Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Ordinance No. 78-19
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE No. 78- i q AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION BY AMART DE VEDOU"W"ENT COR,PANY FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, CHANGING THE ZONE DISTRICT OF A TRACT OF LAND SOUTH OF SCROLLS FERRY RD. BETWEET? S.W. 1 25th AND S.W. 130111 AND DE- PICTED ON WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX MAP 1S1 33A, TAX LOT 502 AND WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX MAP 1S1 33D, TAX LOTS 100 AND 101 ; FROM WASHINGTON COUNTY RS-1 TO CITY OF TIGARD R-7 P.D. "SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT" AND ADOPTING EXHIBITS "A" , "B", "C" , AND "D" GRANTING THE APPLICATION AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Finding that the lands hereinafter described have been heretofore and are now classified as Washington County RS-1, pursuant to the provisions of the City of Tigard's Zoning Ordi- nance and Tigard Ordinance No. 75-52, and further finding that pur- suant to prescribed procedures, the above-stated application for a zoning map amendment was heard in a public hearing held by the Tigard Planning Commission on July 26, 1977, and February 14, 1978, and all interested persons were there and then afforded an opportunity to be heard, and thereafter the Planning Commission filed its report and recommended approval with the City Recorder, a copy therefore hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, the Council adopts the substantive .findings: 1. The proposed R-7 P.D. zoning is compatible with the sur- rounding zoning and conforms to the Tigard Community Plan, 1971; and 2. That with the attachment of appropriate conditions, the adequate provision of public services to serve development of the site can be assured; and 3. That the applicant has shown a community need for his pro- posed development on the site herein described; and 4. That the proposed location is most suitable for the ap- plicant 's proposed development. SECTION 2: THEREFORE, pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 18.88 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the applicant's request for an amendment of the Tigard Zoning Map of 1970 to zone those lands de- scribed in the attached Exhibit "A", for Planned Development District is hereby approved, subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.56 of the Tigard Municipal Code so embodied in or exhibited by the document sub- mitted and identified as follows: Exhibit "A": - Bikeway and pedestrian pathway plan Exhibit "B": Staff report Exhibit "C": - General plan and program Exhibit "D": - Legal description And further subject to the following conditions: 1 . That the bikeway and pedestrian plan as submitted be amended, according to the attached Exhibit"A", and include the following: a. An 8-foot wide asphalt bikepath along the S.W. Scholls Ferry Road frontage. b . 8-foot wide concrete bikepaths be provided along only the collector streets within the development. C. That the bikeway behind lots 10-14 be deleted. d. That an approximate 80-foot long bikepath from S.W. Glacier Lily Lane be provided between single family detached lots 9 and 10. e. That a bikepath be provided around the east lake. f. That a bikepath from the area described as lots 161-164 be provided on the southside of the west lake where it would connect with the bikepath on the greenway to the east. g. That the bikeway be constructed within Phase I , to include Scholls Ferry Road, the bikepath around the east lake, along the south side of the west lake, and along the collector streets. h. That the entire greenway and bikeway system be subject to design review and improvement plans for the areas marked X on Exhibit "A" also be sub- mitted (to include benches, picnic tables, etc. ) . 2 . That the "vision easement" between single family de- tached lots 14 and 15, and 64 and 65 be increased. That an additional "vision easements" be provided be- tween lots 11 and 12, and 61 and 62. 3. Lots 161-164 be deleted as single family detached homes, and this 1.1 acre area become part of the open space area and that this area be included within Phase I and subject to Park Board review. 4 . That all cul-de-sac streets over 156 feet in length be developed on a 45-foot radius. 5. That landscape islands be provided within the cul-de- sacs, and a landscape plan for the cul-de-sac-islands be submitted for design review, and that maintenance responsibility for the landscape island be prescribed as part of the Declaration of Restrictions for Summer Lake. 6. That 'a cul-de-sac with a landscape island be developed Page 2 ORDINANCE No. 78- } E i on a 40-foot radius for single family attached lots 85-93. k f 7. That 5-foot wide sidewalks be provided along both sides of the local streets (deleting them within the cul-de-sac) . t 8. That covenants be attached to the deeds of single family attached lots 1 , 19-23, and 121-126 restricting access from S.W. Scholls Ferry Road. 9. That street improvements for S.W. Scholls Ferry Road be provided per Oregon State Highway Division require- ments (to include a left-turn lane and a right-turn taper) . 10. That a bus turnout lane be provided along the S .W. Scholls Ferry Road frontage (exact location Co, be worked out between the applicant, Beaverton School District 48, and Oregon State Highway Division) . 11 . That S .W. 130th be vacated between single family at- tached lots 85-88. 12. That the street tree plan and signing program for the development be subject to design review. 13. That no final plat be recorded for any lots within Phase I until such time as public sewer service is available to the site. 14. That all attached single family units be subject to design review. 15. That the design of the dike and flood control apparatus be subject to city approval. 16. That variances from the setback requirements of the code be subject to the Planning Director's approval. 17. That soil stability tests be provided for lots adja- cent to the lakes. SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective on and after the 31st day after its passage by the Council and approval of the Mayor. PASSED: By 1L�1���,t�sr,n�iti vote of all Council members present this - Tay. day of / at_cL, 1978, after being read two times by number and title only. Recorder F' APPROVED: By the "ems thisday of ¢. 1978. Page 3 J Mayor ORDINANCE No. 78-� ,,V, L1 I stab Ak oli oil Ch IL 1 —� 111 1! 10 / 1 Aft Aq lei AOW r - , •> fir--r---�. . ., • . , : : -� rte_ . , - � v . L I .. 1•.�_:f ... ... � � .-�� �"_yam' \ J 19 *001 Ise' lass®sassed®�easssaeassses� � STAFF REPORT , AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COIIIISSION February 7, 1978 Fowler Junior High School 10865 S.yy. Walnut - Ti Lecture Room Tigard, Oregon Docket : Zone Change ZC 28-77 Request: For general plan and residential program review Of a single i'amily Tamil planned development to include 261 single Y units and 126 attached single family units on a 99.91 acre parcel . Location: South of Scholls Ferry Road between S.W. 125th and S.W. 130th (`Nash. Co Tax Map 1S1 33D, Lots 100 and 102)33A' Lot 502, and Applicant: Amart Development Company I • Findings of Fact : 1 • The applicant is requesting view in accordance with Section e18.56.030ral Plan aOf the Ti Municipal Code for a nd program re- Muncipalresidential 99 91 acre (387 lot gard Planned development, ) multi-phased Road between S.W. 125th and S yV: south of Scholls Ferry 130th. 2. The site is designated on the Tigard Co:rmunit plan, as Urban Low Density Residential and on the PO 1971 , Plan, Urban bfedium DensityN #7 Draft Of the parcel and Urban LowfDensit northern most remainingy Residential forthe portion., 3• Applicable policies from the Tigard the following: Community Plan, 1971, o The maximum overall density of development will b four dwelling units or 12 Persons This amounts to a standard Ofs7500psr gross acre afeet of f l per dwell space. unit allowing for streets and Other oend Some areas will have a lower densit P topography, existing l development Y owing to sire of individuals to own a patterns, or the de- sire lot. o Residential subdivisions will streets, curbs and be developed with ways, according gutters, street li paved tilities will be to city or count taghts, and waik- Placed underground streets, standards. A11 u_ o Development will coincide with the provision of water and sewera e shall be g facilities Public- (a) capable of adequatelyThese facilities vening properties as well as the crying all inter- and (b) designed to meet proposed development, city or county standards. y f ' STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION February 7, 1978 Page 2 o Planned unit development will be encouraged on tracts large enough to accommodate ten or more dwellings. Planned unit development will permit a degree of flexi- bility in design that will enable a higher quality of t development in accordance with zoning standards. 4. Section 18.56.010 of the Tigard Municipal Code states that : Purpose. The purpose of the planned development district is to provide opportunities to create more desirable en- vironments through the application of flexible and diversi- fied land development standards under a comprehensive plan and program professionally prepared. The planned development district is intended to be used to encourage the application of new techniques and new technology to community development which will result in superior living or development arrangements with lasting values. It is further intended to achieve economies in land develop- ment , maintenance, street systems, and utility networks while providing building groupings for privacy, usable and attractive open spaces, safe circulation, and the general well-being of the inhabitants. 5. Section 18.56.030 of the Tigard Municipal Code provides for general development plan and program approval by the Planning Commission after receiving approval in principle of the preliminary plan and program and the applicant has petitioned for an amendment of the zoning map in accordance with Chapter 18.88. 6. On July 26, 1977, the Tigard Planning Commission approved the preliminary plan and program review for this proposed development subject to the following conditions: 1 . The recommendations to be followed are: a. `rnac the developer be permitted to submit the general plan for the entire parcel with phased approval for detailed plans. f. b. That further study be given the street system in the southern portion (below the lakes), es- pecially in regard to the point where the collector street contacts the school site to the east. c. That the School District be contacted to ascer- tain their thoughts on the best method for pro- viding access to the school site . 4 1 t STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMnJISSION February 73 1978 S Page 3 j 2. Applicant obtain approval from the City for minor land partition for parcels subdivided illegally (Tax Map 1S1 33A, Lots 500 and 502) . 3. That the density of the project be reduced by in- creasing the duplex lot size to a minimum of 9000 square feet and the triplex lot size to 12,000 square ment and that the 14 areanit on S.Wrt13Othcbepadjacent deleted tothe 4. General plan and program assess effect of lackoaf - right-of-way on 130th on traffic circulation, par- ticularly in regard to the first phase homes on Lots 143-146. 5. No subdivision plats will be approved until public sewer service is assured to the satisfaction of the planning director. 6. Drainage be reviewed by Public Works department prior to submission for general plan and program, with in- eed crease run-off dcalculations explain flood in SummeraCdreeklated to storm flows an ton 7. Applicant obtain written assurance from the Beaver method and/or Tigard School District that a satisfactory of providing school space is being developed. g. Lotting pattern be modified more effectively to pre- serve southern drainageway. th g. An open space rortn be included l general plan and program addresses the following: a. A bicycle pedestrian circulation system. b. Method of protecting the western lake marsh area, with particular attention to access control , method of limiting boating to the east lake only, path- way location, vegetation, and fencing barriers. c. The area adjacent the western lake designated for 14 units of apartments be included in the open space area. d. That the open space be clearly delineated as sepa rate from the areas to be platted. be provided e. That those improvements expected to STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION February 7, 1978 Page 4 by the City be stated in the general plan and program (for Park Board approval) . 10. That the street tree planting plan be submitted with the general plan. 11 . That further consideration be given to the pro- vision of "vision easements" into and across the open space areas for the enjoyment of persons not residing directly adjacent the lakes. 12. The lotting pattern adjacent the path across the causeway be modified to be recognizable as a pri- mary access point into the open space and also to accomplish vision easement criteria. 13. Design consideration should be given to treating the duplex area as essentially single-family in character. For instance, the units can be designed to have the appearance of one large single-family home rather than the usual mirror image effect you get with a duplex. This has been done quite of-_ fectively in Irvine, California. 14. Special design consideration should be given to the entrance onto Scholls Ferry Road. 15. A thorough hydrologic study be made to ensure that development produces no adverse impact on downstream properties based on 100 year _flood plain. 16. Applicant address issue of adequate play space for children, especially away from the greenway. 17. Applicant propose some workable maintenance pro- gram for non-homeowner units_ 18. A workable plan be developed to assure adequate and timely maintenance of greenway prior to City dedication. 19. That duplex and triplex units be developed as common wall structures to encourage occupant own- . ership. II . Staff Observations and Findings: 1 . The site is gently rolling, with drainage from the north and south to Summer Creek, which flows easterly through t '' the center in the form of two lakes separated by a fill STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING comMISSION February 7, 1978 Page 5 formerly used as a private airplane runway. The uplands are in agricultural production, and the lowlands around the lakes and along the small watercourse to the south are semi-natural marshland. The western lake-marsh com- plex has been identified by biologists of the Oregon De- partment of Fish and Wildlife and the Nature Conservancy as relatively unique in this area and as desirable for preservation in a natural state. 2. The applicant has essentially incorporated in his general plan and program the conditions of preliminary plan ap- proval with the following exceptions: Condition 4. General plan and program assess effect of Zack of right-o -way on 130th on traffic circulation, particularly in regard to the first phase homes on Lots 143-146 (now Lots 165-168) . The applicant proposes to include Lots 165-168, as well as Lots 161-164 (formerly the 14-unit apartment site) , as part of Phase II of the project and resolve the street access via 130th with the public works department and ad- jacent property owners prior to Phase II development ap- provals. Condition 5. No subdivision plats will be approved until public sewer service is assigned to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The Planning Director has only been assured verbally that sanitary sewer service will be avai�a.ble to the site. The extension of sewer service to the site is to be ac- complished by the United Sewerage Agency through a local improvement district. However, the city has not been in receipt of any documents indicating the formation of an LID and when the actual work is to commence on the sanitary sewer line as proposed. Condition 7. Applicant obtain written assurance from the Beaverton and/or Tigard School District that a satis- factory method of providing school space is being de- veZoped. The applicant has contacted both school districts concern- ing the aforementioned condition. The Beaverton School District, in a letter dated 'November. 30, ,1977, iiifcrmcd the applicant that a bond issue vote is planned for Janu- ary, 1979. If positive, a new school would be ready ap- proximately two years from that date. In the interim "additional pupils from the proposed project would place a burden on the existing programs." i` STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION February 7, 1978 Page 6 Both school districts are experiencing capacity problems and, as the applicant points out in his narrative, "the issue of who can best provide school facilities is dif- ficult and involved." Discussions are now taking place between the two districts to review a change in the present boundaries. However, this does not appear to be the so- lution for resolving the school capacity problem. Based on the above stated findings, passage of a bond measure to construct additional facilities would appear as the resolution to this problem. However, it is questionable that the city has the authority to prohibit any develop- ment of this property until additional school facilities are provided through a bond measure. Condition 9. An open space improvement plan be included with the general plan and program which addresses the following: a. A bicycle pedestrian circulation system. b. Method of protecting the western lake marsh area, with particular attention to access control, method of limiting boating to the east lake only, pathway location, vegetation, and fencing barriers. The applicant is proposing to construct a 1 .9 mile bicycle/pathway system (see exhibit 13 of the plan and program) to be located adjacent to both collect- or and local streets within the development as well as within the open space areas. The bikeway would be 8 feet in width except in those areas (e.g. be- tween lots at the end of cul-de-sacs) that serve as feeder paths into the main system where the path would be 4 feet in width. No path is being proposed along the S.W. Scholls Ferry Rd. frontage. Upon review of this proposal, staff finds that a modification of the bike system is in order. An 8-foot-wide bikeway is appropriate along the col- lector streets as well as the greenway path within open space area. However, providing an 8-foot bikeway in lieu of a standard 5-foot concrete side- walk along the local streets is not necessary to adequately handle bicycle/pedestrian traffic in the subdivision. Staff also finds that if the path behind (Lots 10-14) were deleted it would help protect the west lake marsh and that a path could be provided along the south side of the west lake for pedestrian access -foot to Lots 161-164. That also by providing an 8 as. STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION February 7, 1978 Page 7 wide path around the east lake this area would be- come more accessible as an active recreational area. By deleting those portions of the bikeway as mention- ed above and including a path around the east lake, staff finds that there would be an approximate net reduction of 2000 lineal feet in the 1 .9 mile system as proposed. C. The area adjacent to the western take designated for 14 units of apartments be included in the open space area. The applicant has submitted a revised site plan that has deleted the 14-unit apartment proposal and designated this area for 4 single family de- tached homes. The applicant contends that the combined area set aside for open space (both public and private) "represents a significant commitment to fulfilling city regulations and the development's goals and objectives." Therefore, to develop this 1.1 acre site for residential purposes is justified. However, staff disagrees and finds it necessary to request that the land in question be included in order to provide useable open space. It is not sufficient to provide undevelopable land as open t space if some amount of open space is not also pro- vided to render to designated open space accessible and useable. Condition 11 . That further consideration be given to the provision of "vision easements" into and across the open space areas for the enjoyment of persons not re- siding directly adjacent to the takes. i The applicant has expanded the visual access to the lakes by providing a larger area between Lots 64 and 65. How- ever, if Lot 64 were deleted a greater vision corridor would be made available to those lots on the south side of Meadow Grass Lane. In this way, the intent of Planning Commission Conditions 11 and 12 would be more fully realized. On the northside of the west lake an additional vision i access could be provided between Lots 11 and 12, and the vision corridor as proposed between Lots 14 and 15 could be increased without sacrificing any lots. This could be accomplished by shifting Lots 10-14 in a westerly direction STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COSI\-MISSION Page 8 and decreasing the open space area between Lots 9 and 10. This area (between Lots 9 and 10) could serve as an over- look above the lakes (the elevation at this point is well above the lakes) . Benches could be provided and a pe- destrian path from Glacier Lily Lane would serve as access to this area. Condition 16. That duplex and tri-plex units be developed as common wall structures to encourage occupant owner- ship. The applicant has eliminated all the triplex type units as shown on the preliminary plan and is proposing to develop 126 attached single family units as per Planning Commission requirements. This represents a net increase of 12 units compared to the 114 duplex and triplex units previously proposed. 3. Washington County Fire District No. 1 has reviewed the proposal at staff' s request (see attached exhibit) and were "generally favorable to the proposal" with the follow- ing exception regarding street construction and the di- ameter of the cul-de-sacs as proposed. The fire district recommends that all cul-de-sacs in excess of 150 feet in length be developed on a 45 foot radius, measured from center point to edge of all weather surface. The appli- cant is proposing a 40 foot radius. Staff feels this condition could be met without sacrificing any lots. By deleting sidewalks within the cul-de-sac the radius could be expanded per Fire District requirements. However, the increase in asphalt surfacing needed to ac- commodate the 45 foot radius would be a detraction from the aesthetic qualities that are being achieved within the development. Therefore, the placement of landscape islands within these cul-de-sacs, as well as the other cul-de-sacs within the project, will offset the "sea of asphalt" ap- pearance resulting from a 90 foot diameter cul-de-sac. 4. Single family attached lots 85-93 are being proposed to develop around a narrow cul-de-sac with a landscape island in the center. Locating the landscape island in this cul- de-sac would leave an approximate 18-foot wide manuevering lane on either side of the cul-de-sac. This narrow area does not provide enough room for the on-street parking needs of the 9 units which would be served by this street and would conflict with normal traffic flows.' ' S. In a letter to the applicant, dated December 8, 1977, from the Beaverton School District No. 48,recommended that: STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 i r (1) A left-turn refuge on Scholls Ferry Road at the Summer Lake entrance for traffic traveling west be pro- vided to allow cars to pass school buses waiting to turn F into the development . In addition, a right-turn lane refuge at the entrance would allow residents to move out of the faster traffic lane. (2) If left-hand turns are to be permitted when leaving Summer Lake, it is recommended that a center lane be pro- vided on Scholls Ferry to accommodate cars traveling west to move into the traffic flow at this point . (3) The City of Tigard request the State Highway Division to undertake a speed study on Scholls Ferry in this area, that development to the west has already necessitated } speed reduction. (4) The provision of a bus stop along Scholls Ferry Road at Lot 1 would serve school buses and public transportation. Staff has requested the school district to comment on the general plan and program and make any additional recommen- dations that were not included .in the December 8, 1977, letter. Comments from the Beaverton School District (see attached) have been included with the staff report. .11 Staff has also contacted the Oregon State Highway Division requesting their comments on this project . No response . has been received as of this writing. 6. There are a series of structures (i .e. houses and barns located on the northeast corner of the ) ap- plicant is proposing to remove all these rbuildingsTfrom the site. 7. The applicant proposes to deviate from the front and rear yard requirements of the code in a few instances where some front yard setbacks would be 16 feet and in some areas the rear yard setback would be 12 feet 8 inches. 8. On the "Framework Plan" for the area bordered by S.W. 121st , S.W. 135th, Scholls Ferry Road, and S.W. Walnut Street approved by the Tigard Planning Commission on blay 17, 1977, S.W. 130th is not projected to be extended through to S.W. Scholls Ferry Road. The terminus of 130th is to take place at what will become the intersection of S.N. 130th and S.w. Hawks Beard Drive. Therefore, that portion of S. V. 130th between attached single family lots 85-89 could be vacated at this time. Access to the property to the north of the development would continue to be served from S.W. Scholls Ferry Road. I1I Conclusionary Findings: 1. The applicant has essentially adhered to the required con- ditions of the preliminary plan and program (with the ex- ception of those items as referred to in the Staff Findings) and has supplied' information in those areas where he pro • t STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 poses to alter or delete from conditions imposed by the Planning Commission. 2. The request conforms to the density requirements of the Tigard Community Plan, 1971 , and NFO #7 Draft Plan and the underlying proposed R-7 zone. 3. Additional vision easements around the lakes should be provided to allow the lots not adjacent to the lakes, to enjoy the natural amenities the lake area provides. 4. Staff does not concur with the applicant 's reasoning for retaining the 1.1 acre area originally designated on the preliminary plan for apartments and redesignated on the general plan as single family. Staff concludes that Planning Commission Condition 3 of the preliminary plan and program should be adhered to. It should be noted that i this area is one of the few open space areas within the entire project that would not be within the 100 year flood plain making it a year-round useable- open space area. 3V. Staff Recommendation : Based on Findings of Fact and Conclusionary Findings, staff recommends approval of -;,he general plan and program and zone map amendment from Washington County RSI to City of Tigard R7-PD with the following conditions: t 1 . That the bikeway and pedestrian plan as submitted be amended, according to the attached exhibit A, and include the follow- ing: a. An 8-foot asphalt halt bikepath along the S.W. Scholls ' p Ferry Road frontage. b. 8-foot wide concrete bikepaths be provided along only the collector streets within the development. c. That the bikeway behind lots 10-1.4 be deleted. d. That an approximate 80-foot long bikepath from S.W. Glacier Lily Lane be provided between single family detached lots 9 and 10. e, That a bikepath be provided around the east lake. 6 f. That a bikepath from the area described as Lots 161-- 164 be provided on the Southside of the west lake where it would connect with the bi.kepath on the greenway to the east. i STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 g. That the bikeway be constructed within Phase 1 to include Scholls Ferry Road, the bikepath around the east lake, along the south side of the west lake, and along the collector streets. h. That the entire greenway and bikeway system be subject to design review and improvement plans for the areas marked X on exhibit "A" also be submitted (to include benches, picnic tables, etc . ) 2. That the "vision easement" between single family detached lots 14 and 15 be increased; that an additional "vision easement" be provided between Lots 11 and 12 (this can be accomplished by shifting Lots 10 and 11 in a westerly direction) . 3. That single family detached Lot 64 be deleted and this area serve as a vision easement within the open space area. 4. Lots 161-164 be deleted as single family detached homes, and this 1.1 acre area become part of the open space area and that this area be included within Phase I . 5. That all cul-de-sac streets over 150 feet in length be developed on a 45-foot radius. 6. That landscape islands be provided within the cul-de-sacs, and a landscape plan :for the cul-de-sac islands be sub- mitted :for design review, and that maintenance responsibility for the landscape island be prescribed to the Homeowners Association, 7. That a cul-de-sac with a landscape island be developed on a 40-foot radius for single family attached lots 85-93. 8. That 5-foot wide sidewalks be provided along both sides of the local streets (deleting them within the cul-de-sac) . 9. That covenants be attached to the deeds of single family attached lots 1, 19-23, and 121-126 restricting access from S. V. Scholls Ferry Road. 10. That street improvements for S.W. Scholls Ferry Road be provided per Oregon State Highway Division requirements. (To include a left-turn refuge lane and a right-turn taper) 11 . That a bus turnout .lane be provided along the S .W. Scholls Ferry Road frontage (exact location to be worked out between the applicant , Beaverton School District 48, and Oregon State Highway Division . 12 . That S.W. 130th be vacated between single family attached lots 85-88. xf STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Pale 12 13. That the street tree plan and signing program for the de- velopment be subject to design review. 14. That no final plat be recorded for any lots within Phase I until such time as public sewer service is available to the site. 15. That all attached single family units be subject to design review. Developed by Consulting Engineers Consulting Planners AMART Development Co. David Fvans and Associates,Inc. Genkendorf&Associates r buiRialmerLake E f j Glacier %i!y IP CSUMMER LAKE General Development Plan and Program and Zone Change Application c . ii January, 1978 I Applicant: AMART Development Co. , a limited partnership of American Guaranty Financial Corporation and Lutz Development Co. Consulting Engineers: Consulting Planners: David Evans and Associates Benkendorf and Associates 200 S.W. Market St. #110 620 S.W. Fifth Ave. Portland, Oregon 97201 Portland, Oregon 97204 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 umber INTRODUCTION 1 A A. Parpose 1 B. Background 1 C. Preliminary Approval Conditions 1 I. PLAN ELEMENTS 2 A. Existing Conditions 2 1. Natural Conditions 2 2. Developed Conditions 3 3. Zoning 3 4. Comprehensive Plans 3 ` B. General Development Plan 5 1. Land Use 5 2. Lot Sizes 5 3. Building Types 6 4. Circulation 15 5. Open Space 17 6. Landscape and Design 22 II. PROGRAM ELEMENTS 24 (; A. Goals and Objectives of Plan 24 B. Acreage and Density Analysis 25 C. Public Services 27 1. Sanitary Sewers 27 2. Water Supply 27 3. Storm Drainage 30 { 4. Street Lighting 32 5. Transportation 32 D. Community Facilities 33 1. Scholls 33 2. SYiopping 34 3. Protection 35 E. Stages of Construction 36 �wF. Market Analysis 38 , t ` s TABLE OF CONTENTS cont Page Number G. Deviations from Section 17 and 18 39 P of the Tigard City Code H. Public Health, Safety, Welfare 40 Cand Environmental Considerations ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION 41 A. Compatibility with Comprehensive Plan 42 B. Community Need and/or Public Benefit 43 C. Alternatives to the Proposal 44 D. Summary 45 APPENDIX A A. Protective Covenants A-1 B. Beaverton School District Letter A-9 f : I : y, h; e �s f � TABLE OF CONTENTS CONDITIONS OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL RESPONSE Page Number 1. NPO #7 Conditions f' a. Submit general plan, followed by 36 phased detail plans b. Street system near school site 15 C. Contact school district concerning 33 school access 2. Minor land partition 40 3. Reduce project density 6 4. Lack of right-of-way for S.W. 130th 15 5. Assure public sewer service 27 6. Drainage plan to be submitted 30 7. Written assurance from Beaverton School District 33 8. Preserve south drainageway 17 9. Open space improvement plan 17 a. Bicycle circulation system 11 b. Protection of western-- lake/marsh 17 C. Disposition 14 unit apartment site 17 d. Open space be clearly delineated 17 e. Identify city provided park improvements 17 10. . Submit street tree planting plan 22 11. Consider "vision easements" 19 12. Lotting pattern near causeway path 19 13. Single family appearance of duplex type unitsi 6 14. Scholls Ferry entrance design 22 15. Hydrologic study be prepared 30 16. Plan space for children 19 17. Maintenance for non-homeowner units 25 1V. ila:Lntenance of greenivay prior to City dedication 25 19. Duplex units be developed as common wall structures 6 f EXHIBITS Page Number 1. General Development Plan (Envelope, Back Cover) 2. Attached Unit Plans and Elevations 7 3. Attached Unit Plans and Elevations 8 4. Attached Unit Plans and Elevations 9 5. Attached Unit Plans and Elevations 10 6. Attached Unit Plans and Elevations 11 7. Attached Unit Plans and Elevations 12 8. Attached Unit Plans and Elevations 13 9. Attached Unit Plans and Elevations 14 10. Street Cross Sections 16 11. Pedestrian Bridqe Plan 18 12. Tree Planting Plan (Envelope, Back Cover) 13. Bikeway and Pedestrian Walkway Plan 20 14. Entrance Plan 23 15. Sanitary Sewer Plan 28 16. Water Supply Plan 29 17. Storm Sewer Plan 31 18. Phasing Plan 37 r l C I I 1 l . t LIST OF TABLES i Page Number TABLE 1 1970 Census Data 4 TABLE 2 Land Use by Type 5 TABLE 3 Acreage and Density Analysis 25 i i` 1 t : [r INTRODUCTION A. Purpose This document is presented as the basis of a "Zone Map ,_. Amendment" request and as the "General Development Plan and Program" for the proposed Summer Lake planned develop- ment. Summer Lake is a planned residential neighborhood to be developed by AMART Development Company. The site r contains 99.91 acres and is located immediately south of tT S.W. Scholls Ferry Road between S.W. 125th and 130th Ave- nues in Tigard, Oregon. B. Background On August 25, 1976 the Summer Lake site was annexed to the City of Tigard. Prior to proceeding with the preparation of a Preliminary Development Plan and Program, the Tigard planning staff requested that an area-wide "Framework Plan" be developed. During March and April, 1977, the city staff, Benkendorf and Associates, representing AMART Development Company, and Wedgwood Homes, Inc. jointly prepared a "Frame- work Plan" for all the property between Scholls Ferry Road and Walnut Avenue and S.W. 120th and 135th Streets. The .^ plan proposed land uses, residenti;:%:l densities, a circula- tion concept and an open space system designed to preserve the natural features and amenities of the area. On May 17, 1977 the "Framework Plan" was reviewed and approved by the Tigard Planning Commission. Following this action a Preliminary Development Plan and Program for the Summer Lake site was prepared, presented and approved with conditions by the Tigard City Planning Commission.on July 26, 1977. Since the preliminary approval in July, the applicant has continued to work with the city staff to prepare the fol- lowing Zone Map Amendment and General Development Plan and Program. �- The applicant respectively requests that the current Wash- ington County RS-1 zone be changed to the Tigard R-7 PD zone in order that development may occur as shown on the General Development Plan. C. Preliminary Approval Conditions Our discussion and response to the conditions established at the preliminary approval hearing are located in the text by subject category rather than in numerical order. A Y Table of Contents of the conditions follows the report Table of Contents. f + i I. PLAN ELEMENTS A. Existing Conditions 1. Natural Conditions The site is characterized by open, gently rolling i topography, sloping south from Scholls Ferry Road } to Summer Creek and sloping north from the south property line to the creek. e Lakes - Summer Creek has been blocked at the east property line by a small weir. The weir controls the creek water level which has been controlled at a level over the years to form two small lakes. There are two lakes because an earth and rubble fill was placed across the creek to serve as the runway when this site was utilized for a general aviation airport. The lakes comprise 14. 51 acres to the 100 year flood elevation of 174.00 feet. West Lake East Lake Acres 11.63 2. 88 % of Site 11% 3% j Normal Water Level 166. 60 167. 00 High Water. 170.00 170.00 100 year Flood Elev. 174.00 174.00 • Drainage Patterns - The lakes and creek serve as collection points for surface and storm drainage. One drainage channel flows south for approximately 1700' from Scholls Ferry Road in the northeast corner at elevation 230.0 to the west lake at ele- vation 166.6. A second drainage channel runs down the north slope of Bull Mountain, crosses Walnut {' and enters this site at the southwest corner at t ; elevation 200.0 and drains north for approximately 1400' to the west lake also. s Vegetation - The site is open and now in agricul- tural production. A few Douglas Firs exist adja- cent to the west lake primarily on the south side ( with a few still surviving on the north shore also. ( A small amount of brush and second growth deciduous trees exist at the south end of the site in the drainage channel that serves the south half of the $: site. o Wildlife and Waterfowl - The lakes and resulting catchment areas, particularly on the north shore of the west lake, are excellent habitats for-vari- ous forms of wildlife. The lakes are particularly attractive to waterfowl and these can be seen at all times of the year. The east lake is consider- ably deeper and good fishing is available. -2- 2. Developed Conditions } The site is bordered on the north by Scholls Ferry Road. An unimproved S.W. 130th Street borders the west property line and some public right-of-way exists beginning at approximately 860' south of Scholls Ferry and running south varying from 40-50' in width for the remaining length of the west pro- perty line. S.W. 128th Avenue has been extended north from Walnut to the south property line. The site is currently in agricultural production for a seed crop. A single family residence exists adja- cent to the east property and will remain. The old airplane hangers and shed type buildings will be re- moved during the course of development. A single family residence and church are adjacent to the property line in the northwest corner and two residences are in the northeast corner. Two resi- dences also protrude into the site on the west side immediately south of the west lake. The land west and east of the site is essentially undeveloped with !` the exception of scattered rural residences and one subdivision located on S.W. Summer Crest Drive east of the planned development sit.e. The land to the . south is fully developed for residential purposes. The land north is currently under development. Table 1 depicts the 1970 U.S. Census data for the census tract which includes. the proposed planned t development. 3. Zoning �._ The planned development site has not as yet been zoned by the city and therefore, still carries the Washington County Zone designation of RS-1. Lands surrounding the site are also zoned RS-1 by Washing- ton County except to the southeast where the zoning is RU-4. Lands within Tigard's city limits *outh and east of the site are zoned R-7. 4. Comprehensive plans There are three jurisdictions that have some respons- ibility for planning in the area of the Summer Lake site. These jurisdictions and their plan designations are as :follows: CRAG Framework Plan Urban Washington County Framework Plan Urban Tigard - Framework Plan - Urban-Residential Community Plan - Urban--Low Density Residential The applicant's request for R-7 PD zoning is compatible with each of these comprehensive plan designations. -3- TABLE 1 1970 Census Data (Census Tract 319) Characteristic Number. Percent Population 7,457 100.0 Male 3,591 48.2 Female 3,866 51.8 Dwelling Units 2,624 100.0 Single-Family 2,322 88.5 Duplex 27 1.0 Multi-Family 275 10.5 Owner Occupied 2,052 78.2 Renter Occupied 476 18.1 I Vacant 96 3.7 Substandard 16 0.6 Persons/Unit 2'8 --_ Crowded Units 69 2.6 Median Value $23,330. +-- Median Rent $ 131. Same Residence as 1965 1,857 24.9 Labor Force 2,867 --- unemployed 145 5.1 Median Income $11,424. --- Families Below Poverty Level 45 2.2 r -4- j B. General Development Plan Summer Lake is conceived as a residential community comprised of d--c-tached and attached single family homes. (See Exhibit 1) . The lakes which bisect the site pro- vide habitat for many forms of wildlife and wildfowl and it was determined early in the conceptual planning phase that lower densities around the lake would assure continued use of this area by wild game and fowl. Higher densities are proposed at the north end of the site near Scholls Ferry Road. 1. Land Use The planned development of the site is for residen- tial purposes and will occur in phases over the next five to seven years. Two types of single family residential development are proposed. • single family - detached e single family - attached (two units per structure) These uses are proposed on 79.61 acres of the 99.91 acres available.. Development will occur on 39.85 acres north of the lakes and 39.76 acres south of the lakes. The distribution of the two types of residential de- velopment follows: TABLE 2 Land Use By Type Acres Units Lots % of Site Phase I .. North -Detached 20.09 93 93 20.10 Attached 19.84 126 126 19.86 t Sub-Total: 39.93 223 223 39.96 Phase II South -Detached 39.68 168 168 39.72 TOTAL 79.61 387 387 79.68 Lakes and a Open Space: 20.30 -- -- 20.32 GRAND TOTAL 99.91 387 387 100.0 1 2. Lot Sizes The plan proposes two average lot sizes for the single family detached housing; 7550 square feet north of the lakes and 8505 square feet south of the lakes. A range is proposed both north and south so that some- what smaller lots can be developed around the lakes 13. to ensure that as many families as possible will have the opportunity to view the lakes and open space. -5- r'; condition 3 3: That the density of the project be reduced by increasing the duplex lot size to a minimum of 9000 square feet and the triplex lot size to 12,000 square feet and that the 14-unit apartment complex adjacent to the pond-marsh area on S.W. 130th be deleted. Discussion: The overall density of the project has been reduced from 4.15 units per gross acre to 3.87 units per gross acre by: 1. eliminating all triplex type units. 2. increasing the single family attached lot size to an average of 5317 square feet per lot or 10,634 square feet for what was previously called a "duplex" lot. 3. redesignating the 14-unit apartment site as the location of four single family detached homes. 3. Building Type Single family detached residences will be developed on 261 lots. These will be primarily for one and two story dwelling units. Typical architectural render- ings are included for the attached style homes. (See Exhibits 2-9.) The single family attached units will be built on 126 lots. Conditions 13 and 19 13: Design consideration should be given to treating the duplex area as essentially single family in character. Fbr instance, the units can be designed to have the appearance of one large ( ' single family home rather than the usual mirror image effect you get with a duplex. This has been done quite effectively in Irvine,.California. 19: That duplex and triplex units be developed as ccr=n wall structures to encourage occupant ownership. Discussion: The single family attached unit eleva- tions and floor plans included in this report are illustrative of what is proposed in compliance with #13. All of the units have been designed to appear as essentially single family in character. Double- wall construction techniques will be utilized to encourage occupant ownership to the greatest extent possible. ,t -6- 1 .� � A cvM � ti'ii w c J is jjj(kE k r � x O a I yC11L fp"� t I � I i bp �- i v v4.: fir.♦ � Z ti vi UNIT 8 1 S a �1 ti { 71CA Y i J t f O i IV J W � a W E m J w 4 s F i 9� Y 0 J a � J a O � a � o a lst I I ' eHIDIT 5` �i � Y tZ.' 1 e 9 �t �(r�.k �, I��'tl �� �r_S R / _�Ia � I�i �� I �� ���I I' ` � ••, _ 1, ,. I �`• C''f"!` � I ';, �: �, 1:. �,....• UNIT 1 j 111n 41'v" MW'��..r•� IY>��IWIv..I. .., fit- s a r Y a V F� , f 0 01 a MCI i � Q o l) a l y S J Q 0 C � s E d h ' EXNIPI1 1 11 777 «9 Y _ . . uNrr C :.. UNIT D t11 src �C i A 7777 GAP _ f on 1 Dow LIVING NOT WHIM - a r :110 6R m RP X as LIVING _ NOR I�` I rsR { SECOND LEVEL :, II .l l sG PT a.• ®6N _ SECOND LEVEL Ir 6e pf GOR. y —-- EVEL flllST LEVEL FIRST T oMm PT NIT„ UNIT ap' 13516 6.4.PT. 16q a, 4. Circulation { The "Framework Plan" approved by the planning com- mission on May 17, 1977 established the general vehic- ular circulation concept for the proposed development. I The "Framework Plan" recognizes Scholls Ferry Road as t a major arterial street as well as S.W. 121st and S.W. 135th as minor arterial streets. Two east-west collector streets are called for: one north of the lakes (a westerly extension of S.W. Springwood) and !. one south of the lakes. f C The General Development Plan (Exhibit 1) implements E the "Framework Plan" by designating the location of the two east-west collector streets. The proposed planned development is in fact divided into two sep- arate areas by the lakes/open space area. In the north there is a major entranceway off of Scholls Ferry Road (S.W. Summer Lake Drive) which intersects the east-west collector (S.W. Burdock Drive and S.W. Hawk's Beard Drive) . All other streets are designed to serve as local access streets only. (See Exhibit 10.) In the southern part of the development the east-west collector (S.W. Mountain Laurel Drive) connects S.W. 135th with S.W. Walnut via S.W. Meadow Grass Drive (S.W. 128th) . Originally (in the Preliminary Develop- ment Plan) , S.W. Mountain Laurel Drive was planned to connect S.W. 135th with S.W. 121st via an alignment adjacent to the proposed new school site east of the planned development. However, the local NPO #7, Tigard School District and the developer have agreed that the . collector should not pass directly adjacent to the the school. Therefore the collector designation has been shifted to S.W. Meadow Grass Drive (S.W. 128th) . All other streets south of the lakes are local access streets only. Conditions 1 b. and 4 1 b: That further study be given the street system in the southern portion (below the lakes), especially in regard to the point where the collector street contacts the school site to the east. 4: General plan and program assess effect of lack of right- of-way on 130th on traffic circulation, 'particularly in regard to the first phase homes on lots 143-146. Discussion: Meetings have been held with NPO #7 and the Tigard School District to resolve condition 1 b. The decision was not to have the east-west collector serve the school Site but rather direct traffic to S.W. Walnut and S.W. 135th via S.W. 128th. I -15 i. i i l l bei '— _ GelleAtor 1 - 32, —¢�-f- w%. de Sae. Lut. de Sue. f,,eov). as 4*S° 140-4cm'' MOM 46' VXHI1�IT to Regarding condition #4, lots 165 to 168 (formerly lots 143 to 146) and lots 161 to 164 (formerly the 14 unit apartment site) will be developed as part of Phase II of the project. Street access via S.W. 130th will be worked out with adjacent property owners and the Public Works Department prior to Phase II development approvals. '. 5. Open Space The development plan has been prepared to preserve the unique natural and open characteristics of the site. Over 20% of the site will not only be re- tained in an open manner but will be retained in its natural condition and deeded to the city for public use. Approximately 5. 8 acres of land area can be utilized for a variety of passive and active recreation activities. (See Exhibit 11) The provision of public rights-of-way in combination with the dedicated open space provides the basis for a pedestrian pathway and 1.9 mile bikeway system. This system has been designed to enable accessibil- ity to the lakes, school and playground from practi- cally every residence. It is possible to travel con- siderable distances by bike without crossing a street. In fact, it is possible to bike from the northern f extremity of the site to the school without crossing a thoroughfare. The Bikeway and Pedestrian System Plan is included as Exhibit 13 . Conditions 8, 9, 11, 12 and 16 8: Lotting pattern be modified more effectively to preserve southern drainageway. 9: An open space improvement plan be included with the general plan and program which addresses the following: a. A bicycle/pedestrian circulation system. e b. Method of protecting the western lake marsh area, with particular attention to access control, method of limiting boating to the east lake only, patty location, vegetation and fencing barriers. c. The area adjacent the western lake designated for 14 units of apartments be included in the open space area. �M d. That the open space be clearly delineated as separate � from the areas to be platted. e. That those improvements expected to be provided by the city be stated in the general plan and program (for Park Board approval) -17- +:; a LaT I� I � o I o 0 4{ �--plrD�?ff�lAN $IzIDG� W�ht LAK>i �Ayf LAKE,' i_ CAA-*— _ � b 0 L.AWN e 0 � o \�\�►c I ; l � Lir �� 5XH I INT 11 r i, 11: That further consideration be given to the provision of "vision easements" into and across the open space areas for the enjoyment of persons not residing directly ad- jacent to the lakes. 12: The lotting pattern adjacent the path across the causeway be modified to be recognizable as a primary access point into the open space and also to accom-lish vision ease- ment criteria. 16: Applicant address issue of adequate play space for child- ren, especially away from the greenway. Discussion 8: As can be seen from the General Development Plan, the lotting pattern has been modified to effectively preserve the south drainage- way. This has been done by adjusting street and lot line locations. if 9a: The foregoing "open space" description has described in detail the open space improve- ment plan. The open space plan includes a bicycle/pedestrian circulation system com- prised of sidewalks along the streets (see Exhibits 10 and 13 ) and a path system con- necting the north and south portions of the development and access to the new Tigard school site. 9b: The method of protecting the western marsh area includes: 1. No pedestrian path or bikeway is pro- r ; posed through the western area. la 2. only three single family lots abut this area and adequate setbacks will prevent any impact by these residences on the marsh area. 3. Dedication of this- area to the public will assure public stewardship of this �.,. area and the utilization of public re- source and wildlife agencies to develop a method of protecting the existing wildlife habitat. 9c: The apartment site shown in the preliminary Edevelopment plan has been redesignated as a l site for four single family de-ached homes- The open space development plan commits 20.32$ of the site (20.3 acres) to public, open space and another 41.84% of the site x (41..8 acres) to private open space. The individual and combined total sof 'these num Lx 4 -19- c i w— s ) . v ' r 01� 4 Tc j '{ : ; t •,: iii q i`. '/ Y i" s `'� '••*. u is 1-7 � _ '--+ �-.f � t �.t` � � O •",,ra_ `� a Irk"_ ,.._� --.._ � -,,�, t! C Q� v P izUA � y 41 IM lu '^IIIIIFIIIIIIIIiiIIIl III111111 21(1111►I11tI1(13111IIj1IlITTTTr4rn�1>>I111 j11151IT�11111 I1I11 r6tllllll�lii>J�t�111I114�111I111�111I111141111111111111 IIII I11SOL Am 111I111I111111t11(Il�t l�ltllFl .`F _ NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. OE 6Z BZ LZ 9Z SZ bIZ EZ ZZ IZ OZ 6r 21 LI 91 SI bl EI ZI 11 01 6 8 L 9 S b 6 Z dlllt11111111I101IlUlII111IN8Iu11�i11fIilI1I14�1�t111�rN1HllIlltl�r7dr�;A�tll1�({ moi{�t11I((!��{t���ll ••1•••{�•yy�Illl#HIIIr_I�IIHIrflrIIILIHr1hWLIlIItu3III11Ir IIIIIt1I1111II111I1�1�IIt11Y111II111I11i1I1111I11t)�jljJlllllllln11111�. . t - ._ ._ . 1 - , 1990 r t A r r� _ -- - -_ Xll 7-1 lic 4T- 5. 71 :> " f z p — - i` t ti 1t} i ! , i • \./'moi _ ,.. i ,y f ; , ��U�Cn�� V\40 1 - Ft1111111114111 h et t t t t 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 IIT � ! ( � t� 1 ! � � 11 (� I � � 1 ! ! 1� ( �! 1�Tr�m�R��tll(Ill�tlT�tll�tltlllr'Iitlt�tll�tifltll�I�t�1It11`111�1111+Intl!�!It�+it�+It�tlt,llt�llll+Itltlt�+l t'i�l�tl+'ry tltt ,. j NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED - -- ! - 2 3 4 _ 5 6 7 g g 10 11 1 '. DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. - OC 62 ez lz 92 sz t,z eZ Zz1Z 02 ,-611—6�1 L� 9I� si bt el ZI i l ol --8- B 9 s b S z rxlrntdtw6tulxxLtNtxu�tgtilmelta�gp )uln��wzyl�ltii�Nlll6Y 11I1�UluudllW}1tUfWx illl 1 tljjt{lgp��{ 1 �JUu (iln V MARCH 199 120 _ i / - 7 77 44, r i S : �s /1 .. r 1 r. _ { f r y a ., y •.,,� d '--�.i 1 .:.._..L 1--„...r ,,^. ^. I r � _•�O_ __ -. Y V,w .-�” — r , i � s E' t� _.., ��fi,;!.>',- •-�—Lt. '�, � � � � —�._ � -.-- �——�y''3 ��r.L_ :^� E � � T1s.► Y� : =_� E' � — � �' ,�.-✓;ray �,L _ �' ! � � � ti i i — --- -_ ,.�-----_._._-• 111 � � m KWV *4 'r11'°{a(°{Irk{TI°j°]r1°`a:°Iljl'a{alr{i�fjlla{I�1{f�a;alr{all{ria{a�°{li.ala�al°{ila�rl°lal°�a{al°I°�alllara'a{alr{r'aialra 0,1 r { NOTE; IF THIS MICROFILMED --- -- 2 3 4 - _ 5 6 7 g g 10 {{ { 29 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. •--- -- - -------- oe 6z` oz zz- az- sz oz ez zz {z oz sr—ar a s° sl tir ea zr a Oa 6 a s s b e z a c .naruHIHu�walau�mdaMa�nnhualNHI1111I/1MINla�aIli alta�lan�aaaa ¢ E� tttl�u�Iu� lt�art�Ia�t �u�1t1{ _aalatfa�anlaaralaaaa#aaoalne Jtxr� ealeaaa�aa E rra Inrd raal aa°Wy�N►aIN_ a� a aa�alr�uitu�l� 2110,190 - vi Ha' A (4 a G - i - r , t } r \\ Y ._ ._. � � - �� •,,ter \ _____ �_ . 3 0 =s -- - - --------- - --- - - -- - -- - may _L 1.J L I : I l l (' I I 1 I ( i � I � 1 1 �1Tr�m(m II{1�7 1�1 Tl Ill 111 I�i 111 Ili 6� I�i 111 Irl 711 I11 III 1�1 11J I�t 111 ill 111 1�1 111 III !11 III 111 I�ti tll7 IC NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED ---- -- 1. 2 3 4 _ 5 1 6 1 18 9 io 1OWL iisiiIo DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN ' THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. •-_ -. .._ ------ --- - oFFs ez az Lz sa sz t.z II ?z 1? � o'isr—e�-l.•.' Ll si si tl el zIl II of s Ia L 9 s e e z 7 F �NlIllilliilllilll{illllllll{Illil771t_Ilililllli{II11�II7fI1Nl�j) 1 �N711FNIN17111_"i11I7711iloWn III1duJL.NIH11ml idi#ilwiliwiiitlii&Nliflill111ltwlii7dwii tr A1�7!11�i117�i1. lllll lli�7t11117111i111 Illllll illllllllllll''��������ee���� ' 11�_=If�f III -. .i !W!!Jl1�11!]�flll I . S. — __. : , 1990 7777777777 I------------- -,- 7.-2 II ------------- ..............I�jL i -------------------...... ----------- ------........e'' 7n -------.......ON -------------I........... III77 iI ............ R_77 ..... .... IIMA H I 0 ................................. :7_777� 7"7 III bers represents a significant commitment to fulfilling city regulations and the development's goals and objectives. It is our position that such commitment is more than adequate and should not. be augmented by the inclusion of the apartment site (1.1 acres) within the open space improve- ment plan. 9d: The open space areas have been clearly de- lineated as requested. No major improve- ments by the city are requested. However, prior to transfer of this property to the r4' city a management and development plan for the area shall be prepared and approved by AMART Development Company. " i 9e: Under this proposal the city will provide maintenance of the open space and lakes dedicated for public ownership and use. This will begin at the termination of the maintenance agreement required by condition 18 as discussed later in this report (see General Program discussion) . 11: Several areas of both physical and visual access to the lakes have been expanded in the general plan. North of the lakes access S points are now provided about every 300 feet. South of the lakes the major drainageway area provides significant visual access to the lakes s as does the 30 to 50 foot bike/pedestrian pathway access. With very little effort those not residing adjacent to the lakes and wishing to access them can easily do SO. 12: The lotting pattern has been changed in compliance with this condition by removing the cul-de-sac and three lots to provide a "vision easement" for the interior lots to the south. This has made a significant contribution to the clarification of this primary access point into the lake-oriented open space. ` 16: The 20.3 acres of public open space together` with the 1.9 mile bicycle/pathway system pro 3 ( posed provides adequate play space for children. This space developed as proposed will provide approximately 3000 square feet of open space per child for the 300 children projected to reside at full development. F -21- 6. Landscape and Design rr Conditions 10 and 14 i ^ 10: That the street tree planting plan be submitted with the general plan. 14: Special design consideration should be given to the entrance to Scholls Ferry Road. pDiscussion A Tree Planting Plan has been prepared and is in--- cluded in the application as Exhibit 12. The concept of the street tree planting is to utilize the tree plantings as an identifying symbol of street types and to improve the appearance of the lakes and open space. Because the site is very open, London Plane trees on 45' centers have been selected as the street tree for the entrance, Summer Lake Drive, and all collector streets. This tree is a fast grower and will provide a pleasant appearance in a relatively short period of time. Little Leaf Linden trees on 25' centers are „-1 proposed for all cul-de-sacs and drives. This tree is compact and similar in form to the Plane tree, only smaller in stature. Douglas Firs, English �y Oaks and Lindens are proposed to be planted in a more informal manner on G' acier Lily Lane, compat- ible with the intent of this section of the project. I .p Austrian Pines on 151 centers and Lindens are pro- posed as a screen planting along Scholls Ferry Road. ° t (See Exhibit 14, Entrance Landscape Plan. ) M1 �LL ,3g -22- „ter 7"041” if 4 `g ,j �--- I •• o • w s.• O LAW A;: d,. Zo-ALALIAS I t � ' � - pocx WAu• tiVl�u i,��y►fitir.etic.1 x;;16?► —23- I . t II. PROGRAM ELEMENTS Er A. Goals and Objectives of Plan i The goal of the Summer Lake planned development is to provide a well planned single family residential community that is compatible with existing site conditions, comprehensive plans and current and future adjacent development. The primary objective has been to capitalize on and preserve the unique site features provided by the two lakes, the exist- ing flood plain and the wildlife habitat each rep- resents. The second objective is to provide a range of housing types, both single family detached and single family attached, that can accommodate a wide range of hous- ing needs and preferences. E `I r: ri E -24- j B. Acreage and Density Analysis The following figures represent an analysis of the various land uses proposed for the Summer Lake 4 planned development. Residential uses have been < subdivided by development phase. TABLE 3 Acreage and Density Analysis Acres Units Lots Density of Site Residential Phase I detached 20.09 93 93 4.63 20.10 attached 19.84 126 126 6.35 19.86 sub-total 39.93 219 219 5.48 39.96 Phase II detached 39.68 168 168 4.23 39.72 TOTALS detached 59.77 261 261 4.37 59.82 attached 19.84 126 126 6.35 19.86 t TOTAL 79.61 387 387 4.86 79.68 'Open Space Lakes 14.51 -- -- - 14.52 Other 5.79 -- -- 5.80 Sub-Total 20.30 -- -- -- 20.32 TOTAL 99.91 387 387 3.87 100.00 Conditions 17 and 18 17: Applicant propose some workable maintenance program for non-homeowner units. I 18: A workable plan be developed to assure adequate and timely maintenance of greenway prior to city dedication. i Discussion t{ 17: Under this proposal the entire Summer Lake subdivision is subject to stringent deed- . � restrictions requiring all owners of prop- erty in Summer Lake to maintain their prop- erties without respect to the type of oc- i � r E,3 -25-- 4 41 r cupancy. Upon reflection and considera- tion of the problem, it was determined that there was no reason to single out non-owner i occupied units since the goal is to have all properties properly maintained. There- fore, we have provided that the restrictions should be equally applicable to owner-occu- pied units as well as the non-owner occupied units. Section 3 of Article V of the Declar- ation of Restrictions specifically subjects tenants to the provisions of the restrictions. (See Appendix IV-A. ) 18: The greenway area adjacent to the lakes and the area around the southern drainageway will be kept free of litter and trash. Newly seeded areas will be maintained at a 4" length during the spring and summer growing periods. J " Newly planted trees and shrubs will be water- ed during dry periods and tree guying check- ed on a monthly basis. It is the intent of the applicant to maintain open areas in a neat and presentable manner at all times. Areas within the greenway that are retained in their natural condition and have not been disturbed by construction will be kept free � - of litter and trash only. No attempt will be made to change the natural character of these areas, particularly the wetland areas at the north end of the west lake. Wi I a k :8 -26- w C. Public Services 1. Sanitary Sewers The Unified Sewerage Agency, which has the respons- ibility of maintenance and operation of major trunk and interceptor lines in Washington County, is cur- rently in the process of forming a Local Improve- ment District (L.I.D.) which will provide the sani- tary sewer line to service the property. This sewer line is identified as the Scholls Trunk. It will commence at S.W. 121st Avenue, cross the site and terminate at S.W. 135th Avenue. It is expected that the trunk line will be operating by late summer of 1978. A collection system to service the site is shown by Exhibit 15, entitled "Sanitary Sewer Plan". This collection system will be maintained and operated by the City of Tigard. Public sewers will be extended to each dwelling unit as part of the site improvements. fThe average daily sewage generated by the develop- ment is anticipated at 0.14 MGD. Condition 5 5: No subdivision plats will be approved until public sewer service is assured to the satisfaction of the planning director. c Discussion The planning director has been assured of the availability of public sewer service. This is beinq accomplished by the Unified Sewerage Agency establishing a LID as discussed above. 2. Water Supply Water will be provided by the Tigard Water District. Existing 6-inch water lines are adjacent to the site on the south and east sides. In order to provide adequate flows and pressures within the development, approximately 2000 feet of offsite 12-inch water line will be required at the time of initial de- velopment. This 12-inch line will connect to a 12-inch line at 121st Avenue and Scholls Ferry Road and run westerly along Scholls Ferry Road to the site. This line is part of the Tigard Water Dis- _trict plan of service for the area. internal distribution lines on the site are shown by Exhibit 16., entitled "Water Syste.,, Plan". This system will be a 6 and 8-inch loop system with 6-inch lines servicing areas with fine hydrants. -27- �ti t f l The facilities will conform to the Tigard Water District's standards and specifications. The development will demand a peak flow of approx- imately 405 ,000 gallons per day (281 gpm) and an average daily flow of 135,000 gallons per day (94 gpm) . Water pressure will vary from 80 to 100 psi. 3. Storm Drainage Two existing interconnected lakes are situated in the middle of the site. The lakes receive drain- age runoff from the southeast slopes of Cooper Mountain and a portion of the north slope of Bull Mountain. The discharge from the lakes is con- trolled by a weir along the east dam and empties into Summer Creek. A defined natural drainage course traverses the southerly half of the site in a north-south direction and outlets into the west lake. From the lakes at elevation 170 the site slopes i southerly and northerly to elevation 230. As the site slopes toward the lakes, storm drainage will j be directed toward the lakes. A schematic layout of storm drainage lines, man- holes and catchbasins needed to properly drain the site is. shown by Exhibit 17, entitled "Storm Sewer Plan". The sizing of pipes to convey storm �e waters will be based on a 10-year frequency storm. A separate technical supplement entitled "Hydro- logic Study, Summer Lake Development", has been prepared to answer certain conditions of the Pre- liminary Plan and Program. Conditions 6 and 15 6: Drain be reviewed b Drainage y Public Works department prior to submission for general plan and program, with in k crease run-off calculation explained and related to to storm flows and flood levels in Summer Creek. 15: A thorough hydrologic study be made to ensure that development produces no adverse impact on downstream F properties based on 100 year flood plain. t Discussion 6; Compliance with this condition is in pro- cess. 15: See Hydrologic Study prepared by David Evans and Associates. (Submitted under, separate cover.) -30- 4. Street Lighting Street lighting of the roadway areas will be in accordance with the requirements of the City of Tigard. Portland General Electric Company will provide the design and layout of the lighting system and underground service. Prior to de- velopment a light standard will be selected which will be utilized throughout the entire Summer x Lake project. 5. Transportation i The Washington County Public Works Department main- tains traffic statistics for the streets and high- ways surrounding the proposed Summer Lake site. Tieyzeport that traffic levels on Scholls Ferry Road near the intersection with 121st were 5300 I average daily trips (ADT) in 1975. This figure drops to 2900 ADT west of the intersection with Old Scholls Ferry Road. i Traffic levels on 121st range from 2878 ADT near Scholls Ferry Road to 2570 ADT near Walnut Street. Walnut Street itself carries 1025 ADT, similar to the 1075 on 135th. r The only transit service in the area is provided ` by Tri-Met's line 45 - Greenbu ar is route provides service to WashingtonSquare 4 downtown Portland from the Canterbury Shopping Center on Highway 99W. The stop nearest to the Summer Lake development is located at the inter- section of S.W. 121st and Walnut Streets. Ser- vice starts at 5:25 a.m._ and runs until 10:30 p.m. , 6 days per week. The Sunday schedule is from ' 7:40 a.m. until 6:30 p.m, -32- .xr f D. Community Facilities 1. Schools The Summer Lake site is located in the Beaverton School District. The schools that serve the area t are: elementary - McKay E intermediate - Whitford high school - Beaverton At the present time the McKay elementary and Bea- verton High Schools are enrolled over their rated capacity and Whitford intermediate is enrolled at 90 percent of its capacity. The school district has projected total enrollment increases attributable to Summer Lake at full development to be: Grades 1-6 - 119 students Grades 7-9 - 59 students Grades 10-12 - 59 students School district plans call for a bond issue vote about January of 1979 that if favorably received ' would result in a new elementary school in 1981. . While the site is not within the Tigard School District, the district boundary is very close . In fact, Tigard School District has an elementary school site adjacent to the SE boundary of the Summer Lake development that will be open for use in September, 1979. Capacity at opening will be ff 250 students. The Tigard schools that now serve 1 the area adjacent to the planned development are: elementary - Charle F. Tigard Junior high - Fowler �= high school - Tigard The enrollment and capacity figures for these schools are: enrollment capacity Tigard Elementary 697 580 Fowler Jr. High 631 750 Tigard High 1288 1350 Conditions lc and 7 1c: That the School District be contacted to ascertain their thoughts on the best method for providing ac- i cess to the school site. 7: Applicant obtain written assurance from the Beaver- ton and/or Tigard School Districts that a satisfac- tory method of providing school space is being de veloped. -33 i Discussion lc: Meetings have been conducted by NPO #7 in which it was decided that the east- west collector proposed in the prelimin- ary plan not have direct access to the. new school site. The Tigard School Dis- trict and the developer have agreed to this. The general plan of development has been changed accordingly. Access to the school site will now be via S.W. Katherine Street. 7: Meetings and discussions have been held with both Beaverton and Tigard School Districts regarding this condition. Information received to date indicates that both school districts have elemen- tary and high school capacity problems. Beaverton has a bond election scheduled for 1979 and, if successful, a new school will be available in 1981. Tigard has a new elementary school opening in the area f in September of 1979. It will open with tf a capacity of 250 students and will even- tually serve kindergarten through 6th grades. This issue of who can best provide school facilities is difficult and involved. The two school districts have been dis- cussing a boundary change to Scholls Ferry Road. However, no action has been taken to date.. A letter from the Beaverton School District can be found in the appendix. 2. Shopping A wide range of shopping facilities is current- ly available to the Summer Lake planned develop- ments Regional facilities are available at Wash- ington Square within 13� miles of the development. Grocery and other daily consumer goods outlets are adjacent to the Washington Square complex. . Tigard's central business district is approx- imately 2 miles from Summer Lake. Finally, a neighborhood commercial. center will soon be constructed at Scholls Ferry and S.W. 121st to better serve the surrounding area. is -34- 3. Protection With the annexation of the Summer Lake site to the City of Tigard a full range of city services became available. Both city police and fire departments are able to provide adequate pro- tection to the proposed development. 1 t t� 1 -35- E. Stages of Construction The proposed development will be built in four major phases covering a period of 5 to 7 years. Phase I--A will cover all lots north of the lakes except lots 161 to 168 which have access via S.W. 130th. The remainder of these lots will be developed in Phase I-B. The balance of the development (south of the lakes) will be reserved for Phase II-A and B. (See Exhibit 18. ) Condition la la: That the developer be permitted to submit the general plan for the entire parcel with phased approval for detailed plans. Discussion The applicant's request is for general plan and program approval. The intent would be to follow this approval with final plats on a phased basis starting in the area north of the lakes. This is consistent with the above condition. �N -36- t i' F. Market Analysis There is a strong demand for single family residences. The best evidence of this demand is the recent sales experienced by the applicant at other projects. 1. Englewood - Tigard 2. Greenway - Beaverton 3. McCormack Place - Beaverton 4. Rock Creek Ranch - Washington County Construction of Phase I at Englewood and Greenway start- ed in April, 1975. The following table indicates the phases, number of lots and sales to date. r Lots Sold as of November, 1977 e Englewood i Phase I 88 88 Phase II 34 34 Phase III 76 74 i Sub-Total 198 196 t ® Greenway One Phase 120 120 i 318 316 i Rock Creek Ranch was made available for sale on April 1, y 1977. In the last seven months 45 sales have been made to individuals and 40 to builders. This represents an average of approximately 12 lots per month. At McCormack Place, a small 19 lot subdivision in Beaver- ton, all lots were sold within three months. The lots at Summer Lake will be developed in four phases, with approximately 90 to 110 lots per phase over 5 to 7 years, representing anticipated sales of approximately 5-8 lots per month. The sales experience at Englewood and Greenway represents a monthly demand over the last ' 26 months of 12 lots per month for this part of the metropolitan area. Therefore, we believe a 5-8 lot month- ly projection for Summer Lake is a realistic assessment t ' of the demand for single family residences. The above figures represent the experience of only one developer active in the southwest part of the metropolitan area. p The demand for new single family residences is now and is extiected to remain, substantially above the lot pro- duction contemplated for this site. The unique characteristics and amenities of this site can be expected to add considerably to the overall de- sirability of high regional accessibility via Highway 217 and the proximity of this site to Washington Square: j -38- G. Deviations from Section 17 and 18 of the Tigard City Code 1. Section 17: Subdivisions a. 17.28 Streets; Paragraph 17.28.040 sets out minimum right-of- way and widths for road surfacing. The appro- priate regulation is presented below followed by the right-of-way and surfacing being pro- posed for Summer Lake. Street Type Regulation Summer Lake ROW Surfacing ROW Surfacing primary Arterials 100 varies 100 varies Collector Street 60 44 60 36 Local Street 50 34 50 32 Dead-end Street 50 34 40 & 50 24,28 & 32 Turn around for dead-end street 50 rad. 34 rad. 45 rad. 40 rad. b. 17,44.040 Sidewalks The code requires a five (5) foot sidewalk on both sides of single family residential streets. Our proposal is consistent with this regulation. However, for local streets we propose a five (5) foot sidewalk on one side only. For cul-de-sacs we propose a four (4) foot sidewalk on one side ff only. t..Y J 2. Section 18 : Zoning Code Deviations to the following subsection of section 18 are anticipated. a. 18.20.030 (1) and (2) Minimum Lot Size The code requires 7500 square feet for single family detached and 5000 for a single family attached lot. Average lot sizes will be 5317 for attached house lots and 7550 (north of the lakes) and 8505 (south of the lakes) . There may be a few lots, however, that drop below the minimum specified. b. 18.20.060 (1) and (4) Front and Rear Yard Set Backs The code requires 20 foot front yard and 15 foot rear yard set backs. ourro osal will deviate from this in a few in P stances. A few front yard set backs will be 16 feet and in a few places the rear yard set back ` will be 12' 8". -39- H. Public Health, Safety, Welfare and Environmental Considerations City regulations require the applicant to show that the public health, safety and welfare and environmental considerations will be properly served. The foregoing application clearly points out that all of these areas of public concern are being adequately provided for. The public health, safety, and welfare provisions of the law are the basis for zoning and subdivision control. The applicant has met all applicable regulations to this point and will continue to do so during the actual de- velopment of Summer Lake. Environmental concerns have been considered from the out- set. The proper way to incorporate the lakes and drain- ageways into the development so as to protect the natural habitat and site characteristics and still allow the util- ization of the land has been the subject of many meetings and careful planning. This subject was the topic of a special study (enclosed) , the results of which have been incorporated into the overall plan and program. In summary, we suggest that the development plan and pro- gram speak for themselves in showing that the public health, safety and welfare of Tigard residents have been well provided for and that thorough provision has been made for the various environmental considerations at work on, --= and adjacent to, this site. Condition 2 2: Applicant obtain approval from the city for minor land partition for parcels subdivided illegally (Tax Map 1S1 33A, lots 500 and 502). { Discussion Minor land partition will be accomplished following City of Tigard regulations. t -40- .77 �t. 1 t i}! III. ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION The Summer Lake planned development site was annexed to the City of Tigard Augu.s= 25.1976. This zone change application requests that the county's RS-1 zone be chang- ed to the city's R-7 PD zone. The reason for the request is to complete the annexation procedure by affixing city zoning to the parcel compatible with the city' s commun- ity plan and to theresite. ebyallow the residential subdivision and development of to address the In matters of this kind itescourtssinythe "to three issues mandated by the decision as well as the other criteria contained in the city' s application procedure document. The "Fasano" issues are: 1: Compatibility with Comprehensive Plan and Policy 2. Public Need or Benefit 3. Alternative Sites -41- t A. Compatibility with Comprehensive Plan and Policy fThe Tigard Community Plan designates the planned development site area for urban low density resi- dential development. The R-7 zone is the city's zone for implementing this plan designation. The PD designation is requested to allow a more de- sirable environment to be developed than would oth- erwise be the case under strict R-7 regulations. The retention of the lake area in open public use along with innovative sizing and use of residen- tial lots is in keeping with the stated purpose of encouraging the application of new techniques and new technology to community development. It goes without saying that by varying lot sizes, retaining substantial amounts of open space, and still achieving a financially feasible develop- ment is in keeping with the PD objective of achiev- ing economies of land development, maintenance, street systems and utility networks. The following Community Plan Policies apply to the development of the city: Urban Low Density Residential 1. The maximum overall density of develop- ment will be four dwelling units or 12 persons per gross acre. 2. Residential subdivisions will be develop- ed with paved streets, curbs and gutters, street lights and walkways according to city or county standards. All utilities will be placed underground. 3. Development will coincide with the pro- vision of public streets, water and sew- erage facilities. 4. Planned unit development will be encour- aged on tracts large enough to accommodate ten or more dwellings. Discussion The General Development Plan and Program submitted with this application indicates the planned development's compatibility with th-e community plan policies. The total number of lots will be 387 or 3.87 per acre. The total number of dwelling units will also be 387 or 3.87 per acre. All development will be under- taken consistent with policies 2 and 3. -42 B. Communitv Need and/or Public Benefit ! The need for a development such as the one proposed for the planned development site is be.st demonstrated ! by the city's community plan which estimates popu- lation levels will increase to 74 ,000 by 1990. Based upon this growth and other assumptions in the plan, the proposed site was designated for urbanization. Specifically, the site was designated as one neces- sary for meeting the housing needs of the community. f The discussion in an earlier section documented just part of the demand for the proposed land uses with- in Tigard. Not only will the development fill many of these needs, it will also preserve for public - 1 ` benefit the wildlife habitat represented by the lakes and surrounding shore lands. This is a re- source that should not be lost to the residents of Tigard. f_ Finally, in this age of rising housing costs, it is incumbent upon local government to insure a wide range of housing types and sizes at as wide a cost range as possible. The proposed housing development will only aid in achieving this objective by pro- viding two distinct housing types with a wide range in price. �x r -43- L` C C. Alternatives to the Proposal F There are two different ways to look at the concept ( of alternatives to the proposal. Alternative sites within the city for the proposed development and alternative proposals for the subject site. 1. Alternative Sites within the City This issue is not applicable since the land has been annexed to the city and the zone re- quested is compatible with the community plan. Even though there are several other sites zoned R-7 in the city, the issue of alternative locations for R-7 areas was addressed during the plan preparation stage. It was decided at the time that the proposed site and not some alternative site should be developed for res- idential purposes. 2. Alternative Uses of the Site The consideration of alternative site uses must include uses other than residential. Possible alternatives might include commercial or office developments. These, as well as all other alter- native uses, have been carefully provided for j in the Tigard Community Plan. Additionally, the Washington Square regional shopping center - �. and the Koll Business Center have effectively met the needs for commercial and office develop- ment in this area. At a smaller scale, a ( ' neighborhood commercial center has recently been approved near the Summer Lake site, re- ducing still further the demand for commercial uses. In summary, residential development on land planned for that purpose would appear to be the use best suited for the site and surround- ing area. 1. a f -44- } i. D. Summary F The proposed R-7-PD designation fully meets the requirements of "Fasano" as documented above. The proposal is compatible with city I plans and policy, there is a public need and benefit and this is the most suitable use I for this site. The applicant suggests that all city require- ments and conditions have been met and com- plied with and that the city find in favor of this request with confidence. E t r . 1 r. is a to -45- {C_ l IV. APPENDIX t � l i w q 17, -A- DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS OF SUMMER LAKE THIS DECLARATION, made this day of , 1978, by AMART DEVELOPMENT, LTD. , an Oregon Limited Partnership, hereinafter called Declarant; W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of certain property in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon, which is more particularly described on Annex A attached, NOW THEREFORE, Declarant hereby declares that all of the property described above shall be held, sold and conveyed subject to the following easements, restrictions, covenants, and conditions, which are for the purpose of protecting the value and desirability of, and which shall. run with, the real property and be binding on all parties having any right, title or r interest in the above described property or any part thereof, their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each Owner thereof as hereinafter defined. ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS Section 1. "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of a fee simple title to any Lot which is a part of the Property, including contract sellers, but excluding those having such s interest merely as security for the performance of an obligation. Page 1 DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS 4 A_1 Section 2. "Property" shall mean all the property hereinabove described. T Section 3. "Lot" shall mean any numbered plot of land shown upon any recorded subdivision plat of the Property which is not designated as a Street or public area. Section 4. "Street" means any highway or other thoroughfare as shown on a recorded plat of the Property. ARTICLE II PARTY WALLS Section 1. General Rules of Law to Apply. Each wall i which is built as a part of the original construction of multi-family C. homes upon the Property and placed on the dividing line between the f' Lots shall constitute a party wall, and, to the extent not f inconsistent with the provisions of this Article, the general rules of law regarding party walls and liability for property t_ damage due to negligence or willful acts or omissions shall apply thereto. Section 2. Sharing of Repair and Maintenance. The cost of reasonable repair and maintenance of a party wall shall bye shared by the Owners who make use of the wall in proportion to such use. The word "use" as referred to in this Article means ownership of a dwelling unit or other structure which incorporates any part of such wall. Section 3. Destruction by Fire or Other Casualty. If _ a party wall. is destroyed or damaged by fire or other casualty, any Owners who have used the wall may restore it, and if the Page 2 - DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS A-2 i. i, other Owners thereafter make use of the wall, they shall contri- bute to the cost of restoration thereof in proportion to such use without prejudice, however, to the right of any such Owners to call .for a larger contribution from the others under any rule f of law regarding liability for negligent or willful acts or omissions . The Owner repairing or reconstructing a party wall shall have the right of access over the adjacent Owner's Lot c to the extent reasonably necessary to effect the repair or reconstruction. Section 4. Weatherproofing. Notwithstanding any E other provision of Article II, an Owner who by his negligent or willful act causes the party wall to be exposed to the elements shall bear the whole costs of furnishing the necessary protection against such elements . Section 5. Right to Contribution Runs with Land. ` The right of any Owner to contribution from any other Owner under this Article shall be appurtenant to the land and shall pass to such Owner's successors in title. Section 6. Arbitration. In the event of any dispute arising concerning a party wall, or under the provisions of this Article, each party shall choose one arbitrator, and such arbitrators shall choose one additional arbitrator, and the dispute shall be arbitrated by the arbitrators so designated. The decision shall be by a majority of all of the arbitrators_ and shall be binding on all parties thereto, their heirs and assigns. �a� 1 Page 3 - DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS A-3 i ARTICLE III + USE OF PROPERTY BY OCCUPANTS Section 1. Affirmative Duty of Maintenance. Each Owner shall be responsible for maintaining, painting or staining, and generally keeping in good order and repair, the exterior of any improvement on any Property owned by such Owner and such Owner shall be responsible for trimming and maintaining the lawns, shrubbery, plantings, trees and other landscaping thereon in a neat and proper condition consistent with good horticultural practices, it being the intention of this provision that the Property and improvements -thereon shall be maintained by the Owners thereof in accordance with the characteristics of a high-class residential district. Section 2. Use Restrictions. The following restrictions shall be applicable to the use of any Property subject to this Declaration and each Owner is responsible hereunder with respect to any portion of the Property owned by such Owner: A. No Lot shall be used for any purpose other than t` j ' residential purposes. f B. No animals or fowls shall be raised, kept or per- mitted upon the Property or any part thereof, excepting only i domestic dogs or cats and excepting caged pet birds kept within the dwelling house, provided said dogs, cats and pet birds are 7 : not permitted to run at large and are not kept, bred or raised for commercial purposes or in unreasonable numbers. r. Page 4 - DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS A-4 C. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried j _ on upon the Property or any part thereof, nor shall anything be done or maintained thereon which may be or become an annoy;-nce or nuisance to the neighborhood or detract from its value as a high-class residential district, including permitting the land- scaping on any Lot to become overgrown or permitting any structure on any Lot to become unsightly. D. No trucks, campers, trailers, or boats shall be parked or permitted to remain in the Street adjacent to any Lot or on any Lot unless inside the Owner's garage. r ' E. No trash, garbage, ashes, or other refuse, junk vehicles, underbrush, or other unsightly growths or objects, t shall be thrown, dumped or allowed to accumulate on any portion of the Property. F. No exterior clotheslines are allowed that can be seen from any Street or adjacent Lot. ` l ARTICLE IV EASEMENTS Perpetual easements for installation, maintenance, operation, relocation and removal of utilities and drainage are hereby reserved by Declarant over the rear five feet of each Lot and on the side five feet of each Lot (the front of each Lot being the side facing the Street) . Any such easement shall be terminated upon construction of a party wall on the Property line of two adjacent Lots to the extent of the entire area of the structure of which the party wall forms apart; provided, Page 5 DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS A--S I� however, that the Owners of the Lots upon which the party wall E-- is constructed shall relocate and bear the cost thereof all then existing utilities and drainage facilities, if any, in the easement area. ARTICLE V GENERAL PROVISIO14S Section 1. Duration. The covenants and restrictions of this Declaration shall run with and bind the land and shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the Owner of any Lot subject to this Declaration, their respective legal representatives, 1 t , heirs, successors and assigns for a term of twenty years from the i ' date this Declaration is recorded. After such term such covenants and restrictions shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten years unless an instrument signed by the then Owners of two-thirds of the Lots has been recorded agreeing to change said covenants and restrictions in whole or in part. The covenants and restrictions of this Declaration may be amended during the first twenty-year period by an instrument signed by the Owners of not less than 75% of the Lots and thereafter by an instrument signed by the Owners of 'not less than 66-2/3% of the ` Lots. Any amendment must bero erl recorded. I P P Y Section 2. Joint Owners. In any case in which two or more persons share the ownership of any Lot, regardless of the form of ownership, the responsibility of such persons as Owners hereunder and to comply with these restrictions and covenants is joint and several and the act or consentof any Page 6 - DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS A-6 C one or more of such persons is the act or consent of the entire ownership of the Lot unless such Owner records a written notice to the contrary in Washington County Deed Records. Section 3. Lessees and Other Invitees. Lessees, invitees, contractors, family members and other persons entering t the Property under rights derived from an Owner shall comply with all of the provisions of these Declaration of Restrictions restricting or regulating the Owner's use and enjoyment of the Property and shall be liable to any Owner under Section 4 hereof as though an Owner. The Owner shall be responsible for obtaining such compliance and shall be liable for any failure of compliance by such persons in the same manner and to the same extent as if the failure had been committed by such Owner. � 4 R Section 4. Enforcement. Any Owner shall have the right to enforce by any proceeding at law or in equity all restrictions, conditions, covenants, and reservations imposed r by the provisions of this Declaration and a similar right shall exist with respect to recovery of damages for any such violation. q, oFailure of any Owner to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. t' Section 5 . Attorneys' Fees. In the event suit or action is commenced to enforce any provision hereof, or for damages on account of a breach thereof, the prevailing party shall be ., t entitled to such party's attorneys' fees from the losing party, s including such fees in any appellate proceedings. n g t IFe Page 7 DECLARATION .OF RESTRICTIONS A-7 1 { C Section 6 . Severability. Invalidation of any one of these covenants or restrictions by judgment or court decree shall in no wise affect any other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned being the Declarant herein has hereunto set its hand and seal as of the date and year first hereinabove set forth. AMART DEVELOPMENT, LTD. By LUTZ DEVELOPMENT Co. , General Partner 1 By President STATE OF OREGON ) t } ss. County of Washington) . On this day of , 1978, personally appeared before me ARTHUR A. LUTZ who, being duly sworn, does say that he is the President of LUTZ DEVELOPMENT CO. , an Oregon corporation, General Partner of AMART DEVELOPMENT, LTD. and that said instrument was signed in behalf of said corporation and partnership; and he acknowledged said instrument to be their • I voluntary act and deed. t Notary Public for Oregon' My Commission Expires: Page 8 - DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS A-8 0 Beaverton Schools - rT, IDistrict No. 48 P.O. Box 200 Beaverton, Oregon 97005 I 503/649-0422 Gene Springer Director of Facilities & Plant Planning f November 30, 1977 F s I t Mr. Newton Andrus 1 Benkendorf & Associates 620 S.W. Fifth Avenue s Portland, Oregon 97204 Dear Mr. Andrus: AThank you for the opportunity to respond to the Summer Lake develop- ment plan. I shall respond to the school housing situation. You will receive responses from Walt White on busing and Lucy Sarles on safety at a later time. Our present plans call for a bond issue vote about January of 1979. If the vote is positive, a new school would be ready approximately two years from that date. { In the meantime, additional pupils from planned developments will place a burden on our existing Programs. The present attendance boundaries for this development are: School 77/78 Enrollment Buildinq Capacity McKay 486 41hi tford 904 432 Beaverton High 1 ,810 1 ,000 1 ,800 Summer Lake should produce the following additional pupils: Grades 1-6 119 1, 59 n 59 - Sincerely, 1 I Gene; Spri.pAer~� i f � cc halt White Lucy Sarles \ { A-9 I i 1 i a SUMMER LAKE ml&Awn, HYDROLOGIC STUDY r TIGARD, OREGon vc; inno1 'On TE&nICAL SUPPLEMEnT Moak Adm w WC no 1 DAVID EVAn3 Ann ASSOCIATES, inc. no200 3W MARKET STREET • SUITE 110 - PORTLAnD,OREGon 97201 - 503/223-6663 � . %em no is i r SUMMER LAKE DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGIC STUDY C c JANUARY 1978 f f _ I I P Consulting Engineer David Evans and Associates, Inc. 200 S.W. Market Street, Suite 110 Portland Oregon go 97201 bED PRp�F 6467 N f ;: SUMMER LAKE DEVELOPMENT HYDROLOGIC STUDY SUMMARY I. Summer Creek flows into Fanno Creek with its head- waters in Cooper Mountain and Bull Mountain. 2. The Summer Lake Development straddle's Summer Creek and has two (2) interconnected lakes on the site. 3. The drainage area upstream of the site totals 3000 acres. � 4. The slope of the land drains the site toward the }' lakes. 5. Information and data pertinent to the Summer Creek Basin was gathered from the Corp of Engineers, Washington County, and the City of Tigard. This data was utilized in our analysis and discussed with the staff involved. 6. The basis for the calculations of rate of flow is based on the Rational Method and is expressed by the formula, Q = CIA. 7. The rate of runoff for a 100-year storm is calculated at 938 cfs before development and 953.7 cfs after development. This amounts to a 1.7% increase. 8. The lakes currently provide storm water retention. 9. The lakes will be upgraded and modified in order to retain additional runoff from the site. 10. The Summer Lake Development will have no effect on downstream properties and will function as both a flood control facility and an aesthetically pleasing ' amenity. �a INTRODUCTION fThe Summer Lake Development is located south of Scholls Ferry Road, between 125th and 130th Streets and totals 99.91 acres, See Figure 1, "'vicinity Map". The develop- ment is planned as a single family residental community with attached and detached single-family dowelling units. i A major asset of this site is the lakes and surrounding flood plain which are incorporated into the development !: plan. on July 26 , 1977, the Tigard Planning Commission approved a request for a review of Preliminary Plan and Program of the Summer Lake Development subject to nineteen (19) ff conditions as set forth in the City of Tigard letter i . l dated August 1, 1977. This report is prepared in response to the storm drain- age concerns of the Planning Commission. These concerns are part of the conditions for approval and are as follows: "Drainage be reviewed by Public Works Depart- � . ment prior to submission for general plan and iprogram, with increase runoff calculations explained and related to storm flows and flood levels in Summer Creek". "A thorough hydrologic study be made to ensure that development produces no adverse impact on downstream properties based on 100 year floodplain. " , I l qV p L kv til wl : 6ITE II �� a a I III D / ,} .r DATE __�0.kUE+1 5976 k 3CRlE VICINITY MArmrwno DRVID CVFM we AE70CAUS.m raawwn L p z i � -. - =� -::_ _..._. - � �.'..-•.. ::. �p!�0. 7i.9 119 iII)Il 9111111111111-1 a t)1 lit 9i9 119 1111119 9 9 FI NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED (' — t f pill" __._.....1.. 2_ . 3 4 S 6. _ _ 7. 8 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN -. 8 O THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO w THE QUALITY OF TWE ORIGINAL i DRAWING. ---- — 0F£ 62 a L'Z 1 9z 'SZ AZ_£Z ZZ la 02 6t QI LI.-- -Sf it £1 2! 01 Ot 6 t3 ... . _ sNICIII1�tN1�9911�1U9i11A{IHINNN tl 91 It I 111111t t t !sl I �a ID mD�It.t 4`t MARCH— _I ' 2199.0-- a _ ..a T—tee _: -. R� pi •'• _ » a tsy At MD VA Pik '•�` y is�r. � S �(� .l ,. i. y2 4 � .�• to '•iti •� 'R 1�:�. R r.��.� R A ss•� c.7.g7{x. f ;wf {,f R K� r .sem ` �`k � � ♦ .9`~� ,�- f _ 'w'a`x ., t� �N F� '7-:4 tom:: �\ s vR• r _ • �, I . i SUMMER LAKE DEVELOPMENT HYRDOLOGIC STUDY II SUMMER CREEK Summer Creek tributary of Fanno Creek, flows in an easterly direction from its headwaters on Cooper i Mountain and Bull Mountain to its confluence with t Fanno Creek. Due to the .mountaineous upper reaches the majority of the basin has average slopes greater than two (2) percent. The highest elevation in the { basin is elevation 783 feet, on mean sea level datum (msl) and the lowest elevation is 148 feet, msl, at f Fanno Creek. The drainage area upsteam of the site totals3000 acres. A "Drainage Basin Map" - Figure 2, shows the Summer Lake site in relation to the basin boundaries. -+- SITE The Summer Lake Development site comprising about 100 acres is located 1.2 miles upstream from the mouth of Fanno Creek. The site straddle's two in- terconnected lakes_which were built by placing two Earthen dams across the drainageway of Summer Creek. The elevation of the lakes are controlled by a con- crete outlet weir at the east dam. ... -4 17 A concrete box culvert beneath the westerly dam provides �- the connection between the two lakes. A defined natural drainage course traverses the southerly half of the site in a north-south direction and outlets into the west lake. This drainageway conveys storm run- off from the north slopes of Bull Mountain. On the north side of the lakes, the site has one minor drainageway swale. A combination of sheet flow and the ii swal.e conveys storm drainage to the lakes, See "Site 1. Map" - Figure 3. i` t -6- "Ps veer --. _r.41 � -�` � -•-�.~� �,�� '--�;-��, 'moo-� T > r �tGUiztr lr�---• ,! w��-f t,AK� a t-AKV, CC MAV Tj �►�'__�/��� �1 ��� r_..�. r--t.-_ ' �--�- ---L�XIh711VG DI�AINhrLil: TIT L own all MEN I --� Vl�AINAG� Dtr�l.-'tlold 1 � M J '' e HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS The basis for the calculations of the volume of storm drainage is based on the Rational Method according to the equation: Q = CIA. Where Q = the rate of runoff, in c. f.s. C = the runoff coefficient, expressing the ratio rate of runoff to rate of rainfall. I = average intensity of rainfall in inches per i hour for the selected frequency for the duration equal to the time of concentration. t_ . A = drainage area, in acres, tributary to the point under design. Tc = the time required for runoff from the remotest Apart of a drainage area to reach the point under design. j. . cfs = cubic feet per second (rate of volume) ` An Intensity-Duration Curve, Exhibit A, of East Wash- ington County, was utilized in determining the intensity of a 100 year storm for the Summer Lake Development. A selection of I = 1.25 inches per hour at a Tc (Dura- tion) of 56 minutes is shown by the dashed lines on the exhibit. The Tc of 56 m' utes as shown by Exhibit B" nomograph, using as a basis the L (length) and H (fall) from the ( remotest upper reaches of the basin of the site. -8 4k I EAST WASHINGTON COUNTY INTENSITY DURATION CURVES 4.0 3.5 .` 3.0 I 2.5 0 x c a 2.0 y W t 1.15 k y 1.0 t e- 5 IVU YE R FREO E/JCl° 0.5 -7r7l= I 0.0 0 20 40 51r 60 e0 t00 120 140 160 ISO y` DURATION (MINUTES' r ry_ DATE _TANIIAI ��v Si w!NT "A" Dc3iGn DMID CVPM we n 3CXIATE3. m �P DRAwn ,.. s 1^ I H(I'd 500 400 Tc 1200 Y00 . 300 150 200 'I 150 100 \� 80 100 �- L (Ft) 10,00060 r, 40 d 40 a 50 5,000` 30 30 u 25 6Al- 3,000 .21 20 ` Note: a 20 Use nomograph Tc for natural !" 2,000 15 E basins with well defined channels,o _ 1,500 for overland flaw on bare C 0 10 earth,and for mowed gross road- r 10 1,000 g side channels -jc 8 For overland flow,grassed sur- E 1` o E i faces,multiply Tc by 2 E6 s � 5 For overland flow, cancreta or .0 500 5 = 4 asphalt surfaces,multiply Tc _ 4 w 3 by 0.4 300 For concrete channels,multiply 3 i _ Tc by 0.2 200 2 150 2 o �-- 100 � 1 � 1 Based on study by P.Z.KirpicA, y Civil Engineering,V01.10,N0.6,June 1940,p.362 f. 146 7b0' -� 110'a 010' L= Ib,xo ft MetKmf r-ort NOMOgMM) 'fN�R� 01L1r, Uhe Ho WOO' ANP 1s" 0,000' AND DOLIOM V-"UL rINl4 1•G. PILOM GNANT 64, MIN. _ r .; DATE _11MIUAILY I?1b X I X11 vansDEEI6n_ ,..'�. DMO fVP/13.nns AMOCATE5. m DRAwn dam.., t RATE OF RUNOFF The rate of runoff calculation based on a 100 year storm for the existing and after development conditions of the Summer Lake site are based on the Rational Method formula, Q = CIA. The runoff coefficient, C, from the i formula is based on 0.25 for the existing condition and 0.40 for after development of the Summer Lake site. The amount of land upstream of the site comprises 3000 acres with the site total of 86.4 acres as 13. 6 acres are the existing lakes. Exhibit "A" has shown the selec- tion of a 100 year storm for the site at an intensity of 1.25 inches per hour at the 56 minute Tc. 4 The calculations of the existing and after development rate of runoff, Q, are shown below: Given: C = .25 (before) Area (total) = 3000 Acres C = .40 (after) Area (site) = 84 .4 Acres I = 1.25 in./hr. 100 year storm (( Q (existing) = CIA : f = .25 (1.25) (3000) 938 cfs r ( � rill „-------- r_ CQ (after) = Q (upstream) + Q (site) .25 (1.25) (2913.16) + .40 (1.25) (86.4) { = 910.5 + 43.2 f = 953.7 cfs From the above calculations, the increased runoff for a _ 100 year storm is 953.7 cfs - 938 cfs or 15.7 cfs. This is only a 1.7% increase from the total expected flow. To illustrate the insignificance of the increased runoff, a graph of the rate of flow of Summer Creek versus time ff for a 100-yeF - -storm is shown by Exhibit C, entitled 'Streamflow Graph". The cross hatched area on the graph represents the volume of additional storm water contri- buted by the Summer Lake Development. This volume of storm water amounts to 7200 cubic feet. The _additinnal vnlume of storm water will be more than a offset by 1 the increased lake storage created by the removal of a portion of the west dam in order to accom_mo- - ' date the proposed pedestrian bridge andn) modifications s to the outlet weir structure. { f, I I -12 r { r 7 I : Io0o PI;AAK I^LOW WO bfiAK r-I.oW jmvt rmo-N! wil" OUT n�1/t'LOPMENT 04-wig 11,10 NZ VOl,UMf�, OF RDVi'fIONAL h'fOKAG� I�cPUIFED ¢ 7ZDOG.{: ®- G00 / e o 4 t_i o aI0 (00 $O Io0 lw [ nmt✓ (MINu-reW v DAT£ :fAMOAf-Y I'M MALE on micft _ ��. DlivlO.(vpM era A&XXiAT 3. .,c t G .. oaRwn AVAILABLE INFORMATION Information on Summer Creek as a tributary of Fanno Creek is available from the Corps of Engineers - from their report entitled, " Flood Plain Information, Tualatin River and Tributaries, Washington County, Oregon, and from inter-office memorandums. Also, aerial mapping entitled "Flood Plain Delineation Maps" were obtained from the Washington County Department of Public Works. These maps show the approximate location of the 100-year flood plain for Summer Creek. We have discussed the specific site development with i 4 the Corps staff who are performing additional studies i . of the flood plain and stream. We have utilized the i above data in our analysis and have discussed our findings with the staff involved. oFMW i EFFECT ON DOWNSTREAM FLOOD PLAIN l A Flood Plain Map, Figure 4, shows' the flood plain � area downstream of the Summer Lake site. The downstream properties benefit by the on-site lakes. They are already providing storm water storage of Summer Creek flows From the heavy storm of December 13 r F. -14- � _� , z' _�\ �f � =ate„� `� • ���. �..� /.�. /~ "m fl ;` 12-���- \y�•��. - i- � .-•'Y� � ! ...iii < c"`-..� ~`. � � } - �� \ �'`� - vim✓ ”�� J-' f 1i pd 7.Al \ter �'�E��j.', /- �• +s �` �9'' � '��".!�? j. fir� �� h�1,/ +�y.�may/-s I Aly"' � � `��" _ f'- �^•J ' f'--. � - � . ',ti•"P-- T t�1, ��S �\�:� ��1l+'I �`J- . .i�:':� cr�''lL'��71. r� t{- r�.�+••r^� �'�!�.j ��/ �;}'�„�; r—" rS \ \�•,•.. \..� � 1 � ^- 4., �� 1.7. .J (�� f; ' 1 f� j:/t`'l .s %(fl��\_-"'\'E-b.� 1 0 VUox �s II . • Mt � 11 —\.\•\ .,��1 Y,, V� I\� t• ,,. �� � g � �• �• I- �S 0.E /.�'o /� \"' -�-�=\'fL.... .s��•Cn�r n� f•�.Il .a 8.'�. .,0 .eta ... - — ����'•� :��.].' .-. .% �(\m 11fadJ6�E 2 PRAINA61": M,�IN MAP Dom T �(�IrFrl►l!fll�il�rl?)rJ'(r!!Jilr,!!�1lt(�lr�llr��,lap� jm Ili ilI tl � 711 1j, r!a 7 r , � � � i i i l t _ °...;.- � ;:;,___ `' _ ......I 2 3. 6 67tl1 li[(tfi ,ltBt ii, 1lr'r�ll,T, 'l NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED . ,i - _ _ 9 O - - i1. I DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO ___..._ �I THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL j - DRAWING. 0£ 62 8Z LZ 22 SZ— >Z -£a ZZ 12 OZ 61 81 LI 8t —5'I{ ii -£1 `Wlllludnul,mlWtdHWMWILWdu 1 --'! _ tilwlulllllu{u!!i - MARCH990 - M .. 1 and 14, 1977, it was observed that approximately 30 f acre-feet (1.3 million nnhin fpnij of storm water was — f in storage behind the east dam. This retention or storage of Creek flows has been present since the_ earl 1960°s. t The Summer Lake Develo went will have little or n t r on the M p•QPis. It is planned that the lakes will be upgraded and modified in order to retain } the additional runoff from the site. The lakes already f provide storm water retention that will be increased. ' They will function as both a flood control facility and 1 i an aesthetically pleasing g amen. f c : i _ -16- ART002 ® March 24, 1978 GO re URS/js Page 1 of 3 DESCRIPTION RECEIVED "SUMMER LAKE" MAR 2 4 1978 CITY OF TIGARD Real Property situated in the County of Washington, State of Oregon, being a portion of the West Half of Section 33, Township I South, Range I West of the Willamette Meridian, described as follows: PARCEL Is A tract of land in section 33, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Washington County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows Beginning at a stake 12 feet west of the quarter section corner between Sections 33 and 34, T~onaship 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette X eridian, Washington County, Ore:4on, and running thence Kest 19.82 chains to the Southwest corner of :r.D. Hite's land, from which a fir 44 inches in diametar bears North 172 1/2 links; thence North 13.23 chains to a stake in the centers of the County Road; thence North 72. 55' East 8.88 chains to a stake in the center of said road; thence North 78. 35' East 11.48 chains to a stake not 12 feet West of an iron bar 1 1/4 isnchas, 2 feet, not in the County Road where the line: between Section 33 and 34 intersects said road, from which a fir 24 inches in diameter bears North 6. 15' East 98 1/2 links, a pine 30 inches in diameter bears South 3310 East 78 1/2 links; thence South parallel with section line 17.45 chains to the point of beginning. i 7EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following two tracts, bounded and described as follows, to-Witt A. Beginning at a point 688 feet North and 20 feet west of the quarter corner between Sections 33 and 34, Township 1 South, Mange 1 West; thence Went 240 feet; thence North parallel to the East line of said Section 33, a distance of 420.25 feet to an iron pipe in the South line of the Scholl; Ferry County Road No. 348; theace North 79' Fast along the South line of said Scholls Perry Road, 244.50 feet to E an iron pipe; thence South along the West side of that certain 20 foot road which in mentioned in the deed from J.D. Bite and wife to Frank � C. Hausafus and recorded in Book O, page 338, Records of Washington County, Oregon, and is 20 feet West of and parallel to the East line of said Secttou 33, a distance of 466.8 feet to the point of beginning. } B. Beginniner the East quarter section corner of Section 33, I Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, j Oregon; running thence West 1320.12 feet, more or less, along the Southerly boundary of the Vincent Olson tract as recorded in Book 225, page 248, Deed Records, dated December 15, 1943, to an iron rod; thence North 0. Olt Test 262.65 .feet to an iron rod, said iron rod marking the true point of beginnnig of this description; thence continuing North 010 Olt (lent 610.53 feet to the Northwiest corner of the tract conveyed to Progress Bibles Church by deed recorded May 22, 1957, in Book 394, page -254, Deed Records in the center of Scholls Ferry Road (Coy ty Road No. 348) ; thence Perth 7210 55' East 292.93 feet along said center line to a point; thence South 696.58 feet to an iron rod; thence Nest 280.00 feet to the true point of beginning of this description. sen, ARTUu2 Description "Summer Lake" March 24 , 1978 Page 2 of 3 t f PJkRCLL II3 Lots 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14, ASIS VALLEY TRACTS, Washington County, Oregon. { f EXCEPTING that part of Lot 12 deeded to Shirley Dow by that certain ! instrument recorded April 5, 1948, in Book 242, page 177, Deed Records of Washington County, Oregon, and more particularly described as follows f Beginnings at a point 20.0 feet West of an iron pipe and on the � center line of a 40.0 foot roadway, said point bearing South 89e► 48 West and 1320.0 feet from Section corners 33, 34, 3, and 4; thence 'Horth 0* 061 West 1210.0 feet along centerline of the road to an angle point and true point, of beginning; thence North 89. 401 East 20.0 feet to an iron pipe] thence continuing North 89. 48' East 376.0 feet to an iron pipe; thence North 0. 06' West 110.0 feet to an iron pipe on the North line of Lot 12; thence South 890 48' West 376.0 feet to an iron pipe at the Northwest corner of Lot 12; thence continuing South 89. 48' test 20.0 feet to a point on the centerline of the roadway; thence South 0. 06' East 110.0 feet to the true point of beginning. PARCEL III: I Lot 13, ASH VAIJXY TRACTS, Washington County, Oregon, EXCEPTING that part thereof conveyed to Shirley Dow, by that certain instrument recorded December 8, 1948, in Book 291, page 349, Deed Records of Washington County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows: The following described real property in Section 33, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, and out of the Southwest corner of Lot 13, ASH VALLEY TRACTS: Beginning at an iron pipe at the Southwest corner of Lot 13, ASH VALLEY TRACTS, and going thence along the Southerly line of Lot 13, 376 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence parallel to the Westerly line of said lot, North 0® 069 West 110 feet, snore or less, to an iron pipe; thence South 89® 48' viest 376 feet, more or less, to ars iron pipe on the Easterly line of h 40 foot wide roadways thence continuing South 89. 48' West 20 feet, more or less, to a paint on centerline; thence on centerline South 0. 061 East 110 feet, more or less, to a point; thence North 89. 48' East 20 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. AR7 12 MING ' Des,ripti_on "Summer Lake" f March 24 , 1978 Page 3 of 3 PARCEL IV All the East half of! the Northeast 1 Wear of the Southeast quarter Of Section 33, Township '. South, Range 1 �3festl Willamette Meridian,. Lp 311. South, a-axClusiv rlusiv Washington county, ©regoul WITH a 20 foot n+ofrota SchO11s Ferny right of way above desectiOn line cribed Prape�tytbe quarter Post Road to EXCEP'T'ING THEREFROM that certain two acre tract conveyed to Jams G. ' - A_�d recorded October 30, 1975, in Hook 10511 Page Stark, at ux, sore particularly described as follows: i 779, Recon of Washington county, i Beginning at the quarter corner on the East line of said Section 33, which is marked with a 1 1/2 inch gaalvanired iron pipet and running thence SO 0° 06' East 288.86 feet along the Section lime to a 5i 5/8 inch iron rod; them South 89° 45' 02° efeet0to6n 5/at�hto airon inch iron rod; thence North 0 06 West 288.86 r of Section 331 thence worth on the North line of the Southeast quaff 890 45' 02' East 301.60 feet to the point of beginning. TOGETHER WITH a roadway easement over the East 25 feet of the above described parcel excepted from Parcel III. PARCEL V: A trait Of land in the Northeast quarter Of the Southeast quarter of Suction 33, Township 1 South, RanTact teeing moreillamette particular pmerarticularly Washington County, Oregon, said tract g as follows: on East line Of Section 33, which Beginning at the quarter corner is marked with a 1 1/2 inch galvani$ed iron pipes and running thence 288.86 feet along the sectioan line to a 5/8 inch iron South 00 060 East rod; thence South 89® 4thence north $° 06• dales�.288.8602" est ® 6 t feetc>oa 5/8 inch iron rod an the North Tina, of the Southeast quarter of Section 331 thence North. 890 452 02" Nast 301.60 fest to the point Of begiacnning. k TOGETHER WTIS a 20 foo to the quarter past from Schollss Perry non-exclusive right of way on the Section line Rand to the above described property. y a ZC 28_7 wtpa-r't-1 6 c m x c m � e w F f . i S SUBJECT SITE {' Wtf%+f41NG'fON COVNTY R5-1 7D P--7-pp C {Tye a F y •TicapRD t £ , U ME STEE S U ME CR ST mru mrm in mmernrwmmo,wo wow 34 S W 1 3 KL. H RI N .JI _ S R N N r _ y KNREii 5T EE t $ 1 S CT. t 2 7 ! f ` ' t J / MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Dick Bolen SUBJECT: Summerlake Appeal DATE: March 27, 1978 On February 7th, 1978 the Planning Commission approved the Summerlake Planned Development by Art Lutz & Company subject to 17 conditions. One of these conditions requires that: 3. Lots 161-164 be deleted as single family detached homes and this 1.1 acre area become,: part of the open space area and that this area be included within. Phase I and subject to Park Board review. The applicant has appealed this condition and requests that the four lots be reinstated. The area in question is a partially wooded knoll overlooking the western lake (see attached map marked Exhibit "A") . This land ties into the proposed open space system and provides some reasonably level useable open space. Inclusion of this land as open space has been recommended by both the Planning Commission and Park Board. The issue involved is common to residential Planned Developments. The developer is willing to dedicate unbuildable land for open space in exchange for a density transfer. This has often been characterized by critical citizens as trading swamp land for buildable land. There- fore, with each Planned Development the Planning Commission is seeking to acquire some useable open space located in conjunction with the ily less useable drainage ways. # In the case of this project the fact that there are lakes in the drainage way makes this area more useable. However the additional 1.1 acres will round-out the open space area into an attractive and useable open space resource for residents of this development. It is thereforethe staff's recommendation that this development be approved as recommended by the Planning Commission, ART002 -irch 24 , 1978 2c4c� EXHIBIT "D" QRS/js Page 1 of 3 DESCRIPTION RECEIVED "SUMMER LAKE" MAR 2 4 1978 Real Property situated in the County of Washington, State OFTIGARU of Oregon, being a portion of the West Half of Section 33, Township I South, Range I West of the Willamette Meridian, described as follows: PARCEL It A tract of land in Section 33, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Washingto» County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a stake 12 feet West of the quarter section corner between Sections 33 and 34, ftwmship I South, Range 1 West, Willtte Meridian. Washim.gton County, Oregon., and running thence West 19.82 chains to the Southwest corner of J.D. Hite's land, from which a fir 44 inches in diametor bears North 172 1/2 links; thence North 13.33 chains to a stake in the center of the County Roads thence Worth 72. 550 East 8.88 chains to a stake in the center of said roads thence North 780 35' East 11.68 chains to a stake set 12 feet West of an iron bar 1 1/4 inches, 2 feet, not in the County Road where the line between Sections 33 and 34 intersects said road, from which a fir 24 inches in diazseter bears North 60 15' East 98 1/2 Links, a pine j30 Inches in diameter bears South 330 East 781/2 links; thence South paralle1 with section line 17.95 chains to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFAOi�! the following two tracts, bounded and described as follows, to-Witt A. Beginning at a point 688 fest North and 20 feet West of the quarter corner between Sections 33 and 34, Township 1 South, Range 1 West thence retest 240 feet] thence North parallel to the vast line of said Section 33, a distance of 420.25 feet to an iron pipe in the South line of the Scholls Ferry County Road No. 348; thenen North 790 East along the South line of said Scholls Ferry Road, 244.50 feet to an iron pipes thence South along the West side of that certain 20 foot road which is ;mentioned in the deed from J.D. Hite and wife to Frank C. Hausafus and recorded in Book U, page 338, Records of Washington County, Oregon, and is 20 feet West of and parallel to the East line of said Section 33, a distance of 466.8 feet to the point of beginning. B. Beginning at the East quarter section cornea of Section 33, Township 1 South, Range l West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County„ Oregon; running thence gest 1320.12 feet, more or less, along the Southerly boundary of the Vincent Olson tract as recorded in Book 225, page 248, Deed Records, dated December 15, 1943, to an iron rod; thence North oe 01" West 262.65 feet to an iron rod, said iron rod marking the true point of beginnnig of this description; thence continuing North 01 02' Went 610.53 feet to the Northwest corner of the tract conveyed to Progress Bible Church by deed recorded May 22, 1957, in Book 394, page '254, treed Records in the center of Scholls Ferry Road (County Road No. 348) ; the.=e North 720 55' East 292.93 feet along said cater line to a point; thence South 696.58 feet to an iron rods thence West 280.00 feet to the true point of beginning of this description. ■ setARTU02 Description "Summer Lake" March 24, 1978 Page 2 of 3 PARCEL IIs Lots 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14, ASR VALLEY TRACTS, Washington County, Oregon. EXCEPTING that part of Lot 12 deeded to Shirley Dow by that certain instrument recorded April S, 1948, in Book 242, page 177, Deed Records of Washington County, Oregon, and more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point 20.0 feet went of an iron pipe and on the center line of a 40.0 foot roadway, said point bearing South 890 481 West and 1320.0 feet from Section corners 33, 34, 3, and 4; thence North 00 06' West 1210.0 feet along centerline of the road to an angle point and true point of beginning; thence North 89® 482 East 20.0 feet to an iron pipet thence continuing North 890 48" East 376.0 feet to an iron pipe; thence Vorth 00 06' Nest 1:10.0 feet to an iron pipe on the North line of Lot 12; thence South 890 48' West 376.0 feet to an iron pipe at the Northwest corner of Lot 12; thence continuing South 89. 48' Test 20.0 feet to a point on the centerline of the roadway; thence South 00 06' East 110.0 feet to the true point of beginning. PARCEL IIIc Lot 13, ASH VALLEY TRACTS, 'Washington County, Oregon, EXCEPTING that part thereof conveyed to Shirley Dow, by that certain instrument recorded December 8, 1948, in Book 291, page 349, geed ?records of Washington County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows: The following described real property in Section 33, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, and out of the Southwest corner of Lot 13, ASH VA.LLFY TRACTS: Beginning at an iron pipe at the Southwest corner of Lot 13, ASH VALLEY TRACTS, and going thence along the Southerly line of Lot 13, 376 feet, more or less, to an iron pipes thence parallel to the Westerly line of said lot, North 00 06' Test 110 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe; thence South 89. 481 West 376 feet, more or less, to an iron pipe on the Easterly line of a 40 foot wide roadway; thence continuing South 89. 481 West 20 feet, more or less, to a point on centerline; thence on centerline South 0® 060 East 110 feet, more or less, to a point; thence North 890 480 East 20 feet, more or less, to the -point of beginning. AP`002 D€. ;ription "Summer Lake" March 24, 1978 Page 3 of 3 PARCEL IV: All the East half of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 33, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, TOGETHER WITH a 20 foot non-exclusive right of way on the Section line to the quarter post from Scholls Ferry Road to the above described property. W. _.. . .... ........ . MINUTES `1'IGARD PLANNING COMMISSION February 7, 1978 Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room 10865 S.W. Walnut - Tigard, Oregon 1 . Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. 2. Roll Call : Present: Brian, Corliss, Goldbach, Quimby, Rossman, Sakata, Popp. Excused Absence: Tepedino, Wood . Staff: Laws, Chaidez 3. Approval of -Minutes: The minutes of January 10, 1978, were not approved as they were inadvertently left out of the packets. 4. Communications: None 5. Public Hearings: 5.1 Zone Change ZC 28-77 (Lutz) NPO 7 A request by Amart Development Co. for a general plan and pro- gram review of a single family residential planned development to include 261 single family units and 126 attached single family units for a 99.91 acre parcel south of Scholls Ferry Road between S.W. 125th and S.W. 130th (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1Sl 33A, Lot 502; and Tax Map 1S1 33D, Lots 100 and 101) . A. Staff Report: Read by Laws B. Applicant 's Presentation : Al Benkendorf, 620 S.W. 5th, stated that he would reserve his comments until after the staff recommendations had been given. C. Public Testimony: Allan Patterson , 11605 S.W. Manzanita, expressed concern that the parcel of land which he owns will become landlocked. •t MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION February 7, 1978 ' Page 2 D. Staff Recommendations: t Based on Findings of Fact and Conclusionary Findings, staff recommends approval of the general plan and program and zone map amendment from Washington County RSl to City a of Tigard R7-PD with the following conditions: 1. That the bikeway and pedestrian plan as submitted be amended, according to the attached exhibit A, and in- clude the .following: f a. An 8-foot wide asphalt bikepath along the S.W. j Scholls Ferry Road frontage . b. 8-foot wide concrete bikepaths be provided along z only the collector streets within the development. C. That the bikeway behind lots 10-14 be deleted. f d. That an approximate 80-foot long bikepath from f S.N. Glacier Lily Lane be provided between single family detached lots 9 and 10. e. That a bikepath be provided around the east lake.' f. That a bikepath from the area described as lots 161-164 be provided on the southside of the west lake where it would connect with the bikepath on the greenway to the east . g. That the bikeway be constructed within Phase I , to include Scholls Ferry Road, the bikepath around the east lake, along the south side of the west lake, and along the collector streets. h. That the entire greenway and bikeway system be sub- ject to design review and improvement plans for the areas marked X on exhibit "A"also be submitted (to include benches, picnic tables, etc. ) . 2. That the "vision easement" between single family detached lots l4 and 15 be increased; that an additional "vision easements" be provided between lots 11 and 12 (this can be accomplished by shifting lots 10 and 11 in a westerly direction) . 3. That single family detached lot 64 be deleted and this area serve as a vision easement within the open space area. 4 . Lots 161-164 be deleted as single family detached homes, eM MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION February 7, 1978 Page 3 and this 1 .1 acre area become part of the open space area and that this area be included within Phase I . 5. That all cul-de-sac streets over 150 feet in length be devFlol,e4 on a 45-foot radius. 6. That landscape islands be provided within the cul-de- sacs, and a landscape plan for the cul-de-sac islands be submitted for design review, and that maintenance responsibility for the landscape island be prescribed to the Homeowners Association. 7. That a cul-de-sac with a landscape island be developed on a 40-foot radius for single family attached lots 85-93. 8. That 5-foot wide sidewalks be provided along both sides of the local streets (deleting them within the cul-de- sac) . 9. That 'covenants be attached to the deeds of single family attached lots 1, 19-23, and 121-126 restrict- ing access from S.W. Scholls Ferry Road. 10. That street improvements for S.W. Scholls Ferry Road be provided per Oregon State Highway Division require- ments. (To include a left turn refuge lane and a right- turn ight- turn taper) 11. That a bus turnout lane be provided along the S.W. Scholls Ferry Road frontage (exact location to be work- ed out between the applicant, Beaverton School District 48, and Oregon State Highway Division) . 12. That S.W. 130th be vacated between single family at- tached lots 85-88. 13. That the street tree plan and signing program for the development be subject to design review. 14. That no final plat be recorded for any lots within Phase I until such time as public sewer service is available to the site. 15. That all attached single family units be subject to design review. E. Rebuttal .Al Benkendorf, 620 S.W. 5th, Planning Consultant, stated that they concurred basically with the intent of all the conditions, but differed in their implementation. Conditions • E MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING, COMMISSION ` February 7, 1878 " Page 4 1 and 2 were acceptable, Conditions 3 and 4 caused the most concern. They felt that a significant reduction from the original number of units had already been made and that Conditions 5 and 6 the six acres of open space was plenty. Condit requiring landscape islands in cul-de-sacs was inconsistent and a solution should be worked out with the Fire District as to radii. Condition 8 would not be adhered to in only oLily Lane) where the sidewalk would one instance (Glacier } only be along one side of the road in an attempt to create a rural informal atmosphere. All other conditions were fine. t 4 .Darryl Bailey, 12420 S. Y. Summercrest, expressed concern with the dike across the lake and the flow of water under it . .David Evans, 200 S.W. :Market , Consulting Engineer, stated they would improve and maintain the dike, add to the re- tention capacity of the lakes , modify culverts under the dike, and raise -the road level over the water. E i .Goldbach expressed concern over the fluctuating weir system and who would be responsible :for it. X Evans answered the weirs would be enlarged and City of Ti- gard would maintain the facilities as a public area. .Brian disagreed with deletion of lot 64 in that it would benefit only 1 or 2 other lots. .Evans stated a vista could be opened at lot 60 by decreasing the size of lots 61-64. .Quimby was concerned with the soil stability and flooding. .Evans stated none of the lots encroached into the flood plain, that they hadn't developed fragile areas, the drain- age problem had been addressed during the design process. ,Brian questioned the elimination of sidewalks in the cul- de-sacs. .Staff stated that the Planning Commission on previous ap plications had eliminated this requirement . Staff further stated that the landscape islands, as recom- ined by a homeowners Association. mended by staff, be mainta .Evans stated they had no intent for a Homeowners Association. ,Sakata asked about sewer availability . . J MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING' COMMISSION February 7, 1978 Page 5 .Evans stated U.S .A. had the proposal and would begin con- E struction, hopefully this summer. F. Commission Discussion: . .Quimby was concerned with the city's takeover of lake and flood control and felt the developers should be responsible. She also felt there was no need to eliminate lot 64. .Corliss felt city of Tigard should be responsible to assure that someone would take care of it and agreed there was no 4 reason to delete lot 64; she also felt lots 161-164 should be retained for single family units. r .Sakata was concerned (1) over the lack of school facilities, (2) with construction on soils near the lake, (3) with an open space area at lot 60 or 64 to answer boating concerns, . (4) that the Planning Commission had deleted lots 161-164 in the original discussion , and (5) setbacks were too small. i Goldbach saw no reason to exclude lot 64; felt the cul.-de- sac idea was good; questioned the necessity of 2 sidewalks an Glacier Lily Lane and whether the city wanted to accept I the open space area as park. .Brian felt lot 64 could remain; lots 161-164 were okay to remain and provide housing on the lake; the area was in- accessible to the majority of the people - parking and ac- cess to the lake were a problem; the dike should be subject to the approval of the city; setback should be subject to the approval of planning. .Laws stated recreational uses have not yet been established, but should be limited. .Popp stated lot 64 should remain; lots 161-164 would be better suited as single family homes than public access as this wasn' t a. good area for boating and should have only minimum use as such; the 40-foot radius for fire trucks was okay and landscape islands were good; the schools. were the responsibility of the public at large, not the de- velopers; sidewalks need consistency and conformity; the dike should meet approved standards. .Laws recommended revision o.f the following staff conditions: (2) that the "vision easement" between single family de- tached lots 64 and 65 should also be increased; and that an additional "vision easements" be provided between lots 61 and 62; and that the phrase "to the Homeowners Associ- ation" in Condition 6 be deleted and the following wording inserted: "as part of the Declaration of Restrictions for Summer Lake. " MINUTES � TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION February 7, 1978 Page 6 .Brian moved for approval based on staff' s recommendations and revised conditons and adding the following conditions: 16. That the design of the dike and flood control appar- atus atus be subject to city approval. r 17. That variances .from the setback requirements of the code be subject to the Planning Director's approval. 18. That lots 161-164 be developed during Phase. 11 as a a public parking and recreation area. i .Popp seconded the motion. .Quimby requested that the motion be amended to include an additional condition, (19) That soil stability tests be provided for lots adjacent to the lakes. 4. .Brian accepted the amendment. .Evans agreed to soil stability tests. f jV Laws suggested change of language in Condition 18, "develop- ment of this area be determined by 'the Park Board." .Quimby expressed concern over the public paying to mai.n�t,iin a private lake. .Benkendorf suggested waiting to decide on lots 161-1.64 until Phase II of the development. .Popp clarified Phase II will be 12-2 years. .Benkendorf suggested a management program from the City of Tigard to ,ad.dress some of these problems. Brian changed his motion to delete Condition 18 and re- instate Condition 4 and adding, "development of "this area be subject to Park Board review. " ,The motion was passed 4-3. : Yes, Rossman, Brian, Quimby, Goldbach; No, Sakata, Popp,. Corliss. { 5.2 Minor Land Partition NLP 15-77 (Kelleher) NPO 4 I A request by Phillip Kelleher to partition a •83 acre parcel into three lots: two 7500 square foot lots and one 21,000 square foot lot in a R-7, "Single Family Residential" zone at SX. 78th and Pfaffle Streets (Nash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 36 CA, Tax Lot 5400) . A. Staff Report: 1 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF February 7, 1978 EXCERPTS CONCERNING LUNE CHANGE 28-77 AMART DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (SUMMER TAKE) Presentation by the applicant: BENKENDORF: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. My name is Al Benkendorf. Our offices are at 620 S.W. Fifth. Also with me this evening are Phil Mallard with the Amart Development Company and ?have Evans, who is the consulting engineer on the project. We would like our application to become a part of the record by reference. The Staff has advised us that it would be best if we made our comments during the rebuttal part of the hearing, since most of our comments are really directed at the Staff Recommendations and the Staff really hasn't presented its Recommendations at this point. So, unless there are any questions, we would like to sit down and let you proceed with the hearing and make our comments at that time. POPP: Are there any questions? is there anyone else wish- ing to testify in favor of this proposal? PATERSON: I am Allan Paterson, 11605 S.W. Manzanita. I guess this is a small item. I guess this is the time to put it in. When they work towards the more specific plan, I own the five-acre parcel that is directly north of the school site and is land locked and will need access when they lay the streets out. I'll show you on the map. A road should hit in the middle of that property. Here's a plat. I' ll leave the plat with the Staff. This is a plat of Merestone. That is on 121st. It is just half the property. This is the section with 121st. here, the Stark Airport property here, and the back of the property here. The dimensions are easy to ascertain. It is about 823 ft. to the center of the property from the section corner, which is the southern- most part of this property. That's the only point that I have. POPP: Is there anyone else wishing to testify in favor of this proposal? No response. POPP: is there anyone wishing to testify in opposition to this proposal? No response. POPP: John, will you present the Staff Recommendation please? r . . A', Staff Recommendation presented, j, , r PC MTG. 2/7/78 Zone Change 28-77/Amart Rebuttal: BENKENDORF: I would like to just make a few comments about the Staff Recommendations. We have been working on this application ever since last July t which time the Commission gave us preliminary approval. ,john read earlier the list of conditions that were attached to that approval. As I recall, there were about 27 conditions. Our application has responded to most of these. We still have a few minor differences of opinion. What I would like to do is just really focus on those differences rather than review again some of the things the staff has already commented on. Basically, in terms of the conditions that are proposed tonight, we concur with the intent of all of them. Our major differences, really, are in the way the Staff i6 proposing that they be implemented. What I woula like to do if I could, would be to just go through each of the conditions and then we could comment on each of them. Conditions One and Two are acceptable. These essentially relate to the proposed changes in the bikeway and pedestrian plan (a through h) , and Condition Two which relates to moving Lots 14 and 15. Conditions Three and Four are the two conditions about which we are most concerned. These relate to eliminating Lot 64 at the south end of the project, just to the left of the entrance into the lake area. Condition Four speaks to Lots 161-164, which are the lots that are serviced off S.W. 130th. We have already made a significant reduction in the number of units in this project which was, in fact, one of the conditions of the preliminary approval. As you may recall, in our prelimi- nary submission we had 415 units. We've reduced that to 387 to, in fact, respond to the conditions of that approval. So, we have dropped 28 units already, which is about a 7% reduc- tion. If I' could just address the Lot 64 question first. In that area we have already dropped three lots. We had an access road in there (small cul-de-sac, if you will) and three additional lots. We have taken out three lots and that access road, and now the Staff is requesting that we take out another lot. We frankly disagree with that recommendation. We would like to see that lot preserved. The same holds true for Lots 161.-164. Again, in our prelimi- nary submission there were 14 units proposed on this site (really as a small apartment site) and it was proposed at that r time that, instead, the site ,be reserved for open space. We feel, and I think the plan reflected that we have made a sig- nificant contribution in terms of open space. While there is a a lot of the open space, about six acres of the hard ground � and the balance in the west lake and the east lake . granted 2. PC MTG 2/7/78 Zone Change 28-77/Amart some of this is in the floodplain. I urge you to cunsider, though, that the flood plain is a hundred-year flood plain and that, for most of the time, the land is very usable for many kinds of recreational activities. This is about a 100-acre site, about six acres of hard ground, so we are contributing six acres which is really the size of a typical neighborhood park for recreation purposes. We feel that that one-acre site where those residences are shown is really an ideal site for residential development. We have reduced it from 14 to 4, and we would like to see those four lots preserved. Conditions Five and Six. The other comment I would like to make is on Conditions Five and Six, that speak to the size of the radius of the cizl-de-sac and the proposal that there be landscaped islands in the middle of the cul-de-sac. What we would like to see is that these be eliminated as conditions, and rather that the Planning Commission direct the Staff and ourselves to sit down and work out an equitable solution to this problem between ourselves and the Fire District. We feel that, on the one hand, the Fire District is suggesting that the radius and size of the cul-de-sac be increased (we assume to increase maneuverability) ; and, on the other hand, suggesting that we introduce landscaped islands in the middle. These two conditions seem somewhat inconsistent. As I say, we are willing to sit down with the Fire District and review the size of the radiuses and work with the Staff. We would suggest these not be conditions of approval, but rather we just be directed to come up with a solution that is satisfactory to the Fire District. Condition Eight. On Condition Eight we just take a minor exception. Glacier Lily Lane is a smaller looped road just above the lakes. The intent of the development of that lane and the whole character of that street has been to try to in- troduce a more informal kind of residential environment. Maybe you could point that out on the map. We have. a reduce- street cross section, for example, which meanders through there. Our intent, if you will, has really been to try to create the kind of atmosphere that exists around Lake Oswego. We have a very informal, small kind of lane. we propose that there be a sidewalk on one side of thc, street. We think that by putting a sidewalk on both sides of the street this part of the development will end up looking like the rest of the development. We don't have any problem with five-foot sidewalks on all the rest of the streets. We would just like to take exception for this one street and suggest that the sidewalk be built on only one side. 3. PC KrG. 2/7/78 Zone Change 28-77/Amari All the rest of the conditions are fine. we are willing to abide by them. So, our major concern, frankly, is the five additional lots the staff is suggesting be deleted. We would appreciate your considering in your deliberations our points of view on this issue. Thank you very much. POPP: Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in cross examination or rebuttal at this time:' LEVY: 'yes, I would. I am Darrel Levy, 12420 S.W. Sandhurst Drive. I have some questions as to the treatment of the east end of east lake. That's sort of a dike across there, I think. There's some sort of regulation for stream flow. I was just wondering how tnat was going to be treated in this plan. I see there is going to be some sort of bike path across it. I know the thing is somewhat of a monument in some places. I was just wondering what they were planning to do with that. POPP: If I interpret your question correctly, you are inquir- ing in regaru to the water flow? LEVY: Not only the water flow, but are they going to rebuild that dike across there? 'E,'VANS: David Evans, 200 S.W. Market, Consulting Engineer. We have some detailed hydrological information. I can briefly say we do intend to maintain the dam and it will require im- proving some part of our program. The top of the dike right now is slightly underneath the flood plain and will have to be increased. The existing cL .•erts that go through the dike are not of satisfactory capacity, so there will have to be modifi- cations in effluence rate too. All of our efforts have to be recognized as having a concern for both the dike design and for maintaining the lakes and minimizing, if not totally miti- gating any concern about the homes. I hope our care is reflec- ted in our documents which we have presented. We definitely will maintain the lakes to cause no disturbance to down-stream users. LEVY: is there going to be artificial regulation of stream flow? EVANS: The stream flow will have to be maintained, but not artificially. The flow there is almost three miles an hour. We will be adding to the tension, perhaps, and adding more fluctuation. Right now when the lakes become full and a major storm comes, the peak flow must be passed during the storm season. We are going to provide more capacity for retention by fluctuating weirs. That will allow us to 4. PC MTG. 2/7/78 Zone Change 28-77/Psnart retard the peak flows and slightly increase the areas of the lakes. POPP: any additional cross examination at this time? Mr. Goldbach? GOLDBACH: Mr. Evans. You said that fluctuating weirs would control stream flow. How will that be regulated? EVANS: I'm not sure if I can answer your question very clearly. Right now the weirs that are there have removable sections. I think we are going to slightly modify them to allow a larger portion to be removable. Also, they will have to be widened to allow additional capacity. We are looking to a system where we have a valve out. . . GOLDBACH: Will somebody be responsible for watching the flow and regulating the flow? EVANS: These facilities are proposed to be public utilities and the lake. . . Our efforts from the very beginning with the Tigard.. . GOLDBACH? So the City of Tigard will get into the flood control business? EVANS: They are, basically, any time they maintain culverts and creeks. This is a little more elaborate than that and will be design reviewed by the staff. BRIAN: John, behind Lot 64 here in this area, is that elevated or level? LAWS: If you look at the topo in there maybe Al can best des- cribe it. It starts and slopes back. BRIAN: It seems like it must have some elevation. Unless there was some elevation here, taking away Lot 64 would not really add that much. it might benefit one or two lots immediately across the street, but they would, in turn, 'Mack everyone else behind them. So, unless it is elevated quite a bit, you would be taking away one lot to benefit one or two people. LAWS: I am not prepared to say exactly what that elevation would be. I think that would depend, too, on the unit and on how it is constructed on the site. May I ask the appli- cant what difference there is in fall in elevation from that point? 5. �a PC MTG. 2/7/78 Zone Change 28-77/Amart k BECKENDORF: maybe it is about ten feet. LAWS: What I am saying, Brian, is that I am not prepared to say that if only three or eight would be benefitted by that I think there would have to be a lot to the units on t his side. BRIAN: It doesn't seem logical to take one lot away to please just two or three people. Several people could enjoy the view. LAWS: Would the Commission feel more comfortable if that con- dition proposing something were intact but if it were an either/ or situation? If it is shown, in fact, that the benefits would be greater than the loss? I'm not sure that wouldn't get into something arbitrary. How do you determine what the benefits are, if it's six units or if it's ten units? EVANS: I think that there may be an opportunity in Lots 60-64 to accomplish the reduction by shifting the lots. I think we can increase the width of the opening there by decreasing the lot size. You say you have enough flixibility in the size of your lots to do this. LAWS: That was the intent we were trying to accomplish. If the condition can be met by shifting the lot rather than sacri- ficing it, the Staff would be satisfied. QUIMBY: I am concerned about the stability of the soil. When you start putting this much asphalt in as you are going to do, this will cause some of the water to run into some of these dots. They are already very wet. It was my observation this last December (I know we don't have this kind of rainfall very often) that a lot of that land looked pretty wet. How are you going to handle th s? EVANS: Pie are trying to stay back from fragile areas. Our drainage system will keep the roof-top drainage from. . . . . QUIMBY: I'm not just concerned about the flood plain area. We have various areas that are completely off the flood plain. Yet, we see a great deal of water standing on these lots. My concern is how you are going to handle this. Are you going to maks sure that these people are not going to get into a situa- tion where they have storm water; from upper lots draining into their yards and creating an intolerable situation for them? I think we have a responsibility to these people who are going to come into our community. EVANS: One, you can eliminate the majority of the problem of Water draining from one lot into another lot by the proper design of the streets it is a design problem.. . . . 6. I 1 PC MTG. 2/7/70 zone Change 28-77/Ama:�t You can definitely increase .runoff to the lakes by increas- ing the potential of the lakes' retention. BAILEY: Gerald Bailey, 124.20 S.W. Cedarcrest. It would be MY suggestion that the dike and water-regulating equipment be overseen by the City of Tigard according to the specifi- cations of the City of Tigard, noir according to what the builder wants to do. POPP: Are there any final questions to be asked of the appli- cant? Any cross examination? Mr. Goldbach? GOLDBACH: I want to ask the Staff. Do you realize that you're going to get into the flood control business and is the City ready to accept that responsibility? LAWS: When you say the City, this hasn't gone to the Council yet. In terms of Staff, the City Engineering Department has reviewed this, and they are well aware of this. Their comments were something to the effect of "Wait a minute, this is some- thing we don't want to assume. " It was brought to their atten- tion originally during the preliminary stages of this proposal. They didn't find any problems with it then. During the general stages no comments were made. I can' t tell you what's going to happen when it is brought before the Council. GOLDBACH: Are they going to be willing to regulate the flow, to raising and lowering the level of the lake? As far as you know they are willing to do that? LAWS: That's correct. SAKATA: I have a question about Condition 15, "That all attached single-family units be subject to design review. " What established this? LAWS: Under the ordinance today, any unit that is other than a single-family detached unit is required to go before Design Review. All this is doing is covering our bases on that. It is a requirement of the ordinance to do that. BRIAN: I have a question on Condition Five, "That all cul-de- sac streets over 150 feet in length be developed on a 45-foot_ radius. " Do I understand correctly that that would eliminate sidewalks in cul-de-sacs? LAWS: Staff recommends that sidewalks be eliminated in all the cul-ce-sacs. BRIAN: Would there be anything there? Footpaths? LAWS: No. This is happening today. The Commission on several occasions, the last one I can recall specifically was Pathfinder IT, came before you Vi.th a request to eliminate sidewalks in 7. 1 PC MTU. 2/7/78 Zone Change 28-77,/Amart cul-de-sacs. it was felt that foot traffic was minimal in that area and no need was seen to provide for it. BRIAN: It would seem than cul-de-sacs in excess of 150 feet in length would have more residents and more need of sidewalks than the shorter ones. How about the applicant's suggestion that Conditions Five, Six and Seven be negotiated between yourself and the Fire District and the applicant? LAWS: I talked to the Fire District and they were quite adamant in their pos:tionz Whether or not they would be willing to re- negotiate, if you will, and re-evaluate their position, I am not prepared to say. I think that 45-foot radius is more than what the other fire district with which we work in this community (the Tualatin) has required. It is a standard the other fire district feels is necessary. Mr. Benkendorf said possibly we can negotiate this. I'm not sure. I can't speak for them. I can only say Staff didn't have problems with the 40-foot radius, the Fire District did. If they are willing to have that reduced, I think Staff would be receptive to have that reduced to 40 feet. As far as Condition Six goes, in review of a development that the same company has undertaken, I have looked at the idea without incorporating the cul-de-sac island and just having the 90-foot radius. Really, it is kind of a deterrent to what is trying to be accomplished in the development. You're just overwhelmed by asphalt. By providing a landscaped island in there, it helps to soften the appearance and the approach as you enter the neigh- borhood . This would be in accordance with what is trying to be accomplished in this development. Staff feels that if you leave it up to ,zs to negotiate it and not condition it that we would lose our leverage. BRIAN: Does Condition Six mean that ail cul-de-sacs would have islands or just certain ones? LAWS: All cul-de-sacs. BRAIN: What is the purpose of the Homeowners Association, other than maintaining the cul-de-sacs? LAWS: The Homeowners Association would not only be involved in that, but it would also be a condition preliminary to assure the maintenance and upkeep of the `attached single-family units. BRIAN: one more question ori the Homeowners Association. Is it feasible that their responsibilities could be expanded to take Care of the open spaces instead of the City? 8. PC MTG. 2/7/7R Zone Change 28-77/Amart LAWS: it's feasible. Whether the Commission wants to go back and retract is a question. I would say that definitely the lake area should be City because it has been designated as a park area. The Park ward has looked at this consider- ably, and felt this should be the case. The Park Board is looking at the lake area as being a primary site, though the City has not yet designated the area as a park. As far as the greenways go, I don't know. it just seemed to be appropriate: as a continuation of that theme. It would be very similar to Inglewood. . . . . .Couldn't hear a question here. BEKENDORF: I didn't see anything in the Staff Recommendation requiring it as a condition. I realize it is referred to here, but it has not been our intention that there be a Homeowners Association. On the back of our application is a rather detailed deed restriction which it is proposed would be incorporated into all the deeds which speak to the maintenance of the lots. POPP: Any final cross examination or rebuttal at this time? POPP: Now this public hearing is closed. s A t 9. gym;