant's Address: City/State: //e-~*::~1 Zip: Day Phone Where You Can Be Reached:(V,29) Scheduled Date Decision Is To Be Final: 9-za- -©l Date Notice of Final Decision Was Given: 9-11511-62 FOR- STAFFUSE,,ONLY,', :Case No. (s); ,Case Name(s): Receipt No.:` AAplication"Accented By: l Date: ` Approved As To Form By. " Date. r.,D.enied As To Form By: x . Date: . Rev, 10rV96 hcurplnknaslier&lappealdoc.' Specific Grounds For Appeal or Review: REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS ✓ Application Elements Submitted: ❑ Appeal Filing Form (completed) ❑ Filing Fee (based on criteria below) > Director's Decision to Hearings Officer $ 250A0 > Expedited Review (deposit) > Hearing Referee $ 500.00 > Planning Commission/Hearing's Officer to City Council $1.745.00 Transcript) a Signatur (s) o PA APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS hcurpiMmasterMappeal (OVER FOR ADDITIONAL WRITING SPACE) PAGE 1 OF 1 • HARRIS - McMONAGLE ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERS - SURVEYORS 12555 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD OREGON, 97223 TEL. (503) 639-3453 FAX. (503) 6394232 September 27, 2001 APPEAL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD TYPE II, LAND USE DECISIONS FOR THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT OF "DAFFODIL HILL". Condition of approval No. 9 calls for a 8-foot wide public bicycle / pedestrian pathway connection from SW Leah Terrace to SW Bull Mountain Road, to be located along a side lot line of one of the future lots. We believe that there are significant problems with this requirement, which are explained as follows. The apparent reason for condition No. 9 is due to the maximum 1800 foot long block length requirement as stated in City Code Section 18.810.040 B 1. Under this section heading 1. b, you do not measure block lengths along the right of way line of arterials, highways, major collectors or railroads. Using these criteria when we measure the block length that is bounded by SW Leah Terrace, SW Alpine Drive and SW Bench View Drive, it measures 1550 feet, which is within the block length requirements. 2. Under Section 18.810.040 B 2. Topographical constraints are a reason for not constructing a pathway. The frontage of "Daffodil Hill" along SW Bull Mountain Road is faced with a 2:1 cut slope (equaling a 50% grade) the top of this slope is 8 to 12 feet higher than the curb line of the road, this is to steep for a pathway and instead would have to be a stairway. If this stairway was constructed it would in our opinion have the potential to cause a significant safety hazard for the following reasons. a.) As children will sometimes do, they will ride their bicycles and skateboards down the stairway, you may have seen this on television. Because this stairway would enter SW Bull Mountain Road at right angles at the bottom of the 50% slope there is a great possibility that they could shoot out into the roadway traffic. Speeds along SW Bull Mountain Road by the city's own monitoring are in the 45 to 50 MPH range, driver / kid reaction time would most likely be very small to avoid an accident. b.) The Oregon Transportation Planning Rule Sections 660-12-045 3 (E) (i), provides that a physical or topographic condition such as a steep slope are valid reasons not to construct a connection. c.) Under the same Section, (A) concerns access ways that are reasonably free from hazards, particularly type or levels of automobile traffic. d.) Under the same Section, (B) concerns a reasonably direct route of travel between destinations such as a store or transit stop. There are no stores or transit stop any where along the sites frontage. In the future if there were to be a transit stop it most likely • would be at SW Bench View Drive where the roadway is wide enough to accommodate a bus stop. Pedestrians from Daffodil Hill can walk westerly along the local street sidewalk of SW Leah Terrace to the bus stop, with very little traffic to contend with. This distance is approximately 950 feet, in comparison to a quarter of a mile, which is considered a reasonable walking distance to a bus stop. If the stairway were constructed the distance would be 800 feet, and considering the safety reasons it is not a good trade off. • • kr DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION APPLICATION SUPPORT INFORMATION OWNER/APPLICANT GEORGE MARSHALL PO Box 91010 Portland, OR 97291 ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. 12555 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 June 21, 2001 DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION APPLICATION SUPPORT INFORMATION TABLE OF CONTENTS REDUCED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PLANS SECTION I DATA SUMMARY AND REGULATIONS SECTION 2 INTRODUCTION SECTION 3 Il\iPACT STUDY SECTION 4 COMPLIANCE WITH CONMJNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 5 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PLANS (Full size) .................BOUND SEPARATELY Enclosed (1 com each) APPLICATION, INCLUDING FEE PRE-APPLICATION NOTES VESTING DEEDS PLAT NAME APPROVAL AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING INFORMATION LAND USE APPLICATION CHECK LIST ARBORIST PRELIN[INARY MEMORANDUM PRELMINARY STORM WATER DETENTION & QUALITY SIZING GEOTECFMCAL CONSULATION Enclosed (2 sets) ADDRESSED STAMPED ENVELOPES 0 SECTION 1 REDUCED DEVELOPMENT PLANS 3 3 MTN OR CITY F1110 M CMW=TDN OF ALL PU" WORK UTILITIES AND ROADWAYS RILL K N COfOMIMCE MM M oTr OF iRRMRD AND M CIENI uTOI sAYllxs STANDARDS, DAFFODIL H . .1 STDRY ORANABL INIS BURN PULL K EXTODID MUM SW AIPR[ WAY FROM M N101EEC11011 W SW. ISTIE MR. TO BMW TK GK. 1 TISANITARY M Sm SEWID1° 5YSm WILL K E"IALL OR. AU N S AND RILL K UL BE WD WD OMAT AS 5411 AS TROY lM 1EM ORK. TO SUM B 9 PRO\~m 4AMYY Sf UL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PLANS E WAl[1 ZEES 1`1 K EXIDOW 0101 S.W. LEAH WAY AND CONECIFD TO M S1ST01 N SW MPW M,C 11 M NMI Of WAY OF M ROAD TO K CINSTRWIED RILL K 42 FRT VIDE, MIN M PAYNO 13 SS FIXT VOL 6-FOOr MMMXS RRL K COIBTIOCtED W tDM TOES Or M N fTli[IT: FLOM UTILITY EASOMIS ML K PIIO\[tn AMITTNO M NWT Of MY LOWS. 0. SITE GRADING MIL C019ST Of EXCAVATING M ROADWAYS NO LOT / MA OIA04D 5 MIWDATED TO OEHLOP THIS 4R ALL EXCAVATED NATURAL, FROM AIE ROADWAYS AND a UTRITT ONNONTS RILL K KALKED BY TMIIX AWAY ROY M SITE W M APPR6v[D lAw SITE. w E 7. M RAN ORAM! FROM ALL TATS 5RL DISOIMCE TO M CLINT LNL A 10 1`001 VICE PRIVATE ORANACE EASOtNr ALONG M UST LOW Of LOTS 7 TH10104 10 WILL K PROMIED FOR M A COMM Of LOU E T140U01 10. N M EMIT MAI 11 MY K NIXDED. A 10-NW SIORY LARRAL WILL K EXIOIDEC FROM M STOR01 SYSTEM TO LOT 10 AS 9400. 6 W DWXLA 1 ACCESS FROM ON TO SW Out YONNIAN ROAD BY LOTS I T1MOLIGH 6 9ULL K R4YOM51TTD 9 . P°94'PmP!~Rmf°4'~9 0 b YID 1 I' ' , : I Sf11 -Y I `7- \ lot / I I I _r f 25 LOT I OT I 221 ( for 1 1 23 I I -1--' ---1--- f 11 1 N I I. L S H I R E S U M 4 I I N 0. 2 I I 1 es- / \ •ry \ r T ~ r__' i \ \_--L-----1'-----------~" W / - VIE T- L 01 ALPINE \ / 1 . 1 5T 4v2 \ L0 I 1, I to l / LOT i I \ 50 Sys 1 Z. al _ Z 1i' ) , LOT n: I. II I I f 1 I L > 49 $ i i i i.. !I I ' _ f ti r ' 1 _ I f 1 _ _ _ _ -1 2S- 1-0913A ► 1 - - f-- " 1 I I / W TAX LOT TERRACE TAX I OT< 1300 I 1400 I / II Lot J 1 1 f I i • : - - - OUNTAIN ROAD - t - - - - M - - - - _ - S.W. BULL - - ' - - - - 1- .-----L------ ~ BENCHMARK: 1 I ~ N U CITY OF TIGARD BENCH MARK N0.215. p l HAVING AN ELEVATION OF 660.35. I N` I I I I a I ~ d lurt ~~7 , r yH? ..p IT V .f'~f31W ~~~7 ;(~"R•9 ~J ~aI I,NY~ tl 1 "tA ` tt'1` PROJECT Nt !ON i LOCATION VICINITY MAP 110 SCAE GNORGR MARSHALL HARM 1`0. 0W NW40 PWruND, (ANOW I.YE51 ASSOC.. RIC. reDNC ICWT 91`1-NMO u660 S.W. TIAIL an. rTm. (6W) "I-1E66 Sr.ARD. ITIOW RYaa-ItTy/ TMONC (6W) E310-5405 rLL LOGO) 050-I2311 DAFFODIL HILL DEVELOPMEW FEVEW PLANE IIo ma1RSat4or 8110 14 pm m A t/4 A(i 9 Tvn1a~ s MM JUM I WW. 907LIRM IQ~x off or T GAIIA i4s11111mm 009m, Gi111= DEEM COUPWATION GROSS AREA TAX LOT 1400 135,137 S.f. (3.10 AC.) GROSS AREA 7RA07 'C'- 2.513 SF. (0.06 AC.) QRM "to= ANLjk- 07.W IF. (US At) PUBLIC R/W AREA (INTERIOR)- 20.804 S.F. (0.48 AC.) TOTAL- MET CE1 JWMDR AKA- 11E.W V. (!.M AC) MAxRA1)u HU148ER Oi LOTS: 110,846 SF./5.000 S.F. PER LOT- MINIMUM NUMBER OF LOTS; 23 LOTS 2J • BOfL~ IB LOSS AVERAGE LOT AREA: 116.846/113 LOTS- 6,491 S.F. shoot IndexE Preliminary Plat 1 of 3 Preliminary Grading Plan 2 of 3 Preliminary Utility Plan 3 of 3 I~ JUNE 80. 2001 LOT 1 / ! / \ 25 / LOT I LOT 1 I I I I \T \ 24 I 23 1 22T 1 LOT i 1 11 It ILLSII+I?E SUM"II I N0.2 I I ALPINE _N.51os-` - - -------~E \ 101 444 72 / J\~ I 1.01 10 h 1 I \ 51 5,92J S.F. 14 g 13 12 1 1 100' I 1 LOT 5,449 S.F. 5,961 SF 5,461 S.F. 6.326 S.F. b' LOT I 1 Ln 50 55' 55' 55' i$ (.1 I 1 \ I \ I S,•~jv \I O 65' I $ 6.o9 sF. 10 I I 1 I I~ V i - z= 1m z I 1 l \ S / - -pI - I$ F - - -9 ti 15 J 16 0 17 u 18 a R 6660 Sr / L01 g 6.151 S.F. 5.935 S.F. 5,606 SF- 6.166 Sr. 1~, I z I - / ! - - 1.9' 1.10' . 16 55' 77' Q° ov 1 -(2 _ l•9 LD'~ 1 T7 5' 5.66l S.F. Ig 1 _ i / r TERRACE - ;G 8.166 52 01.1! W TAX LOT '.54' L.32' 26' 66' 1300 t.j 1 I / ~ / ~ N 1.10• 1 / - - _ / / J - 2 - 3 4 6.19 Sf.6 9.11 SF. ` / ! / / L01 1 7.191 SF a 7,691 S.F. y 6.0.12 SF 1 ( / / 58 = 7.173 S.S. 1 Ir 60 1 1 63' b - _ \ - - - -1 - - - s eslrO9~ w in aAIN _ ROAD \ MOUNT N S.W. BULL L------------------ / U> I s' 11 I~ ~0I 9 a m 1 3 Q I I a I SCAL. 1 .Ip I N I I 1 1 GEORGE MARSHALL r.LYe V.O. BOi 91019 1_10' IIE"'`-01114KI100 MI`S DAFFODIL HILL ntolm (W31 291 =0 1 SAP. Viii 10011 901-9i6! Fla-PIA7 1 HARRIS-NcMONACIB ASSOCIATES, INC. 1-- W.LW PRELIMINARY PLAT r~ 0(HJI 10 (10CM T00 (AIW 0[ am -/W/01 1Wib. n 1>aif-WI r, nr.c f1a0 w-WI j._ ~ iii i / / - __-_i____ _ 9 ----.1 I I 1 \ r I LOT 25 / LOT 24 1 3 1 227 1 1.107 i } 11 1 / i \ LSHIRE SUMI~I i N0.2 wi LOI 48 STU S" LOT _ losm 10 51 14 13 12 11 _ - 1 1.01 1 - \ LOl Iv ; 10 1 50 Ilk, / _ ~ 1, r 1 1 p p 1 ~ I 7 _ / / C7 C! (01 15 16 17 C4 49 LY.Sw w 7 , U 1 4 7=_ fAX 101 1 - 1300 N. I .owl o= j I rte` i ~'j/ ! In EY S-UU I I lr 141! 5 6 1 1 Lol 1 f... i - - - - 6AD - - - - s M6UNTAI1 `r - - - - _ BULL s'--------------- - - - - w - ~l+J w_ W r LEGEND • ~I M sm WA n Z 1 ```I~ > 1 SWIM! son Wi > Q Q i SfUR1 0R/N CUM mm it 7 I :V) ' Q 1 I~ J , slab awl OEM) G - srxlvrr snm (msmc) ---ss SCML: 1•_a• 0 0 WERVIa wroRwnoR wo ROIEk azo.. M.L- I 1 1 P.O. m 01349 0190011 rm GP DAFFODIL HILL Rul• p 1 I S.O.P. PV_' "1 fw'P9R• PRE AL _ =-1=1= ~ HARRIS-NcYoNAGIS ASSOCIATES, INC. PRELIMINARY Q ..LW EK9YIRS_•an091• i i UTILITY PLAN RElNI 10 nucw FM urter "ON 4e 20/01 r l 1a. w nlu-.r .101c, Ma --m S "m bm maw:nm 1.01 I i I I r as Ta_..e / \ 1A I 1231 I 202T I IOIT I v.o 11111S11IRE SUMA~IT N0 2 ALP]IgE--~------~-- y I., r.. - euar pq a. ter _ „arse ` 1 0 101 i «.w MIEPo.q I ' -1 \ °p cn I 11 SID LOT 1 i i ;90 it , I liff I' n-m- 51 14 .1 QQ Q I 13 12 1 1 ;1 i -0~ I Q LO 48 F` -010 10 - - - 1 ~v 50T Va01 0664jj66 A 00 r \ 1 `£QQQ© ___er.-. \I► ° 00,06 age ii,0'a 14 APPLE (SSXX_E 3W LEAH TERRACE PROFILES / / - _ - - - Z - I~ '''vpI Z i 1 17 Loi = 15 6~ TOOER O I 49 I a`T c KS '8 6Y ± TFe~CE 1-~ 1 Q r TAX LOT . • I - n~ _ _1_ _ 1 . ~Ts~sa, i" - I _ r. l 1;1300 ZU -'A t / / N 11 ~la.r AP+ d.. ,ate / J 3, 4, 5; ; 6 { , Q r.a• anss t•.wwaa cno,r: / LOT - M1 2 f1'OI4 YA9MlR [bC[C L / r 11e0E I149rr1r arr[Gr 58 j W 1'I , I 1 rr' r-rnT-! uv m ' ' ( SW KU AOOUV Y /1010 '0 - - - - - - - - - - - - I _ _ rr''uc-} =.!a s• ,y -I N LLJ r i arrr a swrw +-~n- am Y.wwm aaawa_/ _ - - - - - \ I- La A e B L r YET-1 re,arn euor _ _ i TRE-E MITIGATION 1fFrAt SIWaT SPUTA W V " SW LEAN 1E7 P1PAOE IV) x arau p I b i+- a.+r e• ye rrw, r.n I d I 3 e b o n-rn' amt .re eao uq I- - - . MaRWTgN »a NOTES: GEORGE 1(AR9HAIA. DAFFODIL HILL„ I - _ a w.urc vovnP.. °1a°'M onsa'areor PROWL (003) t%-NN I-- - s.o.a. VAX: (oast am_- - °`bQR W.I.M. HARRIS-McMONAGIB ASSOCIATW. INC. PRELIMINARY 3 ■n. , aosru , u , rr.a I ra Irra, u au so. GRADING PLAN aETta TO nutty no U" IriNnON OE%x0ro, woP°e4a (°sep -Sal > 3 • SECTION 2 0 DATA SUMMARY AND REGULATIONS • -0 DATA SUMMARY SHEET Owner George Marshall & P.O. Box 91010 Developer Portland, Oregon 97291 Engineer Harris - McMonagle Associates & 12555 SW Hall Blvd. Surveyor Tigard, Oregon 97223 Description Tax Lot 1400, Map 1S-1-09BA Size 3.16 acres Request Subdivision: 18 single family lots. Location 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road. Zoning R-7 Contact: George Marshall Telephone: 503-291-2550 Fax 503-291-2555 Contact: Bill McMonagle Telephone: 503-639-3453 Fax 503-639-1232 Regulations: Tigard Community Development Code (TCDC) Applicable sections of the TCDC as follows: 18.390 Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study 18.430 Subdivisions 18.510 Residential Zoning Districts 18.705 Access/Egress/Circulation 18.715 Density Calculations 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.730 Exceptions To Development Standards 18.745 Landscaping & Screening Standards 18.765 Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements 18790 Tree Removal 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas 18.810 Street & Utility Improvement Standards SECTION 3 INTRODUCTION • • DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION APPLICATION INTRODUCTION LOCATION The project site is on the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road approximately 600 feet East of SW Benchview Terrace. The address of the dwelling on the site is 13735 SW Bull Mountain Road. The property is shown as Tax Lot 1400, Assessor's Map IS 1 09BA. SIZE The area of the site is approximately 3.16 acres. ZONING The site is in the R-7, Medium Density Residential District. Minimum lot areas in this district are 5,000 square feet. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The site is approximately 390 wide (east-west) along Bull Mountain Road and 365 feet deep (north- south). The site is bounded by SW Bull Mountain Road on the south, SW Alpine View on the north, single family residences on the east and west. SW Leah Terrace is stubbed out on the west line. There is one single family residence and two outbuildings on the property. There are eight old fruit trees and several shrubs near the house. Refer to the preliminary plat. Approximately seventy-five percent of the site slopes to the east the remainder to the west. Ground slopes vary from approximately I% to 10%. ADJACENT PROPERTIES The land adjacent to the project site is also in the R-7 zone. However, at the time of development the eighty percent density rule was not in effect and the lots in the abutting subdivisions are in excess of 10,000 square feet. There is a single family residence on a 0.86 acre lot adjacent to the southeast corner of the site. • PUBLIC FACILITIES • Water - There are existing water mains in SW Leah Terrace & SW Alpine View which have sufficient capacity to serve the site with line extensions. Sanitarv Sewer - There are existing sanitary sewer lines in SW Leah Terrace & SW Alpine View which have sufficient capacity to serve the site with line extensions. Storm Drainage - There is an existing storm sewer in SW 134`b Avenue. An extension from this storm line west in SW Alpine View will provide service to the site. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL As shown on the Preliminary Plat, the proposal is to develop an IS lot single family subdivision on the 3.16 acre site. Access to the site will be from SW Leah Terrace and SW Alpine View. The existing house and outbuildings will be removed. There is a possibility one of the old fruit trees will remain; this is dependent on the final grading plan. Please refer to the Arborist Report. As mentioned above, and shown on the preliminary plat public facilities; sanitary sewer, storm drainage and water supply are available and will be extended into the subdivision. Electricity, telephone, cable television and natural gas will be supplied by the private providers. The storm sewer which will serve the site discharges into the natural drainage course which flows through Jack Park. In lieu of an on site water quality facility the proposal is to mitigate some of the riparian area in Jack Park or construct a water quality facility for untreated water now entering the drainage course from the Bellwood subdivision. SECTION 4 IMPACT STUDY • • DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION APPLICATION IMPACT STUDY GENERAL The 3.16 acre site is the last portion of the former Zednik farm which comprised approximately 100 acres. The property has been developed over the years as the Hillshire subdivisions. Hillshire Summit and Hillshire Summit No. 2 are the plats abutting the site on the West and North. All of the infrastructure needed for development of the site was provided in the development of these subdivisions. The Daffodil Hill site was taken into consideration in the sizing of utilities and drainage facilities during the development of these Hillshire developments. TRANSPORTATION Traffic impacts will primarily be to SW Bull Mountain Road. The traffic created by the proposed project will not alter the level of service at the intersection of Benchview Terrace and Bull Mountain Road. During the Hillshire Summit development this intersection was widened to provide left and right turn lanes from Bull Mountain Road. The proposed project will complete the improvement of Bull Mountain Road across the frontage of the property. This will include a sidewalk. Sidewalks will be constructed on both sides of the internal streets. The extension of Leah Terrace through the project site will complete the street system originally planned. DRAINAGE The impact to the downstream drainage systems will be minimal as the project site was considered in the design of these systems. To further lessen the impact, a detention facility is being proposed for the portion of the site that drains to the northeast and the Fanno Creek basin. PARKS The nearest park facility is Jack Park which is approximately 1.5 miles north of the site. Just a bit farther north is Summerlake Park. Both of these parks have playgrounds and picnic areas. Cook Park which is approximately 3 miles southeast of the site provides numerous recreational facilities including access to the Tualatin River. These facilities are capable of accommodating the proposed project. • WATER SYSTEM • Potable water will be supplied to the proposed lots by extension of existing Tigard Water Department lines which are stubbed out to the site. There are large mains in Bull Mountain Road which serve the area. All of the facilities were designed to serve the entire development community. SANITARY SEWER Sanitary sewer has been stubbed out to the property. These lines are adequate for the proposed subdivision. Sewage is treated at the Clean Waxer Services Durham Treatment plant which has adequate capacity. NOISE The proposed subdivision will result in future single family dwellings which will be compatible with the surrounding single family neighborhood. • SECTION 5 COMPLIANCE WITH THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE • DAFFODIL HILL SUBDIVISION APPLICATION COMPLIANCE WITH SPECIFIC TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS NARRATIVE Chanter 18.390 - DECISION MA ONGAUMPACT STUDY 18.390.040 Tvve 11 Procedure Comment. The proposal 18 lot subdivision application is being submitted under a Type II procedure. The Applicant met with the City staff in a pre-application conference on May 1, 2001 as required by this Section and is providing the submittal information required Chanter 18.430 - SUBDIVISIONS 18.430.030 Annroval process Comment. The preliminary plat review is the first step in the subdivision approval process. This application is for approval of the preliminary plat through a Type II procedure in accord with TCDC requirements 18.430.040 Approval Criteria: Preliminarv Plat Comment. 1. The proposed preliminary plat complies with the applicable City ordinances and regulations. 2. The plat name "DAFFODIL HILL " was approved by the Washington County Surveyor's office on May 4, 2001 and is reserved for this property. 3. The street through the proposed subdivision will bean extension of SW Leah Terrace which is stubbed out on the west line. The street improvements will conform to all requirements of the City. 18.430.050 Submission Reauirements: Preliminarv Plat Comment. This application contains the general information required for a Type II procedure, as set forth in Chapter 18.390. Chanter 18.510 - RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Comment. The subject property is within the R-7: Medium Density Residential District. The proposed subdivision complies with the District standards as follows: • 18.510.030 Uses • Comment: The proposed lots will be developed as single family housing which is permitted outright in the R-7 District. 18.510.040 Minimum and Maximum Densities, Comment: This section requires that the property be developed to a minimum of 80% of the maximum density. The density calculations are shown on the Cover sheet of the Development Review Plans The maximum densityfor the site would be 22.6 lots; the minimum is the 18 lots proposed 18.510.050 Development Standards Comment: The proposed lots meet the development standards for the R-7 District as set forth in this section. Chanter 18.705 - ACCESS. EGRESS. AND CIRCULATION, 18.705.030 General Provisions, D. Public-street access Comment: All of the proposed lots will connect directly to a public street. K Minimum access requirements for residential use. Comment: Vehicular access for the lots will meet or exceed the requirements of this section. Chanter 18.715 - DENSITY COMPUTATIONS, Comment: The density computation is shown on the Cover sheet of the Development Review Plans. The computation was performed according to the provisions of 18.715.020. Chanter 18.725 - ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, Comment: All federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations will be complied with as well as those of the City of Tigard Chanter 18.745 - LANDSCAPING & SCREENING STANDARDS 18.745.040 Street Trees Comment: The subdivision improvements will include the planting of street trees in conformity with the size and spacing standards set forth in 18.745.040 C. A street tree planting list will be submitted with the final plat as provided under 17.745.040 B. • 0 18.745.050 Bufferine and Screening Comment: The proposed single family residential use is the same as the abutting development; therefore buffering and screening is not applicable. Setbacks and height restrictions for fences and walls will be observed as set forth under 18.745.050 C and D. Chapter 18.765 - OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING REOUIREMENTS Comment. At the time of house construction a minimum of one off-street parking space will be provided on each lot as set forth in Table 18.765.2. Chapter 18.790 - TREE REMOVAL Comment. Robert Mazany, Registered Arborist performed an on site tree inventory. A copy of his memorandum is enclosed with this application. His Memorandum states that there are seven apple trees on site. Due to the location of the trees and little flexibility with lot sizes due to the 80% density requirement there is some doubt that the trees will be retained Chapter 18.790 requires mitigation for removed trees. If grading and home construction requirements do not allow for the retention of my trees, the total number of diameter inches to be mitigated will be 110.7. A plan showing the location of the trees for mitigating the total number of existing trees is shown on sheet 3 of the Development Review Plans. Chapter 18.795 - VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS Comment The visual clearance requirements to assure proper sight distances at intersections will be implemented with development of the subdivision lots Chapter 18.810 - STREET & UTILITY IWROVEMENTS STANDARDS 18.810.030 Streets Comment. All street improvements will be constructed in accord with the City's street standards. SW Leah Terrace - The proposed section is a 44 foot right-of-way with 32 feet of paving, concrete curbs and 5 foot sidewalks The typical street section is shown on sheet 3 of the Development Review Plans. SW Bull Mountain Road - A one-half street improvement will be made across the frontage of the property. This improvement will consist of pavement 22 foot wide from centerline to curb with a 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk This improvement will be made in the existing right-of-way which is 35 feet wide from centerline to right-of-way line. 18.810.040 Blocks Comment. The length width and shape of the blocks has been designed to provide adequate building sites with as little disturbance to the natural land form as possible and to meet the restraints of the existing streets The perimeters of the blocks formed by the street do not exceed 1, 800 feet. • • 18.810.050 Easements Comment: There will be a ten foot wide public utility easement along the front lines of all lots. The front 2.5 feet of this easement will also be a landscape easement. 18.810.060 Lots A Size and share Comment: All of the lots meet the sizze and shape requirements of this section. No lot contains part of a public right-of-way within its boundaries and the lot depth does not exceed 2-1/2 times the average width B. Lot frontage Comment: All of the proposed lots will abut a public street for a width of at least 2.5 feet as required by this section. 18.810.070 Sidewalks Comment: Five foot wide sidewalks will be constructed along all lot frontages. A six foot wide sidewalk will be constructed along the site's Bull Mountain frontage. 18.810.090 Sanitarv Sewers Comment. Extensions from the existing sanitary sewers in SW Leah Terrace and SW Alpine View will serve the proposed lots. A preliminary sanitary sewer plan is shown on sheet 3 of the Development Review Plans All sanitary sewers will be constructed in conformity with the City and Clean Water Services requirements 18.810.100 Storm Drainage Comment: There is an existing storm sewer in SW 13e Avenue. An extension from this storm line west in SW Alpine View will provide service to the site. Underground stormwater detention will be provided on site. The storm sewer which will serve the site discharges into the natural drainage course which flows through Jack Park In lieu of an on site water quality facility the proposal is to mitigate some of the riparian area in Jack Park and/or conrtruct a water quality facility for untreated wistpr "nw enterma the drainage course from the Bellwood subdivision which abuts the park. 18.810.120 Utilities Comment: All utilities will be placed underground within the proposed subdivision as set forth in 18.810.120 A. 4 • • DAFFODIL HILL PRELIMINARY STORMWA TER DETENTION & WA TER Q UALIT Y SIZING REPOR T OWNER GEORGE MARSHALL PO Box 91010 Portland, Oregon 97291-0010 503-291-2550 ENGINEER/SURVEYOR Hams-McMonagle Associates Inc. 12555 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 503-639-3453 June 19, 2001 ~/4~ DAFFODIL HILL 0 PRELIMINARY STORMWATER DETENTION & WATER QUALITY SIZING REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages DISCUSSION 1-2 SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS TABLE 3 DETENTION POND SUMMARY 4 UNDEVELOPED SITE HYDROGRAPH - 2 YEAR EVENT 5 DEVELOPED SITE HYDROGRAPH - 2 YEAR EVENT 6 DETENTION HYDROGRAPHS - 2 YEAR EVENT 7 UNDEVELOPED SITE HYDROGRAPH - 10 YEAR EVENT 8 DEVELOPED SITE HYDROGRAPH -10 YEAR EVENT 9 DETENTION HYDROGRAPHS -10 YEAR EVENT 10 UNDEVELOPED SITE HYDROGRAPH - 25 YEAR EVENT 11 DEVELOPED SITE HYDROGRAPH - 25 YEAR EVENT 12 DETENTION HYDROGRAPHS - 25 YEAR EVENT 13 PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY DESIGN FORM 14 EXHIBIT "N 15 EXHIBIT `B" • 16 • t DISCUSSION DRAINAGE AREAS Approximately 2.4 acres of the 3.16 acre site drains northeast to the Fanno Creek basin. The remainder, approximately 0.76 acres drains southwest to the Tualatin River. The site is at the top of the hill so there is no offsite drainage. Slopes vary from approximately 1% to 10 % . Ground cover is meadow grass. There are eight fiuit trees, a house and barn. SOILS The SCS Soil Survey of Washington County (map 47) indicates the site is comprised of soil types 11B and 11 C which are Cornelius and Kinton silt loams and are in hydrologic group "C". SCS CURVE NUMBERS Runoff curve numbers are from the King County Surface Water Design Manual (1993), Table 3.5.2B. A copy of this table is enclosed. (Page 3) Curve number calculations are shown on the sub-basin summary and hydrograph sheets. TIME OF CONCENTRATION The times of concentration for each subcatchment are shown on the hydrograph summary sheets. DESIGN STORM FLOWS Hvdrocad_ software developed by Applied Microcomputer Systems, was used to compute the drainage hydrographs for each sub-basin and peak flow rates for each reach in the storm sewer system. This was done using the Santa Barbara Hydrograph Method with Type IA rainfall distribution and 24-hour rainfall amounts as follows: 2 year event 2.50 inches 10 year event 3.45 inches 25 year event 3.90 inches UNDEVELOPED SITE STORM FLOWS Drainage from the portion of the site that drains to the Fanno Creek basin flows from the existing house to the northeast corner of the site. Refer to Exhibit "A", page 15. • . 2 Time of Concentration The time of concentration calculations are shown on the hydrograph sheets. Curve Numbers For the unimproved portion of the site the ground cover and hydrologic classification of the soil determine the SCS curve numbers. The ground cover chosen was meadow or pasture. From the SCS curve number table (page 3) a curve number of 85is obtained for hydrologic soil group C. A summary of the peak flows from the site hydrographs for the Fanno Creek basin portion of the undeveloped site are the following: 2 year event 0.52 cfs 10 year event 0.91 cfs 25 year event 1.10 cfs DETENTION The detention facility will be designed to limit the developed site flows to those of the undeveloped or existing site flows going to the Fanno Creek Basin. The proposed detention facility is an underground 48-inch pipe, 230 feet in length. There will be a control manhole at the downstream end with metering orifices to limit peak outflow from the site. Refer to Exhibit "B", page 16. Inflows and outflows from the proposed detention facility are shown on the following drainage summary sheet together with a comparison of the peak outflows from the undeveloped and developed site. The data in the detention pond summary are from the pond hydrographs for each storm event (pages 6, 10, & 13). WATER QUALITY The storm sewer which will serve the site discharges into the natural drainage course which flows through Jack Park. In lieu of an on site water quality facility the proposal is to mitigate some of the riparian area in lack Park or construct a water quality facility for untreated water now entering the drainage course from the Bellwood subdivision. A water quality swale 100 feet long with a 6 foot wide bottom would serve the entire site. Please refer to page 14. KING COUNTY, W*HINGTON, SURFACE WA *R DESIGN MANUAL TABLE 3-5?11 SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS (Published by SCS in 1982) I I 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 Mountain open areas. low growing brush and grasslands , i 74 82 89 92 1 Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed or older second growth 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 1 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses. cemeteries. landscaping. good condition: rass cover on 75% 4 or more of the area 68 80 86 90 fair condition: grass cover on 5096 to 75% of the area 77 35 90 92 i Gravel roads and parking lots 76 85 89 91 s Dirt roads and parking lots 3 72 82 37 89 Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs, etc. 98 98 98 98 Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds, etc. 100 100 100 100 j Single Family Residential (2) 1 I Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre % Impervious (3) 1.0 DU/GA 15 Separate curve number ! i 1.5 DU/GA 20 shall be selected 2.0 DU/GA 25 i for pervious and 2.5 DU/GA 30 impervious portion 3.0 DU/GA 34 of the site or basin 3.5 DU/GA 38 r 4.0 DU/GA 42 i 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 % impervious Planned unit developments , condominiums, apartments. must be computed f commercial business and ` industrial areas. t (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land 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 11/92 PROJECT: DAFFODIL HILL • SUBJECT:PRELIMINARY DETENTION POND SUMMARY DETENTION OUTLET DEVICES DIAMETER (uches) INVERT ELEVATION ORIFICE ORIFICE 1 2 3.70 3.00 149.00 151.15 DETENTION SUMMARY 24 HR PEAK PEAK PEAK PEAK OVERFLOW EVENT RAINFALL INFLOW OUTFLOW STORAGE ELEVATION ELEVATION inches ch afs cubic fed fed fcct elev. 2 YEAR ( 2.50 1.04 ( 0.51 I 1,414 , 151.16 I 153.50 10 YEAR I 3.45 I 1.61 I 0.90 2,413 , 15239 I 153.50 25 YEAR I 3.90 I 1.89 I 1.10 2,906 I 153.47 I 153.50 COMPARISON OF PEAK FLOWS FROM THE UNDEVELOPED & DEVELOPED SITE I PEAK OU TFLOW UNDEVELOPED EVENT DEVELOPED J I cfs eft 2 YEAR 0.52 ` 0.51 10 YEAR I 0.91 0.90 25 YEAR , 1.1 I 1.10 06/19/01 Daffodil Hill - PRELIMINARY 2 YEAR EVENT - Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by Hams McMonagle Associates HydroCAD® 5.95 sin 001146 ©1986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems 6/19/01 Subcatchment 1: Undeveloped Site Runoff = 0.52 cfs @ 8.07 hrs, Volume= 0.222 of Runoff by SBUH method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr Rainfall=2.50" (AMC=2) Area (sf) CN Description 15,732 98 Improvements 89,518 85 Meadow 105,250 87 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 29.5 300 0.0400 0.2 Sheet Flow, House twds NE cor Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.50" 0.4 100 0.0800 4.2 Shallow Concentrated Flow, NE cor Grassed Waterway Kv=15.0 fps 29.9 400 Total 0.5 0.4 3 0.3 0 U. 0.2 Subcatchment 1: Undeveloped Site Hydrograph Plot 0.52 cfs 0.1 5 6 7 8 9 1011 121314151617181920 Time (hours) p Runoff Daffodil Hill - PRELIMINARY 2 YEAR EVENT - Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by Hams McMonagle Associates HydroCAD® 5.95 s/n 001146 ®1986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems 6/19/01 Subcatchment 2: Developed Site Runoff = 1.04 cfs @ 7.94 hrs, Volume= 0.292 of Runoff by SBUH method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr Rainfall=2.50" (AMC=2) Area (sf) CN Description 15,732 98 Streets 36,960 98 Lot impvts (14 @ 2,640) 52,558 86 Landscaping 105,250 92 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: Developed Site Hydrograph Plot 1.04 cfs D Runoff v o ; 0 "1 -.foe 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1920 Time (hours) Daffodil Hill - PRELIMINARM YEAR EVENT - Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by Hams McMonagl ssociates HydroCAD® 5.95 s/n 001146 01986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems 6119/01 Pond 2P: 230' of 48" Pipe, s=0.002'/' [82] Warning: Early inflow requires earlier time span Inflow = 1.04 cfs @ 7.94 hrs, Volume= 0.292 of Outflow = 0.51 cfs @ 8.36 hrs, Volume= 0.290 af, Atten= 51 Lag= 25.0 min Primary = 0.51 cfs @ 8.36 hrs, Volume= 0.290 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1 51.16' Storage= 1,414 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 21.3 min calculated for 0.290 of (99% of inflow) Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (cubic-feet) 149.00 0 149.40 86 150.30 659 151.20 1,445 152.10 2,232 153.00 2,802 153.40 2,890 Primary OutFlow (Free Discharge) t1=Orifce/Grate 2=Orifice/Grate # Routinq Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 149.00' 3.7" Vert. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C=0.600 2 Primary 151.15' 3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C=0.600 N w- 0 LL Pond 2P: 230' of 48" Pipe, s=0.002'P Hydrograph Plot 1.04 cfs 1-' .1 0.51 cfs 0 5 6 7 8 9 1011 121314151617181920 Time (hours) ® Inflow Primary Daffodil Hill - PRELIMINAR& YEAR EVENT - Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by Harris McMonaggWssociates HydroCAD® 5.95 s/n 001146 @ 1986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems 6/19/01 Subcatchment 1: Undeveloped Site Runoff = 0.91 cfs @ 8.06 hrs, Volume= 0.365 of Runoff by SBUH method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr Rai nfall=3.45" (AMC=2) Area (sf) CN Description 15,732 98 Improvements 89,518 85 Meadow 105,250 87 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 29.5 300 0.0400 0.2 Sheet Flow, House twds NE cor Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.50" 0.4 100 0.0800 42 Shallow Concentrated Flow, NE cor Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 29.9 400 Total v 3 0 M Subcatchment 1: Undeveloped Site Hydrograph Plot 5 6 7 8 6"'16 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Time (hours) 0 Runoff 1-~ 0.91 Cfs e Daffodil Hill - PRELIMINARf YEAR EVENT - Rainfall=3.45" Prepared by Hams McMonagl ssociates HydroCAD® 5.95 s/n 001146 ®1986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems Subcatchment 2: Developed Site Runoff = 1.61 cfs @ 7.93 hrs, Volume= 0.442 of Runoff by SBUH method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr Rai nfall=3.45' (AMC=2) Area (sf) CN Description 15,732 98 Streets 36,960 98 Lot impvts (14 @ 2,640) 52,558 86 Landscaping 105,250 92 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: Developed Site Hydrograph Plot 1.61 CfS o f - LL ;i 6/19/01 0 Runoff 000 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 1314151617181920 Time (hours) Daffodil Hill - PRELIMINARM YEAR EVENT - Rainfall=3.45 0 " Prepared by Hams McMonaglMssociates 4W HydroCADO 5.95 s/n 001146 @ 1986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems 6/19/01 Pond 213: 230' of 48" Pipe, s=0.002'P Inflow = 1.61 cfs @ 7.93 hrs, Volume= 0.442 of Outflow = 0.90 cfs @ 8.27 hrs, Volume= 0.439 af, Atten= 45%, Lag= 20.3 min Primary = 0.90 cfs @ 8.27 hrs, Volume= 0.439 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev=152.39' Storage= 2,413 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 29.9 min calculated for 0.439 of (99% of inflow) Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (cubic-feet) 149.00 0 149.40 86 150.30 659 151.20 1,445 152.10 2,232 153.00 2,802 153.40 2,890 Primary OutFlow (Free Discharge) 1=Orifce/Grate ~__2=Orifice/Grate # Routing 1 Primary 2 Primary z w v 1- 3 0 LL Invert Outlet Devices 149.00' 3.7" Vert. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600 151.15' 3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C=0.600 Pond 2P: 230' of 48" Pipe, s=0.002'P Hydrograph Plot 1.61 Cfs 0.90 CfS Inflow p Primary 5 6 7 8 9 1011 121314151617181920 Time (hours) Daffodil Hill - PREUMINAP& 25 YOR EVENT - 24-hr Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by Harris McMonag ssociates HydroCAD® 5.95 s/n 001146 ®1986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems 6119/01 Subcatchment 1: Undeveloped Site Runoff = 1.10 cfs @ 8.06 hrs, Volume= 0.435 of Runoff by SBUH method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr Rainfall=3.90" (AMC=2) Area (sf) CN Description 15,732 98 Improvements 89,518 85 Meadow 105,250 87 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 29.5 300 0.0400 0.2 Sheet Flow, House twds NE cor Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 2.50" 0.4 100 0.0800 4.2 Shallow Concentrated Flow, NE cor Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 29.9 400 Total 4' 0. 3 0 9: Subcatchment 1: Undeveloped Site Hydrograph Plot 1.10 cfs 0 Runoff 1 - 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 1314151617 181920 Time (hours) Daffodil Hill - PRELIMINAI& 25 YO EVENT - 24-hr Rainfaf1=3.90" Prepared by Hams McMonag ssociates HydroCAD® 5.95 s/n 001146 ®1986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems 6/19/01 Subcatchment 2: Developed Site Runoff = 1.89 cfs @ 7.92 hrs, Volume= 0.514 of Runoff by SBUH method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type IA 24-hr Rainfall=3.90" (AMC=2) Area (sf) CN Description 15,732 98 Streets 36,960 98 Lot impvts (14 @ 2,640) 52,558 86 Landscaping 105,250 92 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: Developed Site Hydrograph Plot . ❑ Runoff 1 89 cfs 3 1 - - - - - o 5 6 7 8 9 1011 121314151617181920 Time (hours) 1 S Daffodil Hill - PRELIMINAR& 25 YW EVENT - 24-hr Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by Hams McMonagl ssociates HvdroCADO 5.95 s/n 001146 01986-2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems 6/19101 Pond 2P: 230' of 48" Pipe, s=0.002'P Inflow = 1.89 cfs @ 7.92 hrs, Volume= 0.514 of Outflow = 1.10 cfs @ 8.24 hrs, Volume= 0.509 af, Atten= 42%, Lag= 18.9 min Primary = 1.10 cfs @ 8.24 hrs, Volume= 0.509 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 153.47' Storage= 2,906 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 33.2 min calculated for 0.509 of (99% of inflow) Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (cubic-feet) 149.00 0 149.40 86 150.30 659 151.20 1,445 152.10 2,232 153.00 2,802 153.40 2,890 Primary OutFlow (Free Discharge) 11=Orifice/Grate 2=0rifice/Grate # Routing Invert Outlet Devices 1 Primary 149.00' 3.7" Vert. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600 2 Primary 151.15' 3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C=0.600 Pond 2P: 230' of 48" Pipe, s=0.002'P 2- 0 1-' . u. - Hydrograph Plot 1.89 cfs 1.10 Cfs Inflow El Primary 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Time (hours) 6 . PROJECT: DAFFODIL. HILL 6/18/01 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY SWALE DESIGN jrh CRITERIA: a. Storm event of 0.36 inches of precipitation falling in 4 hours with an average return period of 96 hours. b. Impervious surfaces = street area + 2,640 sq. R per dwelling unit. C. Maximum design depth = 0.5 foot d. Hydraulic residence time = 9 minutes e. Manning "n" value = 0.18 f. Maximum velocity: 2.0 fps based on 25 year flow g. Minimum slope: 0.5 percent IMPERVIOUS AREA Street/impervious area .4, sq. ft. Number of dwelling units l$ Total impervious area 68,324 sq. fL 1.57 acres WATER OUALITY VOLUME Volume =(0.36 inches) x (total impervious area) = 2,050 cubic feet DESIGN FLOW - O Qd = (volume)/(14,400 seconds (4 hn)) = 0.14 cfs SWALE SIZING Slope Bottom Width Mannings Side Slopes Flow Depth (eft) (ft) "n" h:v (ft) Q1Q 0.18 4.00 :::::::4:1:...... SWALE HYDRAULICS Q Velocity Flow Area WO R (Cfs) (fps) (sq- ft.) (ft) (ft) 0.14 0.18 I 0.74 I 6.94 I 0.11 MINIMUM SWALE LENGTH Length of Swale for 9 minute residence time = 100 LE USE Swale dimensions: Design Bottom width Length Slope (fed) (feet) 01/ft) 6®00 I 100 I 0.010 • y 1 I WOW WOOD i Oil I ' I 'opo. h` N I'll` <i - 1 Ot. Oro I ' ~ :c• 6~4 .r ~ fir. ' ~<<9. ~ ~ 666 bbB O N CL"J ~OO ~'4 I r~ 1 N t t 1 111 ~-OOP Vf''87p"~. - III 11~ I t, _999 N - _ I ly 4 O _.999-" ~ I f ~ f ~ 1 ' 2 N0. / r r 111 1 - 66a CIO 1111,-~ N -,il = ! 11,111 - .J , • ` 70 + ~ It' 1111 ` - • t ~ , .a I ..,,1 m r--- N I 1111 "4i~)y I Lr) 00 .109 (j, 1 ! .666 ✓ / f ` -ca~?y' O r- 1 O Q' 1111 _ _ ~ r ~ ~ t - ~ v~ N • pm LINE 6. _ p 11 Q~ f 10' PR~tE / 1 11 I 1 REE 0U N Z' TH 1 ~ i t ' ~ - - - - PRELIMINARY PLAT NOTES i 6}1~ e .,ems k, v, ~y I ~ 1. THE CONSTRUCTION OF ALL PUBLIC WORK UTILITIES AND ROADWAYS WILL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY OF TIGARD AND THE CLEAN WATER SERVICES STANDARDS. ~ t ~~g~~' `fit ~ I 2. STORM DRAINAGE, THIS SYSTEM WILL BE EXTENDED WITHIN S.W ALPINE WAY FROM THE INTERSECTION OF S.W. 133rd AVE. TO SERVE THE SITE. ~ _ 3. SANITARY SEWER, THIS SYSTEM WILL BE EXTENDED IN AND FROM S.W. ALPINE WAY AS WELL AS FROM S.W. LEAH DRIVE. TO SERVE THE SITE. ALL LOTS WILL BE PROVIDED GRAVITY SERWICE. ~ ~ 149(10 ~ ~ s~ HI[~ RJR 4. WATER LINES WILL BE EXTENDED FROM S.W. LEAH WAY AND CONNECTED TO THE SYSTEM IN S.W. E~ ALPINE DRIVE. ~ ~ ~ N 5. THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THE ROAD TO BE CONSTRUCTED WILL BE 42 FEET WIDE, WITH THE PAVING IMPROVEMENTS 32 FEET WIDE. 5-FOOT SIDEWALKS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ,5 15• ~ ROVIDED ABUTTING THE RIGHT OF WAY LINES. ~ STREET. PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS WILL BE P Aa ~ u~~l~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~.7 t ~ ti~r~ ~ ~ Q fii 9i~SV~ I~, ~ d4~, ONSIST OF EXCAVATING THE ROADWAYS. NO LOT SITE GRADING IS a 6. SITE GRADING WILL C / ~ °f ~ [n 4 l9 ' ' Sri M ~ ~ ANTICIPATED TO DEVELOP THIS SITE. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL FROM THE ROADWAYS AND ,,,fit} ~ ~ t ~ 1'~ UMP SITE. W E UTILITY TRENCHES WILL BE HAULED BY TRUCK AWAY FROM THE SITE TO AN APPROVED D b CI fit, ~ ` ITT a ~ ~ ~ n INS FROM ALL LOTS WILL DISCHARGE TO THE CURB LINE. A 10 FOOT WIDE PRIVATE ma 7. THE RAIN DRA DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOTS 7 THROUGH 10 WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE ti~ .-•---'ti~'' ~ ~ ' BENEFIT OF LOTS 6 THROUGH 10, IN THE EVENT THAT IT MAY BE NEEDED. A 10-INCH STORM ~ I5• 15, 3a I`' PROJECT ~r LATERAL WILL BE EXTENDED FROM THE STORM SYSTEM TO LOT 10 AS SHOWN. S C~~~TC0~1~ 8. VEHICULAR ACCESS FROM OR TO S.W BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD BY LOTS 1 THROUGH 6 SHALL BE PROHIBITED. 0 50 100 VIVIIVII 1 IVIHr SCALE; 1"=50' NO SCALE I ~ ~ ~ / \ ~ ~ ~ \ \ - _ \ \ ~ OWNER/DEVELOPER: ENGINEER-SURVEYOR: ~ ~ GEORGE MARSHALL HARRIS-McMONAGLE P.O. BOX 91249 . - ~ PORTLAND, OREGON 97291 ASSOC., INC. \ \ PHONE: (503) 291-2550 12555 S.W. HALL BLVD. _ ~ , ~ FAX: (503) 291-2555 TIGARD, OREGON 97223-6287 PHONE: (503) 639-3453 T ~ ~ ' FAX: (503) 639-1232 / LOT 25 / \ LOT LOT LOT I I ~ 24 4 / 23 22 OT LOT 11 N0,2I ~ HILLSH RE SUM IT N0,2 ~ _ ~ 1 v~Ew LOT ~ ~ ~ 48 _ \ ~ ~ ~ i I I I ~ ~ , ~ n I I ~ 1 J ~ I I I ~ / I - -~l / 51 ~ I I l I ' v w ~ 1 , ~ DEVELOPMENT HEVIE~1111 h'LAIVS ~ 13 12 11 / 14 -r ~ I / i I Z ~ I W ~ / I i ~ I I W LOT ~ ~ ~ \ LOCATED IN THE SX 1 4 OF SECTION 4 W~ 10 i ~ / N LOT ~ I I I ~ g ~ I ~ AND THE N~ i/4 OF SECTION 9 I g - 50 I Z \I o I ' w TOXNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE i NEST, MERIDIAN I .~~ri. ~ I I I riTY of TIGARD. WASHINGTON COUNTY. OREGON i 11 \ V I I I I _ Q' i o o - - - F-- ~ I ~ I i 18 8 g N Q W ~ - 15 16 ~ 17 I i / ~ a / > ~ LOT ~ I I DENSITY COMPUTATION ~ ~ a \ 49 ~ I f _a z E- o ~ ~ ~ i I i ~ \ ~ ~I ~ I - cRass AREA TAX LOT 1400= 135,137 S.F. (3.10 AC.) ~ _ 7 - - - ~ ~ o ~ _ - _ GROSS AREA TRACT 'C'= 2,513 S.F. (0.06 AC.) i ~ GROSS PROJECT AREA 137,650 S.F. (3.16 AC) ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ _------I------T- w TAX LOT ~ i ~ - ' ~ I ~ w 1300 PUBLIC R/W AREA (INTERIOR)= 20,804 S.F. (0.48 AC.) Y ~ ~ I ~ ~ _ ~ I ti i ~ I ~ i ~ / TOTAL- NET DEVELOPMENT AREA= 116,846 S.F. (2.68 AC) o V ~ ~ I 1 o ~ ~ ~ 1 1 z I 6 / ~ MAXIMUM NUMBER OF LOTS: - - ► 4 _ ~ I 3 I I ~ , 2 I ~ I / ~ 116,846 S.F./5,000 S.F. PER LOT= 23 LOTS ~ I ~ , , LOT _ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ 58 I I ~ ~ I~ MINIMUM NUMBER OF LOTS: o r,, I I I 23 ~ 8p~= 18 LOTS m ~ I I I ~ I ~ I i ~ I ~ ' - - - - AVERAGE LOT AREA: ~ ~ I IA~ ~ ~ 116,846/18 LOTS= 6,491 S.F. v ~ _ _ ~ - _ m > _ - - U W w . - - _ Q a ~ - - i z L.L.. z ~ I- w BENCH MA a _ _ _ - w , J ~ ~ 1 a rn ~ J r~ Z . U '^r/ CITY OF TIGAR ~ J H r' W (n AN EL o p HAVING W ~Q - a d. o ~ - 0 a U JUNE 20, 2001 Q - - I ~ ~ / / ~ / ~ j ~ j~~~~ \ nor J I I T I I i ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ 25 LOT ~ I I I I r f-~ I it i ~ i i I ■ i_Y it -1----- / S HILL S I- / / I ~ / ~ ~ ~,s~, 134.87' / ~V / ~ ~ / ~ ~ LOT I I -L\\~/i C,.~ ~i ~ 51 ~ 14 13 12 C,~ / / \ \ ~ ~ ~ \ / / 6.449 S.F. 5,961 S.F. 5.464 S.F. ~ LOT N ~ - - •7 - ~ ( ~ ~ 5 O 55' 55' S5' / I ~ ~ 1 z~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / I I / / ~ ~ \ \ ~~T ~ ~ 6,454 S.F. 5,935 S.F. 5,806 S.F. ~ ~ i 4_ I1 1 ~ / ~ ~~~q~ ( 49 w 1 I H W / ~ ~ L=9' ~_40~ 16' 55~ ■ , i I' I / ~ V? _ L=9' L=37 ~ iv r J ~ I 1 ti ~ I ~ L=32' 28' 60' - / I Z L=10' . - a-~ i ~ ' 4 3 - -r..: ~ _ ~ •f T~~r I ~ ~ \ / / ~ LOT _ W ~.~s~ s.F. ~.os~ s. ~ r I e, ~ ~ ~ / 60. so ~ 63' SO V _ ~,~~-----1_______ M r ~ = _ f S.W. BULL _ _ - - _ 4 ~ • r f f 1 t _ - - - - w L 1 i ~ ~t - ~w __------1---------- ~ w 1 ~ ~ _ ~ ~v L`~ t tt r~ - ~ I ~cn Qpl Y ~ I ~ W I ~ ~ I , ~ ~ I z REFERENCE INFORMATION AND NOTES: r . I REV. DESCRIPTION SUB. APPR. DATE tN~IIV Ctt(~-ZVICVCI VItJ PRELIMINARY PLAT U Q 12555 S.W. HALL BLVD. DATE: TIGARD, OR 97223-6287 REFER TO TRACING FOR LATEST REVISION 06/20/01 of PHONE: (503) 639-3453 / ~ ~ ~ / i ,-I I / / I I I I I / \ - - ~ ~ \ \ \ \ \ ~ ` \ I I / / / \ \ / I / I ~ I I I ~ ~ i i I / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 / I I T ~ ~ ~ ~ I I , i ~ / ~ S / ~ Q i I / ~ ~ ~ I I j III I l j I ~ / I I ~ I ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I / / / \ \ ~ \ / ~ / / / \ \ ~ \ / I LOT i LOT i LOT I II II II / ~ ~ ~ I I 23 I 22 I ; i ~ ~ 1 / ~ ~ ~ I I I , i 1 / / / / ~ ~ ~ / / \ ~ ~ / l / / ~ / ~ ~ ~ SHARE SUMNr`IT N0.2 i I 11 g. I ~ ~ / / / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ SAN.MH •C ~ ~ SAN.MH i I - tiX ~ ~ ~ 11 / / / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E~ ---1EX.FH.- - T- I ~ ~ / ~ ~ \ '------------1-~ - - - -------1---------------- v ~ 1 -~F » ~I1E~ / I ~ ~ ~ -EX:B'~ I V EX.8 WL `L I EX:8"SA1d _ E~~SAb _ ~ 12 j ~ tiX - ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ / _ _ _ ~1~SII~=== ~----12'STM------ r'' \ 1 ~i,1 ~ / I ~ ~ ~ I ~ E EX`. T. EX.LAT. ° I ~ / ~ ~ NI GN ~ ~ ~ 12»STM STUB I 11 11 ~ \ E~MN• i / ~ p0l ~ ~ I ~ Nr EX.LAT. AT B STM.MH I ~ I 1 \ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ i i I ~ \ ~ i ~ 10"STM 1 o I ~ ~ 1 \ I / i ~ ~ i i~ i ~ I 11 ~ ~ 1~ ~ i i ~ i ~ I ~ ~ 11 ~ n I - - I 1~ \ ~I ~ LOT ; 1~,--' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q; 10 1 ~ / ~ ~ \ g W ~ I 1 1 I / ~ 7 ~ 1 ~ 1 1 1 ~ ~ ~ O I Li-1 I 1 ~I I I 1 ~ ( ' II ~ ~ ~ z QI I 1 1 ~I °I z I 1 ~I I 1 l ~ ~ ~ ~l / ~ ~ \ I ~ / I-- ------L-------------~--~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / 18 Q ~ ~ ~ I / ~ \ / / r ~ \ ~ a ~ ~ / ~ / 8 ~I I--- > ' - i ~ SAN.I r ~ ~ i ~.a ui i d, nv i I / ~ ~ ~ EX.FH. ~ ~ / ~ ~ I I I ~ ~J' \ / \ ~ ~P , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ EX.SAN.MH ~ ~ ~ SQL J / ~ ~ ~ - r I I ~ ~ - - _ SAN 's I , / _ - / / ~ _ - - _ / ~ ~ ~ EX. i - a I / ~ 8 WL / - _ - - / ~ - / / - - / - _ ' / / r - - -0 - -_2 I / ! 6 I ~ ~ / ~ / ' / / ~ = HI H POINT I / / ~ .r . ~ " - r i~~rs~v- r ~ r / ~ / ~ ~ EX.SAN.MH i. ~ / / ' / I / ~ I / ~ I . - ~ ~ / ~ / I ~ / i ~ / ~ / ~ j _J I I ~ / I I / / t i I ~ \ ~ ; / ~ / y I I ~ r(~/..~ / _ ~ n,~ - ~ I I ~ / - ♦ / I I ~ . I I i n ti - - - QI - - - - - - - - _ _ - - - - W 3 . - - ~ L- Y / W o _ ~ N I W ~ i. - - - N Q I 1 I I O ~ ~ I r I I Z ~ m ~ • I ti I I W I ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I I I t W Q I I I i m I ~ I 3 I I I y J I I i i I l w a z z a REFERENCE INFORMATION ANID NOTES: a i J H L.L.. ~L. ,r Q e-i REV. DESCRIPTION SUB. APPR. DATE LMANLLM( -Z)UMYLIVI(~ a REFER TO TRACING FOR LATEST REVISION DATE: 12555 S.W. HALL BLVD. UTILITY PLAN 06 20/01 TIGARD, OR 97223-6287 I 3 PHONE: (503) 639-3453 OF . ~ \ / / / ~ ~ I ~ ~ / ~ PVI SfA = 3+50 ~VI STA = 4+7 ~ ~ ~ PVI STA ~ 2+50 p~/I ELEV 875.59 ELEV = 665. ~ ~ r PYI ELEV 666.59 ~ A.D. 5.00 A.D. _ -17.40 AD. = 3.90 ~ K=8.62 K=25.64 ~ K ~ 10.00 \ \ ~ \ ~ ~ 680 ~ 150.00' YC 100.00' VC 660 \ ~ 50, y~ - ~ ~ STA 5+50 STA = 6+2 _ N ~ ELEV 681.72 ~ a w A.D. 3.50 ELEV = 660. 7 ~ n = + ~ m A,D, 4.00 I a m K = 14.29 K-=-25.0 d ~ - ~ ~ 50. ' VC ~ , W ~ ~ 100.00 YC \ N ~ ~ \ tp ~ d \ 870 ~ ~ ~ ~ ______e~ ~ ~_.e. _a_. n _ _-670 + N ~n ~ HIGH POINT s 672.34 ~ _ ~ m ~ n + ~ m ~ ~ ~ HIGH POINT A = 3+52.59 d ~ ~ 'D / \ \ ~ V ~ ~ \ \ ~ ~ ~ .L€ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ EX.GR CENT \ i ERLINE ~ .R. inT 660 - 660 L V ( / LOW INT ELEV =661.34 LOW POINT 5TA = +00 ~ Y 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 - ` , V ~ ~ ~ - - 0 33' ~ _ ~ ~ 22' ~ ~ 5, z~ ~ S/W EX. PVMT x ~ x° SEOPE VARIES _ _ - - . - - CURB & GUTTER 1.5" CLASS "G" ASPHALIIC CU1YCRtlE 1 2.5" CLASS "B" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PLACE A1L ASPHALT ON SAME DAY 3" 3/4"(-) LEVELING ROCK 12" 1-1/2"(-) BASE ROCK ' TYPICAL HALF STREET SECTION SW BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD ,i ~t - 3 - Y - f0' 22' 22' 1D' - - - - - - - °0 7.5 5 16' 16' S 7.5 - 2.5 S S/W 2.5 N LANDSCAPE x '~x° xq~ x 1ANDSCAPE ~ EASEMENT EASEMENT _ _ 0 0 op 3 . . ~ ~ ~ N ~ 3-J/2" CLASS "C" ASPHALTIC CONCRE7E ~ ~ CURB & GUTTER 2" 3/4 LEVELING ROCK ~ 6" 112"(-) BASE ROCK 3 TYPICAL STREET SECTION m SW LEAN TERRACE 3 D NO SCALE o + ~ (2" CLASS "C" A/C FIRST LIFT) (1- J/2" CLASS "C" A/C SECOND UF7) w a c~ z H z Q REFERENCE INFORMATION AND NOTES: Ali J a J J H } Q m ti o REV. DESCRIPTION SUB. APPR. DATE ~•iri~ tNUINttK~ Z)UKVtTVKZo a U a 12555 S.W. HALL BLVD. GRADING PLAN REFER TO TRACING FOR LATEST REVISION 06/20/0DATE: 1 TIGARD, OR 97223-6287 PHONE: 503 639-3453 OF