Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MLP2009-00001
City of Tigard, Oregon 0 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ° Tigard, OR 97223 • October 2, 2009 Oregon Land Law, LLC 3115 SE Salmon St. Portland, OR 97214 Attn: Gary P. Shepherd Re: Permit No. MLP2009 -00001 Dear Mr. Shepherd: The City of Tigard has canceled the above referenced permit(s) and enclose a refund for the following: Site Address: 12390 SW 106 Dr. Project Name: Sanders Minor Land Partition Job No.: Refund: ® Check #101039 in the amount of $250.00. ❑ Credit card "return" receipt in the amount of $ ❑ Trust account "deposit" receipt in the amount of $ Notes: Applicant has withdrawn appeal. Refund 100% of application fee. If you have any questions please contact me at 503.718.2430. Sincerely, Dianna Howse Building Division Services Supervisor Enc. 1: \ Building\ Refunds \ Administration \ LtrRefund- CancelPermit.doc 01 /16/07 Phone: 503.639.4171 o Fax: 503.684.7297 o www.tigard - or.gov o TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 - City of Tigard TIGARD Accela Refund Request This form is used for refund requests of land use, engineering and building application fees. Receipts, documentation and the Request for Permit Action or Refund form (if applicable) must be attached to this form. Refund requests are due to Accela System Administrator by Friday at 5:00 PM for processing each Monday. Accounts Payable will route refund checks to Accela System Administrator for distribution. Please allow 1 -2 weeks for processing. PAYABLE TO: Oregon Land Law, LLC DATE: 9/22/09 3115 SE Salmon St. Portland, OR 97214 REQUESTED BY: Dianna Howse Attn: Gary P. Shepherd CAC TRANSACTION INFORMATION: Receipt #: 174269 Case #: MLP2009 -00001 Date: 7/7/09 Address /Parcel: 12390 SW 106th Dr. Pay Method: Check Project Name: Sanders Minor Land Partition EXPLANATION: The applicant has withdrawn appeal. Refund 100% of application fee. ' INFORMATION: Fee.Descri t, Ft -_ ; . - Revenu Ac¢o - :r�= Exam le ' . ILD ;.Perriih Fee:::; = 4` : Ezarii ie ;:243'' .000b- 43:2000 _. Appeal DD to HO 1003100 -43116 $250.00 TOTAL REFUND: $250.00 APPROVALS: If under $500 Professional Staff If under $7,500 Division Manager If under $22,500 Department Manager . • r.• If under $50,000 City Manager If over $50,000 Local Contract Review Board •. ' . '1: F; " :: }'�:�r': _ .''OR'A_'CCEIt1;SYST:E AMA., <r ,� � " - '- � � � •� - %'- .. .. � _. STRATION - USE ON LY: :. ;,,.• Refund Request Reviewed: Date: ;;�,y By: A Case Refund Processed: Date: "4/ f B 1 : \ Building\ Refunds \Refundltequest.doc 04/13/09 11 1111 I1 CITY OF TIGARD RECEIPT a . 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 p% L�;� =Ci 1\-76 TIGARD Receipt Receipt Number: 175432 - 10/02/2009 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID MLP2009 - 00001 $ 250.00 Total: $- 250.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK # CC AUTH. CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Check 101039 DHOWSE 10/02/2009 $ 250.00 Payor: Oregon Land Law, LLC Total Payments: $ - 250.00 Balance Due: $250.00 Page 1 of 1 • • CITY OF TOGARQ., RECEIPT 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD • Receipt Number: 174269 - 07/07/2009 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID MLP2009 -00001 Appeal DD to HO 1003100 -43116 $250.00 Total: $250.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK # CC AUTH. CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Check 1303 KPEERMAN 07/07/2009 $250.00 Payor: Oregon Land Law, LLC Total Payments: • $250.00 Balance Due: $0.00 • Page 1 of 1 III a m Community Development TIGARD Request for Permit Action TO: CITY OF TIGARD Building Division Services Coordinator 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: 503.718.2430 Fax: 503.598.1960 www.tigard- or.gov FROM: ❑ Owner © Applicant ❑ Contractor Mk City Staff (check one) REFUND OR Name: Oregon Land Law, L.L.C. INVOICE TO: (Business or Individual) Mailing Address: 3115 SE Salmon St. City/State /Zip: Portland, OR 97214 Phone No.: 503- 233 -1985 PLEASE TAKE ACTION FOR THE ITEM(S) CHECKED (1): ® CANCEL PERMIT APPLICATION. ® REFUND PERMIT FEES (attach receipt, if available). Prppeat -Pt- 0 h 1 `8 • 0 INVOICE FOR FEES DUE (attach case fee schedule and explain below). ❑ REMOVE CONTRACTOR FROM PERMIT (do not cancel permit). Permit #: MLP2009 -00001 Site Address or Parcel #: 12390 SW 106 Dr. Project Name: Sanders Minor Land Partition Subdivision Name: Lot #: EXPLANATION: The applicant is withdrawing his appeal (see attached letter). Please refund 100% of the appeal fee ($250.00). Signature: Co.t- -+'..A../ Date: ? — 8 -0 `I Cheryl C . es Print Name: Refund Policy 1. The Director or Building Official may authorize the refund of: a) any fee which was erroneously paid or collected. b) not more than 80% of the land use application fee when an application is withdrawn or canceled before any review effort has been expended. c) not more than 80 of the land use application fee for issued permits. d). not more than 80% of the building plan review fee when an application is canceled before any plan review effort has been expended. e) not more than 80 °/ of the building permit fee for issued permits prior to any inspection requests. 2. Refunds will be returned to the original Payer in the same method in which payment was received. Please allow 1 -2 weeks for processing refunds. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Rte to Sys Admin: Date By Rte to g Admin: Date/ a op, By etrir Refund Processed: Date By Invoice Processed: Date By Permit Canceled: Date By Parcel Tag Added: Date By Receipt # Date Method Amount $ l:\ Building \Forms \RegPermitAction.doc Rev 07/26/07 r te L N a -i +tr h � - i +. it s - �._ ,� � t I ?. .c. s , =.. � �?,, i,, J r t r 7 z r T {' t 4 r _ w k �i: o- i . } G a, �.alE , �1� y p, ? t � r 3k t� �� r xs t s-c -�� r, � L p `A :F t ,. t 'x,:51 ?041- �Pt Shc;p'h 0 tA�ttor art— ' y y' 1£ t , r :, s�� . 1 y ' ' -v f .a � . '�} r Yt , },..6 i .. , f .D r ,. � ��: ;� ' 3115 SE Salmon Street RECEIVED PLANNING Portland, Oregon 97214 C l t- SE1 SEP 08 2009 (503) 233 -1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503) 914 -0474 FAX & CONSULTATIION gary @oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL CITY OF TIGARD September 4, 2009 Cheryl Caines, Associate Planner Community Development Department City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Sanders Minor Land Partition File No. MLP2009 -00001 REQUEST TO DISMISS APPEAL Dear Ms. Caines: This office represents Steven Sanders. This letter constitutes Mr. Sander's request to dismiss his notice of appeal. A notice of appeal was filed on 7/7/09. The appeal was filed as a precautionary matter and to allow time to satisfy and resolve conditions of partition approval. The conditions at issue have since been resolved. An appeal fee of $250.00 was previously remitted. If permissible, since no appeal hearing was scheduled, applicant requests the return of all or a portion of the appeal fee. I thank you for your assistance in processing this application. Sincerely, Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION �� MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 „�.�,:��� y �- SANDE RS PARTITION 120 DAYS =9/15/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SLJ�VIMARY FILE NAME: SANDERS PARTITION CASE NO.: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2009-00001 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval for a Minor Land Partition to partition one (1) existing 35- acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-family residences. An existing residence on Parcel 1 will reir�ui. APPLIC.ANT & Steven W. Sanders and APPLICANT'S GaryP. Shepherd,Attorney OWNER Barbara Swanson-Sanders REP.: 3115 SE Salmon Street 2647 SW Talbot Road Portland, OR 97214 Portland, OR 97201 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: R 4.5: Low DensityResidential. ZONE: R 4.5 Low Densitv Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a min;mum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-fanvly units are pernzitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pernlitted conditionally. LOCATION: 12390 SW 106�'Drive;Washington CountyTax Assessor's Map 2S103AA,TaY Lot 1916. PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 7,524 Square Feet. PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 7,500 Square Feet. APPLIC'�t1BLE RE VIE W CRITERIA: Communiry Development Code Chapters 18390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18J15, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Commuruty Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V. NOTTCE OF DEQSION ML,P2009-00001/SANDERS PAR7T7TON PAGE 1 OF 22 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SI3ALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: e app icant s a prepare a cover etter an su mit it, a ong wi any supporting ocuments an or ans that address the folIowing requirements to the PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: CHERYL CAINE�503- 639-4171, EXT 2437. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 1. Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit and receive approval for either a variance to the m;nimum lot size requirements under 18.370.010 or an adjustment to the street standards under 18.370.020.C.11. 2. Prior to the final plat, the applicant shall: A. Submit for review and approval revised plans showing the type of screening proposed for the 3-foot area east of the e�isting deck on Parcell. B. Install screening according to the approved plan. 3. Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit for review and approval, revised plans to scale showing the street tree spacing that meets the standards of Section 18745.040.C� 4. Street trees for Parcel 1 shall be planted according to the approved plan prior to final plat. 5. Prior to final_plat the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction on Parcel 1 to the effect that any existing tree greater than 6" diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a cert�fied arbonst. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. 6. Place a note on the final plat for the visual clearance easement at the corner of SW 106`� Drive and SW Johnson Street to the benefit of the Ciry of TiQard. Said easement is subject to the City of Tigard Visual Clearance Area standards that restrict the heiglit of plantings and structures (Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.795). The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporti�ng documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DIVISION,ATTN: HIM MCMILLAN 503- 639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall cleady identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 7. A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) ernzit is required for this project to cover utility laterals and any other work in the public rig ht-of-way. SiY 6 sets of detailed public unprovement plans shall be submitted for review to the En u�eenn lle artment. N��: these lans are uz addition to an draw�n s re uired b the Buildin Division and sho�d orPily include sheets relevanPto public improvements.yPublic �acilit�-y Improvement (PFI� pe __mut plans shall conform to Csty of Tigard Public rmprovement Design Standards,which are ava�lable at City Hall and the City's web page (www.t�gard-or.gov). 8. The PFI pernzit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and tele�phone number of the individual or corporate entiry who will be designated as the "Perrruttee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public unprovements. For example, specify if the entity is a co�oration, luruted partnership, LLC.� etc. Also spec�fy the state withul which the entity is uzcorporated and provi e the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate inforn�ation to the Engineenng Department will delayprocessu7g of project documents. 9. A five foot utility easement shall be recorded across Parcel2 in favor of Parcel 1to ensure that no concentrated flows of storm drainage waters from Parcel 1 will flow across Parcel2. Storm drainage for both parcels shall be directed to an approved system. 10. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control dunng the pubhc improvement construction phase. 11. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall paythe addressing fee. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering). NOTICE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 2 OF 22 12. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall plant street trees along the frontage of SW 106th Drive and Johnson Street. 13. The applicant shall execute a Restrictive Covenant agreeuig to complete or participate in the future im�provements of SW 106th Avenue and Johnson Street ad�acent to the subject property, when any of the f oIlowing events occur: A. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for by the forn�ation of a Local Improvement D�strict; B. when the unprovements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for in whole or in part bythe City or other public agency; C. when the improvements are part of a lar�ger project to be constructed by a third party and involves the sharin of design and/or construction expenses by the thu-d pany owner(s) of property in addiuon to the su�ject property; or D. when construction of the improvements is deemed to be appropriate by the City Engineer in conjunction with construction of unprovements by others adjacent to the subject site. 14. The appli� cant shall obtain approval f rom the Ciry of Tigard for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the C:it�s Public Faciliry Improvement per�rut. 15. A plan for disposal of the storm water nuioff from the proposed house on Lot 2 shall be provided as part of the Public FacilityImprovement (PFI) pernzit drawings for review and approval. 16. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Faciliry Improvement (PFI)�pernlit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sed'unent C:ontrol Design and I'lanrung Manual, February 2003 edition." 17. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the Cit�s global posrtionuig system(GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22) as recorded in Washington Counry survey records. These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contaui the scale factor to convert ground measurements to gnd measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: . GPS tie networked to the Cit�s GPS survey. . By random traverse using conventional sutvey�ng methods. 18. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: A. Submit for City review four (4) pap er copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon and necessary data or nan-ative. B. Attach a check u1 t�e amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Planning/Engineering Permit Technicians,at (503 639-4171,ext.2421). C The final plat and ata or narrauve shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington Count�; and bythe Ciryof Tig ard. D. The plat shall create public sidewalk easements along the frontages of SW 106`� Drive and Johnson Street of sufficient width to provide 27 feet from centerline when combined with the e�isting nght-of- way. E. N(�TE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from the Engineenng Department indicating that the City has reviewed the fuial plat and submitted c�mments to the a�ppIicant's surveyor. F. After the City and C�oun have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final plat for City Enguieer signature t(for partnions), or City Engineer and Commurury Development Director signatures (for subdivisions). NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 3 OF 22 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: e app icant s a prepare a cover etter an su mit it, a on wi any supporting ocutnents an or ans that address the folIowing requirements to the PLANNIN�DIVISION, ATTN CHERYI. CAINE�503- 639-4171, EXT 2437. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 19. Prior to issuance of building pem�its, the applicant shall demonstrate that the height restriction and front, rear, and side yard setbacks for structures are as reqwred for the base zone. 20. Prior to building pern�it issuance, a site plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the miniinum access andth requu-ements are met. 21. At the time of submittal for building permits for individual homes within the development, the developer shall submit materials demonstrating that one (1) off-street parking�space, which meets nururnum dimensional requirements and setback reqwrements as spec�fied in T'itle 18,will be provided on-site for each new home. 22. Prior to building perniit issuance the applicant shall submit revised plans to the Ciry Arborist for review and aPproval showuig accurately and "to scale", the tree protection specifications and tree protection fencing dunensions outluied in the arborist report. The plans shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist. 23. Prior to building pernzit issuance, the applicant shall position fencing as directed by the�project arborist to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the City Arborist tor the purpose of morutonng and inspection of the tree protect�on to verify that the tree protection measures are perforniing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or mauita.in tree protection fencu�g in the desig nated locations shall be grounds tor unmediate suspension of work on the site until remediauon measures and/or civil citations can be processed. 24. If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely impacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the C.�ty Arborist before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arbonst may require changes prior to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is occiuzuig witlun the tree protection zone and submit a sununary report cert�fying that the work occurred per the pro�po� sal and will not significantly impact the health and/or stabihty of the trees. Th�s note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan. ?�. The applicant shall have an on-going responsibiliry to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the Ciry Arborist, at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist monitors the construction activities from irutial tree protection zone (TPZ) fencing installation through the building construction phases. The reports shall evaluate the condrtion and location ot the tree protecuon fenculg, deternzine �f any changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arbonst shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the overall, jong-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted to the City Arbonst at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears.the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan are not beuig followed by the contractor or a sub-contractor, the Gty can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the Ciry Arborist and the Project Arbonst. 26. Prior to issuance of building pernzits, the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicatin�g the locations of trees that were preserved on the lot dunng site development. In addinon, the plans shalI include accurate locations of tree canopy driplines and protection fenculg, and a signature of approval from the project� regarding the placement and construction techruques to be employ�d in bwld�ing the structures. All proposed protection fencui�shall be installed and inspected prior to commencuig construcuon. The fencing shall remauz in place throu�h the duration of all of the 6uilding construction phases, until the Certificate of Occupancy has been approved. Prior to final inspecuon the applicant shall submit a fuial report by the Project Arbonst certifying the health of protected trees anc� that the street trees were properly planted per the approved street tree plan. Tree protecuon measures may be removed and final inspection authonzed upon review and approval by the City Arborist. NOTICE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 4 OF 22 27. Prior to issuance of building pernuts the a�plicant/owner shall record a deed restriction on Parcel 2 to the effect that any existing tree greater than 6 diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a cert�fied arbonst. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. 28. Prior to issuance of building pernuts the applicant shall submit a miugation plan to the City Arborist for review and approvaL Mitigation can be accomphshed by either planting the number of caliper uiches removed or payuig a fee in-lieu at the rate of �125 per ca]iper uzch, or any combmation thereof. If a mitigation planting proposal is submitted, it neecis to have a s�gnature of ap proval from the project arborist certifying that �t meets the requirements of Section 18J90.060.D and that the species and placement of mitigation trees has been reasonably calculated to provide for their growth to matunty: The mitigation proposal sliall show the species location, and spacing of mitigation trees in relation to buildings, inf rastructure, e�sting trees, street trees, anc� each other. Mitigation shall be based upon one of the following tree plan alternatives: Alternative 1: 5 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved =83.3% retention,no mitigation required Alterciative 2: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retenuon, 50% rrutigation required, SO% x 27" removed = 13.5" of mit�gation required Alternative 3: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required, 50% x 37" removed = 18.5" of mitigat�on req�uired Alternative 4: 3 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 50% retention, 50% mitigation required, 50% Y 50" removed =25.0" of mitigation required 29. Prior to building perniit issuance,the applicant shall submit a cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) f or the equivalent value of mitigation requu-ed. IVl�tigation �s calculated at $125.00 pe�r caliper inch. Any�trees successfully planted on or off-site, in accordance with an approved Tree 1Vlitigation Plan and Tigard Development Code Section 18J90.060.D7 will be credited agau�st the assurance two years after all of the trees are lanted per the ap roved Tree Miti�ation Plan. After the trees are lanted the�pro ect arbonst shall submit a letpter to the City Arpbonst to certify that all of the miti�ation trees were prop erly p�anted per the approved Tree Mitiga�tion PIzn in order to set the startin�g point of t e tu=o year tree estabrishment period. After the two- year establishment period, the applicant shall provide a re-ulventory of the mitigation trees conducted �by a cert�fied arborist in order to document mitigation tree survival and compliance with the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The rema�n�ng value of caliper inches not success�ullyrruugated shall be paid as a}ee ui-lieu of planung from the original cash assurance. 30. Prior to building p�ern�it issuance for Parcel2 ,a site plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the standards of Chapter 18J95 (Visual Clearance Areas) are met. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, alon with any supportin documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERI�GDIVISION,AT�: HIM MCMILLAN 503- 639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 31. Prior to buildin� perniit issuance the driveway for Parcel 2 shall be moved to Johnson Street to achieve adequate sight d�stance or application for a vanance to this Code requirement shall be requested and approved. 32. Prior to issuance of building pernzits,the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a paper copy of the recorded final plat. 33. The CiryEngineer inaydeternzine the necessiryfor, and rec�uire submittal and approval of, a construction access and parkmg plan for the home building phase. If the Caty Engineer deems such a plan necessary,the applicant shall provide the plan pnor to issuance ot bwlci�ng pernuts. 34. Prior to a final buildin� inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance rom the City,and provide a one-year mauitenance assurance for said unprovements. 35. The app licant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Johnson Street underground as a part of-this proJ�ect, or contact Mike McCarthy- (R�ght-ot-Way Adm�rvstrator) to deteimine if they will be allowed to pay the fee in-lieu of underg rounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that �s parallel to fhe utility lines and will be $35.00 per lineal foot. If the fee opuon �s allowed, the amount will be $3,488 and it shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 5 OF 22 36. During issuance of the building pernvt for Parcel 2,the applicant shall pay the standard water quality and water quanury f ees per lot (f ee amounts will be the latest approved by CWS). THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL BLTILDING INSPECTION: e app �cant s a pre�are a cover etter an su mit it, a ong wi any supporting ocuments an orp ans that address the folIowing requirements to the PLANNING DIVISION ATTN: CHERYL CAINES 503- 639-4171, EXT 2437. The cover letter shall cleady identify where in the su�mittal the required information is found: 37. Street trees for Parcel 2 shall be planted according to the approved plan prior to final building inspection. THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION NOTED UNDER THE PROCESS AND APPEAL SECTION OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROLJND INFORMATION Site and VicuutyInforn�ation The .35 acre site �s located on the south corner of SW 106`�Drive and SW Johnson Street within the Cottonwood Place subdivision. The site is zoned R 4.5 (Low Density Residential) as are all surroundin��g pro erties. An e�sting single-family home sits on the southern portion of the site, and rt w�l remau� on proposed I'arcel�. Homes in the area are suigle-familyof varying ages. Pro e Histo . A searc o City records shows the site was annexed into the City of Tigard in 1996 (ZCA96-00005). This approval also granted a Zone Change and Comprehensive Plan Amendment to chan e the zoning from Washington CounryRS to Cstyof Tigard R 4.5. No other approvals were found affecting this parce� Pro�osal Description The owner �s proposing a two lot partition. An existing home will remaui on Parcel 1. The net square footage of the turo parcels w�71 be: Parcel 1 - 7,524 square feet and Parcel 2 - 7,500 square feet. SECTION IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS The Tigard CommuniryDevelopment Code re uires that propertyowners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an oppominity�or wntten comments and/or oral testimony pnor to a decision being made. In addition, staft has posted a notice on the site. Comments were received from two neighbors. These comments were passed along to the applicant's representative, Gary Shepherd. Mr. Shepherd's responses are shown below each comment. Comments were received from Dick Pearson concerning compatibility of the new residence with the homes in the neighborhood. He states that ma�ny neighbors are long-term residents and assume that the new residence will fit in well with the existing neighborhood. He is requestin�the courtesy of the owner to share the general residential construction plans with neighbors, who can then respond with any concems or suggestion. He has �ound in the past that this is a verypositive step in the process for both owner and neighbozs. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant appreciates Mr. Pearson's comments and his effon to coordinate a response with area residents. The applicant�s not currently requesting permission to build a home, but rather seeking to create a lot for plannuig and future development purposes. If the app&cant were to build a home, he would welcome a neighborhood meeting to d�scuss building plans. STAFF RESPONSE: G,u7-ently there are no re quirements for notification, public comment, or design when constructing a single-family home. Based on the app�icant's response, he is open to public comment on the building plans. NOTTC�OF DEC[SION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 6 OF 22 Comments were also received from Gary Helmer. He is against issuing a conditional pernut to build a single-family home or dupleh on the site. He states the area was built in the 1960s with the idea of having space for your home, not to be five feet from your neighbor. By approving this application the look of the neighborhood will be chan�ed and property values will be lowered. The homes in the neighborhood blend in and have beautiful yards. It is a Green development;do not destroy it. He goes on to say that the property owner had to be creative to come up with the proposed site for this lot. In order to do this he notes the owner-had to use space behind the existing home to ga.in the necessarylot square footage. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The app licant is res��pectful of Mr. Helmer's comments. However, the subject partition is consistent with City zoning and regional infiIl objectives. The applicant demonstrated it is feasible to meet all a p plicable zorun g and develo pment standards. The comment received}rom Richard Pearson demonstrates that other area residents are uz support of the application. STAFF RESPONSE: The applicant has shown that densiry standards are met. Setback standards will be reviewed during building pernzit applicauon for the new home on Parcel2. As noted above,there are currently no neighborhood compatibiliry or design requu-ements for single-familyhomes, but Staff encourages the applicant to work vv�th neighbors to find an agreeable design. SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIAAND FINDINGS Land Partitions (18.420� The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations; The proposed partition complies or can be made to comp l�y with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations as demonstrated by the analysis contained within th�s admimstrative dec�sion and through the imposition of conditions of development approval. All necessary conditions must be satisfied as part of the development and building process. Therefore,th�s cntenon�s met. There are adequate public facilities available to serve the proposal; Public facilities are discussed in detail later in this decision under Chapter 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards). Based on the analysis provided herein, Staff finds that adequate pubhc facilities are available to serve the proposal. Therefore,this critenon�s met. All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards;and The public facilities and proposed improvements are discussed and conditioned later in this decision under Chapter 18.8I0 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards). Improvements will be reviewed as part of the pernut process and during construction, at which tune the appropnate review authoriry will ensure that City and applicable agency standards are met. Based on the analysis in this dec�sion,Staff finds that this critenon is met. All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below: The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable zoning district The average m;n�mlun lot width required for the R 4.5 zoning district is 50 feet. The maJ�ority of Parcel 1 is 80 feet wide or more, but the rear 17 feet is 45.27 feet wide. The average lot width is approximately 70 feet. Parcel2 is 64.92 feet wide at its narrowest point. Therefore,this standard has been met. The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning district In the case of a flag lot,the accessway may not be included in the lot area. The minunum lot area requi.rement in the R 4.5 zonin district is 7,500 square feet for detached single-family units. The proposed paration creates two (2) lots. �ach lot has street frontage, therefore no flag lots are being created. The areas of the two proposed parcels are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet respectrvely. This cntenon has been met. NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 7 OF 22 Each lot created through die partition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least 15 feet or have a legally recorded minimum 15-toot wide access easement. Parcel 1 has 85.33 feet of frontage along SW 106�' Drive. Parcel 2 has 64.92 feet of frontage on SW 106`�' Drive and 99.66 feet along SW Johnson Street. Tlvs criterion is met. Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district Setbacks for the R 4.5 zoning district are as follows: front,20 feet;side, 5 feet• street side, 15 feet; and rear 15 feet. The setbacks for the future home on lot 2 will be reviewed at the time of bui�ding perrrut subrruttal. Set�acks for the existing home on Parcel 1 meet the requirements;setbacks are discussed further under the Residential Zoning Districts section of th�s decision. A condition of approval under the Residential Zoning Districts section will ensure the applicant shows the correct setbacks on the bwlding site plans. This criterion can be met conditionally. The condition is found under the Residential Zoning District section of th�s decision. When the partitioned lot is a flag lot,the developer may determine the location of the front yard, provided that no side yard is less than 10 feet Structures sliall generally be located so as to ma�mize separation from existing structures. There are no flag lots proposed with this application. This standard does not apply. A screen shall be provided alon the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an accessway is located within ten feet of an a�utting lot m accordance with Sections 18J45.040. Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed development There are no flag lots proposed with this application. This standard does not apply. The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway would have a detrimental effect on fire-fighting capabilities. There are no flag lots proposed with this application. Tlus standard does not apply. Where a common drive is to be provided to serve inore than one lot, a reciprocal easement which will ensure access and maintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partition map. Each parcel will be accessed via a drivewayto the public street. This standard does not apply: Any access way shall comply with the standards set foith in Chapter 18.705,Access, Egress and Circulation. Tlvs standard is addressed under Chapter 18.705 (Access,Egress and Circulation) later in this decision. Where landfill and/or develo ment is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred year floodplain, the city shall require consideration o�the dedication of su�cient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for tlie construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. Thep artitioned lots are approximately 117 feet to the southwest of the nearest 100-year floodplain. The elevation of the floodplain is 156 feet,while the lowest point on the site is 162 feet. Therefore,this standard does not apply. An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in accordance with Chapter 18370,Variances and Adjust�nents. The applications for the paitition and variance(s)/adjustment(s) will be processed concurnendy. The applicant has not regu�ested any variances or adjustment; but either an adjustment or variance is required to approve this application. The site is 15,024 square feet. There �s an existin 50-foot right-of-way(RO� on both SW 106�'Dnve and SW Johnson Street. The applicant states that the existing R�W is adequate to meet standards for local streets with lower traffic volumes. NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PAR7TTTON PAGE 8 OF 22 Both streets currently have 32 feet of pavement. Street standards for lower volume streets have narrower pavement widths. To install a planter strip and public sidewalk at this location would require additional right-of-way beyond the 25 feet from centerline. The applicant has stated that if the dedication is re quu-ed,then a variance will be requested to allow the lots to be below the muumum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Another option �s to request an adjustment to the street standards and record a ublic sidewalk easement on the pro erty for future ubhc im rovements. Thistype of easement was permittedpor a minor land partition (MI.P20Q5-0�009) through ana djustme n process in 2006. Like the site partitioned in 2006,the subject site has sufficient land for dividing pnor to nght-of-waydedication. FINDING: The Land Partition standards have not been fullymet but can be as conditioned below. CONDITION: Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit and receive approval for either a variance to the rrununum lot size requu-ements under Section 18370.OTQ or an adjustment to the street standards under Secuon 18.370.020.C.11. Residential Zonin Districts (18.510� Development stan�ards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2 below: TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES STANDARD R-4.5 Parcell Parcel2 Minimum Lot Size -Detached unit 7,500 sq.ft 7,524 sq.fr. 7,500 sq.fc. -Duplexes -Attached unit Average Minimum Lot Width -Detached unit lou 50 ft 70 h.[1] 81 ft.[1] -Duplex lots 90 ft. -Attached unit lots Maximum Lot Covera e - N/A N/A Minimum Setbacks Can be met -Front yani 20 ft 25 ft. -Side facing street on comer&through lots 15 ft N/A -Side yacd 5 ft 22.5 ft./5 ft. -Rear yaccl IS ft 3 ft.[2] -Side or mar yani abutting mom mstrictive zoning district -- N/A -Distance between ro e line and front of ara e 20 ft 25 ft. Maximwn Hei ht 30 ft. 1 sto /da ht basement Can be met Minimum Landsca e Re uirement - N/A N/A [1]Average lot width. Lotshapes are irregular. [2]Rear yard se[back is 3 feet[o an existing,uncovered deck. The remainder of the home is approximately 19 feet fmm the rear property line. A inuiunum lot size of 7,500 square feet is requu-ed for each lot. The proposed lot sizes meet this standard if the adjustment to the street improvement standards or variance to muiunum lot size requirements is subseguently approved. Setbacks of the e�stuig home are met for Parcel 1. The applicant states that the standards will 6e met on Parcel 2. Site and building plans for Parcel 2 will be reviewed through the building �ermit process to ensure compliance with the R 4.5 zone development standards, including setbacks and height restnctions. FINDING: Based on the analys is above, the Residential Zorung District Standards will be met pursuant to the following conditions: GONDITION: Prior to issuance of building pernzits, the applicant shall demonstrate that the height restriction and front,rear,and side yard setbacks for structures are as required for the base zone. Access,Egress and Circulation�8.705� Continuing obli�ation of property owner. The provisions and rnaintenance of access and egress stipulated in this tide are cont�nuing requirements for the use of any structure or par�cel of real property in the Gty. NOT'IC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 9 OF 22 Joint Access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize joindy the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, orp arcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as desi nated in this title,provided: Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, �eases or contracts to establish the �oint use; and copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City. Both parcels have individual access to public streets. No joint access is proposed. This standard does not apply. Curb cuts. Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall connect direcdy with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a cont�nuous basis. Both parcels will connect directly with a public street. Parcel 1 will continue to utilize an e�sting driveway to 106�' Dnve and Parcel2 has fronta�e on both 106�'Drive and Johnson Street. A new drivew�ay w� as proposed to 106�', but sight distance cannot be obtauzed at this location as detailed under 18.705.030.�-L1. This standard can be met as conditioned. Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stackin needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT,Washington County,the City and AASH�O. The applicant proposes to retain the e�stin driveway for Parcel 1 and to provide an additional driveway for Parcel 2. Both dnveways provide access to SW 106th�rive,a local street with less than 2,000 ADT. The applicant's engineer has submitted a sight distance report showing that the proposed driveway exceeds the required 250 feet of s-ig ht distance to the north but it limited to 190 feet to the south by a crest curve. Consequently, the applicant shall move the driveway to Johnson Street to achieve adequate sight distance or apply for a variance to th�s Code section. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is tFiat area where queues of traffic commoi�ly form on ap�proach to an intersection. The minimum diiveway setback from a coIIector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the roposed driveway. The setback may be greater dependin upon the influence area, as determined from �ty Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by�e applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a pro�ect has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any o�ption for shared access with the ad jacent pa�el. If shared access is not possible or practical, the drivewa y shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. Tl-vs propercyis not located on a collector or arterial street;therefore the standard does not apply. Section 18.705.030.H3 and 4 states that the minimum spacin of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 fee� The minimum s acin��of drivewa�ys and streets a�on an artenal shall be 600 fee� The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet g The property is not located on a collector or arterial and is not constructing a local street; therefore this standard does not apply. Minimum access requirements for residential use. Table 18.705.1 states that the minimum vehicular access and egress for single-family dwelling units on individual lots shall be one, 10-foot paved driveway within a 15- foot-wide accessway. The minimum access width for 3-6 dwelling units is 20 feet with 20 feet of pavemen� The e�sting drive for Parcel 1 is 33.9 feet wide. A driveway is proposed for Parcel 2, which does not meet sight distance reqwrements under 18J05.030. A newdrivewaylocation must be proposed and approved. This standard can be met as conditioned below. NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTT7TON PAGE 10 OF 22 Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of d1e Uniform Fire Code. No private access drives/fla lots are proposed a�ith this application. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue was sent a copy- of the proposal but subnutte�no comments to the City. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with app roved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus by one of the followin : a) A circular,paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured from center point to outside edge of 3�feet; b) A hainmerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet; c) The ma�mum cross slope of a required tumaround is 5%. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length have not been proposed with this application. This standard does not apply. FINDING: The standards for Access,Egress, and Circulation were not completelymet. CONDITIONS: . Prior to building pernut issuance the driveway for Parcel2 shall be moved to Johnson Street to achieve adequate sight distance or apphcation for a variance to this Code requirement shall be requested and approved. . Prior to building perniit issuance a site plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the muumum access width requu-ements are met. Density Comvutations and Limitations (18.715� Chapter 18.7 implements the Compre ensive Plan by establishin� the criteria for determinin the number of dwellin units pernlitted. The number of allowable dwellin uruts is based on the net deve�opment area. The net area is the remaining parrel area after exclusion of e nsitive lands and land dedicated for public roads or parks. The net area is then divided by the minimum lot size pemiitted by the zoning distnct to determine the number of dwelling units that may be developed on a site. Based on the formulas in Chapter 18J15 of the City of T'igard Community Development Code, the maxirnum and minimum number of units perrrutted on the site u based on the net developable area, subtracting sensitive land areas, land dedicated to public par-ks, land dedicated for public rig,ht-of-way,land}or private streets or access dnves, and lot area for the existing home from the total site area. The densityis calculated as follows: ross ite Area 15 024 s . t. Lot or E�sun Home - 7 524 s . t. Net ite Area 7 500 s . t. The resulting net area is 7?500 s quare feet. If this area is divided bythe minimum lot size for the zone �7,500�,then the rn�iinum number of additional lots pernlitted on this site is 1 and the m;n�mum number is 1. The app cant s proposal to create 1 additional lots for single-tainily detached homes meets the max;n,um and mi.niinum density requirements of the R 4.5 zone. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the DensityStandards have been satisfied. Exce tions to Develo ment Standards 18.730 : Allowed projections into rear yard setbacks. en porches, decks or balconies not more than 36 inches in height and not covered by a roof or canopy, may extend or project into a required rear or side yard provided such natural yard area is not reduced to less than three feet and the deck is screened from abutting pmperties. Porches may extend into a required front yard not more than 36 inches. The existing home on Parcel 1 has a rear yard deck built over a concrete pad. Based on the survey,the concrete pad has an average elevation of 171.80. Therefore, the wood deck is 1.43 feet above the ground. An uncovered deck not more than 36 inches in height is pernutted within the rear yard setback as long as the yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet and the deck is screened trom abutting properties. NOTTC�'.OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 11 OF 22 111e e�:istin� deck is set back 3 feet from the proposed propercy line of Parcel 2. The applicant reasons that screening may not be necessary since a dwelling will not be constructed on the area east of the deck meaning there is no privacy ulterest that must be protected. At the same time the applicant states that if required, the applicant prop oses to plant a row of evergreen shrubs in the 3-foot area. As the standard does not allow for an exception, stat� has conditioned the applicant to ulstall the required screening. FINDING: The Exceptions to Development Standards can be met as conditioned below. CONDITION: Prior to the final plat, the applicant shall: A. Submit for review and approval revised plans showing the rype of screening proposed for the 3-foot area east of the existu-ig deck on Parcel 1. B. Install screening according to the approved plan. Landscaping and Screening�18.745� All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures. The accepted planting procedures are the guidelines described in the Tigard Tree Manual. These �u�delines follow those set forth by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) tree plantuig guidelines as well as the standards set forth in the American Institute of Architects' Architectural Graphic Standards, lOth edition. In the Architectural Grap hic Standards there are guidelines for selecting and planting trees based on the soil volume and size at macuriry. Addrtionally,there are directions for so�l amendments and modifications. The plant material shall be of high rade, and shall meet the size and grading standards of the Ainerican Standards for Nurberg Stock(ANSI �60, 1-1986,and any other future revisions);and Cettificate of Occu�ancX Certificates of occupancy shall not be issued unless the landscapin requirements have been met or other arrangements have been made and approved by the City such as �e posting of a bond. Existing vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as possible: 1) The developer shall provide methods for the protection of existing vegetation to remain during the construction process; and 2) the plants to be saved shall be noted on the randscap e plans (e. ., areas not to be disturbed can be fenced, as in snow fencing wluch can be placed around the individual trees�. Tree protection is addressed under the Tree Removal section of this decision. Street trees: Section 18.745.040 Section 18.745.040.A.: All development projects frontin� on a pu� blic street, private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the adopt�on of this tide shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040G This project has frontage on both SW 106`'' Drive and SW Johnson Street. Street trees are re quired along both frontages and shall be planted in accordance with the standards for size and spacing in this title, under Section 18J45.040.G The tree removal plans prepared bythe Project Arborist showtrees along both frontages. Since the plans are not to scale, the City Arborist cannot detemune �f the trees are correctly spaced. A condition of approval will ensure the spacing standards are met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Landscaping standards have not been fully met. However, if the applicant comphes with the conditions below the standards will be met. GONDI'ITONS: . Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit for review and approval, revised plans to scale showuig street tree spacing that meet the standards of 18.745.040.G . Street trees tor Parcel 1 shall be planted according to the approved plan prior to final . �lat. treet trees for Parcel2 shall be planted according to the approved plan prior to final building inspection. NOTiC�OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 12 OF 22 Off-street Parking and Loadin� Requirements (18.765): This Chapter is applicable or development pro�ects when there is new construction, expansion of existing use, or cfiange of use in accordance with Sect�on 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements. The proposed partition will create two lots for single-family residences. Table 18.765.2 requires that one 1) off-street parkuig space 6e�provided per detached dwelling unit. There �s no maX�mum limit on pa�rking allowed �or detached suzgle-farruly dwelIings. There �s also no bicy�le parking requirement for single-farrulydwellings. The existing residence has spaces tn the garage and driveway. To ensure that the new home constructed u1 this development comphes anth these standards,the followulg condition shall apply: CONDITTON: At the time of submittal for building permits for individual homes within the development,the developer shall submit materials demonstratulg that one (1) off-street parkin�g space, which meets m�n,mum dunensional requirements and setback reqwrements as specifled u7 Title 18, will be provided on-site for each new home. Tree Removal(18J90� Chapter 18.790.030 requires die submittal of a tree plan t�iat identifies the location size and species of all trees on the site, a program to save existing trees over 1�-inch diameter at breast height (dbh) or mitigate for their removal, ident�ficat�on of trees to be removed and a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees c�uring and after construction. As required for�partitions, the applicant submitted a tree plan conducted by Gary Drendel.certified arborist, however the tree plan�does not contaul all of the required elements. These elements are c��scussed in further detail below under Plan Requirements. A specific house plan has not been chosen for Parcel 2, and the applicant is not constructing a home at this time. As the applicant cannot deternzine which trees will be removed,four aIternative plans have been provided. Alternative 1: no removal Altemative 2: remove tree#6 Alternative 3: remove tree#7 Alternative 4: remove both trees #6 and #7 Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: 1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; The Arborist Report identified the location,size and species of all e�sting trees,consistent with this standard. 2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the following�standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: a. Retention of less than 25% of existin trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18�90.060D of no net loss of trees; b. Retention of from 25% to 50% of e�ustin� trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section T8J90.660D; c. Retention of fmm 50% to 75% of existin� trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 pe�ent of the trees to be removed be mitigated m accordance with Section r8.790.060D; d. Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation. There are 5 viable e�sting trees and one (1) previously removed tree (14 inch birch) on site greater than 12 inches, making 6 trees subject to rruugation. The app licant states that the birch was removed due to hazardous conditions (diseased and damaged from storms). Only the snunp of the tree remau�s, which is not adegu�ate for the arborist to establish the condition of the tree. As noted above,the applicant has not deterniined exactly which trees will eventually be removed and therefore, has presented four alternative tree plans. Each plan indicates the trees on the property that are to recnaui and those proposed for removal. This requirement has not been met. NO7TC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 13 OF 22 Based on the alternatives provided in the arborist report,mitigation will be required as follows: Alternative 1: 5 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 83.3% retention,no mitigation required. Alternative 2: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retenuon, 50% rruugation reqwred. 50°/o x 27" removed = 13.5" of mitigation required. Alternative 3: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, SO% mitigation required. 50% x 37" removed = 18.5" of mitigation required. Alternative 4: 3 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 50% retention, 50% mitigation required. 50% x 50" removed =25.0" of mitigation required. The applicant will need to provide a mitigation plan with a signature of app roval from the project arborist that meets the replacement requirements uz Secuon 18.790.060.D. A cash assurance tor the equivalent amount of mitigation will be requu-ed at the rate of $125 per inch to be mitigated. Trees that are required by other code provisions such as street trees are not eligible for mitigation credit. 3. Identification of all trees wluch are proposed to be removed; All of the trees proposed to be removed are identified in the applicant's Tree Preservation Plans and Arborist Report. 4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construct�on. The guidelines for tree protection are outlined in the arborist report, but the plans do not reflect these measures. The applicant shows general tree�rotection fenculg on the tree plan, but plans need to display the required tree protection fencuig,tree protection spec ications,and the tree protection zone dunensions to scale per the pro�ect arborLSt's report. Section 18.790.040 states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may thereafter be reinoved only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of a�proval for a conditional use, and shall notbe subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by t}us section to the effect that such tree may be removed oiily if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a cettified ar�orist The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. The forrn of ttus deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director. The applicant has proposed four alternative tree plans, some of which show retainuig trees on-site. Removal of retained trees �s restncted. A condition of approval will ensure that this standard is met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Tree Removal standards will be met, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below: CONDITTONS: Tree Protection . Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall submit revised plans to the City Arborist for review and approval showuzg accurately and to scale the tree protecuon s�pecifications and tree protecuon fencing dimensions outluied in the arbonst report. The plans shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist. . Prior to building pern�it issuance, the applicant shall osition fencing as directed bythe project arbonst to protect the trees to be retauied. �e applicant shall allow access by the CatyArborist for the purpose of morutoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are perfomung adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or mauitaui tree protection fencmg ui the designated locations shall be grounds for unmediate suspension of work on the site unt�l remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. NO7TC�OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTI'ITON PAGE 14 OF 22 . If work is required w�thin an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techruques to be emp loyed and the likely unpacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the Ci��Arbonst betore proposed work can proceed within a tree protecuon zone. The City Arborist may requu-e changes pnor to approval. The project arbonst shall be on site wlule work �s occurnng within the tree protecuon zone and submit a stuninaryreport certifying that the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly unpact the health and/or stability of the trees. T1��s note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan. . The applicant shall have an on-going_responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted wntten reports to the (�ty ArbonstJ at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist morutors the construction actrviues from initial tree� protection zone ('TPZ) fencuig installation through the building construction hases. The reports shall evaluate the condition and location of the tree rotection �encing, detern-une �f any changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part o�the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced,then the Project Arborist shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely unpact the overall, long-term health and stabiliry of the tree(s). If the reports are not subrrutted to the Ciry Arbonst at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan are not being followed by the contractor or a sub-contractor, the City can stop work on the pro�ect unt�l an u�spection can be done bythe CiryArborist and the Project Arbonst. . Prior to issuance of building pernuts, the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicating the locations of trees that were preserved on the lot during site development. In addition the plans shall include accurate locations of tree canopy dnplines and protection fencmg, and a signature of approval from the project arbonst regarding the placement and construction techruques to be employed in building the structures. All proposed protection fenculg shall be installed and inspected pnor to commencing construction. The fencing shall remain in�place through the durauon of all of the building construction phases, until the Certiticate of Occupancy has been approved. Prior to final u�spection,the applicant shall submit a final repon bythe Project 1�rbonst certifying the health of protected trees and that the street trees were properly planted per the approved street tree plan. Tree protection measures may be removed and fu�al uispecuon authorized upon review and approval by the Ciry Arborist. . Prior to final plat the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction on Parcel 1 to the effect that any e�stuig tree greater than 6" diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invahd if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. . Prior to issuance of building permits the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction on Parcel 2 to the effect that any existing tree reater than 6" diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous accor�ing to a certified arbonst. The deed restnction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. Mitigation . Pnor to usuance of building pernuts the appli��cant shall submit a mitigation plan to the City Arborist for review and app roval. Mitigauon can be accompl�shed by either planting the number of caliper inches removed or paying a fee-in-lieu at the rate of$125 per caliper inch, or any combinauon thereof. If a mitigauon planting proposal is subrrutted, it needs to have a signature of approval from the pro�ect arbonst certifying that it meets the requirements of 18.790.060D and that the species and placement of mitigation trees has been reasonably calculated to provide for theu-growth to matlu-iry. The iruugation proposal shall show the species,locauon, and spacu7g of rrntigation trees in relation to bwlduigs,infrastructure,e�stu�g trees,street trees,and each other. NOTICE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 15 OF 22 Mitigation shall be based upon one of the following tree plan alternatives: Alternative 1: 5 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 83.3% retention, no mitigation required. Alternative 2: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required. 50% x 27" removed = 13.5" of mitigation required. Alternative 3: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50°/o mitigation required. 50% x 37" removed = 18.5" of mitigation required. Alternative 4: 3 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 50% retention, 50% mitigation required. 50% x 50" removed = 25.0" of mitigation required. . Prior to building perniit issuance, the applicant shall submit a cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation required. Mitigation is calculated at $125.00 per caliper uzch. Anytrees successfu�ll�yplanted on or off-site, in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and Tigard Develop ment Code Section 18J90.060.D will be credited aga��uist the assurance two years atter all of the trees are planted per t�e approved Tree Mitigation Plan. After the trees are planted,the project arbonst shall submit a letter to the City Arborist to certify that all of the rrutigation trees were properly planted per the app roved Tree Mitigation Plan u1 order to set the starting point of the two-year tree esta6lishment period. After the two-year establishment period, the applicant shall provide a re-inventory of the mitigation trees conducted by a cert�fied arbonst in order to document rrutigation tree survival, and compliance with the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The remain;ng value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in-lieu of planting from the original cash assurance. Visual Clearance Areas (18J95� This Chapter requires at a clear vision area shall be maintained on the comers of all property adjacent to intersecting nght-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hed e, pl�anting fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in heig�t 'I'he coc�e provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between thnee (3) and eight(8) feet in heigh� Trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measurin from the corner, 30-feet along the right-of-way and along the driveway and connecting these two points wi�a straight line. Clear vision areas are shown on the�preluninaryplat for the existing drive, proposed drive and street corner. Because the proposed access on SW 106�' I�rive cannot meet site distance requu-ements, the access for the future home on Parcel2 must be from SW Johnson Street. Vision clearance areas have not been shown for this location. This standard has not been satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the Vision Clearance Standards are not met. CONDITTONS: . Place a note on the final lat for the visual clearance easement at the corner of SW 106�' Drive and SW Johnson�treet to the benefit of the City of Tigard. Said easement is subject to the Ciry of Ti ard Visual Clearance Area standards that restrict the height of plantuigs and structures �I'igard Development Code Chapter 18J95). . Prior to building permit issuance for Parcel2 , a site plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the standards of 18J95 (Visual Clearance Areas) are met. Impact Study_(18.390� Section 18.360.090 states, "The Director shall make a finding with res�ect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application: ' NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTION PAGE 16 OF 22 Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of developinent on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose iinprovements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Coinmunity Develo�ment Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedicahon, or�provide evidence that supports that the real roperty dedicat�on is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the develo ment Section 18390.�40 states that when a condition of ap roval rec�uires t�e transfer to the public of an interest in real propeity,the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion diat the interest in real propetty to be transferned is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on t11e public. 'I1�e applicant has subinitted an impact study Stormwater currently flows from the high side of the site (Parcel 1) across Parcel2 to e�stuig weep holes on SWJohnson Street. The Engineerulg Division has conditioned the applicant to show how stormwater from both srtes�will be directed to an approved system. Water and sarutary sewer is or will be provided by public lines within SW 106 Drive or SW Johnson Street. Parks system development charges will be collected for each new home at building penrut�ssuance as well as a TransportationDevelopment Tax. The Washington County Trans ortation Develop ment TaY ('TDT- effective July 1, 2009) is a mitigation measure that is requu-ed at the time of deve�opment. Based on Washington Counry figures TDTs are expected to recapture 28 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Artenal Street system The applicant will be required to pay TDTs of approximately$4,599 (Ef f ective July 1,2009} per new dwelling urut. Based on the estimate that total TDT fees cover 28 percent of the impact on major street im rovements cityvvide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic unpact �s $16,425 ($4,599 divided by.28� The difference between the TDTpaid, and the full impact is considered the utunitigated impact on the street system; therefore the uiu7uti ated impact of-this pro�ect is $l1,g26 �$16,425 - $4,599). The srte has I50.25 feet of frontage along 106`� Drive and �9.66 feet along Johnson Street. Both are classified as local streets. Two feet of righ�t-of-waydedication is required to meet current standards. Because the e�sting site is large enough to be divided,the City has considered allowu�g the apphcant to record a sidewalk easement or request a vanance to the n-uiumum lot size �f dedication occurs. In addiuon the applicant would execute a Restnctive Covenant for future public improvements. The allowance for a sidewalk easement u-i lieu of dedication requires the applicant to apply and receive approval for an adjustment to the street improvement standards. If the applicant chooses to dedicate the additional ROW instead of executing a sidewalk easement, the total dedication will be approxunately 500 square feet. The estur�ated cost of the dedication is $1,500 (500 square feet x $3.00/square foot). The dedication is required to meet the street im�provement requiremenu of Section 18.810.030. The total cost is less than the Luunitigated impact on the arterial and colIector system PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides constiuction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers,and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Sect�on 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a pottion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a local street to have a 54-foot right-of-way wicith and 32-foot paved section. Other improvements rec�uired may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities,street lighting, storm drainage,and street trees. NO7TC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 17 OF 22 T�us site is at the intersection of SW 106�'Drive and Johnson Street. Both are classified as a local street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, both streets have approxunately 25 feet of right-of-wayfrom centerline, accordu-ig to the most recent tax assessor's map. An additional two feet ot right-of-way�s required to comply with current local street standards. The applicant states that the "skiruiy street" standards of Table 18.810.1 of 18.810.030.E allow SW 106�' Drive and Johnson Street to ren�a.ui with a nght-of-waywidth of 50 feet. However, Note 3 of the table allows the reduced width only if certain cross section critena are met. A proval of the reduced width would require the applicant to meet the adjustment approval critena of Section 18370.0�0 C.11. The additional two feet of right-of-way dedication would not allow for the mixuinum lot size of 7,500 square feet. The m;n;mum lot size could be achieved by allowing the additionally required two feet of width to be placed within a public sidewalk easement. Both streets are cLU-rently improved with a 32-foot paved width and curbs but without sidewalks. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should plant street trees, enter into a future streets improvement agreement for the remauung unprovements and provide a two-foot wide public sidewalk easement along both frontages. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed wluch shows the pattern of e�stin and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states �at where it is necessary to give access or perniit a satisfactory future division of ad1'o_ ining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such t�me as the adjoining �roperty is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners wluch shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be mcluded in the street construction cos� Tem ora�y hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess o�150 feet in length. The property is surrounded bv e�sting residential development. There are no opportunities or needs for future streets or e�ensions of streets through this property. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre- e�sting developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restnct�ons e�usting prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not pemiit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within t�ie site to provide tl-YUrough circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, e}usting development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or etrtension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfi�ure the street pattem to �rovide required e�tensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15/o for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topograplucal constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. The properry is surrounded by e�sting residential development. There are no oppomuuties or needs for future streets or e�ensions of streets through this property. Block Desig ns - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate buildin sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convement access, ci�ulation, control an� safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opporiunities of topography. NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/S1�NDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 18 OF 22 Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line excep� . Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wedands or other bodies of water or, pre- existing development or, . For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways,major collectors or railroads. . For non-res�dential blocks in which internal public circulat�on provides equivalent access. Due to existing development surrounding the property�there are no possible street connections or oppomuiities to create shorter block lengths through this site. SW 106 Dnve connects Walnut Street with Tiedeman Avenue, and Johnson Street currently dead ends at Fanno Creek and is picked up on the opposite side of the creek. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prolubits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 t�mes die minimum lot size of t�le applicable zoning district All of the parcels are less than 1.5 times the m;nimlun lot size (7,500 x 1.5 = 11,250). Parcel 1 i� 7,524 square feet and Parcel2 is 7,500 square feet. Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of fronta�e on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c ap lies, wluch requ�res a pamel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a mmimuin 15-foot wide reco�ed access easemen� In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 fee� Parcel 1 has 8533 feet of street frontage along SW 106�' Drive. Parcel 2 has 64.92 feet of frontage on SW 106`� and 99.66 feet of frontage on SW Johnson Street. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. T1ie applicant shall enter into a future street improvement agreement for SW 106`''Drive and Johnson Street,which will include public sidewalks,thereby meeting this critenon. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A reyuires that sanitary sewer be installed to setve each new development and to connect developments to e�cisting mains in accordance with the provisions set fotth in Design and Constniction Standards}or Sanitary and Surface Water Management(as adopted by Gean Water Sernces in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by tlie Comprehensive Plan. There is a public sewer line located in SW 106th Drive and a lateral that serves the existing home. The applicant's plans show a proposed lateral f rom the existing sewer to serve Parcel 2. Stotm Drainage: General ProvYSions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be larg e enough to accommodate potential n.inoff froin its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility based on the pro� visions of Design and Construction Standards for Samtary and Surface Water Management�as adopted by �;lean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream drainage ways that impact this development. NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PAftTITION PAGE 19 OF 22 Effect on Downstream Draina�e: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resultin from the development will overload an e�st�ng dramage facility, the Director and Engineer shall wid�old approval of the development until pro��isions have been inade for improvement of the poteiitial condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management(as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, C1ean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments ir�stitute a stormwater detention/effective imp ervious area reduction prog ram resulting ui no net u-icrease u-i storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an uzcrease of impervious surfaces provide onsite detenuon facilities,unless the develo�pment is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water nuloff will be pernlitted to d�scharge without detention. The CWS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land partitions. It would be impractical to require an on-site water quantiry facility to accommodate the storm water from the two parcels. Rather, the C�VS standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed appropnate. Staff recorrunends payment of the fee in-lteu on tivs application. Storm drainage for both parcels shall be directed to an approved system. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states diat all utility lines, but not limited to those required for elect�ic, communication, ligliting and cable television sennces and related facilities shall be placed under�ro� und, except for surface mounted transfomiers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility senrice facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operat�ng at 50,000 volts or above,and: . The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the under�round services; . The City reserves the ri�ht to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; . All underground utilit�es, incIuding sanitary sewers aiid stomi drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed pnor to the surfacing of die streets; and . Stubs for service connections sFiall be long enough to avoid disturbing dic strect improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requiremen� Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority detemiines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-groundin� the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the developmen� The deternunation shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only such situat�on is a short frontage development for which under- rounding would result in the placement of additional poles,radler than the removal of above-ground utilities�acilities. An applicant for a developrnent which is served by utilities wluch are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are existing�o��verhead utiliry lines alon the frontage of SW Johr�son Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it must be approved by Mike McCarthy,Righc-of-�ay Adnunistrator, and it is e qual to $35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage chat contauis the overhead ].ules. The frontage along this site is 99.66 lineal feet;therefore the fee would be $3,488. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UI'ILITY IMPR�VEMENT STANDARDS: Fire and Life Safe : Tualatin Va eyFire and Rescue (South Division) [Contact:John Dalby, 503-356-4723]provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. There is an existu-ig hydrant on the northwest corner of the site. The District should be contacted for uiforn�ation regarding the adequacy of the distribution system, the need for fire hydrants, or other requirements. Public Water S stem: Water service is Provi ed by the City of Tigard. The applicant rop oses to continue to use the existing service f or Lot 1 and install an additional service from the ex�sun�rnain in SW 1�6th Drive to serve Lot 2. NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 20 OF 22 Storm Water pualitX The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality faciht�es. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff�enerated troin newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the faciliry maintained through the year. The CWS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land partitions. It would be im�practical to require an on-site water qualiry facility to accommodate treatment of the storm water from the two parcels. Rather,the C,,WS standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a faciliry if deemed appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee m-lieu on this apphcation. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Des�ign and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construct�on, gradin�, excavatin�, clearin , and any other activity wluch accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to su�mit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over five acres, the develo_per will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permi� An Erosion Control Plan must be submitted with the PFI Perniit application for review and approval. Address Assi nments• The City o Tigard is responsible for assignin addresses for�parcels within the City of Ti ard. An addressing fee in the amount of$50.00 per address shall be assesse�. Tlvs fee shall be paid to the Cityprior to�uial plat approval. Surve Re uirements: The applicant's inal plat shall conta.in State Plane Coordinates AD 83�(9� 1)] on two monuments with a tie to the Cit�s gIobal positioiung system (GPS) geodetic control network�GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same prec�sion as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert round measurements to gnd measurements and the angle from north to gnd north. These coordinates can be establis�ed by: . GPS tie networked to the Cit�s GPS survey. . By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. In addition, the applicant's as-built drawin�s shall be tied to the GPS network. The applicant's eng.ineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points or each structure (mar�lioles, catch basins, water valves,hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 ( SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS Tigard Police and the Public Works Departments were sent copies of the proposal and have no objection. The City Arborist provided comments,which have been incorporated into the decision. SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services (CWS) has reviewed the proposal. Comments have been inco orated into the decision and conditions. A copyof the entire CWS letter is found uz the land use file (NII..P2009-00001�. NOTICE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTION PAGE 21 OF 22 Applicant's Response: Many of the comments submitted by CWS are ty�pical of a subdivision application where new facilities and construction closely follow the preluninary and tinal plat approvals. They are not spec�fic to the subject application. Applicant objects to the tu�ung o}the obligations recommended by CWS. Qwest Cornmunications states that this location falls out of the Qwest service area. Verizon Communications stated that a 2'x 3'vault is located on the corner of the site within the area of the proposed sidewall�. The applicant is not proposing a sidewalk at this time. SECTION VIII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JLJNE 22,2009 AND SECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JULY 8�2009 LJNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. AP- De-al-: The I�irector's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Commurury Development Code which provides that a written a peal together with the re�quired fee shall be filed with the Director withul ten (10) business days of the date the Notice o�Dec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forn�s are available from the Plaiuung Div�sion of T"igard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues ident�fied in the wr�tten comments subrrutted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party dunng the appeal hearing,subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted from tune to tune by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON JULY 7,2009. I�estions: e any questions, please call the City of Tigard Plaruluig Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard,Oregon at (503) 639-4171. C�i0��,�, Q • �'a�v�.e� �une 22,2009 PREPARE BY: Cheryi Caines DATE Associate Plan.ner ,�'^�') .�� ! � , ' ; - (� , �-� june 22 ,2009 APPROVED�Y: Ric ar Bewersdo DATE Plaruiing Manager NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 22 OF 22 I L VICINITY MAP 1213D 12732 bYbuu��ii r'.,rh �� _ .---- --–. ------ -.--__ _ � MLP2009-00001 ,zzw ,zzao �uso �os�s �osos -_ �zz3Z �uco���o �a9s c�y�����.,,�� `' � .t,_ ' SANDERS PARTITION ... .� v .�.� �` -- - _ _ _ _- - ,.. � �was �osoo �u33 .� mszs ��,•:����r�s. �uas �� �a�s �ass '�a�o w w �uss � Qa 12237 �" 12285 ��65 1Wb5 O3 Z V t052o tp�gp. N Q � Qt�� 7221! t2295 tz300 10t7Q 10150 10395 � Subjed Site W � f" 1D365 12320 f2325 10335 a5� � tI330 10515 7Q155 ��5� 10375 i�� 12350 O �� 10315 t235s � �OHNSON ST � � � 10318 ilg rd Q 10804 10TT4 tObTS 12385 1653Q 7W90 t0450 Q ,_..__. .,... 10300 l '12390::::: 10270 / 1Q� \ �706+/5 10240! �� l 10295 10214 tOfi25 12a40 �asas 10195 10b75 ��� 10265 tOWO �'R� 7oezo O iae�o �o� '�d+iQ �zszs � tOS10 10355 �` � 12555 C>, 107T5 707fi5 ��5 � W ��Q Information o�this map is for general location Z .G, only and should be verified with the Development ERROL ST Z Pv ServicesDivision. O 72515 12575: LL 10594 � 12535 � �Q� ty550 Scale 12,587-1 in=216 ft � 12555 �G _(�� 12595 O�-� Map pnnted at 12-May-09 03:36 PM Q�Cr 10360 � 0 1257� 14780 18�� �OT�S jQ��Q �Z595125T5 `�\� 14330 �� 0� � DATAISDERIVEDFftOMMULTIPLESOURCES MECITYOFtIGARD �1 MANES NO WARPANiV.REPRESENTATION OR Gl1RMNiEE IS TO TME ` CONTENT.ACGURACV.i1MElINE55 OR COMPLE iENE55 OF ANV OF inE Y�1/1V C`.i�(l'.`. AP` 'Z�O �ZS3S �T �O26S OnTAPFOVIDEDHEREMl.THECIttOFTiGnRDSwLL1n55UMENO ' t �O2SS �IAB�LRYFORANYERRORS.OMISSIp15.ORINRCCURPCIE5INTHE �OTZO �Z5�5 �.� �OZ�S �NFORMATIONPRW�DEDREGM�LESSOFNOWCnUSED t2550 125T5 y —,.�..._.---------------- 12b34 �a Giry ot Tigartl 10725 ��� ���s '� �QZ�d 13125 SW Hall Blvd � 12b35 �P T��qR� Aps 7igard,OR 97223 • 12fi52 12655 12��� t2fi95 12555 � 10256 J� � y�H,H,,tlga9d-or.gov ¢ �16Tfi5 �J� �\ � 1269912bY11 12687 �10236 LEGEND: �s°'—z'—�-"—��� I ro.s�e'i.e.,o.s eoirxo-% � I !BENT.T.S.P..O.P. ' �POINT 'A' . • DEM011E5 MOM111EN1T Fq1N0 AS NOTED p1M� E)OS71NG Mh1ER ME7ER 5 00'10'DO'W 0.12' , y� F�.S/B'I,R..0.2'BURiED I O DElIO7E5 S/KXW NtON ROp �( ElOS1WC i1RE HYORANT ,' O.P,HEID � Mi1M A YE110M PtASDC CM S7�IMPED ' ' ZTEC LS 19�1' m fXIS71NG WA1ER VA14 '� 3 �� �� m EIASING SAMT�RY IIANHOIf I:� �� � I.R OENOlES IRON ROD '� d i pcu Ex�51MC CAS ME7ER I.P. OENOlES 1tON VPE � `� OFb EIASTNC RECIRIC ME1ER „� � �' ���5�� oM8 EkISqNG MAilBO% � I 3 0 3 i.SP. DFHOIES 71E0 STRAIGHT Pdlllql o0S E%ISiMG DONNSPOUT ;I � lOT 19 � l01 18 1PC DDIOIES 1fLL0'M PLASII[CAP �-q, EIOSTMlC UTIl11Y POIE NI1M SIREET lld1T .� 'Y 'i ,:.. _ _ . . ............. (M) OfHOlES NFASURED Q pps�� h r � ......r�.. � ^m FD.I 2 I R 0.3'BURIED. (r) oaorzs tonor+w000 w Act" ,. .—� cbsnHC coNrara : �,{ _ /' .., � BENT,1.S.P.,O.U. O.P. OENOlES dUGMeI PL�7 CORNER —SA— F7ASfi1G SEMER � ;i I ... ..... POINT E� S 0079'00'E 0.32' . o.u. UENOTES OPo(A!uNKNOxtI —w�— E%ISTNG wATER � i� SS MH I.<• ExIST.R.O.W. N 89"21�00'E 219.30'(M) 2Y0.00'(P G— EI(K11NC GAS IINf �165.12 �� ' � PR. DENOIES PRORATED — .'. .. . �> . ._ ...._. ,�_...).�. ....:._. ...........:. ..._....... . /V/ �� . ..... LF.M(5)160.17 �1 - ..._.D. ....... _.. ..... SN OENOTES SURVEY NUNBER,wASNMGTON —P— fxI511NC EIECTRICAL IM�E I,E.IN(N)I60.17 � (i� , S`iw. �]D�NS'�� ST. by�BBy.27� }55' `" COUN7Y AIRVEY RECdtDS LE.WT(E)160D7 $ 1� _ o O�H OVERNEAD � ; .A SA . S SA $A.�—SA SA S/+ —SA—ti� � s��) s�ses9� v�o �n+o�nc S � , `• � ; g' ' � f i �� �,., ! ' � cuae � J rr� Fxesi+nook eitv�na� ,; %' ' -- , a � , '° � N 894'00'F 4966 (M) iuo (P) ; o/x,.,�� w' a, CO QEAN Wi F/0 LINE , � ,p y ...'..�� . I gp.pp'(P)k HELD LE.INIEW)�T6(E) , ...:. . . _ .�_._ . . ,_.._}(t . / .... OS OOMR7 SPOUT ��- �}BN � ",�.. .L 01�ERHEAD PO�YER ....-,. / � �CABIE BOX �p01NT D� � � E1QSlklC SP07 EIEVAlION � . . CA8lEro0%� 3aSSIBLESSl�I -7.y. � , 32, � - FD I/2'IR.,BENT CONC.GAiCH �a . ���.9' 80MD � T S FD.1 2'I R.D U. , 5A �� .,. . 1 WpOp p�µ7ER� � ..P. O.U. C000/fOR NORTHINC .,r�.� ...r..... �.�..�....,,.��-�.-,....�.:.�.,..,�,........�..-: , � 4 7� ��._...p._...PARCEL.2 �3'DE CEDAR- N 89'21'00'W 0.25' �•� . . � i � A �`�' 7500 S0.{T�:,;. I 15' Q 0 �a t... � i �' :,. I POS4BLC BUILdNC. , �-j"� � ; �R L�(1��r,;��.��� � o x .. �e � ��e �,����,� , e ; �:, . 1 �� '23'N�p � g � r ,ti:�t�v� F n � ClT'f CF T .71f`=•si� P�..:�4�iP���NG . i •.�J � !,;� � 0 g � ' n�o��:E azor e'' ` ^ n �o,�� � I* q N 8 � `�. ' � �"�p R a p p�d, �5 . '�9 c Y ,��F�� p',.�' O i INTFRSEC110N HSION iRIANG tE ' ; F� ;,,�vi y PR�E , ESIS iINC HWSE I � " . s� p0 NSUAL QEARAHCf AREAS PCF CDC SECTION 78795 i4' �j p�� . �G �,�� �7 � � Y �'... F�., f17790 u� -s; $ ` p H`N� . ..�Y l.�•l.(fi.+1A. ���.Y�� .. . .._._.,_..._.,--- , iD.5/t'I R 0.5'BUkIE� \i,� � z ��� .1--- .0 -S-` .�0 O E7fI5TINC NFEP XOIE IN CURB s m - ..�. __._ .... .~.�~ kBENT,T.S.P.,O.P. / � �1�� POS48lE(iE 8 „�„._ .�,y;-.,.�. ..._..-..�..._., .. .. _..: ��..,.., �,.. ._...� . POSS�BLE IXISiINC PUMP dStHMCE WEEP NOIE .. S E9S0'00'E 0.7/'J "� 5A ' I. � j gi.21 WAY 4APlE O „33.� ,� AC` �� PARCEI 1 .I `� y�ppp pE� �4 POSSIBLE N1URE 20'NIDE ORI4EWAY LOCAiION N1iX ' QN39 � � m,(�W'�\^ J524 S0.R. �I f7.5B' O�ER CONC.PA710 NSIp!QEARANCE NOTED. � � . 20 r'�"� NARRATIVE: !- �::_ . . F' , , ����� 7, c :� � .SHEO IGRAVEL �CHAIN�Nllt N BAAS Of BEARNCS: N 03VJ19�E BETN£FN 1HE S�D�RON RODS fd1ND Ai ppN1$�'A�A!q 9', � FENCE I I . _"_ � AS GLCUUIED FAOM THE PIAi Of�OTTONNDpp PIALE' j!.. �RRE'-�- �5 ` � � PqNT'A°TO POINT�'=S Oi'Ol'19'W (BAS�S OF BEARINGS) . ' 2 -�;r...... �". tD 117.�AS PUAPOSE OF$URVEY: TO PARIITION�LDi 13 OF 1FIE VLAT Of'COiTON►A0�MACf'WTO 1 ,� -,7'. .....ia^... T� /915'(P)Y�HfLO � ���. 19'APPIE PARCQS AS 51101{M. �CABIE BO% p t � J 1 /76.Y3'(N) �57.93'(P) ' � so'R.o.w �S B/'36'30'W sz�s��S��rW POINT �G� 1K1D 11£S/E'NON ROD fOUND AT POMT'A'AS AN ORICMAL MAi MCMIYENT ANO NELD TME j :.�� .,.i•_..-� FD.5/8'i.P..O.R (M� 52.8y�p� � S�TE AREA= 15.021 S0.f l. �/�, F/0 JBON 1° 0.5'BURffD,BENT, 5/b'RON R00,SET 8Y SN YD197,AT 7dNT�'(A1 2629)kEPIACEp iNE OpIClIAI pLAT S/6' ;� � ; � r�S�P. F0.3/1'I.P.,O.LL ZONE� R4.5 lOW DENSITY RESIDCN71Al ROM ROD)AS BONC AT iHE ORIGMAL PLAT CORNER lIELD 11E pUT BEARMG ON S 00'Id00'M � S 21'17'25'E 0.57 Mn+.LOT SRE= 7500 S0.FT. FRON PdNi'A'MID NOR1H 1435'00'EAST FROIA POMi B'ANp N7ERSECIEU 1HESE IfKS A7 '�i �� o S 76'S0'27'E 2.06' POWT C'. NEXT.1HE PtAT BEAltlN'Of S 69ZibD'M MAS NEID/ROAI 7NE 5/E'IROM R0p � � �.... °i LOl 3 � raMO,�T Poert v;uio mnxs�ctm rnTM nc t�st ti+arr-a-w�r ur�a s.w.ioen�qnv� ss uH �� � POINT 'F' AT PdNT�'. 7ME RFSUliM6 p6T,VICE Up TO VdNi'h•n ie�.�s�o nc vuT cuis von R„�,».�, POINT 'C' BENCHMARK: � +eseo'. n+e Nonnra,�1 caauv�a n�rnovcnrr w�s EsT�rs�o�r na vur asrer,cc a I E.IN(SE)166.01 � �(D,5/8'I.R., E0.D0 fFfT fRdl Trt 5/E'RON ROD FOUND�T POMT�'. Nptt,1HE SOU7HN[ST CORIIER OF I E.OUi(N)165 91 �� O S'BURIED,BfNT,T.S.P.,O.P. BENCMAIARK NOE 3 6Sf A BRASS OIISN IH�1HE S.W CORNER LOT 13 NAS ESiABUA1Ep BY MOLDMC A PRORATED q51ANCE[f SQI9 IFET 50.16 PLA iROAI OF ME CONCRETE PDRCN AT 5T.AHTHONY SCMOOI IH ( T� Sa� S 19'S7'00'E 0.55' POMT�1,',1NEN pqHT T WAS F1ELD AT 1HE PUi BEMNIG A1q dSTAHCE Of N 0�'J6'JO"E AND s� iIGNtO,EASi MAIN ENTRANCF 10 SCHOOL. � �9.15 iEET Fltdl SNp Sd1THNE5T CORNER Of lOT 13 LAMT,7HE PUT BEARINC Of S � 001d00�11 MAS MELD iR011 TFIE N.E CORNER OF 1f[PROPEp7Y ANp WAS MIERSECIED YAM THE _� POIN? B ELEY.=i69.50(UHE 30)) � PUT BfARINC OF SW7N 75D5'OR EAST fRqA VOMT Y,AT PDMT'G'. f�.S/B'I.R.x11M 1PC iB1A: TOP pF lA'IN M1/EILER ON fIRE HYDP�NT A1 iME n�STAAIPEO,$UCKLCS Pl5 2231' NW CORNER OF S17F. ELEV= 167.10 N SEi ON SN(1)k HELD JOB/: 51870-1 GRAPHIC SCALE DATE: 1/22/09 ZTEC ENGINEERS INC. REGISTERED STEVE SANDERS 3737 S.E. BTH AVE., POR?LAND. ORECON 97202 PROFESSIONAL 30 0 15 30 60 120 SCAI.E: 1'.3D' pH. 503) 235-0795 fAx �AND SURVEYOR DRA1fN: JWS � '. (SOJ) 233-7869 ( IN 10E7) CHKD: CCF � I 1NCH- 30� IOGTED IN THE N.E. 1/4 OF SECTION 3, OREGON JJLT 17,19B1 T. 25., R. 7W., W.M., IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, CHRIS FiSCHBORN pRELIMINARY PLAT FILE: 5]af0-iPRE2 WpSHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON i9aa PLOT: 5-14-'09 qEt+ew��o�ic� i/i�yao ' NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION � ""�d MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 -� . SANDERS PARTITION 120 DAYS = 9/15/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SLJNIMARY FILE NAME: SANDERS PARTITION CASE NO.: Minor Land Partition (MLP) MLP2009-00001 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval for a Minor Land Partition to partition one (1) e�sting .35-acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-family residences. An e�cisting residence on Parcell will remain. APPLICANT & Steven W. Sanders and APPLICANT'S GaryP. Shepherd,Attorney OWNER Barbara Swanson-Sanders REP.: 3115 SE Salmon Street 2647 SW Talbot Road Ponland,Oft 97214 Portland, OR 97201 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: R 4.5: Low DensityResidential. ZONE: R 4.5 Low Density Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-f amily homes with or without accessory residential units at a rninunum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are pernutted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pemutted conditionally. LOC'.ATION: 12390 SW 106�'Drive;Washington CountyTax Assessor's Map 2S103AA,Tax Lot 1916. PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 7,524 Square Feet. PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 7,500 Square Feet. APPLICABLE RE VIE W CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of T'igard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPR�VAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenry-five cents (25t} per page,or the current rate charged for copies at the tune of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Af f ected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JUNE 22, 2009 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JLTLY 8, 2009 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. A eal: e Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are othera-ise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as��rovided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code wluch provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) busuless day_s of the date the Notice of Dec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forn�s are available from the I'lanning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 S�'Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues ident�fied in the v�mtten comments subrYUtted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party durui_g the appeal hearing,subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted from time to tune bythe appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON JLJLY 7, 2009. Fo�estions: r information�please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Che , Caines at (503� 639-4171, Tigard Ciry Hall, 13125 SW HaII Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223 or by email to cher�lcCa�tigsrd-or.gov. - —� _ _ VICINITY MAP � �. I � _ I � -- —. -TI— �, � M1P2009-00001 � . i � I I . .. '."`; � -- � '� �"ve�:�� ����'C1. . SANDERS PARTITION I ��� ..�� ' 1 . I �\ c . _I .`.. ..� r i. i f :,' �� � �,, I� •�,,,�:- L � � ` � _ _ 1 i, , �_:: .�� � I ' I ' `� '!1" ♦ .i•].e]` � .1�> :��. Z I. I :`..� ` �.. . .�, � II . i"'•\�'�" � ` , � i _ r_ `� � . �Z� � „ .,� .:r. .�� ,.. , , ,. , _ ,.,. , ... �, -�, , , �, .=.r � .�,, ���:. , ' __ � � ..,:: _� , o. `� — — . ,� j ..... �.;, �- �r�: ., '. -. I ..,: =,.� JMINSUNSI ' . � � � �.� , Oi Jv(� � I ; — k T ..% .� Ol . �'�'� �� 1 .. � I�u f �.�e: �-o ',a»: � . � � '' w 7�,� ' • l — _— � , ' / ti . ..� . �,r J� �. '�.! I I� J '. . � � I .'.� .., .. ..:/ . ' _. a n. � ,. I -_ . _... � f ; o. �� �v' � � �..: -r_ , : I .... %.�<r. `+ �j'�_. �``` �.� ' .;. oys�^-- �n _�.. ' ! ,1 \,- ."_ ` ��Y): � [ � ..r.. .t.. x ��. . 1\. '� . . ...�. � :T " 1 \� .. lJ` , .x - ...eaame� CNNOl51 4 .i . `,.I I . ) . 'Y p , � s�.a.�....a. . . . . I . –' ��. \ .I�f^, . 4 '~� .• O� ., � - � � �•- n I pG� � r�a I ' � v q O J�V�. (,y��. p `'t='y '`�� '� . �srOQ � ✓'�. QP i f . � 4, .. . . .�. �� ��.m. r�� '� , .?_p� . �� � . I �.. I . , .. .. �� � ' � , .. . . `P ' �- . TI�hkA1�P5 . � � ,. . � . . , , • , �_ 'a' LBGEND: ------ Ryfu.voe!'"�rnm.�a,j . i . oumsaeia..r�eo o� anc�nKa ir°�ieir.��ur � �`vOwr'A � I nyrw.rw.� e iwoe LT��is $ m�c rw Mer.n � ���� a•,ian � � �w.we v nrm u�w � �snr�r....+� I � • o�.s 'I"�� . LL .m e�.. on o.,.ea,... I ��ti . � � a n m.o1..e ae.s...� 'sig i � w. oee�nwn ra.a ,es as+k mrrn� s �q j t �e.�. j .;,u � r� �c mmewu.w�w pe oenewn'u.mmmwn 3 i, � �,� o �.��. �� � k� : n .�,�.�� ,_ - m g, v, .,�,�.,� a.. eoo aaa n.�ase —"—m"14° � � .-oT:i 4� � �n:ia���e�i l � owwe.u..o.� —r—u�.R.a ` i� � r.,�vt I nuro msm ��� —�_ u,u. `���rt oe� ...._ . . en � � w�mz°wn�°"'O' •—oa.swc+rru. conm�ra ��"� � �S:N. JoHNSON 57. r�f'A'�,} v. r oh es�ie � z+�st— s• s•—s� — Mlp fm) rN �POnC �:�. �B I. � n�� P � nninavotwe -�I I .r"�: �,�L _ _ �n�.. ' .�iw m-- i^ �c w -- `.{yy �"t,cs..ac�.� y..1,,�`@ua min�ru 1-�9�n�-,_ . . 2.. �+� .j+� oenc wr wwa � mc ruw� �v '�^�� z .� �^ L ' 'U i s. a 1' rue�so�n �:s'',C . . .,� .,...�. .oi�,. a' '�r^ _J P'+r• � ° xs., �'e � �f ."� 'Z . � �xi 5 3 y�'=; "u �i YI �S'R.* '-'1 _ Z� ,� i . r- :r,,�" �',�5 , . 7 G: N /� 8�� o�:;���_� ,�� Z O '�n � X� �� ? �±� roM x ri e 4 i y, .��., �. n� . .� c. . e i v � �;:;a,�= e,;��, �. ��'" .�,,,;, g�' i� - r,j.��N..�,m.�.. - � � �.-W., � p��...�..s....:.- .. ;� r "o� .,�>�,...a K,. N�ARRATIVE: _ �� "• '`.`••` � s� w��.m,xe,�r���o.e.�nrn�..�or. �� 1 �"r�c��s I tl U1Q4L �f Mt>ZTNnOm Nf[' ..4/ -... . ��4t!!M R IMmidim J rc M Ml a tmronom MtF Ino f I ..� �� S 01 � .` r.n e h[ ran�:ro rox�1 ,.. ,.�s ML6t p fnfl �p�. . � '%�' �1 a b@ D6:II'L' M Nt�Id o Nw��IM'n.0 w u�s M�w�Mrt w0�YC F[ rN 10� � Y dO.11R l M#4 n1 11(�� b0.fI�n f fpA.�I qn T If Yi�0.��t uit Mr f? �b�zlfb��bo .�I �q BR�I M nMk iU��El iY1 e!Mi fMR a f m��1C• � �a C� f H91ri t>#I R Ll�r py �( ru�ir e.�m�e�i�i.�i.a nai iwn r w.aa+¢.n ua.� '.I Ig p � aan.�in � ' .. �mm•m�eonaxsm.a� x � i � ����v�� �..A�.��...���..k..� rygw i`.�a -x�rr m��w".a.,�o M�.'�i�MSan°.,�.��.�e '. aa+r c B.E�xHMo P k. � �[fTM�ImiwO�iivrtV ��M��xi� sI�tYM�.•a�s Q, im il�mr�no n�nw�rouim atl�¢s nn R*fax iu�rw �._n�r . j i� f MTV. .o. At�ee \�w�i 1Trtt�n�ia f�isTm e�mnn v��i��ii.n�e M rQ 4�wTle t�o .�.un �u�+� ,.. �M.r�en�en�u w��'an�r�.nn°r••'�va,m,.wµ •p� :!wi 8' un.w�nr m�;;'. . . o mr. nn .. [� eir�_.w r.. �.u .,w N av�o-� �/ixr.+uiumnn�u�, ..meivs2 a�°u'i..°,.�y.w...�.�- an.r�n ��,����,,�.s ..,e ,,,:,a ZTEC ENGINEERS INC. �"IS'[�[o sTevE snNOE=� � •� � o ,� � w �zo �„�;�5�».'.",y.�.;�.� ; �„�.� �.e':';.., ,, ..,-. . ,""y«w ' �.;'�i:�� ---- _ ._ .. . . . PP.ELIMINARl' PL.;- �--�— - — -'--- - -.. . _—. ... ,-..--� , NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE,LIENHC'- �FR,VENDOR OR SELLER 'I'HE TTGARD DEVELOP'vIF:I�iT CODL _QUIRES T'f�AT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS �TICE, IT SI-IAI.L BF PROMP'IT,Y FORWARDED TO'I'HE Pt'RCF-IASF.R NOTICE OF PENDING ,, LAND USE APPLICATION : MINOR LAND PARTITION , , � DATE OF NOTICE: May 26, 2009 FILE NO.: MINOR LAND PARTITIDN (MLP) 2009-00001 FILE TITLE: SANDERS PARTITION APPLICANT & Steven W. Sanders& APPLICANT'S Gary P. Shepherd,Attorney OWNER: Barbara Swanson-Sanders REP.: 3115 SE Salmon Street 2647 SW Talbot Road Portland, OR 97214 Portland, OR 97201 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval for a Minor Land Partirion to parrition one (1) e�sting .35-acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-family residences. An e�sting residence on Parcel 1 will remain. The proposed lots are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet in size. LOCATION: 12390 SW 106�'Drive;Washington Counry T�Map 2S103AA,Tax Lot 1916. ZONE: R-4.5: The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a iYUmmum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family untts ase permitted condirionally. Some civic and insntutional uses are also permitted condittonally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Communiry Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the Ciry. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON JUNE 9, 2009. All comments should be directed to Cheryl Caines,Associate Planner (x2437� in the Planning llivision at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at 503-639-4171 or by e-mail to cherylcCa�ti�ard-or.gov. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION- MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR jUNE 19, 2009. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHAI.L CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: ♦ Address the specitic "Applicable ew Criteria" described in the section re or any other criteria believec3 to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concems believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; ♦ Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relcvant approval criteria with sufficient specificiry on that issue. FAILURE OF ANY PARTY TO ADDRESS THE RF.LEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA�i�I'I"H SUFFICIENT SPECIFICIT'Y MAY PRECLUDE SUBSEQUENT APPEALS TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS OR CIRCUIT COURT ON i THAT ISSUE. SPECIFIC FINDINGS DIRECTED AT THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA ARE WHAT � CONSTITUTE RELEVANT EVIDENCE. AFTER THE 14-DAY CO�iMENT PERIOD CLOS�S, THE DIRF,CTOR SHALL ISSUE A �I�'I'E II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SI�ALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND'I'O OWNER5 OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE,AND TO ANYONE ELSE WIIO SUBMI'I"I'ED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT t1PPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD,THE DIRECTOR SI-�LL APPROVE,APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DF.NY THE REQUESTED PER,'�11T OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: ♦ The application is accepted by the Ciry ♦ Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. ♦ The application is reviewed by Ciry Staff and aFfected agencies. • City Staff issues a written decision. ♦ Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of properry located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agenry which is entided to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise enuded to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. If you want to inspect the file,please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the planning technicians. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of$.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the secuon tided "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." I I ! .�ei, ., — YICINITY MAP �r» �nu - � ,.-.. � � iLP2008-00001 �nM �a� �� �u �uv F �ar�yw '0��ws ,'rve�.�.. � `-�.. SAI�AHtS PARIITiON / u ian w �y � � +axa� ,,...,.+o �ua �: �«r� uoy ���a» � +m� � un, ,m �� wrs w. � � y M�M ���uH 'au � v»t �iw �» tM1� �wf � . swpn sa. W � �~ tnr �or�/ ( .»» �»t �•us .p Y�� , ,. i rosn �a» ,p. m>s . �� ixn� �� � �`��t�e\J� -- • t . JDNMOpN 6i �~ \� / � � �i e �aa�ona �aia tiM1 ��";''.+.�.�xM ���aw a wrr l< ..._ �o� \ `� � �iiM1'�� /un/\ toNO �•�Cf1{ '�.,:,• �IM� �w� �� �xw +un �iuro �w� �wn �� ior� �aw � � uam �a�e ��/����tau S � w+w / fOilf N/ff �� ,�/ t�5��\l � I� \ lRROLfT O taM � � ``.7� J •f .M�.�.wb�a«�".....+.:i iM�O / /` \ �JN� /�. \ \Mta Su���tl1a .�a.� r ... ... � ,.,.e� . �tm\ C N]N � 1riM/p''�.` \.. ea...+n._...a.r.. � / / �9 �rw uaw Ha�e ro� , ��\ �\'�'��4R����os�o���f t�l ���i� / �Y�/� \ �1 ,.�� �: "/�u s ',C \�� /^C,a„�:':��\�,:� �� % � � \7�� Y ' ��.. /�/ � \.v —______._. �orr� / //� »/x��,-'1\�u�` \ i�„�s �,�t�.an/ ., . ='+"�.•''v' � wKf !j/`� \✓ ��\ `� ���\s'/11��5K1`•? �� •�'�TS��' �*�T ---� i� �._i �� i� ,�is»� irir v ��s»j � Lrr� q � ; � � . REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: May 2C,2009 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: C'it�of Tigard Planning Division ST�FF CONTACT: C'heryl('aines tlssociate Planner (x2437) Phone: (503) G39-4171 Fas: (503) G24-3681 Email: che�lc(�ti�a�.rd-or•gov MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 - SANDERS PARTITION - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting appro��al for a Minor Land Parririon to parririon one (1) esistulg .35-acre site into nvo (2) parcels for detached single-famil}' residences. �n e:�isring residence on Parcel 1 will remain. The proposed lots are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet in size. LOCATION: 12390 SW 106`'' Drive; Washington Counry Tax Map 2S103r1�1, Tax Lot 1916. ZONE: R-4.5: The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-famil�� homes with or �vithout accessor5- residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-famil�- units are perniitted condirionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pernvtted condirionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.71 S, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Viciniry Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From informauon supplied by �-arious departments and a encies and from other informarion available to our staff, a report and recommendarion will be prebared and a decision �v�l b� rendered on the nronosal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JUNE 9. 2009. You may� use the space provided below or attach a separate letrer to rcturn ��c,ur cc�tiinients. If�ou are unablc to res�ond b�the abo��e date, please phone the staff contact noted abo�-e with �-our comments and confirm �-our comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any quesrions, contact the Tigard Planning Di�rision, 13125 SW�Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: _ We ha�-e re�-ie�ved the proposal and ha�-e nc>objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. _ Written comments provided below: Name&Number of Person Commenung: CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS � � NOTIFIC/ N LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY D LOPMENT APPUCATIONS FILE NOS.: Li�- uc.� i � ����r � FILE NAME: � ������ %��- ►� CITY OFFICES LONG RANGE PLANNINGiRon Bunch,Planning Mgr �CURRENT PLANNING/Todd Prager/Arborist-Planner yC PUBLIC WORKSIBrian Rager,Asst.Public Works Dir. �BUILDING DIVISIONI r �r ENGINEERING DEPT./Kim McMillan,Dvlpmnt Rewew Engineer PUBUC WORKS1Steve Martm,Parks Supervisor CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy WheaUey,CIty Recorder X ENGINEERING DEPTJGreg Berry,Project Engineer HEARINGS OFFICER(+y sets) COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Planning•Engineering Techs.�POLICE DEPT.;Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer PLANNING COMMISSIONlGRETCHEN(+�y$ets) _CODE ENFORCEMENTlChristine Darneli,Code Compliance Specialist(DCA) X FILE/REFERENCE(+2 sets) SPECIAL DISTRICTS TUAL.HILLS PARK 8 REC.DIST.sZ( TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE 8 RESCUE s _ TUALATIN VALIEY WATER DISTRICT aM � CLEAN WATER SERVICES+► Planning Manager Norlh Division Administrative Office Development Services Department 15707 SW Walker Road John K.Dalby,Deputy Fire Marshall 1650 5W 170'"Avenue David Schweitzer/SWM Program Beaverton,OR 97006 14460 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton,OR 97006 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway Beaverton,OR 97005-1152 Hillsboro,OR 97123 LOCAL AN�STATE IURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON � _ CITY OF TUALATIN � OR.DEPT.OF FISH 8 WILDLIFE OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS _ Planning Manager Planning Manager Devin Simmons,Habitat Biologist Melinda Wood�w�uN Fo�Req���ea� _ Steven 5parks,oP�Svcs Manager 18880 SW MaRinazzi Avenue NoRh Willamette Watershed District 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road Salem,OR 97301-1279 Beaverton,OR 97076 Portland,OR 97231 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING +M _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.8 MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE _ CITY OF DURHAM • 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 17160 SW Upper Boones Fry. Rd. _ Joanna Mensher,oa�ae:o�«e ce��e��zcn> US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97224 _ Paulette Allen,GrowlnManagemeNCoordmator OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.B DVLP. Kathryn Harris iM.P.acws�.n.�o��Y� _ M21 HUI6,GreenspacesCoorA�nata(CPN20A1 M8f2 UII021Comp PlanAmendmenlsBMeasure37) Routing CENWP-OP-G CITY OF KING CITY � _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regionel Glanner(Wellantls) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946 Ciry Manager _ C.D.Manager,c�o�nMa�a9amB��s�N�e: Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 15300 SW 116th Avenue Ki�g City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY� OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY(POwenines i�nrea) _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION�reonoPo�e rowers� Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,a�a����9 155 N.First Avenue _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO +IF Routi�g TTRC—Atln: Renae Ferrera 3040 251h Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro.OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 JC Naomi Vogel-Beattie�ce�e�a�a.PPS Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Planning Division�zcn�Ms ia _ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DE�) ODOT,REGION 1 � Breni CuRis�can� CITY OF PORTLAND (NOldyfor Wellantlsand PolenLal Environmental Impads) Development Review Coordinaror poria Mateja�zcn�MS,e Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section iva���o�s� _ScCartographer icPNZCn,MS,. 1900 SW 4'"Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,s�rveYo�,zcA,M5,5 Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 OR.PARKS&REC.DEPT. WA.CO.CONSOI.COMM.AGNCY ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A iR _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION STATE HISTORIC Dave Austin�wcccn�°e„°iMO�o,��..o,..,,, Sam Hunaidi,Assistant Oistr�cl Manager (NOtily if ODOT R/R�Hwy.Croasinp is Only Accees to Land) PRESERVATION OFFICE PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road Dave Lanning,s�Gossing Sa(ety Special�sl (Natify il Prop�rty H�s HD OvsAay) Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221 555-13"'Street,NE,Suite 3 725 Sumner Street NE,Suite C Salem,OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES PORTLAND WESTERN RIR,BURLINGTON NORTHERNISANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC RIR(Bu�lington NonherNSanta Fe WR Predecessor) Bruce Carswell,President&General Manager 1200 Howard Drive SE Albany,OR 97322-3336 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS k COMCAST CABLE CORP. TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer�n��exa��o�so��Y� Gerald Backhaus�s»��a<a���a<o QfPrqecllsW�thm'/.MAeola7ransnRou�e) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay 5treet Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 �{,PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC �NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY �VERIZON C QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Mike Hieb Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. John Cousineau,OSP Network Lynn Smith,Eng.ROW Mgr. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue 4155 SW Cedar Hilis Blvd. 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97005 Portland,OR 97219 TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 �COMCAST CABLE CORP. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC. Teri Brady,Administrative Offices Jenni(er Garland,Dernoyraphics Alex Silantiev ,�«�,��A�a�«�e«, Brian Every iro�sew��,o�su�� 696D SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg. 12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Beaverton,OR 97008 Tigard,OR 97223-4203 +Ir INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS (Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties TO NOtify�. h:lpattylmasterslRequest For Comments Notitication List.doc (UPDArED 28-Aug-oe) (Also update �'�curplmsetupuabels\annexalions\annexa6on_utilities and franchises.doc,mailing labels 8 auto lext when updating Ihis docume� . � : � � . " REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: Ma�26.2009 TO: jim Wolf T�ard Police De�artment Crime Prevention Officer FROM: Cit��of Tigard Planning Di��ision ST.�FF CONTr1CT: Cher�l Caines Associate Planner (x2437) Phone: (5O3) 639-4171 Fat: (503) (24-3681 Email: cherylc tigard-or.gov MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 - SANDERS PARTITION - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting appro��al for a ��inor Land Parriaon to parririon one (1) e:�isting .35-acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-famil� residences. r1n existing residence on Parcel 1 will remain. The proposed lots are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet in size. LOCATION: 12390 SW 106`'' Drive; Washington Counry Tax Map 2S103r1A, Tax Lot 191 G. ZONE: R-4.5: The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessorv residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are pernutted conditionally. Some civic and institurional uses are also permitted condirionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. �ttached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your re�riew. From information supplied b}� various de�artments and a�encies and from other infc>rmarion a��ailable to our staff, a report and recommendarion will be pret�ared and a decision «�ill be rendered on the pronosal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: TUNE 9. 2009. You may use the space pro�rided below or attach a separatc letter to return �°our comments. If you are unable to res��nd h� the above date, please phone the staff contact noted aUo�-e with }�our comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have an}� questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: � Wc ha�re re�iewed thc �ioposal and ha�-e no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Pleasc rcfer to the enclosed letter or email. _ Written comments provided below: Name&Number of Person Commenting: �,�p1.� .�,1�1 Cheryl Caines From: Smith, Lynn [Lynn.Smith@qwest.com] Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 4:03 PM To: Cheryl Caines Subject: Request for Comment -" �� /T �..T ✓� _ti��. �•°r ��s r, ....-1r .'1 ar' �--`' Good day, In response to your request for comment on the following project. Sanders Partition MLP 2009-00001 This location falls outside of the Qwest serving area, therefore, we have no objection to this proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to review and respond. Lynn Smith Qwest Right of Way Oregon 503-242-6376 i � � . -� - ��:� REQUEST FOR COMMENTS , , � D;1TE: \-fa�r 26.2009 "1'O: John Cousine�u,Verizon OSP Net�vork 1=ROi�1: C�it�of'1'ignrd Pl�nnin�I�ivision s-r�rr c_o��i���CT: C'hci-��1 Clincs �\ssc�ciatc Plat�ner (�2�37) Phoue: (503) 639-4171 rax: (503) G24-3G81 Email: cherylc�u�a,.�, rd-or_.gov MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 - SANDERS PARTITION - REQUEST: TI1C 1l)k)11C:111C 1S TCC1UCSLIII�1�)pf0�'Rl EOl 8 �'IIIlOT L111CI P1Yt1t1011 t0}�1YtIC1011 OI1C (1) existing ,35-RCCC ti1tC lllt0 hvo (2) parcels for detached single-famil�� residences. An esisting residence on P1rce1 1 will reiiiain. The proposed lots �re 7,524 and 7,500 sc�uare Eec:t u� size. LOCATION: 12390 S��/ 10G`'' Dii��e; �V:iSlllll�t011 C,OUIlt}� "I'a� \fap 2S103f1r1, '1'ax Lot 191 G. ZONE: R-�.5: '1'he R-�}.5 xonu�g clisuict is desi��ed to accominodlte detached sui�;le-family honies �vith or �vitliotit accessor��reside�ttial ututs at a i�iitii�num lot size of 7,500 sqt�are feet. Duplexes ancl attached single-fnnulj' Ulll[S 11'C pernutted conditionall��. Soiiie civic and 'u�sritt�tion:�l uses :�re also permitted coiicliaonall}�. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Cn11111�1ll11C�' De�'C10��I11Cllt COC�e Ch�ipters 18.3)U, 18.�F20, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.730, 18J45, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicit�ity M�ip and Applicant's Materials for }��tll L'eV1C\V. FL'11111 1IlEO1I111C1011 Sll��i1CC� ti}� ��arious departments and a�encics and from other information a�>ailable ro out staff, a ieport 1nd reco►nmendation �vill be l�rei��reci aud a ciccision �vill be rendered on the prot�osal ui the near fiitt�re. If you ���ish to comment on tlus applicarion, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JUNE 9. 2009. 1'ou nlay use the space pco��ided belo�v or nttach a sepacate letter to renu�n ���ur comment,. If}�ou �re un�hle to res���nd by� the abc>ve date, �lease phone the staff contact noted abo��e �vitli �'Olit CcJt7llllellt5 :111C� COl1Eltlll j�our coi�u»etits ui �vriting :�s sooii as possib�e. If�TOLl IlA\'e :111�� quesrions, contict die"I'igard Planning Di��ision, 13125 SW Hall Boulc��lyd,"1'igard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: _ We ha��c re��iewed the proposll and h:►��e no objections to it. Plc�se contact of our officc, Please refer to the ciiclosed lctter or email. X ��/rittcn comtncnts pro�rided bclo�v: A REVIEW OF THE RECORDS INDICATE A 2 ' X3 ' VAULT ON THE CORNER IT IS THE AREA OF THE PURPOSED SIDEWALK. Namc&Nu�nbec of Pcrson Com�nentii�g: � . � : � � . REQUEST F�R C�MMENTS DATE: May 26. 2009 � Brian Rager,Assistant Public Works Director � City of Tigard Planning Division �.��y'..,��__.ti_- ..�,� .�' ti,.. � �' STr1FF CONT��C . Cher��l Caines rlssociate Planner (x24371 Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 62 -3G81 Email: chetylcntigard-or.gov _^-__ �.---1�-.^-`.i"`-.�-�-- MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 - SANDERS PARTITION - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval for a �luior Land Parririon to parririon one (1) e�isting .35-acre site into two (2) paxcels for detached single-family residences. r'�n existing residence on Parcel 1 will remain. The proposed lots are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet in size. LOCATION: 12390 SW 106``' Drive; Washington Counry Tax �1ap 2S103AA, Tax Lot 1916. ZONE: R-4.5: The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residenual units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-famil�� units are pemutted conditionally. Some civic and insritutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Communiry Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18J15, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. I'rom information supplied by various deparrments and a�encies and from other informarion aaailable to our staff, a report and recommendarion will be prepated and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this applicarion, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: TLTNE 9, 2009. �'ou may use the space provided below or attach a separate lettcr tc� return �-our comments. If�-�u are unable to res�ond b�� the above date, please phone the staff contact noted abo�-e �vith j-our comments and confirm }-our comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any quesrions, contact the Tigard Planning Di�rision, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: ✓ We ha�-e re�-ie�ved the proposal and ha�e no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed lctter or email. _ Written comments provided below: Name&Number of Person Commenring. � x �,, , � Brian Rager Subject: Sanders Partition (MLP 2009-00001) Start Date: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 Due Date: Friday, June 05, 2009 Status: Not Started Percent Complete: 0% Total Work: 0 hours Actual Work: 0 hours Owner: Rob Block; Theresa Reynolds; Vance Walker; Sam Morrison; John Goodrich Categories: Request for Comments This is a land use review request for comments. Not a lot for us to review. SS and Water mains are there to service the proposed second lot. There is no SD in the area, but they plan to weep the new lot drainage to the curb. 1 � : � � . REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: �1ay 26,2009 TO: Todd Prager,City Arborist FROM: Cit�of Tigard Planning Division STr1FF CONTACT: Cher��l Caines,��ssociate Planner (x2437) Phone: (503) G39-4171 FaY: (503) G24-3681 Email: cherylc ena.ti�ard-or.gov MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 - SANDERS PARTITION - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting appro�-al for a Minor Land Parririon to parririon one (1) existing .35-acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-family residences. l�n e�sting residence on Parcel 1 will remain. The proposed lots are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet in size. LOCATION: 12390 SW 10G`" Drive; Washington Counry Tax Map 2S103��, Tax Lot 1916. ZONE: R-4.5: The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot sir.e of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permittecl condirionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted condirionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Communiry Development Code Chapters 18390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. rlttached are the Site Plan, Viciniiy Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From informarion supplied by various departments and a encics and from other informarion available to our staff, a report and recommendarion will be pret�ared and a decision w�l Ue rendered on the proposal in thc near future. If you wish to comment on this applicarion, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JUNE 9, 2009. You may use the space provided below or attach a separare letter to return ���ur c�mments. If you are unable to res�ond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writ�ng as soon as possible. If you have any quesuons, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: _ We haee re�-iewed the proposal and ha�re no objecuons to it. � Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. _ Written comments provided below: Name&Number of Person Commenting: �� = MEMORANDUM � � � TO: Cheryl Caines FROM: Todd Prager, City l�rborist RE: Sanders Parrition DATE: May 26, 2009 r�s you requested I have provided comments on the "Sanders Partition" project. If you have any questions or concerns regarding my� comments please contact me anytime. 18.370.020 Adjustments C. Special adiustments. 6. Adiustments to landsca�ing re�uirements (Cha�ter 18.745� a. Adiustment to use of eadstrn�trees as street trees. By means oFa Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a reguest for the use ofexistrng trees to meet the street tree requirements rn Section 18.745.030 providrng there has been no cutting and fillrng around the tree during construction which may lead to its loss, unless the followrng can be demonstrated.• (1) The ground within the drrp-Irne is altered merely for dtainage purposes;and (2) It can be shoum that the cut or fill wrll not damage the roots and will not cause the tree to dre. N/�� b. Adjustment for street tree reauirements. By means ofa Type I procedure, as governed by Sectron 18.390.030, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for the adjustments to the street tree requrrements in Section 18.745.030, based on the followrng apptoval criteria: (1) Ifthe location ofa proposed tree would cause potential problems wrth existrng utility lines; (2) If the tree would cause visual clearance problems; or (3) If there is not adeguate space in which to plant street trees. N/r1 18.745.030 General Provisions C. Installation Rec�urrements. The installation ofall landscaping shall be as follows: 1. All landscaping shall be rnstalled according to accepted planting procedures. The accepted planting procedures are the guidelines described in the Tigard Tree Manual. These guidelines follow those set forth by the Internarional Society of r�rboriculture (ISA) tree planting guidelines as well as the standards set forth in the rlmerican Institute of �rchitects' '�rchitectural Graphic Standards, 10�h edition. In the ��rchitectural Graphic Standards there are guidelines for selecting and planting trees based on the soil volume and size at maturitv. Additionally, there are directions for soil amendments and modifications. 2. The plant material shall be ofhygh grade, and shall meet the size and gradrng standards of the American Standards for Nurberg Stock(ANSI Z-60, 1-1986, and any other future revisions);and 3. Lar�dscaping shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of this trtle. D. Certifrcate ofOccu�anc�Certificates ofoccupancy shall not be issued unless the landscaping requirements have been met or other arrangements have been made and approved by the Clty such as the postrng of a bond. 18.745.040, Street Trees This requirement has not been met. Street trees need to be shown on the plans with spacing appropriately scaled. The arborist's sketch is not to scale, and therefore I am unable to determine if the placement of the street trees meets our Code requirements. It is acceptable for them to include a note on their street tree plan that slight variations in placement may be required due to driveways, utilities, etc., but every attempt will be made to keep the same species and net number of street trees that are shown on the plans. Page 2 of 9 18.745.050., Bufferrng and Screenin� N/� 18.790.030,. Tree Plan Rec�uirement A. Tree�lan rec�uired. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protectron of trees prepared by a certrfred arborrst shall be provided for any lot,parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdrvrsron, partition, site development review,planned development ot conditional use is filed. Protection is pteferred over removal wherever possible. 11s required, the applicant has provided a tree plan conducted by Gary Drendel, a certified arborist. However, the tree plan does not contain all of the required elements. B. Plan re�'uirements. The tree plan shall include the following.• 1. Identification ofthe location, size and species ofall existing trees including trees desrgnated as significant by the city; This requirement has been met. 2. Identification ofa program to save existing trees ormitigate tree removal over 12inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacementgurdelrnes ofSection 18.790.060D, in accordance wrth the followrng standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and patkrng lots: a. Retentron of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches Jn caliper requires a mitigation ptogram in accordance wrth Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees; b. Retention offrom 25% to 50% ofexisting trees over IZinches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance wrth Section 18.790.060D; c. Retention of from 50% to 75% ofexrsting trees over 12inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mrtigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D; d. Retentron of75% orgreater ofe�sting trees over 12inches in callperreguires no mitigation. This requirement has not been met. Page 3 of 9 Based on the alternatives provided in the arborist report, mitigation will be required as follows: Alternative 1— 5 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 83.3% retention, no mitigation required Alternative 2 —4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required 50% x 27" removed = 13.5" of mitigation required Alternative 3 —4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required 50% x 37" removed = 18.5" of mitigation required Alternative 4— 3 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 50% retention, 50% mitigation required 50% � 50" removed = 25.0" of mitigation required The applicant will need to provide a mitigation plan with a signature of approval from the project arborist that meets the replacement requirements in 18.790.060D. A cash assurance for the equivalent amount of rrutigation will be required at the rate of$125 per inch to be mitigated. Trees that are required by other code provisions such as street trees are not eligible for mitigation credit. 3. Identificatlon ofall trees whlch are proposed to be removed; This requirement has been met. 4. A protection program defining standards and methods that wrll be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. This requirement has not been met. The tree protecrion specifications and tree protection fencing dimensions in the arborist report need be transferred accurately to the plans (to scale) and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. 18.790.040 Incentives for Tree Retention A. Incentives. To assist in the preservatron and retention of existing trees, the Director may apply one or more of the following incentives as part of development review approval and the provisions ofa tree plan according to Section 18.790.030: 1. Density bonus. For each 2% ofcanopy coverprovided by existing trees over 12 Inches in calrper that are preserved and incorporated into a development plan, a 1% bonus may be applred to density computations of Chapter 18.715. No more than a 20% bonus may be granted for any one development. The percentage densrty bonus shall be applied to the number of dwelling units allowed rn the underlying zone. This bonus is not applicable to trees preserved rn areas offl'oodplain, slopes greater than Page4of9 25%, drainageways, or wetlands that would otherwrse be precluded from development; 2. Lot size averaging. To retarn exrsting trees over 12 inches in caliper rn the development plan for any land division under Chapter 18.400, lot srze may be averaged to allow lots less than the tninimum lot size allowed by the underlyrng zone as long as the average lot area for all lots and private open space is not less than that allowed by the underlying zone. No lot area shall be less than 80% of the minimum lot size allowed in the zone; 3. Lot width and depth. To retain existing trees over 12 inches in caliper in the development plan for any land division under Chapter 18.400, lot wrdth and lot depth may be reduced up to 20% of that required by the underlyrng zone; 4. Commercial/industrial/civic use parktng. For each 2% ofcanopy cover provided by existing trees over 12inches in calrper that are preserved and incorporated into a development plan for commercial, industrial or civic uses listed in Section 18.765.080, Minimum and Maarimum Off-Street Parkrng Requirements, a 1%reduction in the amount ofrequired parl�ng may be granted. No more than a 20%reduction in the required amount ofparking may be granted for any one development; 5. Commercial/industrial/civic use landscaping. For each 2% ofcanopy cover provrded by existing trees over 12 inches in caliper that are preserved and incorporated into a development plan, a 1%reduction in the required amount of landscaprng may be granted. No more thar120% of the required amount of landscaping may be reduced for any one development. No incentives have been requested. B. Subse�uent removal ofa tree. Any tree preserved or retarned in accordance with thrs sectron may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance wrth Section 18.790.030, or as a condition oFapproval for a conditional use, and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property oumer shall record a deed restrrction as a condition ofapproval ofar�y development permrt affected by this section to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or wrll be considered invalid ifa tree preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director. A condition of approval will ensure that this standard is met. 18.790.050 Permit A�plicabrlitv Page 5 of 9 A. Removal�ermit rec�uired. Tree removal petmits shall be required only For the removal ofany tree which is located on or rn a sensitive land atea as de�ned by Chapter 18.775. The pernvt for temoval ofa tree shall be processed as a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, using the followrng approval crlteria: 1. Removal of the tree must not have a measurable negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow ofsurface waters or water quality as evidenced by an erosion control plan which precludes: a. Deposits ofmud, dirt, sediment or similar material exceedrng 1/Z cubic foot in volume on public or private streets, adjacent property, or into the storm and surface water system, either by direct deposit, dropping, discharge or as a result of the action of erosion; b. Evidence of concentrated fl'ows of water over bate soils; turbid or sediment- laden flows;or evrdence ofon-site erosion such as rivulets on bare soiJ slopes where the fl'ow of water is not frltered or captured on site usrng the techniques of Chapter 5 of the Washington County Unified Sewerage Agency Envrronmental Protection and Erosion Control rules. 2. Wrthrn stream or wetland cortrdors, as defrned as 50 feet from the boundary of the stream or wetland, tree removal must maintain no less than a 75% canopy cover or no less than the existing canopy cover if the existing canopy cover is less than 75%. B. Effective date of�etmrt. A tree temoval petmit shall be effective for one and one-halfyears from the date ofapproval. C. Extension. Upon written request by the applicant prror to the exprration ofthe existrng permit, a tree removal permit shall be extended for a period of up to one year if the Director finds that the applrcant is in compliance with all prior condrtrons of permit approval and that no materral facts stated in the orrgrnal application have changed. D. Removal�ermit not re�uired. A tree removal permrt shall not be reguired for the removal ofa tree whrch: 1. Obsttucts vrsual clearance as defrned in Chapter 18.795 of the trtle; 2. Is a hazardous tree; 3. Is a nuisance affectrng publre safety as defined in Chaptet 7.40 of the Munrcipal Code; Page 6 of 9 4. Is used for Christmas tree production, or land regrstered with the Washington CountyAssessor's offrce as tax-deferred tree farm or small woodlands, but does not stand on sensitive lands. E. Prohibrtion of commercial forestry. Commercial forestry as defined by Sectron 18.790.020 A.2., excluding D.4. above, is not permitted. This requirement does not appear to be applicable to this project. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Street Trees This requirement has not been met. Street trees need to be shown on the plans with spacing appropriately scaled. The arborist's sketch is not to scale, and therefore I am unable to determine if the placement of the street trees meets our Code requirements. It is acceptable for them to include a note on their street tree plan that slight variations in placement may be required due to driveways, utilities, etc., but every attempt will be made to keep the same species and net number of street trees that are shown on the plans. Tree Mitigation This requirement has not been met. Based on the alternatives provided in the arborist report, mitigation will be required as follows: Alternative 1— 5 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 83.3% retention, no mitigation required Alternative 2—4 of 6 trees over 12.0" cliameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required 50% x 27" removed = 13.5" of mitigation required Alternative 3 —4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required 50% x 37" removed = 18.5" of mitigation required Alternative 4— 3 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 50% retention, 50% mitigation required 50% x 50" removed = 25.0" of mitigation required r� cash assurance for the equivalent amount of mitigation will be required at the rate of$125 per inch to be mitigated. Page 7 of 9 Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of miugation required. 1-�ny trees successfully planted on or off-site, in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and TDC 18.790.060.D, will be credited against the assurance two years after all of the trees are planted per the approved Tree Nlitigation Plan. The Tree Mitigation Plan shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist and be due for review and approval prior to tree planting or the issuance of building permits, whichever is first. The mitigation proposal shall show the species, locarion, and spacing of mitigation trees in relation to buildings, infrastructure, exisring trees, street trees, and each other. �-�fter the plan is approved and the trees are planted, the project arborist shall submit a letter to the Ciry tlrborist to cerufy that all of the mirigarion trees were properly planted per the approved Tree Mitigation Plan in order to set the starting point of the two year tree establishment period. 1-�fter the two year establishment peric>d, the applicant shall pro�ride a re-inventory of the mitigation trees conducted by a certified arborist in order to document mitigation tree survival, and compliance with the approved Tree �Iitigation Plan. The remaining value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in-lieu of planting from the original cash assurance. Tree Protection This requirement has not been met. The tree protection specifications and tree protection fencing dimensions in the arborist report need be transferred accurately to the plans (to seale) and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. The applicant shall position fencing as clirected by the project arborist to protect the trees to be retained. The applicant shall allow access by the Ciry�rborist for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protecrion to verify that the rree protecrion measures are performing adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or maintain tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for immediate suspension of work on the site until remediation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely unpacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the Ciry Arborist before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arborist may require changes prior to approval. The project arborist shall be on site while work is occurring within the tree protection zone and submit a summary report certifying that the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and/or stability of the trees. This note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicating the locations of trees that were preserved on the lot during site development. In addition, the plans shall include accurate locations of tree canopy driplines and protection fencing, and Page 8 of 9 a signature of approval from the project arborist regarding the placement and construction techniques to be employed in building the structures. l�ll proposed protection fencing shall be installed and inspected prior to commencing construction. The fencing shall remain in place through the duration of all of the building construction phases, until the Certificate of Occupancy has been approved. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall submit a final report by the Project�rborist certifying the health of protected trees and that the street trees were properl3� planted per the approved street tree plan. Tree protection measures may be removed and final inspection authorized upon review and approval by the City 1-�rborist. The applicant shall have an on-going responsibiliry to ensure that the Project 1-�rborist has submitted written reports to the City 1'�rborist, at least once every two weeks, as the Project 1-�rborist monitors the construcrion activities from inirial tree protecrion zone ('I'PZ) fencing installation through the building construction phases. The reports shall evaluate the condition and location of the tree protection fencing, determine if any changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced, then the Project r�rborist shall cerrify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted to the Ciry Arborist at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protecrion Plan are not being followed by the contractor or a sub-contractor, the City can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the City Arborist and the Project r�rborist. Prior to final inspection for each lot, the applicant shall submit a final report by the Project��rborist certifying the health of protected trees and that the street trees were properly planted per the approved street tree plan. '1'ree protection measures may be removed and final inspection authorized upon review and approval by the City Arborist. Deed Restriction Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant/owner shall record deed resrrictions to the effect that any e�sting tree greater than 6" diameter may be rem�ved only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. Page 9 of 9 ' • ' \-� /�� ��� CleanWater Services RECEIVED PLANNING Our cciiinuitnic�nt iti c�c��r. JUN 10 2009 M E M O R A N D U M C�Ty OF TIGARD Date: June 8, 2009 To: Cheryl Caines, Associate Pl nner, City of Tigard From: Jackie Sue Humphrey lean Water Services (the District) Subject: Sanders Yartition, MLP 2009-00001, 2S103AA01916 Please include the following comments when writing your conditions of approval: PRIOR TO ANY WORK ON THE SITE AND PARTITION PLAT RECORDING A Clean Water Services(the District) Storm Water Connection Permit Authorization must be obtained prior to plat approval and recordation. Application for the District's Permit Authorization must be in accordance with the requirements of the Design and Construction Standards, Resolution and Order No. 07-20, (or current R&O in effect at time of En�ineering plan submittal), and is to include: a. Detailed plans prepared in accordance with Chapter 2, Section 2.04.2.b-l. b. Detailed grading and erosion control plan. An Erosion Control Permit will be required. Area of Disturbance must be clearly identified on submitted construction plans. If site area and any offsite improvements required for this development exceed one-acre of disturbance, project will require a 1200-C Erosion Control Permit. c. Detailed plans showing each lot within the development having direct access by gravity to public storm and sanitary sewer. d. Provisions for water quality in accordance with the requirements of the above named design standards. Water Quality is required for all new development and redevelopment areas per R&O 07-20, Section 4.05.5, Table 4-l. Access shall be provided for maintenance of facility per R&O 07-20, Section 4.02.4. e. If private lot LIDA systems proposed, must comply with the current CWS Design and Construction Standards. A private maintenance agreement, for the proposed private lot LIDA systems, needs to be provided to the City for review and acceptance. 255o SW Hillsboro Highway• Hilisboro, Oregon 97123 Phone: (503) 681-3600• Fax: (503)681-3603 •www.CleanWaterServices.org f. Show all existing and proposed easements on plans. Any required storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water quality related easements must be granted to the City. g. Any proposed offsite construction activities will require an update or amendment to the current Service Provider Letter for this project. CONCLUSION This Land IJse Review does not constitute the District's approval of storm or sanitary sewer compliance to the NPDES permit held by the District. The District, prior to issuance of any connection permits, must approve final construction plans and drainage calculations. � June 8, 2009 R�r�I�/�j1 � � U y �J JUN 0 g 2009 ClTY 4F TI�AFiD ��.�rd����w:��rI�GI�sEEl�I(�G Cheryl Caines Associate Planner(X-2437) Planning Division City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 FILE NO.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 FILE TITLE: SANDERS PARTITION Dear Ms. Caines, This letter is in response to the proposed minor land partition as referenced above. I am against issuing a conditional permit to build a single family home or duplex on said property for reasons as addressed below. This development was built in the 1960's with the idea of having space with your home, not to be five feet away from your neighbor. By allowing this conditional use, it will change the look of this neighborhood and lower property values. It is a neighborhood where all of the homes blend in and they all have beautiful yards. It is a "Green" development, let's not destroy it. It appears to me that the owner of this property had to be creative to come up with the proposed site for this lot. In order to do this, it appears they are using some space behind the existing house to gain the necessary space for the additional lot. Again, I voice my objection to this proposal. Sincerely, Garry L. H Imer 10585 SW Walnut St. Tigard, OR 97223 503-620-2684 I Cain � Chery es From: Dick Pearson [dpearson32@integrity.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:15 PM To: Cheryl Caines Subject: Sanders Partition Cheryl Caines Associate Planner Planning Division City of Tigard Subject: Sanders Partition Dear Cheryl, As I have talked with several neighbors with property facing 12390 SW 106th Dr, none have expressed concern with partitioning of the property. Most of us are quite long term residents who really appreciate our city and neighborhood. A potential concern is that the residence to be built would fit in well with our existing neighborhood. We assume this will be his plan and have no reason to anticipate any problem. So, I request the courtesy of the owner to share the general residence construction plans with our close neighbors so we can respond with any concerns or suggestions. In my experience, this has been a very positive step in the process, for both owner and neighbors. Thank you for sharing this request with them as they move ahead with these plans. Yours Truly, Richard Pearson 12330 SW 106th Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 P.S. Thank you for your reply, confirming this has been received. i MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: G/9/09 TO: Cheryl Caines, rlssociate Planner FROM: I�iin �ic�lillan, llevelopment Reeiew Engineer RE: MLP2009-00001 Sanders Access Management (Section 18.705.030.H� Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT,Washington Counry, the Ciry and AASHTO. The applicant proposes to retain the existing drive�ua�- for Parcel 1 and to provide an additional driveway for Parcel2. Both driveways pro��ide access to SW 10G`'' Drive, a local street with less than 2,000 .�llT. The applicant's engineer has submitted a sight distance report showing that the proposed dri��eway exceeds the required 250 feet of sight distance to the narth but it limited to 190 feet to the south by a crest cunre. Consequendy, the applicant shall move the dri��eway to Johnson Street to achieve adequate sight distance or apply for a variance to this Code section. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from Ciry Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. This property is not located on a collector or arterial street; therefore the standard does not appl��. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. ENGINEF.RtNG CO;�fi�fI;NTS i�fl.P 3OC19-00001 Sanders P:�GE 1 The propert��is not located on a collector or arterial and is not constructing a local street; therefore this standard does not app1�-. Sueet And Utiliry Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as stteets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a local street to have a 54-foot right-of-way width and 32-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting,storm drainage, and street trees. This site is at the intersection of SW 106``' Drive and Johnson Street. Both are classified as a local street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, both streets have approxirnately 25 feet of right-of-way from centerline, accorciing to the most recent tax assessor's map. r1n additional two feet of right-of-way is required to comply with current local street standards. l�pplicant states that the "skinny street" standards of Table 18.810.1 of 18.810.030.E allow SW 106`" Dri�re and iohnson Street to remain with a ri�ht-of-wa��width of 50 feet. Howe�er, Note 3 of the table allows the reduced width only if certain cross secrion criteria are met. �leeting the required criteria along a street fronting the site is not feasible. r'�pproval of the reduced width would require the applicant to meet the adjustment approval criteria of 18.370.020 C.11. 'I'he addirional two feet of right-of-way dedication would not allow for the minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. The minunum lot size could be achieved b��allowing the additionall`� required two feet of width to be placed within a public sidewalk easement. Both streets are currendy improved with a 32-foot paved width and curbs but without sidewalks. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should plant street trees, enter into a future streets improvement agreement for the remaining improvements and provide a two-foot wide public sidewalk easement along both frontages. ENGINEERING C0�11�fENTS i�1L.P 2009-00001 Sanders P�GE 2 Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the uact to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the properry owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the Ciry Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street consttuction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. The property is surrounded b�- e�cisting residenrial de��elopment. There are no opportuniries or needs for future streets or extensions of streets through this propertj'• Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full stteet connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local, neighbothood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topo�raphical constraints, the mere ptesence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. 'I1ie propern-is surrounded bt' e�isting residenrial de�relopment. "I'here are no opportuniries or needs for future streets or extensions of streets through this propern-. Cul-de-sacs: 18.810.030.L states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and through circulation: • All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other than circular,shall be approved by the City Engineer; and ENGIN�:�:RING CO�il'�ZENTS i�1I.P 2009-00001 Sandcrs P�1GE 3 • The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured from the centerline intersection point of the two streets to the radius point of the bulb, and • If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street may be reyuired to be provided and dedicated to the City. No cul-de-sacs are proposed. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wedands or other bodies of water or,pre-existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial sueets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. PI.�NNING Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. PI.ANNING Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. PL�INNING Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of fronta�e on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partit�on, 18.420.OSO.A.4.c a�plies, which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a mimmum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. PL�INNING Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local ENGINEERING COI�ZI�IL:NTS iVII,P 2009-00001 Sanders P�GE 4 residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant shall enter into a future street improvement agreement for SW 106`h Drive and Johnson Street,which will include public sidewalks, thereb�� meeting this criterion. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is a public sewer line located in SW 106th Drive and a lateral that sen-es the e�isting home. The applicant's plans show a proposed lateral from the existing sewer to serve Parcel 2. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage faciliry shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream drainage way s that impact this development. ENGINF.F.RING COMMENTS I�TL,P 2009-00001 Sanders Pr1GE 5 Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Seraices (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impenrious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-y�ear e�rent. The City will require that all new developments resulung in an increase of imper�rious surfaces pro�•ide onsite detention facilities,unless the de�relopment is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those de�relopments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge �vithout detenrion. The CWS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residenrial land partirions. It would be unpractical to require an on-site water quanury facility to accommodate detention of the storm water from the two parcels. Rather, the CWS standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of construcung a faciliry if deemed appropriate. Staff recommends pay�ment of the fee in-lieu on this application. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction,high capaciry electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utiliry to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and ENGINEERING CO1�Zi�1ENTS �II.P 2009-00001 Sanders Pr1GE 6 technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the bene�t of under- grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are e�cisting overhead utilin� lines along the frontage of SW Johnson Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it must be appro�red by Mike I�ZcCarthy, Right-of-Way�dininistrator, and it is equal to �35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 99.66 lineal feet; therefore the fee�vould be �3,488. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Fire and Life Safetv: Tualatin �'alle�- Fire and Rescue (South Dieision) [Contact:John Dalb��, 503-356-4723� pro�=ides fire protecrion senrices within the Cin� of Tigard. There is an existing hydrant on the northwest corner of the site. The District should be contacted for informauon regarding the adequacy of the distribution system, the need for fire hydrants, or other requirements. Public Water System: Water service is pro�rided by the Cit�- of Tigard. The a�rlicant j�rn�c�ses r� c�nrinue to use the existing senrice for Lot 1 and install an additional sen ice from the e�sting main in SW 106th Drive to sen-e I.ot 2. Storm Water Qualit� The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (Resolution and Order No. 07-20) which require the construction of on-site water qualiry facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the faciliry maintained through the year. The CWS standards include a pro�-ision that would exclude small projects such as residenrial land partitions. It would be impractical to require an on-site water quality facility to accommodate treatment of the storm water from the site. Rather, the CWS standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facilit�� if deemea appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this application. Grading and Erosion Control: ENGINEERING COi�1MENTS i�ILL,P 2009-00001 Sanders Pr�GE 7 CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and apptoval prior to issuance of Ciry permits. r1n Lrosion Control Plan must be submitted with the PFI Permit application for review and approval. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the Cin' of Tigard. An addressing fee in the amount of�50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City-prior to final plat approval. Survey Reyuirements The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates [NI�D 83 (91)] on two monuments with a tie to the Cin�'s global posirioning s��stem (GPS) geoderic control network (GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: • GPS rie networked to the City's GPS survey. • 13�-random traverse using convenrional surve}�ing methods. In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall pro�-ide the Cin•with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valt�es, h��drants and other water system features) in the development,and their respecrive 1 and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). Kccommcndarions: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan,639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: r� Public Facilin� Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover utility laterals and any other work in the public right-of-wa��. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for re�-iew to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addirion to an�• drawings required b}� the Builciing Di�-ision and should onl�� include sheets rele�-ant to public impro��ements. Public Facilih� Impro�rement (PF� permit plans shall conform to Ciry of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at Ciry Hall and the City's��veb page (www.tigard-or.gov). ENGINEERING COiv11�1ENTS 1��.P 2009-00001 Sanders P?�GE 8 . The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone nutnber of the indi�-idual or corporate enrity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who �vill provide the fmancial assurance for the public impro�rements. For example, specify if the enrit�� is a corporarion, limited partnership, LLC, etc. .�lso specify the state within �vhich the enrit�- is incorporated and pro��ide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate informarion to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. . The applicant shall pro��ide a construcrion vehicle access and parking plan for approval b�- the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public impro�rement constn�crion phase. . Prior to final plat appro�-a1, the applicant shall pa}- the adciressing fee. (ST1�FF CONT��CT: Bethan�� Ste�vart, Engineering). . Prior to final plat approaal, the applicant shall plant street trees along the frontage of SW 106th Drive and Johnson Street. . The applicant shall execute a Restricrive Covenant agreeing to complete or parricipate in the future improvements of SW 106th Avenue and Johnson Street adjacent to the subject property,when any of thc following events occur: A. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for b`� the formarion of a Local Improvement District, B. when the unprovements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for in whole or in part by the City or other public agency, C. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be constructed by a third party and involves the sharing of design and/or construcrion expenses b�- the third part��owner(s) of property-in addirion to the subject propert�',or D. when construction of the improvements is deemed t� be appropriate b�� the Cin� Engineer in conjuncrion with construcrion of improvements by others adjacent to the subject site. . The applicant shall obtain approval from the City of Tigard for the proposed water connecrion prior to issuance of the Cit��'s Public Facilin� Improvement permit. A plan for disposal of the storm water runoff from the proposed house on Lot 2 shall be pro�-ided as part of the Public Facilin- Improvement (PF� perniit drawings for re�riew and approval. l�n erosion control plan shall be pro�-ided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PF� permit dra�vings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevenrion and Sediment Control Design and Planning I�lanual, February 2003 edirion." . The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a rie to the City's global posirioning system (GPS) geoderic control network (GC 22) as recorded in Washington Count�� suroey records. T'hese monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for thc subdi�rision plat boundary. rllong with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to coneert ENGINEERING C01�4MENTS I�II.P 2009-00001 Sanders PAGE 9 ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. "1'hese coordinates can be established b��: • GPS rie networked to the Ciri�'s GPS sun�ev. • By random traverse using conventional surne}-ing methods. . Final Plat rlpplicarion Submission Requirements: A. Submit for City re��iew four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared b��a land sur�-eyor licensed to pracrice in Oregon, and necessar�'data or narrari�-e. B. Attach a check in the amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Planning/Engineering Permit Technicians, at (503) G39-4171,e�t.2421). C. The final plat and data or narrari��e shall be drawn to the ininimum standards set forth by the Oregon Re�-ised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington Count��, and b�- the Cit��of Tigard. D. The plat shall create public sidewalk easements along the frontages of SW 106`'' Drive and Johnson Street of sufficient width to pro��ide 27 feet from centerline when combined with the existing right-of-�va��. E. NOTE: Washington County� will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from the Engineering Department indicating that the City has revicwed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's surveyor. F. rlfter the City and Count�� have re�-iewed the final plat, submit one paper copy of the final plat for Cin- Engineer signature (for partirions), or City Engineer and Community Development Director signatures (for subdi��isions). THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan,639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pro�ride thc I�.ngineering Department with a paper copy of the recorded final plat. The City Engineer ma�- determine the necessin- for, and require submittal and approval of, a construcrion access and parking plan for the home building phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary, the applicant shall provide the plan prior to issuance of building permits. ENGINEERING COMMENTS ML,P 3009-00001 Sanders Pr�GE 10 Prior to a final building inspecrion, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain condirional acceptance from the Cih-, and pro�ride a one-year maintenance assurance for said impro�-ements. The applicant shall either place the existing o�-erhead utility lines along SW Johnson Street underground as a part of this project, or contact �1ike �icCarthj� (Right-of-Way Adininistrator) to detennule if the�� will be allowed to pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. �l�he fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be � 35.00 per lineal foot If the fee oprion is allowed, tlie amount will be�3,488 and it shall be paid prior to issuance of builciing permits. During issuance of the building permit for Parcel2, the applicant shall pay the standard water qualit�-and water quanrity fees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest approved by CWS). ENGINEERING COMMEN'I'S MI.P 2009-00001 Sanders PAGE 11 ., AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE ° OF A LAND USE PROPOSAL . � . IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED ON THE SITE. In the Matter of the Proposed Land Use Applicarions for: Land Use File Nos.: MLP2009-00001 Land Use File Name: SANDERS PARTITION I, Cheryl Caines, Associate Planner for the Cit� of Ti�ard, do affirm that I posted norice of the land use proposal affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or ta.x lot(s) currendy registered) y��' � � 5�.� �u�::�-�"`' /�-�-� and did personally post norice of the proposed land use applicarion(s) by means of weatherproof posting in the general vicinity of the affected territory, a copy of said notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the ��'� day of r'�C 4 ,2009. C'�t,,u c., C� � C�.�.. �� Signatur of Person Who Performed Posting �i:Uo�,nn\patq�\mastcrs\aEt3dacit of pos[uig for applicant tu post public heacu�g.doc SANDERS PARTITIDN r MINOR LAND PARTITON MLP 2009-00001 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval for a Minor Land Partition to partition one (1) existing .35-acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single- family residences. An existing residence on Parcel 1 will remain. The proposed lots are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet in size. LOCATION: 12390 SW 1��t�l Drive; Washington County Tax Map 2S103AA, Tax Lot 1916. ZONE: R-4.5: The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.� J, 18.795and18.810. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Cheryl Caines, Associate Planner (x2437� at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171 or by email to ehe o le o,ti�ard-or.gov. A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are ! available for inspection at no cost and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. � Area Notified (500 Ft) /,� m oc� MEADOW ST � OREGON LAND LAW 2S103AA 01916 i;:;;::;:`' � � —�\ 1 � O Subject Site Property owner information is valid for 3 months from the date printed on pO this map. .......::. ..::.:::�:'::�::'�::�:'�:' ' '•::.�'�.,. . ., �::!'':�'r:• y F � Q,J�' Map Prin[ed OS/12/2009 N��S� �`�h Information on this map is for general location only and should be verRied with the Development �P� Services oivision. NO``' DATAISDEFNEDFROMMULTIPLESOURCES THECITVOfTIGARD �t` M4KES NOT WFRRANTY.REPRESENTAPON.OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE Q�,� � CONTENT ACCUFACV,TIMEUNESS OR COMPLETENE55 OF ANV OF THE DATAPftOVIDEDHEREIN THECITVOFTIGARDSNALLASSUMENO � LIBABLAV FORANY ERRORS OMISSIONS OR INACCl1RACIE5IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDIESS OF HOW CAIISED. ; COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT -� � n1 P Ciry of Tigard T�6�DMAPS 'T9503639>i 123d t n 0 300 fi00 www.tigardor.gov 2S103AA03800 2S1026CO2004 ABRAHAM,BART&DARCIE CARMICHAEL,LINDA 8 JOSEPH 12295 SW 106TH DR 10680 SW FONNER ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01912 2S102BB00813 AGNESSE,PHILIPPE&RACHEL COFFMAN,RIE 10455 SW JOHNSON ST 10340 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25102BC05400 2S102BC05300 AUDRITSH,JEREMY 8 CYNTHIA A COOLEY,CRAIG L&JUNE E 12555 SW PATHFINDER CT 4147 CASEY CT TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE 05WEG0,OR 97034 2S103AA01914 2S102BCO2000 BAKER,DEBRA JO COSENZA,JENNIFER L 10490 SW JOHNSON ST 10690 SW FONNER ST PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03900 2S1026C05600 BARICEVIC,JOHN/KAY REV LIV TRUS CURTIN,ROBIN L& BY JOHN J/KAY F BARICEVIC TRS CURTIN,KENNETH J 12285 SW 106TH DR 14355 F05BERG RD TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 2S102BC00107 2S103AA01911 BISSETT,CRAIG ALLEN DIAZ-CORTES,ALEJANDRO 10295 SW BROOKSIDE CT 10515 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA04100 2S102BC00106 BOYER,SANDRA RAE DICKMAN,ALFRED E 8 CLAUDIA H 12244 SW CLYDESDALE CT 10290 SW BROOKSIDE CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA04200 2S103AA04300 BRADEN,DONALD W LIVING TRUST DUNN,STEPHEN W AND BY DONALD W DRADEN TR HALPERN,MICHAEL L 12238 SW CLYDESDALE CT 29572 AVANTE TIGARD,OR 97223 LAGUNA NIGUEL,CA 92677 2S103AA03000 25103AA01909 BROWN,JEANETTE M FLATTERS,JAMES G 10485 SW CLYDESDALE PL LORAINE M TIGARD,OR 97223 12385 SW 106TH DR TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01908 2S102BC05200 BRUGGER,JUDITH C&JOHN A GONZALEZ,SEJIS 12355 SW 106TH DR 12515 SW PATHFINDER CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1026600812 2S1026600700 GRAVES,MICHAEL R AND LAWTON,MARY JANE JANINE D NOW SKELTON 10300 SW BROOKSIDE PL 10355 SW WALNUT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA019D0 2S103AA02400 HADDOCK,GLEN RICHARDS AND LEFEVER,WILLIAM JAMES KATHRYN RUTH TRUSTEES 12270 SW 106TH DR 10495 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01800 2S103AA040D0 HALL,BRIAN E&IRENA M LEW,ON YONG FOWN HAH 10675 SW FONNER ST 12255 SW 106TH DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01902 2S103AA03500 HATANAKA,BARRY LEWIS,GARY JAMES RURIKO 10490 SW CLYDESDALE PL 10625 SW WALNUT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01901 2S103AA03600 HELMER,GARRY L BARBARA S LINDQUIST,ROGER A MARILY 10585 SW WALNUT 10520 SW CLYDESDALE PL T�GARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BB00826 2S103AA02500 KELLEHER, DANIEL V 8 KATHRYN K MACFARLAND,ELSA TR 10465 SW JOHNSON CT 10525 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02700 2S102BC00105 KNOX,CARL J MACK,DAVID J&LORI A FLORA L 10260 SW BROOKSIDE CT 10505 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BC01806 2S103AA01906 KRALL,FRED&PATRICIA HELEN MARTIN,RICHARD E 12560 SW PATHFINDER CT 12320 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02600 2S103AA01904 KREBS,AMY K MARTINI,MATTHEW S/KATHERINE B& 10515 SW CLYDESDALE PL MARTINI,ROBERT C/VIRGINIA M TIGARD,OR 97223 10675 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01915 2S103AA02300 LAMBERT,ROBERT A&GEORGIA C MIRPOURIAN,MAZIEH&ZAHRA 10530 SW JOHNSON PO BOX 8552 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97207 zs�o2acossoo zs�ozaeoosia NASS,KARI ROBINSON,JAY G&BRIGITA A 12575 SW PATHFINDER CT 12180 SW 127TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03700 2S1026CO2D03 NEWTON, ELIZABETH A SAKHITAB,HOMA 12300 SW 106TH DR 10700 SW FONNER ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03400 2S103AA01916 NICOLI,EDNA SUZANNE SANDERS,STEVEN W& 10470 SW CLYDESDALE PL SANDERS,BARBARA SWANSON TIGARD,OR 97224 2647 SW TALBOT RD PORTLAND,OR 97201 2S102BC05700 2S102BC01805 NYSSEN,BENJAMIN J& SCHRADER,MARCUS J NYSSEN,AMBER C 12490 SW 129TH ST 12615 SW PATHFINDER CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BCO2002 2S103AA01917 OLSEN,KENNETH E SHELLEDY LIVING TRUST OLSEN,SANDRA L BY RODNEY/JEANNINE SHELLEDY TRS 10640 SW WALNUT 12440 SW 106TH DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BCO2001 2S103AA04400 OTT,PENNY N STOVER,LAWRENCE& 10540 SW WALNUT ST SHARON LIVING TRUST TIGARD,OR 97223 11700 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01913 2S103AA01801 PARTRIDGE,SCOTT SUNDAY,MELVIN R BARBARA PO BOX 781 PO BOX 230995 JEFFERSON,OR 97352 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S103AA01910 2S102BCO2005 PEARSON,RICHARD E&MARY ANN TR TA,LEE 12330 SW 106TH DR 10620 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S103AA02200 2S1026CO2006 PRICE,SHARON L&DONALD R THOMAS,BRENDA S&JAMES L 12250 SW 106TH DR PO BOX 230073 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97281 2S103AA01907 2S1026C01807 RINGER,JERRY L THOMAS,MARC C 8 CAROL A 12325 SW 106TH DR 10360 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02800 THURSTON,MILDRED TRUSTEE 10495 SW CLYDESDALE PLACE TIGARD,OR 97223 2 1026C06700 TI RD, OF 1312 HALL BLVD T RD, R 97223 2 03AA029 TIGA Y OF 1312 ALL BLVD T RD,O 97223 2 103AA01 TIG D TY OF 131 HALL BLVD ARD,O 97223 103AA017 1 TI D Y OF 131 W HALL BLVD T ARD, 97223 2S103AA00101 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT#23J 6960 5W SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 25103AA03100 VAZQUEZ,MIGUEL A& GUEST, MELISSA 10475 SW CLY�ESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03200 VILLALOBOS,MAURICIO& VALORIE 10465 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03300 WEEKLEY,TIMOTHY E 10450 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01905 YORK, DANIEL UKATHLEEN S 1000 MADISON ST NEWBERG,OR 97132 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136�h Place Tigard, OR 97224 Don & Dorothy Erdt 13760 SW 121 st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139'h Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Martha Bishop 10590 SW Cook Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Vanessa Foster 13085 SW Howard Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Susan Beilke 11755 SW 114�h Place Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 Patricia Keerins 12195 SW 121 st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Todd Harding and Blake Hering Jr. Norris Beggs & Simpson 121 SW Morrison, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97204 CITY OF TIGARD - CENTRAL INTERESTED PARTIES (i:lcurpinlsetup\IabeIslCIT Central.doc) UPDATED: 16-Dec-08 05/12/2009 09:15 FA� 503 914 0474 OREGON LAND LAW f�001 CI'I'Y QF 'I'ICA�I) COMMUNITY llEV�.LUYMP.NT nLPAxTMLNT ,.;�� PLANNINC`T DIVISTC�N '" a� . �.:;�, w�f..n. �.3125 SW NALL ]3��UI,EVAltU �:�:: TICTARD, 4REGUN 97223 ��'�` °p . .�;?x". �n i'HC�Nfi; 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-624-3G81 (Itrm, 1'atty/Plamiin� F?NiAIL: g�tty��.t!gt!xd-ux_g4Y . • ��, ���'^a', \.• ..�N!y',+.��+.�,,. .J. �QU�sT Fo� �oo-�'OOT FROPERTY OWNER MAILING LIST Pco�erty owner ittfonnation is valid for 3 months from the d�ttc of your reclucsr INDiCATL ALL PRCI]r,C'1' Mt�P &TAX LOT NUM N'lt (i.c. 1S134AB,T��x Lot OUlUU) OR TH� �llD .RFSSF� NOR ALL PRC)J�'.CT PARCFLS BLLOVV: (If more than 1 tax lot or if th�parce!hsis ao addi e�s,you�+m�ust separ�tely�dentify each tax!ot associated with the project^) ��� l � �� � �J� 2.� 1 �3 � �1 C�1 °1 PLE E B AW E T AT O LY 1 ET F I.A$E ILL BE P VID �D T TH 'rI E FO L NC Y R EIG SOR OOD EE I�IG After suhmitting your land usc application ti� t1�e Ci.ry•, ,ind the proiect. planner has reviewcd your applic�cion for completeness, y��u will be notiFied by means of an incomplc�tcness ler.ter to obtain your 2 Fina1 sets oElabels. Ik'YO HAVE BEFN N TIFI D BY PLA NIN� TO OB I UR BE PL E I . DI fE B LO THA Y NE 2 'T'S LA ELS• Completeness Letter Received Indicating 2 Sets af Envelopes w/Aff'ixed Address Labels Required � . _ The 2 final sets of labels need t� be pl�ced �n envelo(�es (no eelf-adhesrve envelopes please} with first c.lass lettcr- rate posr�t�e ort tl1e envclopes in the form of(��stagc stamps {no metered envelopea and no return address) and resubmttted to the City Eor the purpose of providing nohce to proper.ry owners of the Prc�posed lanc� use applicatiorl and the decision. '1'he 2 scts of cnvelopcs r►-�'� be ke��r separ<;te. The persun listed below will be c<<�1ed to pick i�p and pay for the labels when tliey are reac�y. � , � : �.lc� ��CJ !/��� PT-IUNF.: S� - - �� NAME C)N'CU.�1T1�C°I'1 L,�ON NAM�: OF COMI't1NY: �r` FA�: -�S1L/ _ Q r�MAiL: �� h , w, Thiti rec�uest may he emailed, mailed, faxed, or hanci delivered to thc City oE Tigard. Please allow a 2-day mitiimum f�r processin� requests. Upon com�letion �F your rec�ucsr, the conr�tct person listed w�ll be called to ��ck up their request that w�ll he placed in "W�I1 C,all I�y the c:ompany namc �or by the contact person's lasr. n�Lrne if no comp�ny) �t the Planning/E.ngtneering C:ountcr at thc Permit Center. The cost of processing y�ur request must be paid at rhe time of pi�k up,�ts eaact cost��;n not I�e prc-determined. p�l�',4.4F N07'E; FOR REASONS OF ACCURACY, ONLY pRIGINAL MAILING LABELS PRDYIDED BY THE CITY YS �'-�'ED MAILING LABELS WI,�L BE ACCEA7ED. � , .ost D scriptl011, $l i to generate the�nailinb list,[�lus$2 per sheet feit piinting the list o�1to 12bels (20 adciresses [1ec slle�:t). '1'hen,multiply die cost t print o��e s�t of�abels by thc rn�mt�er of�c;ts requested. - EXA,MPLE - - CQST FQR THIS REQUEST - 1G.W slieel s of 10br.ls x S2/shect��x�sets= � D 4 shee�s al'Sxbels x$2/ahcct=$.}},QO x Z xets= � �� _ .� 1�I1P.CL5 Of iP�7C�5 X��.I��IGGt fOC inurecred�artirs x 2 seta= 3 4.00 �sficcl(s)of lnbels x E?/yl�crt f�r u�terearcd pNrti�_�x SeTa_ � ,,�, _ � GE AT � — t �� �.� 2S103AA01916 SANDERS,STEVEN W& � /�� D� ��//,.�/�A ,r � SANDERS,BARBARA SWANSON ��; !/t'/1/y 2647 SW TALBOT RD PORTLAND,OR 97201 J � ���_� �� AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING - ��_ . I,Patricia L. Lunsford,being fust dulysworn/affirrn,on oath depose and saythat I am a Planning Assistant for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: �(}xck.4'p"'P^arc&�x(s)Brba� � NOTTCE OF PENDING LAND i.JSE DEQSION FOR MI,P2009-00001/SANDERS PAR7T7TON ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Re(erence) � City of T"igard Plannuzg Director A copyof the said notice being hereto attached,marked Exhibit"A",and byreference made a part hereof,was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s),marked E�ibit"B",and by reference made a part hereof,on Ma�26,2009,and deposited in the United States Mail on May 26,2009,postage prepaid. � � �� (Petson thac Prepare otice) STATE OF OREGON County of Washington) ss. City of Tigard ) 4. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the �� dayof ����/ ,2009. �� �,, , � sHi��T N�'��PL. . C OF O ON NOTARY PUBLIC-OREOON w COMMISSION NO.�18777 My Coinmission E�ires: ���SI< < MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APR�L 2S�2011 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE,LIENHC ER,VENDOR OR SELLER THE TIG_�RD DE`'ELOP�i�:N"I'(;OD��c�.QLIRF:S TF I_�T IF�YOL'RF.CEIVE THIS 1�OTTCE, EXH I B IT I'I'SH_�I.L BE PR0�11''I'LY f�OR\�'�1KllLD'I'O'I�I IE PL'RCI�.1SER. NOTICE OF PENDING ,, LAND USE APPLICATION - MINOR LAND PARTITION , , � DATE OF NOTICE: May 26, 2009 FILE NO.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 FILE TITLE: SANDERS PARTITION APPLICANT & Ste�-en W. Sanders& APPLICANT'S Gan' P. Shepherd,Attomet- OWNER: Barbara Swanson-Sanders REP.: 3115 SE Salmon Street 2647 SW Talbot Road Portland,OR 97214 Portland, OR 97201 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting appro�ral for a iVlinor Land Partirion to partirion one (1) e�sting .35-acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-famil�� residences. r�n existing residence on Parcel 1 will remain. The proposed lots are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet in size. LOCATION: 12390 SW 106�h Drive;Washington Counry Tax�iap 2S103r1r1,Tax Lot 1916. ZONE: R-4.5: The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residenrial units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family� units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted condinonally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Develo ment Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.7�5 and 18.810. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the Cit�• making an}� decision on the l�pplicauon, �ou are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the City. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON JUNE 9, 2009. r'�ll comments should be directed to Chervl Caines.rlssociate Planner l,x2437�in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard b5� telephone at 503-639-4171 or bv e-mail to cherylcCa�tiQard-or.gov. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION- MAKING PROCESS THE CIT1' OF TIG�RD �PPRECI��TES RECEIVING COi�1�'�i�NTS �ND Vr1I.liES YOL;R INPUT. COMMENTS ��ILL BE CONSIDERED �ND .�DDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 19, 2009. IF YOU PROVIDE COI��fENTS, YOL WILL BE SENT r1 COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. VLRITTEN COMiVfENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERM�INENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SF-I�I.L CONT�IIN THE FOLLOWING INFOR�'��TION: ♦ rlddress the specific "Applicable _ ✓iew Critetia" described in the section �.,�ve or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; ♦ Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City t�provide a response; ♦ Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificin�on that issue. F�ILL'RE OF�1NY P��RT'�'1'O �DDRESS THE RELEVI�NT_�PPROV�L CRITERI.� ��'ITH SL FFICIENT SPECIFICITY iv1�'�Y PRECLL'DE SLBSEQUENT ��PPE.�LS TO 'I'HE L�1ND L'SE BO�RD OF :�PPF..ILS OR CIRCL'IT COL'RT ON THAT ISSUE. SPECIFIC FINDINGS DIREC'I'F.D �T THF. RELF,V,�NT ?�PPRC)V.'�L CRITF.RI�� .�RF �Y'H?�T CONSTITUTE RF,LE�'_�NT FVIDENCE. �F1'1:R '17[k? 14-D.�Y CO\f\il{V'1' V1�:R1011 (:l.O�I{�, '1�II1: DIHI�:(:"l�OR tiII.U.I. I�ti�'I�: .A T1"PI�. II :11�1I1\Iti'I'R.A'1�1V�1�: lll�.(:1SIO\. TIII; DIRf:C1'OR'S Dl?CISION SII,�LI,Bl�: tiI��IIJ�.D'TO'1'Hf�,r�PPI.I(:,1N'1',�Nll'fO O�G':�I?RS Ul�RECORll O}�PROPI?R1'Y I,OC.�'17�.11 Wl"1'Ii1N S00 FEET OI�THF.SL'HJ1�.("I'SITf�,,:AND TO,�NYONI;I��,I.SI�.WHO SUB�11'I'I'I�,D W}2P1"1'FN CU�1�iF.NTS OR WI IO IS O'1'I�F?RWISI:FNTITI,1?D'1'O NO'1'ICI?. THR DIRI?CTOR'S DI�.CISION ti[I_Al.L.�llllRf?SS.Al.l.<>I�'1'IIF.RI?],I�.�'.A'�"1'.�PPRO�'�1L CRI"1'I�:RI.1. B:�S}?D UYON"1'l It�:CRI'17�:K1.1 �1ND'I'I II?I�;1C1'ti CUNTAIN}?ll W1T}IIN"1'I II�.Rf�,COR[),"1'E II?DIRf�,C"I'OR SI LU,I..APPROV'1?,:APPROV'I•:WI'1'f I COI�DITIONS OR DI�:I��'"1'1{E�. Rl?QUI?ti'17?D PI?1tti1I'1'OR AC'1'1ON. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: • The applicarion is accepted b�- the Cin- ♦ Notice is sent to property� owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. ♦ The applicauon is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. ♦ City Staff issues a written decision. ♦ Notice of the decision is sent to the�pplicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site;all owners of record of properry located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entided to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Communiry Development Departtnent. If you want to inspect the file,please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the planning technicians. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of�?5 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this applicauon should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the hr�t pa�c c,f this \r>rice undcr the �ccri��❑ tided "Your Right to Pro�•ide ��'ritten Comments." i — — — ___ --- VICINITY MAP � , , I _ — ___ .-- I �-� � i �/7- w�v2000-0000t �mo �ar yy' �+» ,p�n� �, . �ezu +� ,iar��rm �� � c�w�,o.. ` ';�-� �'. S1INDERS PARTITION �-. u\� ��'•. \��nw ,. W ( un � �,.�..r� ( :x�a�� .wre �wf �an > �''7 < i= �n' rr�.4 '�nw �� »� `w u"` ,.� � ',—`" '� ,��ua +aw 1 i� �aM �ar �n wy �wn 1�n�` ■ �;�ti...•:w. wna %^ i� I':u� �»» � «»ey/,�5�.�� � , L -- � .w�s .a» ��• _. . .� . �i� �xHS x 'e . 8 JONMSOM<T '� �\ `'�� {I O,� �_ � . :, �,.w:r� , ,•r�,�,�� ���iarr0 �M>f fiMf ..�.. .:. �tOSK ���MU .. � ,/ \ 1�]N% � / �]1M � 1C1��` �\ �61�C�� ��Ytf '. � 1NM �4 �y iq�o 1W� �� 11W / IM�s \�/�(' �M>f I / ��iM! Ori> ': 1MN � tRS �� �� _ ���.. 14Y��A��llh`\ re '�aw /`'�' �uw ��'`Rf�✓ �rn� nrw �� � / � �� ." �....�v . / ^ ...� � .�,(�,.� rr r.rr��wi.i'"tiwn.�+.�� fIGOI fT �� , � , ', p�s � ��� r • w.+r � �MA ���((( A �riN\. ♦ /�j�\. ]NO s.r,.x.��.� �; ....� ////���� \1]Sff\ / `1�� �� I ��MO 1�]0! �[. \ y �( � � . . Nfw �O�M �,�1\ �]Af '¢�4.�/wl'� " ',Mi J yO. �xf�0 s� � r«.,;` �r� � . �:en � ��. �o�ne �w. »" / �'an � � . ..��o . �'���, �:.e .._._._ _ _. � , o re x s:� `- 'na .� 4 � 3�r . ,. � �� ..� �va� � \ �� r', ,,.u� j � 4 ,� „ � �_ . �.���;'°';y�� _. : ---I °� � � � ' .,«.�� 2S103AA03800 2S102BCO2004 EXHIBIT� ABRAHAM, BART&DARCIE CARMICHAEL,LINDA&JOSEPH 12295 SW 106TH DR 10680 SW FONNER ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25103AA01912 2S1026600813 AGNESSE, PHILIPPE&RACHEL COFFMAN,RIE 10455 SW JOHNSON ST 10340 SW JOHNSON 5T TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BC05400 2S102BC05300 AUDRITSH,JEREMY&CYNTHIA A COOLEY,CRAIG L 8 JUNE E 12555 SW PATHFINDER CT 4147 CASEY CT TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 2S103AA01914 2S1028CO2000 BAKER,DEBRA JO COSENZA,JENNIFER L 10490 5W JOHNSON ST 10690 SW FONNER ST PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03900 2S102BC05600 BARICEVIC,JOHN/KAY REV LIV TRUS CURTIN,ROBW L& BY JOHN J/KAY F BARICEVIC TRS CURTIN,KENNETH J 12285 SW 106TH DR 14355 FOSBERG RD TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 2S102BC00107 2S103AA01911 BISSETT,CRAIG ALLEN DIAZ-CORTES,ALEJANDRO 10295 SW BROOKSIDE CT 10515 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA04100 2S1026C00106 BOYER, SANDRA RAE DICKMAN,ALFRED E 8 CLAUDIA H 12244 5W CLYDESDALE CT 10290 SW BROOKSIDE CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA04200 2S103AA04300 BRADEN, DONALD W LIVING TRUST DUNN,STEPHEN W AND BY DONALD W DRADEN TR HALPERN,MICHAEL L 12238 SW CLYDESDALE CT 29572 AVANTE TIGARD,OR 97223 LAGUNA NIGUEL,CA 92677 2S103AA03000 2S103AA01909 BROWN,JEANETTE M FLATTERS,JAMES G 10485 SW CLYDESDALE PL LORAINE M TIGARD,OR 97223 12385 SW 106TH DR TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01908 2S102BC05200 BRUGGER,JUDITH C&JOHN A GONZALEZ,SEJIS 12355 SW 106TH DR 12515 SW PATHFINDER CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 ,2S1026B00812 2S1028B00700 GRAVES, MICHAEL R AND LAWTON,MARY JANE JANINE D NOW SKELTON 10300 SW BROOKSIDE PL 10355 SW WALNUT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01900 2S703AA02400 HADDOCK,GLEN RICHARDS AND LEFEVER,WILLIAM JAMES KATHRYN RUTH TRUSTEES 12270 SW 106TH DR 10495 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01800 2S103AA04000 HALL, BRIAN E 8 IRENA M LEW,ON YONG FOWN HAH 10675 SW FONNER ST 12255 SW 106TH DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01902 2S103AA03500 HATANAKA,BARRY LEWIS,GARY JAMES RURIKO 10490 SW CLYDESDALE PL 10625 SW WALNUT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01901 2S103AA03600 HELMER,GARRY L BARBARA S LINDQUIST,ROGER A MARILY 10585 SW WALNUT 10520 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1026B00826 2S103AA02500 KELLEHER, DANIEL V&KATHRYN K MACFARLAND,ELSA TR 10465 SW JOHNSON CT 10525 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02700 251026C00105 KNOX,CARL J MACK,OAVID J 8 LORI A FLORA L 10260 SW BROOKSIDE CT 10505 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BC01806 2S103AA01906 KRALL, FRED&PATRICIA HELEN MARTIN,RICHARD E 12560 SW PATHFINDER CT 12320 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02600 2S103AA01904 KREBS,AMY K MARTINI,MATTHEW S/KATHERINE B& 10515 SW CLYDESDALE PL MARTINI,ROBERT CNIRGINIA M TIGARD,OR 97223 10675 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01915 2S103AA02300 LAMBERT,ROBERT A&GEORGIA C MIRPOURIAN,MA21EH&ZAHRA 10530 SW JOHNSON PO BOX 8552 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97207 , • 2S1028C05500 2S102BB00814 NASS, KARI ROBINSON,JAY G&BRIGITA A 12575 SW PATHFINDER CT 12180 SW 127TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03700 2S102BCO2003 NEWTON, ELIZABETH A SAKHITAB,HOMA 12300 SW 106TH DR 10700 SW FONNER ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03400 2S103AA01916 NICO�I, EDNA SUZANNE SANDERS,STEVEN W& 10470 SW CLYDESDALE PL SANDERS,BARBARA SWANSON TIGARD,OR 97224 2647 SW TALBOT RD PORTLAND,OR 97201 2S1026C05700 2S1026C07805 NYSSEN, BENJAMIN J 8 SCHRADER,MARCUS J NYSSEN,AMBER C 12490 SW 129TH ST 12615 SW PATHFINDER CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BCO2002 2S103AA01917 OLSEN, KENNETH E SHEL�EDY LIVING TRUST OLSEN, SANDRA L BY RODNEY/JEANNINE SHELLEDY TRS 10640 SW WALNUT 12440 SW 106TH DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1026CO2001 2S103AA04400 OTT, PENNY N STOVER,LAWRENCE& 10540 SW WALNUT ST SHARON LIVING TRUST TIGARD,OR 97223 11700 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01913 2S103AA01801 PARTRIDGE,SCOTT SUNDAY,MELVIN R BARBARA PO BOX 781 PO BOX 230995 JEFFERSON,OR 97352 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S103AA01910 2S1026CO2005 PEARSON, RICHARD E&MARY ANN TR TA,LEE 12330 SW 106TH DR 10620 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S103AA02200 2S1028CO2006 PRICE,SHARON L 8 DONALD R THOMAS,BRENDA S 8 JAMES L 12250 SW 106TH DR PO BOX 230073 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97281 2S103AA01907 2S102BC01807 RINGER,JERRY L THOMAS,MARC C&CAROL A 12325 SW 106TH DR 10360 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02800 THURSTON,MILDRED TRUSTEE 10495 SW CLYDESDALE PLACE TIGARO,OR 97223 2 1026C06700 TI RD, OF 1312 HALL BLVD T RD, R 97223 2 03AA029 TIGA Y OF 1312 ALL BLVD T RD,O 97223 2 103AA019 TIG D TY OF 131 HALL BLVD ARD,O 97223 103AA017 1 TI D Y OF 131 W HALL BLVD T ARD, 97223 2S103AA00101 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT#23J 6960 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03100 VAZQUEZ,MIGUEL A& GUEST,MELISSA 10475 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARO,OR 97223 2S103AA03200 VILLALOBOS,MAURICIO 8 VALORIE 10465 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103AA03300 WEEKLEY,TIMOTHY E 10450 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01905 YORK,DANIEL L/KATHLEEN S 1000 MADISON ST NEWBERG,OR 97132 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136�h Place Tigard, OR 97224 Don & Dorothy Erdt 13760 SW 121 st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139'h Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Martha Bishop 10590 SW Cook Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Vanessa Foster 13085 SW Howard Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Susan Beilke 11755 SW 114'h Place Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 Patricia Keerins 12195 SW 121 st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Todd Harding and Blake Hering Jr. Norris Beggs & Simpson 121 SW Morrison, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97204 CITY OF TIGARD - CENTRAL INTERESTED PARTIES (i:lcurpinlsetupllabels\CIT Central.doc) UPDATED: 16-Dec-08 Steven W. Sanders & Barbara Swanson-Sanders MLP2009-00001 2647 SW Talbot Road SANDERS PARTTION Ponland, OR 97201 GaryP. Shepherd,Attorney 3115 SE Salmon Street Portland, OR 97214 �� � AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING � � � . I, Patricia L. Lunsford, bcing first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Assistant for the City of Tigard,Washington County, Oregon and that I served the foIlowing: ;�luck.l�rcqma�eli�x(,714�I��u; . � NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: ;�TI.P2009-00001/S1�NDERS P��RTITION 7�ilc\��.�\amc Rc[crrna�. � AMENDED NOT[CE � Cin- of Tigard Planning Director � copy of the said norice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit "A", and b�- reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit "B", and by reference made a part hereof,on Iune 22,2009,and deposit e United States Mail on�une 22,2009,postage prepaid. ` • � (Perso repared Norice) STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ss. City of Tigard � � Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the �L� day of J���' ,2009. OF'FICIAL SEAL :iNRLEY�TREAT ' NOTARY PUBIIC-OAE�ON COMMISSION N0.416777 � ��� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 2S,2011 NOT��RY PL B IC OF OREGON My Coirunission Expires: ���SI�� � EXHIBIT.�. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION ; �� MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 �� SANDE RS PARTITION 120 DAYS = 9/15/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SLJMMARY FILE NAME: SANDERS PARTITION CASE NO.: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2009-00001 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval for a Minor Land Partition to partition one (1) existing.35- acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-family residences. An e�sting residence on Parcell will reinaui. APPLICANT & Steven W. Sanders and APPLICANT'S GaryP. Shepherd,Attorney OWNER: Barbara Swanson-Sanders REP.: 3115 SE Salmon Street 2647 SW Talbot Road Portland, OR 97214 Portland, OR 97201 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: R 4.5: Low DensityResidential. ZONE: R 4.5 Low Densitv Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-farruly homes with or without accessory residential uruts at a m;nimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are pernlitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pern7itted conditionally. LOCATION: 12390 SW 106`''Drive;Washington CountyTax Assessor's Map 2S103AA,Tax Lot 1916. PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 7,524 Square Feet. PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 7,500 Square Feet. AI'PLICABLE RE VIE W CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certa.in conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V. NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 1 OF 22 � CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: e app icant s a �prepare a cover etter an su mit it, a on wi any supporting ocuments an or ans that address the folIowing requirements to the PLANNIN�DIVISION, ATTN: CHERYL CAINE�503- 639-4171, EXT 2437. The cover letter shall cleady identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 1. Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit and receive approval for either a variance to the m;nimum lot size requirements under 18.370.010 or an adjustment to the street standards under 18.370.020.G11. 2. Prior to the final plat,the applicant shall: A. Submit for review and approval revised plans showing the type of screening proposed for the 3-foot area east of the e�sting deck on Parcel 1. B. Install screening according to the approved plan. 3. Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit for review and approval, revised plans to scale showing the street tree spacing that meets the standards of Section 18.745.040.0 4. Street trees for Parcell shall be planted according to the approved plan prior to final plat. 5. Prior to finalplat the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction on Parcel 1 to the effect that anye�sting tree �reater than 6" diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a cettified arbonst. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. 6. Place a note on the final plat for the visual clearance easement at the corner of SW 106�' Drive and SW J�hnson Street to the benefit of the City of Tigard. Said easement is subject to the City of Tigard Visual Clearance Area standards that restrict the height of plantings and structures (Tigard I�evelopment Code Chapter 18.795). The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any suppoitin documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DIVISION,AT�: HIM MCMILLAN 503- 639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall cleady identify where in the subinittal the required infornlation is found: 7. A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) erniit is required for this project to cover utility laterals and any other work in the public rig ht-of-way. Six 6 sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the En ineenn De artment. N��: these lans are in addition to an drawulgs re uired b the Buildin Division and sho�d orpily include sheets relevanpto public improvements.YPublic Facility Improvement (PFI� pe ._rmit plans shall conform to Cstyof Tigard Public rmprovement Design Standards,which are ava�lable at City Hall and the Cit�s web page (www.tigard-or.�ov�. 8. The PFI perniit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and tele�phone number of the individual or corporate entny who will be designated as the "Per7ruttee", and who wiIl provide the financial assurance f or the public unprovements. For example, specify if the entity is a co�orauon,luruted partnership, LLCti etc. Also spec�fy the state witlun which the entity is uzcorporated and provi e the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineenng Department will delay processulg of project documents. 9. A five foot utility easement shall be recorded across Parcel2 in favor of Parcel lto ensure that no concentrated flows of storm drainage waters from Parcel l will flow across Parcel2. Storm drainage for both parcels shall be directed to an approved system. 10. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the Ciry Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the pubhc improvement construction phase. 11. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. (STAFF CONTAGT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering�. NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTT7TON PAGE 2 OF 22 12. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall plant street trees along the frontage of SW 106th Drive and Johnson Street. 13. The applicant shall execute a Restrictive Covenant agreeing to complete or participate in the future imp rovements of SW 106th Avenue and Johnson Street ad�acent to the subject property, when any of the foIlowing events occur: A. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for by the forn�ation of a Local Improvement D�strict; B. when the unprovements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for in whole or in part bythe City or other public agency; G when the improvemenu are part of a laiger project to be constructed by a third party and involves the sharing of design and/or construction expenses by the third party owner(s) of property in addition to the subject property;or D. when construcuon of the improvements is deemed to be appropriate by the City Engineer in conjunction with construction of unprovements by others adjacent to tlie sub�ect site. 14. The appli� cant shall obtain approval from the City of Tigard for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the C:it�s Public Facility Improvement pernut. 15. A plan for dispo� sal of the storm water runoff from the proposed house on Lot 2 shall be provided as part of the Public FacilityImprovement (PFI) pernut drawings for review and approval. 16. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment C:ontrol Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." 17. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the Cit�s global �osiuorung system(GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22) as recorded in Washington County survey records. These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same prec�sion as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contaul the scale factor to convert ground measurements to gnd measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by. . GPS tie networked to the Cit�s GPS survey. . By random traverse using conventional surveyuzg methods. 18. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: A. Submit for City review four (4) pap er copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon and necessarydata or narrative. B. Attach a check ui t�e amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Planning/Engineering Pernlit Technicians,at (503 639-4171,e�t.2421). G The final plat and ata or namative shall be drawn to the m;,,;mum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington County,and by the City of Tig ard. D. The plat shall create public sidewalk easements along the frontages ot SW 106''' Drive and Johnson Street of sufficient width to provide 27 feet from centerline when combined with the existing nght-of- wa . E. N�TE: Washington Counry will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from the Engineenng Department uidicatulg that the Ciry has reviewed the fu1a1 plat and submicced comments to the appIicant's surveyor. F. After the City and C;oun have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final plat for City Enguieer signature l(for partitions), or City Engineer and Community Development Director signatures (for subdivisions). NOTTCE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 3 OF 22 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BLTILDING PERMITS: e app icant s a repare a cover etter an su mit it, a ong wi any supporting ocuments aii orp ans that address the fol�owing requirements to the PLANNINCT DIVISION, ATTN: CHERYL CAINES 503- 639-4171, EXT 2437. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required infonnation is found: 19. Prior to issuance of building pernuts, the applicant shall demonstrate that the height restriction and front, rear, and side yard setbacks for structures are as required for the base zone. 20. Prior to building pernut issuance, a site plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the m;n;mum access width reqwrements are met. 21. At the time of submittal for building pernzits for individual homes within the development,the developer shall submit materials demonstrating that one (1) off-street parking�space, which meets minimum dimensional requirements and setback requiremenu as spec�fied in Title 18,w11 be provided on-site for each new home. 22. Prior to building pemzit issuance the applicant shall submit revised plans to the City Arborist for review and ap proval show�ng accurately and "to scale", the tree protection specifications and tree protection fencing dunensions outluied in the arborist report. The plans shall include a signature of approval from the project arborist. 23. Prior to building perniit issuance, the applicant shall position fencing as directed by the project arborist to protect the trees to be.retauied. The applicant shall allow access by the City.Arborist tor the purpose.of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protection measures are per�onrung adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or mau�tain tree protection fencing in the desig nated locations shall be grounds tor unmediate suspension of work on the site until remed�ation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. 24. If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techniques to be employed and the likely unpacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the Csry Arborist before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arbonst may requu-e changes prior to approval. The project arbonst shall be on site while work is occurrulg withui the tree protecuon zone and submit a stunn�ary report cert�fying that the work occurred per the prop�osal and will not signif icantly impact the health and/or stability of the trees. Th�s note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan. 25. The applicant shall have an on-�oing responsibiliry to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the Caty Arborist, at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist monitors the construction activities from uut�al tree protection zone ('TPZ) fencul u�stallation through the building construcuon phases. The reports shall evaluate the condition and location o�the tree protection fencuig, deterniine �f any changes occurred to the TPZ, and if any part of the Tree Protecuon Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arbonst shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the overall, �ong-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not submitted to the Ciry Arbonst at the scheduled uitervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protecuon Plan are not being followed by the contractor or a su�rcontractor, the Gty can stop work on the project until an inspection can be done by the City Arborist and the Project Arborist. 26. Prior to issuance of building pernuts, the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicatin�g the locations of trees that were preserved on the lot dunng site development. In addition, the plans shall include accurate locations of tree canopy driplines and protection fenculg, and a signature of approval from the project a� regarding the placement and construction techruques to be employed in bwlding the structures. All proposed protection fencuig shall be installed and ir�spected prior to commencuig construcuon. The fencing shall remam in place throu�h the duration of all of the building construction phases, until the Certificate of Occupancyhas been approved. Prior to final inspection the applicant shall submit a fuZal report by the Project Arbonst certifying the health of protected trees anc� that the street trees were properly planted per the approved street tree plan. Tree protection measures maybe removed and final inspection authonzed upon review and approval by the Caty Arborist. NOTICE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 4 OF 22 � 27. Prior to issuance of building pern�its the a�plicant/owner shall record a deed restriction on Parcel 2 to the effect that any e�cistin tree greater than 6 diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a cert�fie� arbonst. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. 28. Prior to issuance of building pernlits the applicant shall submit a mit�'gation plan to the City Arborist for review and approval. Mitigation can be accomplished by either planting the number of caliper uzches removed or paying a fee in-lieu at the rate of $125 per cahper uzch, or any combu-iauon thereof. If a mitigation planting proposal �s submitted, it needs to have a signature of ap pr�val from the project arborist certifyuig that it meets the requu-ements of Section 18.790.060.D and that the species and placement of mit��gation trees has been reasonably calculated to provide for their growth to matunty The mitigation proposal shall show the species location, and spacmg of mitigation trees u� relation to build�ings, infrastructure, e�.stuig trees, street trees, anc� each other. Mitigation shall be based upon one of the following tree plan alternatives: Alternative 1: 5 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved =83.3% retention,no miti�ation required Alternative 2: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% rrutigation required, 50% x 27" removed = 13.5" of mit�gat�on required Alternative 3: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required, 50% x 37" removed = 18.5" of mit�gat�on req�uired Alternative 4: 3 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 50% retention, 50% mitigation required, 50% x 50" removed =25.0" of mitigat�on required 29. Prior to building pern�it issuance,the applicant shall submit a cash assurance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation reqwred. 1Vl�tigation is calculated at $125.00 pe�r caliper inch. Any�trees successfully planted on or off-site, ul accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and Tigard Development Code Section 18.790.060.D, will be credited agairist the assurance two years after all of the trees are lanted per the ap roved Tree Miti�auon Plan. After the trees are lanted the�pro ect arborist shall submit a letpter to the City Arpborist to certify that all of the miti ation trees were prop erly p�anted per the approved Tree Mitiga�tion Plan in order to set the startin point of t�e two year tree establishment period. After the two- year establishment period, the applicant sh�provide a re-ulventory of the mitigation trees conducted �by a cert�fied arborist in order to document rrutigation tree survival and compliance with the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The remaining value of caliper uiches not success�ully mitigated shall be paid as a}ee u�-heu of planung from the original cash assurance. 30. Prior to building p�erniit issuance for Parce12 ,a site plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the standards ot C:hapter 18.795 (Visual Clearance Areas) are met. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supportin documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DIVISION,AT�: HIM MCMILLAN 503- 639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 31. Prior to building permit issuance the driveway for Parcel 2 shall be moved to Johnson Street to achieve adequate sight d�stance or application for a vanance to this Code requirement shall be requested and approved. 32. Prior to issuance of btulding pernuts,the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a paper copy of the recorded final plat. 33. The CityEngineer maydetermine the necessityfor, and re uire submittal and approval of,a construction access and parking plan for the home building phase. If the Csty�ngineer deems such a plan necessary,the applicant shall provide the plan pnor to issuance ot bwlduig perniits. 34. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the requu-ed public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance trom the City,and provide a one-year mauitenance assurance for said unprovements. 35. The ap�plicant shall either place the existin overhead utility lines along SW Johnson Street underground as a part ot-this pro�ect, or contact Mike Mc�hy (R�ght-of-Way Adinuvstrator) to determine if they will be allowed to pay t�e fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that �s parallel to the utility lines and will be $35.00 per luieal foot. If the fee option �s allowed, the ainount will be $3,488 and it shall be pa.id prior to issuance of buildin�pemuts. NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 5 OF 22 36. During issuance of the building pernzit for Parcel 2,the applicant shall pay the standard water quality and water quantityfees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest approved by C,�WS). THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHAI_L BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: e app icant s a �prepare a cover etter an su rrut it, a on wi any suppo�n ocuments an or ans that address the folIowing requirements to the PLANNIN�DIVISION ATT� CHERI'L CAINE�503- 639-4171, EXT 2437. The cover letter shall cleariy identify where in the su�mittal the required infotmation is found: 37. Street trees for Parcel2 shall be planted according to the approved plan prior to final building inspection. THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS OF THE EFFECI'IVE DATE OF THIS DECISION NOTED LTNDER THE PROCESS AND APPEAL SECTION OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site and VicinityInforn�ation The 35 acre site�s located on the south corner of SW 106�'Drive and SW Johnson Street within the Cottonwood Place subdivision. The site is zoned R 4.5 (Low Density Residential) as are all surroundin properties. An existing single-family home sits on the southern portion of the site, and it w�l remain on proposed�arcell. Homes in the area are single-familyof varying ages. Pro e Histo . A searc o Ciry records shows the site was annexed into the City of T'igard in 1996 (ZCA96-00005). This approval also granted a Zone Change and Comprehensive Plan Amendment to chan e the zonuzg from Washington County R5 to C.�tyof Tigard R 4.5. No other approvals were found affecting this parce� Proposal Description The owner is proposing a two lot partition. An e�sting home will remain on Parcel 1. The net square footage of the two parcels w�l be: Parcel 1 - 7,524 square feet and Parcel 2- 7,500 square feet. SECTION IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS The T'igard CommunityDevelopment Code re uires that propertyowners within 500 feet of the.subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity�or written comments and/or oral testimony pnor to a decision being made. In addiuon, staf} has posted a nouce on the site. Comments were received from two neighbors. These comments were passed along to the applicant's representative, Gary Shepherd. Mr. Shepherd's responses are shown below each comment. Comments were received from Dick Pearson concerning compatibility of the new residence with the homes in the neighborhood. He states that many neighbors are long-term residents and assume that the new residence will fit in well with the e�sting neighborhood. He is requestuig the courtesy of the owner to share the eneral residential construction plans with neighbors, who can then respond wrth any concerns or suggestion. He has�ound in the past that this is a very positive step u�the process for both owner and neighbors. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant appreciates Mr. Pearson's comments and his effort to coordinate a response with area residents. The applicant �s not cun-ently requesting pern�ission to build a home, but rather seeking to create a lot for planning and future development purposes. If the applicant were to build a home,he would welcome a neighborhood meeting to cl�scuss building plans. STAFF RESPONSE: Cturently there are no re quirements for notification, public comment, or design when constnicting a single-family home. Based on the appl�cant's response, he is open to pubhc comment on the building plans. NOTTC:E OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTION PAGE 6 OF 22 � Comments were also received from Gary Helmer. He is against issuin� a conditional permit to build a single-family home or duplex on the site. He states the area was built in the 1960s with the idea of havin�space for your home, not to be five feet fromyour nei hbor. By a rovin this application the look of the neighborhood will be chan�ed and pro pe r t y values will be lowe ed. The homps in t�e nei ghborhood blend in and have beautiful y a r d s. It is a Green development;do not destroy it. He goes on to saythat the propertyowner had to be creative to come up with the proposed site for this lot. In order to do this he notes the ownerhad to use space behind the e�sting home to gain the necessarylot square footage. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The app licant is res��pectful of Mr. Helmer's comments. However, the subject partition is consistent with City zoning and regional infiIl objectives. The apPlicant demonstrated it is feasible to meet all a p plicable zorun g and develo pment standards. The comment received }rom Richard Pearson demonstrates that other area residents are in support of the application. STAFF RESPONSE: The applicant has shown that density standards are met. Setback standards will be reviewed during building perniit application for the new home on Parcel2. As noted above,there are currently no neighborhood compatibility or design reqwrements for single-family homes,but Staff encourages the applicant to work v�nth neighbors to find an agreeable design. SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIAAND FINDINGS Land Partitions (18.420� The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations; The proposed partition complies or can be made to comp l�y with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations as demonstrated by the analysis conta.ined within this admuustrative dec�sion and through the imposition of conditions of development approval. All necessary conditions must be satisfied as part of the development and building process. Therefore,this critenon is met. There are adequate public facilities available to serve the proposal; Public facilities are discussed in detail later in this decision under Chapter 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards). Based on the analysis provided herein, Staff finds that adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal. Therefore,this critenon�s met. All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards; and The public facilities and proposed improvements are discussed and conditioned later in this decision under Chapter 18.8I0 (Street &Utiliry Improvement Standards). Improvements will be reviewed as part of the pernut process and during construction, at which tune the appropnate review authority will ensure that City and applicable agency standards are met. Based on the analysis in this dec�sion,Staff finds that this cntenon is met. All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below: The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable zoning district The average m;n;mum lot width required for the R 4.5 zoning district is 50 feet. The ma ority of Parcel 1 is 80 feet wide or more, but the rear 17 feet is 45.27 feet wide. The average lot width is approximate�y 70 feet. Parcel 2 is 64.92 feet wide at its narrowest point. Therefore,this standard has been met. The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning distric� In the case of a flag lot,the accessway may not be included in the lot area. The ininunum lot area requirement in the R 4.5 zoning district is 7,500 square feet for detached single-family units. The proposed partition creates two (2) lots. Each lot has street frontage, therefore no flag lots are being created. The areas of the two proposed parcels are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet respectively. This criterion has been met. NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PAR'ITTTON PAGE 7 OF 22 ' Each lot created through the pattition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least 15 feet or have a legally recorded ininiinum 15-toot wide access easetnent. Parcel 1 has 8533 feet of frontage along SW 106�' Drive. Parcel2 has 64.92 feet of frontage on SW 106�' Drive and 99.66 feet along SW Johnson Street. Th�s criterion is met. Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district Setbacks for the R 4.5 wning district are as follows:front,20 feet;side,5 feer street side, 15 feer,and rear 15 feet. The setbacks for the future home on lot 2 will be reviewed at the time of buiiding permit subrruttal. Set�acks for the e�sting home on Parcel l meet the requirements; setbacks are discussed further under the Residential Zoning Districts secuon of this decision. A condition of approval under the Residential Zoning Districts section will ensure the applicant shows the correct setbacks on the building site plans. This critenon can be met conditionally. The condition is found under the Residential Zoning District section of tlus decision. When the partitioned lot is a flag lot,the developer may detertnine the location of the front yard,provided that no side yard is less than 10 feet Structures shall generally be located so as to ma�cimize separation from existing structures. There are no flag lots proposed with this application. This standard does not apply. A screen shall be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an accessway is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accorciance with Sections 18.745.040. Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed developinent There are no flag lots proposed with this application. Tl�us standard does not apply. The fire district inay require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway would have a detrimental effect on fire-fighting capabilities. There are no flag lots proposed with this application. This standard does not apply. Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement which will ensure access and maintenance rights sIiall be reco�ied with the approved partition map. Each parcel will be accessed via a driveway to the public street. This standard does not apply. Any access way shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18J05,Access, Egress and Ci�ulation. Tlvs standard is addressed under Chapter 18.705 (Access,Egress and Cu-culation) later in this decision. Where landfill and/or develo ment is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred year floodplain, the city shall require consideration o�the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. Thep artitioned lots are approximately 117 feet to the southwest of the nearest 100-year floodplain. The elevation of the�loodplain is 156 feet,while the lowest point on the site is 162 feet. Therefore,this standard does not apply. An application for a variance to the standarcis prescribed in this chapter shall be made in accordance with Chapter 18.370,Variances and Adjustrnents. The applications forthe partition and variance(s)/adjustment(s) will be processed concurrendy. The applicant has not requ�ested any vanances or adjustment, but either an adjustment or variance is required to approve this application. The site is 15,024 square feet. There �s an existin 50-foot right-of-way(ROV� on both SW 106`�'Dnve and SW Johnson Street. The applicant states that the existing R�W is adequate to meet standards for local streets with lower traffic volumes. NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 8 OF 22 � Both streets currently have 32 feet of pavement. Street standards for lower volume streets have narrower pavement widths. To install a planter strip and public sidewalk at this location would require additional right-of-way beyond the 25 feet from centerline. The applicant has stated that if the dedication is re quired,then a variance will be requested to allow the lots to be below the muumum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Another opuon �s to request an adjustment to the street standards and record a public sidewalk easement on the property for future pubhc improvements. Thistype of easement was perniitted for a muior land partition (MLP20Q5-00009) through an adjustment process in 2006. Like the site partitioned u�2006,the subject site has sufficient land for dividing pnor to nght-of-waydedication. FINDING: The Land Partition standards have not been fullymet but can be as conditioned below. GONDITTON: Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit and receive approval for either a variance to the m;n;mum lot size reqwrements under Section 18.370.010 or an adjustment to the street standards under Section 18370.020.C.11. Residential Zonin� Districts (18.510� Development stan ards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2 below: TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES STANDARD R-4.5 Parcell Parcel2 Mi�umwn Lot Size -Detached unit 7,500 sq.ft, 7,524 sq.fc. 7,500 sq.ft. -Duplexes -Attached u�ut Average Minimum Lot Wddi -Detaclied unit lots 50 ft 70 fc.[1] 81 ft.[i] -Duplex lots 90 ft -Attached unit lots Maximwn Lot Covera e - N/A N/A Mini�num Setbacks Can be met -Front yatcl 20 ft 25 ft. -Side facing street on comer&through lots L5 ft. N/A -Side yard 5 ft. 22.5 ft./5 ft. -Rear ya� ]5 ft. 3 fr.[2] -Side or rear yanl abutting more restrictive zoning district -- N/A -Distance between ro eitv line and front of ara e 20 fL 25 ft. Maximum Hei ht 30 ft 1 ston/da��i ht baseinent Can be met Mi�umum Landsca e Re uirement - N/A N/A []]Avengr bt width. Lot shapes are irregular. [2]Rear yarcl setback is 3 fee[to an existing,uncovered deck. The remainder of the home is approximately 19 feet from the rear property line. A miniinum lot size of 7,500 square feet is required for each lot. The proposed lot sizes meet this standard if the adjustment to the street improvement standards or variance to m�n�mum lot size requirements is subseguently approved. Setbacks of the e�sting home are met for Parcel 1. The applicant states that the standards will 6e met on Parcel 2. Site and building plans for Parcel 2 will be reviewed through the building perrnit process to ensure compliance with the R 4.5 zone development standards, including setbacks and height restnctions. FINDING: Based on the analys is above, the Residential Zoning District Standards will be met pursuant to the following conditions: CONDITTON: Prior to issuance of building pernzits, the applicant shall demonstrate that the height restriction and front,rear,and side yard setbacks for structures are as required for the base zone. Access,Egress and Cirrulation(18.705� Continuing obligation of property owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in this tide are cont�nuing requirements for the use of any structure or parrel of real property in the Gty. NOTICE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTION PAGE 9 OF 22 ' Joint Access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize joindy the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or�parcels of land satisfies the combined re9uirements as designated in this tide, provided: Satisfactocy legal evidence shall be presented in the fomi of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the jomt use; and copies of the deeds, easements,leases or contracts are placed on pennanent file with the City. Both parcels have individual access to public streets. No joint access is proposed. This standard does not apply. Cu� cuts. Cur� cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall connect direcdy with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a cont�nuous basis. Both parcels will connect directly with a public street. Parcel 1 will continue to utilize an existing driveway to 106`�' Drive and Parcel2 has fronta�e on both 106`�' Drive and Johnson Street. A new drivew�ay w� as proposed to 106`'', but sight.distance cannot be obtauied at this location as detailed under 18.705.030.�L1. This standard can be met as conditioned. Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new developinent proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stackin needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County,the City and AASH�O. The applicant proposes to retain the e�stin driveway for Parcel 1 and to provide an additional driveway for Parcel2. Both dnveways provide access to SW 106th�rive,a local street with less than 2,000 ADT. The applicant's engineer has submitted a sight distance report showing that the proposed driveway exceeds the required 250 feet of s�ig ht distance to the north but it limited to 190 feet to the south by a crest curve. Consequently, the applicant shall move the driveway to Johnson Street to achieve adequate sight distance or apply for a variance to th�s Code secnon. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where gueues of traffic commonly form on ap�proach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a colIector or a�terial street intersection shaII beL50 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the roposed driveway. The setback may be greater dependm upon the influence area, as determined from �ty Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by�e applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a pro�ect has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the apphcant must explore any o�ption for shared access with the adjacent pa�el. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway sFiall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. This properry is not located on a collector or arterial street;therefore the standard does not apply. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacin of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet The minimum s acin��of drivewa�ys and streets a�on an artenal shall be 600 feet The minimtun spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet g The property is not located on a collector or arterial and is not constructing a local street; therefore this standard does not apply. Minimum access requirements for residential use. Table 18.705.1 states that the minimum vehicular access and eg�ress for single-family dwelling units on individual lots shall be one, 10-foot paved driveway within a 15- foot-wide accessway. The minimum access width for 3-6 dwelling units is 20 feet with 20 feet of pavemen� The e�sting drive for Parcel 1 is 33.9 feet wide. A driveway is proposed for Parcel 2, which does not meet sight distance reqwrements under 18.705.030. A new driveway locauon must be proposed and approved. This standard can be met as conditioned below. NO7TC�,OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 10 OF 22 � Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code. No private access drives/flag lots are proposed with this application. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue was sent a copy of the proposal but submitted no comments to the Ciry. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with app roved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus by one of the followin : a) A circular,paved surface Fiaving a minimum turn radius measured froin center point to outside edge of 3�feet;b) A hammerhead-configured,paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet; c) The maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length have not been proposed with this application. This standard does not apply. FINDING: The standards f or Access,Egress,and Circulation were not completely met. CONDITIONS: . Prior to building pernlit issuance the driveway for Parcel2 shall be moved to Johnson Street to achieve adequate s� ht distance or apphcation f or a variance to this Code requirement shall be requeste�and approved. . Prior to building perniit issuance a site plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the m,n;mum access width reqwrements are met. DensityComvutations and Limitations (18.715�: Chapter 18.7 implements the Compre ensive Plan by establishin� the criteria for detenninin the number of dwellin units permitted. The number of allowable dwellin units is based on the net deve�opinent area. The net area is the remaining parCel area after exclusion of e nsitive lands and land dedicated for public roads or pa�s. The net area is then divided by the minimum lot size pennitted by the zoning distnct to deternzine the number of dwelling units that may be developed on a site. Based on the formulas in Chapter 18.715 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code, the maxiinum and minimum number of units perrrutted on the site is based on the net developable area, subtracting sensitive land areas, land dedicated to public parks, land dedicated for pu_blic right-of-way land}or private streets or access dnves, and lot area for the e�sting home from the total site area. The densityis calcu�ated as follows: ross �te Area 15 024 s . t. Lot or Existin Home - 7 524 s . t. Net ite Area 7 500 s . t. The resulting net area is 7j500 s quare feet. If this area is divided bythe m;n�mum lot size for the zone (7,500�,then the ir�a.scimum number of additional lots pernutted on this site is 1 and the m;n�mum number is 1. The applicant s proposal to create 1 additional lots for single-tamily detached homes meets the maxiinum and minimum density requu-ements of the R 4.5 zone. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the DensityStandards have been satisfied. Exce tions to Develo ment Standards 18.730 : Allowed projections into rear yard setbacks. en ponches, decks or balconies not more than 36 inches in height and not covered by a roof or canopy, may e�rtend or project into a required rear or side yard provided sucIi natural yard area is not reduced to less than three feet and the deck is screened from abutting properties. Porches may extend into a required front yard not more than 36 inches. The existing home on Parcel 1 has a rear yard deck built over a concrete pad. Based on the surve y,the concrete pad has an average elevation of 171.80. Therefore, the wood deck is 1.43 feet above the ground. An uncovered deck not more than 36 inches in height is permitted within the rear yard setback as long as the yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet and the deck is screened trom abutting properties. NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 11 OF 22 � The e�sting deck is set back 3 feet from the proposed property line of Parcel 2. The applicant reasons that screening may not be necessary since a dwelling will not be constructed on the area east of the deck meaning there is no pnvacy u7terest that must be protected. At the same time the applicant states that if required, the applicant prop oses to plant a row of evergreen shrubs ui the 3-foot area. As the standard does not allow for an exception, statt has conditioned the applicant to uistall the required screening. FINDING: The Exceptions to Development Standards can be met as conditioned below. CONDITION: Prior to the final plat,the applicant shall: A. Submit for review and approval revised plans showing the type of screening proposed for the 3-foot area east of the existing deck on Parcel 1. B. Install screening according to the approved plan. Landsca�in� and Screening(18.745� All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures. The accepted planting procedures are the guidelines described in the Tigard Tree Manual. These �u�delines follow those set forth by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) tree planting�guidelines as well as the standards set forch in the American Insutute of Architects' Architectw�l Graphic Standards, lOth edition. In the Architectural Graphic Standards there are guidelines for selecting and planting trees based on the soil volume and size at maturiry. Addtionally,there are directions for so�l amendments and modifications. The plant material shall be of hi h rade, and shall meet the size and grading standards of the American Standards for Nurberg Stock(AN�I �60, 1-1986, and any other future revisions);and Certificate of OccupancX Certificates of occupancy shall not be issued unless the landscaping requirements have been met or other arrangements have been made and approved by the City such as the posting of a bond. E�cisting vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as possible: 1) The developer shall provide inethods for the protection of existin� vegetation to remain during the construction process; and 2) the plants to be saved shall be noted on the randsca�pe plans (e. ., areas not to be disturbed can be fenced, as in snow fencing which can be placed around the ind'ividual trees�. Tree protection is addressed under the Tree Removal section of this decision. Street trees: Section 18.745.040 Section 18.745.040.A.: All development projects frontin� on a pu� blic street, private street or a private driveway inore than 100 feet in length approved after the adopt�on of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040C. This project has frontage on both SW 106`'' Drive and SW Johnson Street. Street trees are re quired along both frontages and shall be planted in accordance with the standards for size and spacing in this title, under Section 18.745.040.0 The tree removal plans prepared bythe Project Arborist show trees along both frontages.Since the plans are not to scale, the Caty Arbonst cannot deternune �f the trees are correctly spaced. A condition of approval will ensure the spacing standards are met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Landscaping standards have not been fully met. However, if the applicant compl�es v�nth the conditions beIow the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: . Prior to final plat the applicant shall submit for review and ap roval, revised plans to scale showing street tree spacing that meet the standards of 18.7�5.040.G . Street trees tor Parcel 1 shall be planted according to the approved plan prior to final plat. . Street trees for Parcel2 shall be planted according to the approved plan prior to final building inspection. NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 12 OF 22 � Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements (18.765): This Chapter is applicable or development pro�ects when there is new construction, expansion of existing use, or change of use in accordance with Sect�on 18.765.070 Minimum and Ma}cimum Off-Street Parking Requireinents. The proposed partition will create two lots for single-family residences. Table 18J65? requires that one 1) off-street parkuzg space 6e�provided per detached dwelling unit. There �s no maX,mum limit on pa�rking allowed �or detached su�gle-familydwelIirigs. There �s also no bicycle parking requirement for single-familydwellings. The existing residence has spaces in the garage and driveway. To ensure that the new home constructed ui this development comphes with these standards,the following condition shall apply: CONDITION: At the time of submittal for building permits for individual homes within the development, the developer shall submit materials demonstratuig that one (1) off-street parkin�g space, which meets m,n�mum dimensional requirements and setback reqwrements as speci�ied u-i Title 18, will be provided on-site f or each new home. Tree Removal (18.790� Chapter 18.790.030 requires the subrnittal of a tree plan that identifies the location size and species of all trees on the site a program to save e�usting trees over 12-inch diameter at breast height (dbh) or mitigate for their removal, ic�entificat�on of trees to be removed and a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees c�uring and after constiuction. As required for,partitions, the applicant submitted a tree plan conducted by Gary Drendel.certified arborist, however the tree plan«does not contaui all of the required elements. These elements are c��scussed in further detail below under Plan Requirements. A specific house plan has not been chosen for Parcel 2, and the applicant is not constructing a home at this time. As the applicant cannot deterniine which trees will be removed,four alternative plans have been provided. Alternative 1: no removal Alternative 2: remove tree#6 Alternative 3: remove tree#7 Alternative 4: remove both trees #6 and�#7 Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: 1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; The Arborist Report identified the location,size and species of all e�sting trees,consistent with this standard. 2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replaceinent gu�delines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the followin�standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: a. Retention of less than 25% of e�cistin trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation pmgram in accordance with Section 18�90.060D of no net loss of trees; b. Retention of froin 25% to 50% of existin� trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be reinoved be initigated in accordance with Section T8.790.060D; c. Retention of from 50% to 75% of e�stin�trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 pe�ent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section T8.790.060D; d. Retention of 75% or greater of e�cisting trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation. There are 5 viable existing trees and one (1) previously removed tree (14 inch birch) on site greater than 12 inches, makulg 6 trees subject to rruugation. The app licant states that the birch was removed due to hazardous conditions (diseased and damaged from storn�s). Only the stump of the tree remains, which is not adegu�ate for the arborist to establish the condition of the tree. As noted above,the applicant has not deterniined exactly which trees will eventually be removed and therefore, has presented four alternauve tree plans. Each plan indicates the trees on the propertythat are to ren�ain and those proposed for removal. This requirement has not been met. NO7TCE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 13 OF 22 Based on the alternatives provided in the arborist report,mitigation will be required as follows: Alternative 1: 5 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved =833% retention,no mitigation required. ternative 2: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% rrutigation reqwred. 50% x 27" removed = 13.5" of mitigation required. Alternative 3: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required. 50% x 37" removed = 18.5" of mitigation required. Alternative 4: 3 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 50% retenuon, 50% mitigation required. 50% x 50" removed =25.0" of mitigation required. The a plicant will need to rovide a miti ation lan with a signature of a proval from the ro�ect arborist that meets the repIacement requiremenPs uz Section �SJ90.�60.D. A cash assurancePfor the equivalenta mount of miugation will be reqwred at the rate of $125 per inch to be mitigated. Trees that are required by other code provisions such as street trees are not eligible for mitigauon credit. 3. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; All of the trees proposed to be removed are identified in the applicant's Tree Preservation Plans and Arborist Report. 4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construct�on. The guidelines for tree protection are outlined in the arborist report, but the plans do not reflect these measures. The applicant shows general tree�rotection f encing on the tree plan, but plans need to display the required tree protection fencing,tree protection spec ications,and the tree protection zone dunensions to scale per the pro�ect arbonst's report. Section 18.790.040 states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall notbe subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by tlus section to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified atfiorist The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazarclous tree. The form of tlus deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director. The applicant, has proposed four alternative tree plans, some of which show retaining trees on-site. Removal of retained trees �s restricted. A condition of approval will ensure that this standard is met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above� the Tree Removal standards will be met, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below: CONDITIONS: Tree Protection . Prior to building pernzit issuance the applicant shall submit revised plans to the City Arborist for review and approval showuig accurately and to scale the tree protection s�pecifications and tree protection fencmg dimensions outlined in the arbonst report. The plans shall include a signature of approval from the pro�ect arborist. . Prior to building pernzit issuance, the applicant shall�position fencing as directed by the project arbonst to protect the trees to be retauied. The applicant shall allow access by the City Arborist for the purpose of monitoring and inspection of the tree protection to verify that the tree protecuon measures are perforrrung adequately. Failure to follow the plan, or inaultaul tree protection fencing in the designated locations shall be grounds for urunediate suspension of work on the site unt�l remeci�ation measures and/or civil citations can be processed. NOTTC�OF DEQSION MI.P2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 14 OF 22 � . If work is required within an established tree protection zone, the project arborist shall prepare a proposal detailing the construction techruques to be emp loyed and the likely unpacts to the trees. The proposal shall be reviewed and approved by_the Caty Arbonst before proposed work can proceed within a tree protection zone. The City Arborist may requu-e changes pnor to approval. The project arbor�st shall be on site while work �s occurnng within the tree protection zone and subrrut a sucrunary report certifying that the work occurred per the proposal and will not significantly impact the health and/or stability of the trees. T�us note shall be included on the Tree Protection Plan. . The applicant shall have an on-goin�responsibility to ensure that the Project Arborist has submitted written reports to the ty Arbor�st, at least once every two weeks, as the Project Arborist morutors the construcuon activiues from initial tree� protecuon zone (TT'Z) fencing installation through the building construction phases. The reports shall evaluate the condition and location of the tree rotection tencing, deterTrune �f any changes occurred to the 'IT'Z, and if any part o�the Tree Protecnon Plan has been violated. If the amount of TPZ was reduced,then the Project Arborist shall certify that the construction activities did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and stability of the tree(s). If the reports are not subrrutted to the C�ty Arborist at the scheduled intervals, and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protecuon Plan are not being followed by the.contractor or a sub-contractor, the City can stop work on the pro�ect until an inspecnon can be done by the City Arborist and the Project Arbonst. . Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicating the locations of trees that were preserved on the lot during site development. In addinon the plans shall include accurate locations of tree canopy dnplines and protection fencing, and a signature of approval from the project arbonst regardmg the placement and construction techruques to be employed in building the structures. All proposed. protection fencing shall be installed and inspected pnor to commencing construction. The fencing shall remain in�place through the duration of all of the building construction phases, until the Certi�icate of Occupancy has been approved. Prior to final inspection,the applicant shall submit a final report bythe Project Arborist certifying the health of protected trees and that the street trees were properly planted per the approved street tree plan. Tree protection measures may be removed and fu1a1 u�spection authorized upon review and approval by the City Arborist. . Prior to final plat the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction on Parcel 1 to the effect that any exisung tree greater than 6" diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invahd if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. . Prior to issuance of building pernzits the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction on Parcel2 to the effect that any existu-ig tree greater than 6" diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restnction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. Mitigation . Pnor to �ssuance of building pern�its the appli�cant shall submit a mitigation plan to the City Arborist for review and app roval. 1Vlitigation can be accomphshed by either planting the number of caliper inches removed or paying a fee-in-lieu at the rate of$125 per caliper inch, or any combinat�on thereof. If a mitigation planting proposal is subrrutted, it needs to have a signature of approval from the pro�ect arbonst certifyuzg that it meets the requirements of 18.790.060I� and that the species and�placement o} mitigauon trees has 6een reasonably calculated to provide for the�r growth to maturity. The mitigation proposal shall show the species,locauon, and spacing of rruugation trees in relation to btuldu�gs,infrastructure,ex�sting trees,street trees,and each other. NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTION PAGE 15 OF 22 � Mitigation shall be based upon one of the following tree plan alternatives: Alternative 1: 5 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 83.3% retention, no mitigation required. Alternative 2: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required. 50% x 27" removed = 13.5" of mitigation required. Alternative 3: 4 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 66.6% retention, 50% mitigation required. 50% x 37" removed = 18.5" of mitigation required. Alternative 4: 3 of 6 trees over 12.0" diameter preserved = 50% retention, 50% mitigation required. 50% x 50" removed = 25.0" of mitigation required. . Prior to building pernzit issuance, the applicant shall submit a cash assur�ance (letter of credit or cash deposit) for the equivalent value of mitigation required. Mitigation is calculated at $125.00 per calip er ulch. Any trees successful��ly planted on or off-site, in accordance with an approved Tree Mitigation Plan and Tigard Develop ment Code Section 18.790.060.D will be credited a au�st the assurance two yeaxs atter all of the trees are planted per t�e approved Tree�tigation Plan. After the trees are planted,the project. arbonst shall submit a letter to the City Arborist to certify that all of the mitigation trees were properly planted per the app roved Tree Mitigation Plan in order to set the starting pou�t of the two-year tree establishment period. After the two-year establishment period, the applicant shall provide a re-inventory of the mitigation trees conducted by a cert�fied arborist in order to document mitigauon tree survival, and compliance with the approved Tree Mitigation Plan. The remauling value of caliper inches not successfully mitigated shall be paid as a fee in-lieu of planting from the original cash assurance. Vsual Clearance Areas 18.795 : This Chapter requires at a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersectin� nght-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicIe hed e pla� ntin fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceedin thnee �3) feet in heig�t TI'he coc�e provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visual�y clear etween three (3) and eight(�) feet in heigh� Trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by ineasuring from the corner, 30-feet along the right-of-way and along the driveway and connecting these two points with a straight line. C1ear vision areas are shown on the�prelunuiary plat for the e�sting drive, proposed drive and street corner. Because the proposed access on SW 106�' L�rive cannot meet site distance requu-ements, the access for the future home on Parcel 2 must be from SW Johnson Street. Vision clearance areas have not been shown for this locauon. This standard has not been satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the Vision Clearance Standards are not met. CONDITIONS: . Place a note on the final plat for the visual clearance easement at the comer of SW 106�' Drive and SW Johnson Street to the benefit of the City of Tigard. Said easement is subject to the City of Ti ard Visual C�earance Area standards that restrict the height of plantu-igs and structures �I"igard Development Code Chapter 18.795). . Prior to building pernut issuance for Parcel 2 , a site plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the standards of 18.795 (Visual Clearance Areas) are met. Im�act Study(18.390� Section 18.360.090 states, "The Director shall make a finding with res�ect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions ordenying an application: ' NOTICE OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTION PAGE 16 OF 22 � Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of developinent on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the developinent on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedicat�on, or provide evidence that supports that the real roperty dedicat�on is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the develo men� Section 18.390.�40 states that when a condition of ap roval requires t�l-►e transfer to the public of an interest in real propeity,the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The applicant has submitted an impact study Stormwater currently flows,from the high side of the site (Parcel 1) across Parcel 2 to e�sting weep holes on SW Johnson Street. The Engineenng Division has conditioned the applicant to show how stormwater f rom both sites will be directed to an approved system. Water and sarutary sewer�s or will be provided by public lines within SW 106 Drive or SW Johnson Street. Parks sys tem development charges will be collected for each new home at building pernzit�ssuance as well as a Transportation Development Tax. The Washington County Transportation Develop ment Tax ('I'DT- effective July 1 2009) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on Washington County figures 'IDTs are expected to recapture 28 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Artenal Street system. The applicant will be requu-ed to pay TDTs of appro�cnately$4,599 (Effective July 1,2009) per new dwelling unit. Based on the estunate that total TDT fees cover 28 percent of the impact on major street im rovements citywide,a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $16,425 ($4,599 divided by.28� The difference between the TDTpaid, and the full impact is considered the uruiutigated unpact on the street system;therefore the uruniti ated impact ot this project is $l1,g26 �$16,425 - $4,599). The sne has T50.25 feet of frontage along 106�' Drive and �9.66 feet along Johnson Street. Both are classified as local streets. Two feet of righ�t-of-way dedicat�on is required to meet current standards. Because the e�sting site is latge enough to be divided,the C:ity has considered allowing the apphcant to record a sidewalk easement or request a vanance to the muiunum lot size �f dedication occurs. In addition the applicant would execute a Restrictive Covenant for future public improvements. The allowance for a sidewalk easement uz lieu of dedication requ.ires the applicant to apply and receive approval for an adjustment to the street improvement standards. If the applicant chooses to dedicate the additional ROW instead of executing a sidewalk easement, the total dedication will be approximately 500 square feet. The estunated cost of the dedication is $1,500 (500 square feet x $3.00/square foot). The dedicauon is reqwred to meet the street im�provement requu-ements of Section 18.g10.030. The total cost is less than the uiunitigated impact on the arterial and colIector system. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets,sewers,and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Sect�on 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standarcis. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accorciance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a local street to have a 54-foot ri�ht-of-way width and 32-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, si ewalks and bikeways,underground utilities,street lighting,storm drainage,and street trees. NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 17 OF 22 � Tlvs site is at the intersection of SW 106�''Drive and Johnson Street. Both are classified as a local street on the City of Tigard Tx�ansportation Plan Map. At present, both streets have approximatel 25 feet of right-of-way from centerline, according to the most recent t� assessor's map. An additional two feet o�right-of-way�s required to comply with current local street standards. The applicant states that the "skinny street" standards of Table 18.810.1 of 18.810.030.E allow SW 106�' Drive and Johnson Street to ren�ui with a n�ht-of-waywidth of 50 feet. However,Note 3 of the table allows the reduced width only if certain cross section critena are met. Approval of the reduced width would require the applicant to meet the adjustment approval criteria of Section 18.370.026 C.11. The additional two feet of right-of-way dedication would not allow for the minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. The min;mum lot size could be achieved by allowing the additionally required two feet of width to be placed within a public sidewalk easement. Both streets are currently improved with a 32-foot paved width and curbs but without sidewall�s. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should plant street trees, enter into a future streets improvement agreement for the rema,r„r,g unprovements and provide a two-foot wide public sidewalk easement along both frontages. Future Street Plan and E�ension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of e�ustin and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states �at where it is necessary to give access or pernut a satisfactory future division of ad'oining land, streets shall be e�ended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade sha� be constructed at the end of the stree� These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such t�me as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners wluch shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cos� Tem orary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess o�150 feet in length. The property is suxrounded by existing residential development. There are no opportu.nities or needs for future streets or extensions of streets through this property. Street Ali nment and Connections: Section 1�.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre- e�cisting developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restnct�ons e�usting prior to May 1 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulatec� water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within t�ie site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, e�usting development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfi�ure the street pattem to�rovide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15/o for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topograplucal constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. The property is surrounded by existing residential development. There are no oppomulities or needs for future streets or extensions of streets through this property. Block Desig ns - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate buildin sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convement access, circulation, control an� safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. NOTTC�, OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTT7TON PAGE 18 OF 22 ' Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line excep� . Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wedands or other bodies of water or, pre- e�sting development or, . For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways,major collectors or railroads. . For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulat�on pro�ndes equivalent access. Due to existin development surrounding the property�there are no possible street connections or opportunities to create shorter �lock lengths through this site. SW 106 Drive connects Walnut Street with Tiedeman Avenue, and Johnson Street currently dead ends at Fanno Creek and is picked up on the opposite side of the creek. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, ui�less the pa�el is less than 1.5 t�mes the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district All of the parcels are less than 1.5 times the min;mum lot size (7,500 x 1.5 = 11,250). Parcel 1 is 7,524 square feet and Parcel2 is7,500 square feet. Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of fronta�e on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land pattition, 18.420.050.A.4.c ap lies, wluch requires a pax�el to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide reco�ed access easement In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 fee� Parcel 1 has 85.33 feet of street frontag e along SW 106''' Drive. Parcel2 has 64.92 feet of frontage on SW 106�' and 99.66 feet of frontage on SW Johnson Street. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant shall enter into a future street improvement agreement for SW 106�'Drive and Johnson Street,which will include public sidewalks,thereby meeting this criterion. Sanitary Sewets: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to e�usting mains in accordance with the provisions set foith in Design and Construction Standards}or Sanitary and Surface Water Manageinent(as adopted by Clean Water Servrces in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted pohcies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by t11e Comprehensive Plan. There is a public sewer line located in SW 106th Drive and a lateral that serves the e�sting home. The applicant's plans show a proposed lateral from the e�sting sewer to serve Parcel 2. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other draina e facility shall be lar�e enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whe�er inside or outside the developmen� The City Engineer shall approve the necessa�y size of the facility based on the pro� visions of Design and Construction Standards for Samtary and Surface Water Management�as adopted by �:lean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream drainage ways that impact this development. NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITION PAGE 19 OF 22 Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resultin from the development will ovedoad an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall wi�old approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the developinent in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management(as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, C1ean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local govenunents institute a stormwater detention/effective imp ervious area reduction prog ram resultin ui no net uicrease ui storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments res�tin ui an uicrease of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities,unless the develo-pment is located adjacent to�anno Creek For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff will be perniitted to d�scharge without detention. The CWS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land partitions. It would be impractical to require an on-site water quantity facility to accommodate the storm water from the two parcels. Rather, the CW5 standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed appropnate. Staff recommends payment of the fee ui-heu on this application. Storm drainage for both parcels shall be du-ected to an approved system. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed under�ro� und, except for surface mounted transformets, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: . The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the under�round seivices; . The C'ity reserves the ri�ht to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; . All underground utilit�es, incIuding sanitary sewers and stonn drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed pnor to the surfacing of the streets;and . Stubs for service connections sFiall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where e�cisting utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority deterniines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-groundin� the ut�lities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the developmen� The determinat�on shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only such situation is a short frontage development for which under- rounding would result in the placement ot�additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities�acilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are existing o��verhead utiliry lines along the frontage of SW Johnson Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed,it must be approved by Mike McCarthy,Right-of-WayAdinuustrator, and it is equal to $35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contau�s the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 99.66 lineal feet;therefore the fee would be$3,488. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Fire and Life Safetv: Tualatin ValleyFire and Rescue (South Division) [Contact:John Dalby, 503-356-4723]provides fire protecuon services within the City of T�igard. There is an ex�stuig hydrant on the northwest comer of the site. The District should be contacted for ulforn�ation regarding the adequacy of the distribution system, the need for fire hydrants, or other requirements. Public Water S stem: Water service is provi ed bythe Catyof Tigard. The applicant prop oses to continue to use the existing service for Lot 1 and install an additional service from the ex�stui�inau�in SW 106th Drive to serve Lot 2. NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTITTON PAGE 20 OF 22 Storm Water Qualit�: The City has agreed to enfonce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construct�on of on-site water quality facilit�es. The facilities shall be desi ned to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff�enerated�rom newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. The C�US standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such as residential land partiuons. It would be im�practical to require an on-site water quality faciliry to accommodate treatment of the storm water from the two parcels. Rather, the CWS standards provide that applicants should paya fee in-lieu of constructing a facilityif deemed appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this apphcation. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Desi n and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other po�utants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construct�on, gradin�, excavatin�, clearin , and any other activity wluch accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to su�mit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over five acres, the develo.per will be required to obtain an NPDES pernut from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along wrth the site and/or building permi� An Erosion Control Plan must be submitted with the PFI Pernzit application for review and approval. Address Assi nments• The City o Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses fo� r�parcels within the City.of T'i ard. An addressing fee in the amount of$50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the Citypnor to�inal plat approval. Surve��Re uirements: The applicant's in p at shall contain State Plane Coordinates AD 83 (9� 1)] on two monuments with a tie to the Cit�s global positioning system(GPS) geodetic control network(�G�C 22). These monumenrs shall be on the same line and shall be of the same prec�sion as requu-ed for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to gnd measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by. . GPS tie networked to the Cit�s GPS survey. . By random traverse using conventional surveyuig methods. In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network The applicant's eng'ineer shall provide the Ciry with an e7ectronic file with points tor each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 ( SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS Tigarcl Police and the Public Works Depa�nents were sent copies of the proposal and have no objection. The City Arborist provided comments,which have been incorporated into the decision. SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services (CWS) has reviewed the proposal. Comments have been inco orated into the decision and conditions. A copyof the entire C�X/S letter is found ui the land use file (MI.P2009-00001�. NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLI'2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTTON PAGE 21 OF 22 " Ap licant's Response: Many of the comments submitted by C,'WS are typical of a subdivision application where new fac�ties and construction closely follow the Prelimuiary and tinal plat approvals. They are not spec�fic to the subject application. Applicant objects to the tuYUng o} the obligations recommended by CWS. Qwest Communications states that this location falls out of the Qwest service area. Verizon Communications stated that a 2'x 3'vault is located on the corner of the site within the area of the proposed sidewalk The applicant is not proposing a sidewalk at this time. SECTION VIII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JLJNE 22,2009 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JULY 8t2009 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. A eal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Commuruty Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the re�quired fee shall be filed with the Director wulun ten (10) business days of the date the Notice o}-Dec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and fom�s are available from the Plaiuzing Division of Tigard Ciry Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues ident�fied in the wntten comments subrrutted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party dunn_g the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted from tune to tune by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON JULY 7,2009. I�estions: e any questions, please call the City of Tigard Plannulg Division,T"igard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, T'igard,Oregon at (503) 639-4171. ��Q�v.,J�• Q � ��� june 22,2009 PREPARE BY: e Caines DATE Associate Planner �/ fJ � � � r ' c'.�-� june 22 ,2009 APPROVED . Ric ar Bewers o DATE Plaiuvng Manager NO7TC� OF DEQSION MLP2009-00001/SANDERS PARTTTION PAGE 22 OF 22 ',, VICINITY MAP tzt3o �z13z Woou�,o!°a,h .---. � MLP2009-00001 1223Q 12210 17250 10515 t0505 nc ,uu ,uso�u�o �oass cyeesaak '� ,�. SANDERS PARTITION V ,,.,c� 12233 1 10525 10185 10500 Il Fow/e��t5 12235 �� 10/75 10495 1D170 � o �uss Z �zza� U �zzas �� �ago �oaas ioaes �Z � O � ��u �p� Subject Site o �zsse �zzss �zsoo ia�o �aso � W � f- 10365 12320 12325 10335 aGJ� 12330 p� t0515 �p�55 ��5� 10375 „� 12350 � � 10315 72355 = � � J�HNgpN 8T 0 ° -� 103�4 f ig �tl R 1�� tOT70 10675 12385 70530 1�� 10150 Q :.............:::::: 1030D 12394;;;;; 10270 tOGGO ,10515 ��w 10210� i 10295 10210 106t5 12�40 10585 �ass t06T5 10265 10290 � 106+10 '(� �� O • �oe�o �ozeo �s`i�uszs � �p�p 10355 10685 12555 �j, tOT7S 10765 � W ��� Information on this map is for general location Z only and should be verified with the Development ERROL $T Z P� Services Division. O 12515 12575 LL 10690 \ 72535 '� � ��� 12550 Scale 1:2,587-1 in=216 ft �2us (�Q�G ��� _YR t2`'�S �'�"� \ Map prinled at 11-May-�y 0;1:Sti PM io�ao �os�o 10705 �o�oo f �zsss�zs�s F��� �oaw ��p 0Q-� ,- �zs�o ti � �AiA IS DERIVEO FROM MU TiGLE SOURCES TNE CITY O�iiGARO MAI(ESNOWARRMTV REPRESEh�TATqhORGUARANTEEASTOTME (:ONTENi ACCURACY i IMEIIhESS OR COMGLETENE55 OF MV OF TIIE YUIU E]Iult'1� AP� 12�4 �25.�'S T �OXIS DATAPROVIDEOMIEREiN THECITVOFTIGAROSMALLASSUMENO �OISS LIABILIIV iOR AM1V ERRORS OMIS510N5 0R INACCURACIE5IM1 i11E 'OT� �xi�5 � J� INFOqMAt101v GROVIDED REGAROLESS OF HOW C,AlI5E0 1z� �zs�s yP �ozas -------- _ � City of Tigard �zsso �ons �xas �x�a �z6�s �P,��!` �ano wAR� PS �Tigard,OR 97B13d • 12655 10�50. T M� 503639-41�1 ���. 12652 12655 t�30'4 12695 0 5ft www.tigard-or.gov �10765 i �� / t2699 72620 t2687 �1D23U LEGEND• S°'�z,•°°•W 5°°°� — • vo.s/e'i.R.,o.s'suR�o--% � !BENT,T.S.P.,O.P. ! ~ppINT 'A' � � • DENOTES MOHtMNTS FOUNO AS N01Ep pN1A E%IS71NC WA1ER ME1ER S 00'1700'W 0.12' �,yrtd fD.S/6'I.R.,0.1'BURIED O OQ1016 S/6l00'NtON ROp �( E7�S1WG FME HYDRANT D.P.,MEID MTM A YEILOM PlAS11C CM SiAMPED ' . 'YIEt LS 194�' m E)OSiMIG WA1FR VFL4E 3 � SET d1 m EIOSTWC SAMTNtY M/�MIOIE '��..�n.1 � ' lR DFNO7E5 IRON ROD OG11 EASiNG CAS ME1ER � I.P. DENOTES MlON PPE DE4 EIa51NG EIECiRIC MEIER � m. oer�ohs raxro oue E705iRIC MAM190% n ;� s LSP. DEH01E5 11[D$1RNCMT PoR110N oDS f7pS71NG ppNNSpq�T �Ot i9 L01 iB YPC OENOIES YELLOW PLASIIC CAP f3-i0, EIOSiMlC UTllltt POIE MI7N STAEET Llpli 'r �•'! ..� ' ^ � __.. .:.. .-. _ � (W) DFNOlES IIEASURFD O bOS71NG 1REE � e ��{� FD.1/Y IR.,0.3'BURIEO, (P) DENOffS'CORONMOOD PUCE' .._.,�••�...,.-..... ElOS71NG CONIOUR i . n ..,. �;I - BENT.T S.P..O.u. O.P. UENOIES ptIGMAI PLAT COPNER -57'- Ek1571NC SENER '� - POWT �E 5 00']9'00'E 0.12' O.U. OENOIES ORIpN UNKNONN -wA- EJOSIING WAIER `v I'� � SS AIH CXISt.p.O.W. N 89'21'00'f 219.10'(M 210.00'(P) RIM 185.12 '�' -� " �` PR. DENORS PRORAIED -G- E%IS71NC CAS LINE I.E.M(S)160.17 ��... ��... _..... • �......... , -...-_ ._._..D/W.. .� . -P- EA1511NC QEC7RICAL LINE LE.M(N)16Q17 3 � .- � ... . ... ._ ...... _ � . .. . sn oo+otES surt�r�we�,rr�vm�craN oM �� i.E.Wi(E)16007 s � ' S;'yV. JOZ-INSON ST g•Pvic e83 Z�p }� k ������ �A SA � S SA SA—�—SA SA SA '—>A—� sN(�) s�ses9� r�o r�oanc g ' t� z s : j ,,::, - � / �,:, ;`a `•N ,cuae ss fFE f7l1511 ROOR ELfYAl10N ' �o . .' � ____ � ,W CD CLEAN WT F/0 UNE ��I �� .. q 1 .. N 89'2'00'�F�,y9.66'(M) 1W. (P) ._--�. D/N�'�I �:. LE.IN(W)I 8.42 , }�lf� •.'/�� F... . . .��1,t� 1 80.00'(P)k MELD i.E.WT(E) R��-` " TBN` ��L GYEqHEAD POKER • ..��-'��cne�e eoz .... .�POINT D DS DONN SPWT . � � � .... �. . CABLEroO%�_3USSIBL�SS-1�7 E1fIS7MC SP07 ELEVAIIfk! 3F, � � BOrRO � FD.1/2'LR.,BENT FD t/Y I.R.,O.u. CONC.PFTCH . '�� �"' 1 W00D p�µhRJ T.S.P.,O.U. �I" S� � ` COOD FOR NORININC � f ��� N 89'21'00'W 0.25' .,.�.�_...,..�.._ ..��...,�-_.,-...�,.�....�.......�... 3 , ` .. �PIRCEL. U'�E CEDAR ,� � . , a s o— � �soo w.�r... ,s PR�L!(���4��:FY � � A N � POSS�BIE ��N� ; o ..r� �'WO' W � .�.._y 55 CO ACONC, � C l T Y O f=Ti��.�,�� �!a r�n�,��y:��i�;��� � �, � 23�;�Ep-,l � ;,�, � � s �� �. _�,. � N� � �o��, Q • �'� N 90'OO�OU: 82.01' , iT .~ �g � � , g 4ROP09E6S' �5� �'8".0 Y WOpp FENCE P��C f O1 INiERSECT10N NSION TRIANCIE �. �N (XI$IINC H�USC � . 3 � R ^_-n� ,. � � �,_O� � ^ _� �,I..,.. U PROPE�': �11390 ��� s .� g t�pN��o O F ISTING WEEP HOIF�EACURBR CDC SECIION 18.795 l-(/�(� t ..,Y C_ .,--- �`� — ____._ —--- � �n.s/a�i.a.,as eumen edae#- n'_��'� " ° � ` g '`° _.r...,_..�. _ ._ _.. . .-. .._.... . ... , _.... k BENT.T.SP..O.P. / J w VOSSiBLE FFE OJ POSSBIE E%ISTtNG PUMP pSCHMCE xfEP MOIE. "".��� . . . S E9'SU'00'E 0.7�'J � 1��. :� SA . i 3�1. ,��3 8�21' wAr 4APLE ,L �' '� 1� POSSIBIE fU7UNE 20'NiDC OfUYEWAY�OCAiION M11M a aC` VARCEI 1 I WOOp pECK �I ,lCUR6 £ �W���" 75N SQ fT '�� t).58' OVER CONC.PAi10 NSION CLEARANCE NOTED. NARRATIVE: � n;::. .��- f ' -��•50�� BA9S OF BfARNCS: N 0303'19'E BE7MEEN Mf S/6'RON R005 FdlND AT PONTS'A'AND 9'� . �I'�- �7.� °n �:..I SHE�._ CRAVEL JCXMN�INIf� AS CAlqAA1ED fR011 7F1E PLAT OF�O7TONNDOD PIACE.� � ... �. -�/ �VERHE,D..-_-....� � FENCE� ' Y i �r G�SY�R � - �pl�� 'A PpNi'A"70 PqNT�'•5 03'OJ'19'W (BASIS OF BEMMJCS) k-HELO � J �76.21'(M) �5).93'(P) PUAPOSE OF SUR6EY! TO PART110N-L01 1J Of 7HE PLAT Of'COTTONNOOD PIACE'W7D 2 i i..CABLE BO%N.. I` +5t5'(P) �� M . 19'APPIE PARCEtS AS SMONN. 5 gq}6'30'W )5 . 50'R.OWI °�FD 5 B'I.R..O.P. 5z�s�Mfti,5b0'W POINT G NElD 1HE S/E'IROH R00 fOUND AT POINT'A'AS AN ORIdNAL plAi MOMMQiT ANO MEID THE � 'Y.�.�I""...- - S/8�MtON R00,SET BY SN 28297,AT PqNi'�'(SN 2EI97 REDLACED 7HE dIIQNAL PLAT 5/8' F/G JBO% I � � 0.5'BURIED,BENi, ?8Z�P� 9iE hREh= 15.021 S0.F7. r.s.P' FD.3 ZONE�. R4.5 lOW DENSITY RESIDMTUI 5 2/'17'2S E 0.52' � ��P'���� MiN.lOT S12E= 7500 SQ.fi. IRON ROD)AS B�NG AT 71iE ORIGMAL PUT CORNER HM THE PIAT BEARMG ON 5 00'1V00'W , /. fROM PdNT'h'M!D NOR7H 1435b0"EAST fROM POM7'9'AHp pl7ER5[C7FD 1HESE UNES AT i�y i o S 76'S0'17'E 7.06' PdNi'C. NEXT,TME ptAT BEAfiNC OF S E9'21'00'M MAS HEID fROM iHE 5/E'�tON ROD i � LOl 3 FOUND AT POMT V•,MID R(TEHSECIED IMTH ME EASi RM;NT-Of-NAY 11NE OF S.N.1061N DRI�E SS MH �� � POINT 'f' � AT PdNT�'. iME R@1liMIC plSTµq Up Tp ppN7•�•,s,e„�,,,,o,,,E,,,,,,c,�,s Fo� RIM 171.11 POIN T 'C' B E N C H MA R K: � ` 1E1MY• 7!E N�R7ME5�T CORIIER aF 1ME PR�PER7Y MAS ES7ABLISMED Ai 7ME PIAT qSTANCE 0� l[,iN(SE)�66 Ol ` �FD.5/8'I.R., � E0.00 FEET fROM 7HE S/E�IRON ROD Fd1ND AT PORIT'p'. Np(T,TIiE 5q11HMfST CORNER OF "� EIEVATIOH$ARE 8�SE0 ON WASHINCiON CWN1Y I.E.OU7(N)165 91 0.5'BURIED,BEN i,i.S P,0 P. LOT 1S NAS ESiABU9Kp B'I NOIDNG A PRORhiEtl pSTANCE OF SQ19 fEET SQ76 PU FRqA .ga BENQiNhRK N0.116,A BRASS Di$K IN iME S.W.CORNER P091T�C,1NEN POMi T MAS lIELp AT 1NE PLAi BEARMC AIA pSTANCE Oi N A�'16'b'E AND S 39'S7'00'E 0.55' OF THE CCNCRETE PORCM A1 Si AHi110N7$CHOOI IN � 49.15 fEET FRq1$1�p Sd17HNEST CORNER OF l0T 11 IASTLT,1HE PUT BEARING OF S e� 1ICAP,D,EAST AIAIN ENiR,WCE 10 SCHOOL. � 00'IObD�N MAS HEID FRp,1 7HE HE COqNER 0�1HE pROpfply ANp NAS M7ERSEC7Ep N1TH THE �•"n/ P��NT 8 ELEY.=169.50(IINE}07) PLA1 BEARMC Of SW7H 7505'00'EAS7 FROAI PqNT'F",AT PqNT b'. FD.5/8"I.R.N11H YPC iBM�. TDP Of ll"IN NUELIER ON FIRE HYDRANi A1 iHE ��;TAMPEO,'EUCNlES Pl5 2Y?Y Nw CORHER OF SI1E. EIEV.= i67.10 � SEi ON SN(1)k HELD � '°B': S'°,°-' ZTEC ENGINEERS INC. GRAPHIC SCALE DATE: 1/22/09 REGiSTEP,ED STEVE SANDERS 30 0 15 30 60 120 3737 SE. 8TH AVE.. PORTLIND, ORECON 97202 PROFESSIONAL SCA1.E: 1".30' LAND SURVErOR PH: (5031 235-B795 FAx� (503) 23J-78B9 DRA1fN: JWS - ( �N�e,�,� CNKD: CCF I �NCH� 3D 1'C}.T LOCATEC� W THE N.E. 1/4 OF SECTIDN 3, OREGON T. 25., R. 1W, W.M., IN THE CIN OF iiCnRD, �uir n,isei e��.e: sae�o-�vncs wnsHiNCTON couN�r, oRecoN cnRis 9i44neoRN j�RELIMINARY PLAT PLOT: 5-14-'09 Reuew�i onic. i/i/ZOio ' Steven W. Sandexs & EXH I B 11�� ; Barbara Swanson-Sanders MLP2009-00001 . 2647 SW Talbot Road SANDERS PARTTION Portland, OR 97201 Gary P. Shepherd,Attorney 3115 SE Salmon Street Portland, OR 97214 Garry L. Helmer 10585 SW Walnut St. Tigard, OR 97223 Richard Pearson 12330 SW 106`''Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 �� AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING � � � . I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first dul�� swom/affirm, on oath depose and sa�- that I am a Planning Assistant for the City of Tigard,Washington County, Oregon and that I served the foIlowing: ;i,htrA\��n�pm.lm 14>ri.;11c1�u'� ❑X NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: �iLP2009-00001/S1�NDERS P1�R"I'ITION 'Filc\�i.�\�mr Ri�ti�ntiiro. � AMENDED NOTICE � City of Tigard Planning Director :� cop�� of the said norice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit "A", and b�� reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit "B", and by reference made a part hereof, on lune 22,2009,an sited in th LTnited States Mail on�une 22,2009,postage prepaid. ` ��. (Person epa ed N STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ss. City of Tigard � y �I�I�l l-/ Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the O l da� of ,2009. OFRCIAL SEI►L sFIIRLEY L TlIEAT NOTARY PUBLIC-OREOON � � COMMISSION NO.�1d7T7 I�AY CAMM�ssiO►�ExP�aES�2s,20�t N TARY PL�BLIC OF OREGO �1y Commission Expires: 4'I 3S�l � � � EXHIBIT�. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION . �� MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 „ SANDERS PARTITION 120 DAYS = 9/15/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SANDERS PARTITION CASE NO.: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2009-00001 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval for a Minor Land Partition to partition one (1) existing .35-acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-family residences. An e�sting residence on Parcel 1 will remain. APPLICANT & Steven W. Sanders and APPLICANT'S GaryP. Shepherd,Attorney OWNER Barbara Swanson-Sanders REP.: 3115 SE Salmon Street 2647 SW Talbot Road Portland,OR 97214 Portland,OR 97201 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: R 4.5: Low DensityResidential. ZONE: R 4.5 Low Density Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-f amily homes with or without accessory residential units at a m;n;mum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are pernzitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are aLso pernutted conditionally. LOC'.ATION: 12390 SW 106`''Drive;Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S 103AA,Tax Lot 1916. PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 7,524 Square Feet. PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 7,500 Square Feet. APPLICABLE RE VIE W CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the Ciry of T"igard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FRO�I T�iE �FFECTIV� l��i E OF THIS D�;C;ISIC7N. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenry-five cents (25�) per page,or the current rate charged for copies at the tune of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JLJNE 22, 2009 AND BECOMES E FFE CTIVE ON JULY 8, 2009 UNLE SS AN APPEAL IS FILE D. —A- D—Deal-: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as� provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code wluch provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director anthin ten �10) busuiess daYs of the date the Notice of Dec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are ava able from the 1'laruiing Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues ident�fied in the wntten comments subrrutted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues �roperly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party durui�the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted f rom time to tune by the appe ate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON JULY 7, 2009. Fo�estions: r inforn�ation�please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Cheryl Caines at (503) 639-4171, Tigard CityHall, 13125 SW HaII Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223 or byemail to che , c(a�tigsrd-or.gov. � - - VICINITY MAP �„ �•..�: � . . . � , �� _I . ndLP2009-00001 � �uw �ar�. / ' i � � � � °�u �:�f� °"`'��e o'"`} ���''an/ . ... . -- SANDERS PARTITION W \(� � / i ,� \ y ��ef1! �µ�� � �nn. ����� � /��a:e � . .. �f � _.__, 'tIIf! - �'� • 161/l�.�� � �in�5.V "�us� �m�o w�ao�°as i°w� �\? . f I �i�u - � ;ono � � .�� � ,�. .� ,��u'� �un aHro iww uns,�?�.�, � . _ �, ` �11A � ' �Q%1`� :. 1JX I �� �� 1DM �0))S �°�� t — 3 I •%�f �WSS I �1��� , ' �,... � � — " lill0 I O .-_ i_ . � . . . . �1��•= IONNypN 5T . O� � � � °�-. 'a„ .,e �.,g' ���._ ��^—� j . r �`., , �. ` :�R�« p� '.� � i — �� '�/� .,� � � �er � �os.e �' , ��� .� � _. � '�,/ ,.�., i__ __ �,. I - ,o,� .,�' •/, , \ �1T ,«„ ' �-,�_ —.�,r �.a i �-.. ,.ao'o � � �-o,.o�,�,� �� `..,o� I � � �o�« -i� • � . �._ :�, � '.�, ,�.. '� ,.,,, ,�.„ i � + . ,�' ,.�. . i ,,.� r ,,,� / � •� � ' ,.� _. ,� ERROL SI J ��1 // � �is�f � ' . ' Py. � .,.� f —M- �� z„ ,�.; �a� . �ouo \isn �d��� o�eo,e k.4(�_sus odf `�' ' � �na' ,,��, \' �:e, �Jar�{, e. � . � � . Q�� . � � i� � . - - �. I ��u: � ���s�� ° .: . ,� � . .e� --- � ���� /i� I o: ,e/.�•� �so. . . ` • �r` �- . � � � � , . . .« •F �' TRF�M�PS . . . , . , . . i_ �,r - LSGEND: — — - x:'."m -- — m�R,tiu.���'-•----- \ • 1F1�1Y�p�isM�o a�lur.N Y"�`MMT�P � pM a61Mt wp� f�IIf r aH 'F .c �fTee.+.P�.tc • �O'+I�M1R�nw6 ni 06f5 nF M�viMl . . . t�r su nr . �c ra vaK � weo�a e m ona vw'xn.�at . _ oa m�c ws rin � ' �a� � �,��� e F ��. � - �. - - W IB9E 9 lIII!MI M!b eM t15R OOrlan i g k . _. lIC �llp'iR1AMfIICW o-e MIRUtIM1Mt1IFISiV*W�I E. I� n . . �n amern�u p �.a A ' �e' � � eeine row�rsm nKr ,,.� m�mw g ;�i� � . ree s�a n..r m�a —s•— t ' - .. : � s...rcc� ._- �..�.. —•— .n � '�"�---��: ' _. --._ 4 .�.o�...a —'— �..m � ..�_'� . .wnm� ' m�ir.m'"'t'i."�emora,"°""ml N � �'� rca"ro' n � I ,I .�� 5 s�x. Jox�sov sT. s.�—s. s. s_ �M a sn ero ro nx � , ; ��.v � —''� � noi naw orm+n � °�•-�— - r� � m.�w �m u� ' _ � .. �� �«m � - << 'sd '� ' .�M1t� _^ �!�� � oes sm wwa mc r��. — b i'�` �,� (� � Z� '� :e P I�:� . +ca•rT'�d'$' _ eY?Y r&c1S .Dx a wM.nK '.( _, � z B — ws� � R \ T � �.7 :A r�� 'e: I f $�y.� -, _ � _.� ��`� � 1 �I� o I` p . E ,.., �yi N � . . �. $I� �,' . s } � �•: � p' ' MS]Rn�•S � O+9W w �5 x.S rJ�e n rtt9 ��t ! e � fi- � �. � �C m�r u.u � j � �1,� , _ ��""•w •,• . � �`�.M'"'u.e": -�. � y ''"`' ;:ro:v w+ ' � •B � �,,,.�..�...� ,��-� �'�`� ?��� .�. ��•�� � E � �I �°>_'i y»�rt � �.x Ka O���`�°�,�....tt,�..�. NARRATIVE: , - �-`� �—�-� " -'�`"n` rs�rs.mmwl�rmu[f/s'�awsrae�rrarsa�uor. . ' _�_'�,.,1__ I°i _'"�'•.U.R GOML110YD[14IYt0AYE�Ntt' . -.FMY� `.. ,. ra��.ASnY.�„D:n• x�h� ��MM�A�MIibIT�)UMluirtt R�n000h'[CwRa �I�x '�.. �'� � � 1 � ' 'ul ..�S e s ,^6W �ry�.� �.';.•'"_' /� �49[LY�a M140n��'f�twOMUIU�Y�OrtY9blN[ rv � I Y� � n�v�T'+ ����TliFNmlWM14llRffi�9tMlfMlaalm��Otl�� m�l f�{��IF . �kb��t 1tt �w �MYlxn4 � 'kwe�ivn���gp�unmrqnT�e�tm�un.r *£ roi[. f enraY�n5�on Ib M sA'b im / ��n'aoY.,Ye�s�wxumm�o"��virteni� wJ ��A -or�4'T �:�r ���o. m.��ro�,•�•s� ,. o�,N7r BENCHMARK: . ,uw. n�a.�va,,.,m:n.c,•Ma�ru�.�m�.n e�\,.��r�.. � u�wns�m�oorwon�anv.m.xmve.mmenu' E�..�nes s.,n�er�oe .n• �w u e mrnm r�eas.r.ouim eso.0 u mn�m ro,e iuq ua� §,�' \wnR'��S�iO���MMi1fNi�OM�1OxK.fY[Ye " _i..a '[..• y�..,���:�'.;Q..Y��::�..M .a :,,h g <<,.,o,.,,.�u, .�s,,.�� �,n�..� . :� �,,.u.,,� ... . ��rt.wa wo-�n ns m� maam.�oc ..�a.e...i.�`LL�y.+i.ro• ... w+o-� N cn.�rw��uu ..a�mia ZTEC ENGINEERS INC. �„�,,,,, sTEVE SaNOeRs x ia .w eo ,xo � , ry ..s..•e.�u.s._oN.¢a mw � i.,,o w,.<ro+ �—�.sr� _ _ ,.._....s, • . . �......- ,. i .�,t�F�nuw w.�c. ...,I �� , � PRELIMIN.tRY PLAT -- --- -�--- - -- - i . . . 2S103AA03800 ZS,o28�o2ao4 EXH I B IT�.. ABRAHAM, BART 8 DARCIE CARMICHAEL,LINDA&JOSEPH 12295 SW 106TH DR 10680 SW FONNER ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01912 2S102BB00813 AGNESSE, PHILIPPE 8 RACHEL COFFMAN,RIE 10455 SW JOHNSON ST 10340 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1028C05400 2S102BC05300 AUDRITSH,JEREMY 8 CYNTHIA A COOIEY,CRAIG L&JUNE E 12555 SW PATHFINDER CT 4147 CASEY CT TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 2S103AA01914 2S1028CO2000 BAKER, DEBRA JO COSEN2A,JENNIFER L 10490 SW JOHNSON ST 10690 SW FONNER ST PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD.OR 97223 2S103AA03900 2S1028C05600 BARICEVIC,JOHN/KAY REV LIV TRUS CURTIN,ROBIN L 8 BY JOHN J/KAY F BARICEVIC TRS CURTIN,KENNETH J 12285 SW 106TH DR 14355 FOSBERG RD TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 2S1026C00107 2S103AA01911 B15SETT,CRAIG ALLEN DIAZ-CORTES,ALEJANDRO 10295 SW BROOKSIDE CT 10515 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA04100 2S1026C00106 BOYER,SANDRA RAE DICKMAN,ALFRED E&CLAUDIA H 12244 SW CLYDESDALE CT 10290 SW BROOK510E CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA04200 2S103AA04300 BRADEN, DONALD W LIVING TRUST DUNN,STEPHEN W AND BY DONALD W DRADEN TR HALPERN,MICHAEL L 12238 SW CLYDESDALE CT 29572 AVANTE TIGARD,OR 97223 LAGUNA NIGUEL,CA 92677 2S103AA03000 25103AAD1909 BROWN,JEANETTE M FLATTERS,JAMES G 10485 SW CLYDESDALE PL LORAINE M TIGARD,OR 97223 12385 SW 106TH DR TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01908 2S102BC0520a BRUGGER,JUDITH C 8 JOHN A GONZALEZ,SEJIS 12355 SW 106TH DR 12515 SW PATHFINDER CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1028600812 251028800700 GRAVES, MICHAEL R AND LAWTON,MARY JANE JANINE O NOW SKELTON 10300 SW BROOKSIDE PL 10355 SW WALNUT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD.OR 97223 2S103AA01900 2S103AA02400 HADDOCK,GLEN RICHARDS AND LEFEVER,WILLIAM JAMES KATHRYN RUTH TRUSTEES 12270 SW 106TH DR 10495 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01800 2S103AA04000 HALL,BRIAN E 8 IRENA M LEW,ON YONG FOWN HAH 10675 SW FONNER ST 12255 SW 1D6TH DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01902 2S103AA03500 HATANAKA, BARRY LEWIS,GARY JAMES RURIKO 10490 SW CLYDESDALE PL 10625 SW WALNUT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01901 2S103AA03600 HELMER,GARRY L BARBARA S LINDQUIST,ROGER A MARILY 10585 SW WALNUT 10520 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1028800826 2S103AA02500 KELLEHER, DANIEL V&KATHRYN K MACFARIAND,ELSA TR 10465 SW JOHNSON CT 10525 SW CIYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02700 2S1026C00105 KNOX,CARL J MACK,DAVID J 8 LORI A FLORA L 10260 SW BROOKSIDE CT 10505 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1026C01806 2S103AA01906 KRALL, FRED&PATRICIA HELEN MARTIN,RICHARD E 12560 SW PATHFINDER CT 12320 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02600 2S103AA01904 KREBS,AMY K MARTINI,MATTHEW S/KATHERINE B& 10515 SW CLYDESDALE PL MARTINI,ROBERT CNIRGINIA M TIGARD,OR 97223 10675 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01915 2S103AA02300 LAMBERT, ROBERT A&GEORGIA C MIRPOURIAN,MAZIEH&ZAHRA 10530 SW JOHNSON PO BOX 8552 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97207 .. . • . 2S1028C05500 2S102BB00814 NASS,KARI ROBINSON,JAY G 8 BRIGITA A 12575 SW PATHFINDER CT 12180 SW 127TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03700 2S1028CO2003 NEWTON, ELIZABETH A SAKHITAB,HOMA 12300 SW 106TH DR 10700 SW FONNER ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03400 2S103AA01916 NICOU, EDNA SUZANNE SANDERS,STEVEN W& 10470 SW CLYDESDALE PL SANDERS,BARBARA SWANSON TIGARD,OR 97224 2647 SW TALBOT RD PORTLAND,OR 97201 2S1028C05700 2S102BC01805 NYSSEN, BENJAMIN J& SCHRADER,MARCUS J NYSSEN,AMBER C 12490 SW 129TH ST 12615 SW PATHFINDER CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BCO2002 2S103AA01917 OLSEN,KENNETH E SHELLEDY LIVING TRUST OLSEN,SANDRA L BY RODNEY/JEANNINE SHELLEDY TRS 10640 SW WALNUT 12440 SW 106TH DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BCO2001 2S103AA04400 OTT, PENNY N STOVER,LAWRENCE& 10540 SW WALNUT ST SHARON LIVING TRUST TIGARD,OR 97223 11700 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01913 2S103AA01801 PARTRIDGE, SCOTT SUNDAY,MELVIN R BARBARA PO BOX 781 PO BOX 230995 JEFFERSON, OR 97352 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S103AA01910 2S102BCO2005 PEARSON, RICHARD E&MARY ANN TR TA,LEE 12330 SW 106TH DR 10620 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S103AA02200 251028CO2006 PRICE,SHARON L&DONALD R THOMAS,BRENDA S 8 JAMES� 12250 SW 106TH DR PO BOX 230073 TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97281 2S103AA01907 2S1026C01807 RINGER,JERRY L THOMAS, MARC C 8 CAROL A 12325 SW 106TH DR 10360 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA02800 THURSTON, MILDRED TRUSTEE 10495 SW CLYDESDALE PLACE TIGARD,OR 97223 2 102BC06700 TI RD, OF 1312 HALL BLVD T RD, R 97223 2 03AA029 TIGA Y OF 1312 ALL BLVD T RD,O 97223 2 103AA01 TIG D TY OF 131 HALL BLVD ARD, O 97223 103AA017 1 TI D Y OF 131 W HALL BLVD T ARD, 97223 2S103AA00101 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT#23J 6960 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03100 VAZQUEZ, MIGUEL A 8 GUEST,MELISSA 10475 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA03200 VILLALOBOS,MAURICIO& VALORIE 10465 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103AA03300 WEEKLEY,TIMOTHY E 10450 SW CLYDESDALE PL TIGARD,OR 97223 2S103AA01905 YORK, DANIEL L/KATHLEEN S 1000 MADISON ST NEWBERG,OR 97132 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 Don & Dorothy Erdt 13760 SW 121 st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139'h Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Martha Bishop 10590 SW Cook Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Vanessa Foster 13085 SW Howard Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Susan Beilke 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 Patricia Keerins 12195 SW 121stAvenue Tigard, OR 97223 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Todd Harding and Blake Hering Jr. Norris Beggs & Simpson 121 SW Morrison, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97204 CITY OF TIGARD - CENTRAL INTERESTED PARTIES �i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT Central.doc) UPDATED: 16-Dec-08 i - PRE-APP.HEI.D BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION � = �" LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION Czty of Tiga�Pem¢t Cerner 13125 SWHaII Blul, Ti�z� OR 97223 Phon� 503.639.4171 Fa�c: 503.598.1960 File# L a� - �0750 1 Other Case€! Date �' �O �� By �-���� Receipt t� ��'"�"��� Fee 3 ��0�''� Date Complete � i TYPE OF PE RMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance(I or II) �Minor Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone Change (III) I ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment(I� ❑Planned Development(III� ❑ Zone Chan�e Annexation(I� ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑ Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment(I� ❑ Hutoric Overlay(II or III) ❑Site Development Review(II) ❑ Home Occupauon(II) ❑ Subdivision(II or III) A ss av �Z-3q o 5 w 1 D��`' AX M. & AX L N . ZS 1 O 3 A o-r U �1 1 � . I 1v � j� � Z� S f� F'C . � - l';' a � APPLICA. " ��� �v � tv SA� p� �S � b G A�Y �. � �, E��4��� A`�-cou.Nty A � 11 S S� SA��b � S'c�. �o�rt�N�,a(� a�L,� �503) G�� -a4�� RIMARY N A N �A�-- �. S +� E� �1 �Cz (Sa3) z,3�- ��1�� s i PF�PERTI'Ou^��ER� EED HOL ER(Aaac t more c n one) I ?-c�v�:n� S� rv �t A � y� 5 w �p��� o-r- �-� , �0 2T l�N D�Z 7 Zo . N . 'When the oaner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from tlie oa�ner or an agent of the owner. The oamers m�t sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this a lication. R OSAL .11�LARY t'ease spec �c � �ti� ;Z �J�1p �AR—T�'��Dt�l o ftTE i' NA � ��,Lt o� PPv/ZT -. 2� D NT� A V '� APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS , DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQLTIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. i:\curpin\masters\land use applications\land use pemut app.doc THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: " ♦ If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the tern�s and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any pernzit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that anysuch statements are false. ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. C��;...� \�\ `�(�� o�� Ownet's Signature Date Owne�'s Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owne�'s Signature Date �vne�'s Signature Date �� �- -- :--� - > >, � ��z.s��q Applicant/Agcn cprescntativc s Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date - CITY OF TIGARL RECEIPT . q 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 Receipt Number: 2009-00616 - 03/17/2009 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID MLP2009-00001 Land Partition Fee-2 Lots 100-0000-438000 $2,672.00 MLP2009-00001 Land Partition Fee-2 Lots-LRP 100-0000-438050 $394.00 Total: 53,066.OU PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Check 300137 STREAT 03/17/2009 $3,066.0� Payor: Steven Sanders and B Swanson Sanders Total Payments: $3,066.00 Balance Due: $0.00 . V = LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION . � . 120 DAYS = 9/15/2009 FILE NO.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2009-00001 FILE TITLE: SANDERS PARTITION APPLICANT & Steven W. Sanders & APPLICANT'S Gary P. Shepherd,Attomey� OWNER: Barbara Swanson-Sanders REP.: 3115 SE Saltnon Street 2647 SW"Talbot Road Portland,OR 97214 Portland, OR 97201 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval for a Minar Land Partiuon to partition one (1) existing .35-acre site into two (2) parcels for detached single-famil`�residences. �1n existing residence on Parcel 1 will remain. The proposed lots are 7,524 and 7,500 square feet in size. LOCATION: 12390 SW 106`h Drive;Washington Counry Tax Map 2S103��,Tax Lot 1916. ZONE: R-4.5: The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessorv residenrial units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted condirionally. Some ci��ic and insrituuonal uses are also permitted conditionallv. APPLICABLE � REVIEW CRITERIA: Community llevelopment Code Chapters 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18.715, 18.730, 18.745, 18,765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I � TYPE II ❑ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV COMMENTS WERE SENT: MAY 26,2009 COMMENTS ARE DUE: TUNE 9 2009 ❑ HE��RINGS OFFICER (MON.) D�1TE OF HE�RING: TI�1E: 7:00 PM ❑PLr,NNING COM�IISSION (MON.) Dr1TE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM ❑ CI'I'Y COUNCIL (TUES.) D11TE OF HF�r1RING: TIME: 7:30 PM � ST?�FF DECISION (TENTATIVE) D�TE OF DECISION: JUNE 19� 2009 COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION � VICINITY�'f��P ❑ L`TILITI'PLr1NS � SITE DISTI�INCE CERTIF. � SITE PL.AN � SERVIC�: 1'ROVIDER LTR. � IMPACT STL DY � N�RR�Tn'E � 'I'REF. PL.�N � OTHER: MISCELLANEOi;S STAFF CONTACT: Cheryl Caines Associate Planner �03) G39-4171, Ext. 2437 ' G'ity of Tigard, Oregon � 13125 S�Hall Blvd. • TZg�..�, OR 97223 o� :�� �, � - �' -�� �� � � ._: �_��.��-� April 3, 2009 Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law 3115 SE Salmon St. Portland, OR 97214 RE: Completeness Sanders Minor Land Partition, Case File No. MLP2009-00001 Deax Mr. Shepherd: The City has received your application for a minor land partition (MLP2009-00001) to divide a 34 acre site into two parcels. The development site is located at 12390 SW 106th Drive. Staff has completed a prelitninary review of the submittal materials and has deternvtied that the following additional information is neccssary befoYe the application can be deemed complete. Please provide three copies of any revised materials. All revised materials must be inserted into the copies on file with the City by the applicant. 1. Rear Yard Setback. There is deck in the reaY yard. This deck, if not more than 36 inches in height, must meet the setback and screening requirements in 18.730.050.D.3. If the deck is more than 36 inches in height, then it must meet the 15-foot Year yard setback requirement. Please provide plans and a narrative to show how these rear yard setback requirements will be met. 2. Landsca,�ing and Screening Please address secrions 18.745.020/030/050 in the narrative(see attached comments from the City Arborist). 3. Tree Plan. A tree plan is required per 18.790.030. The four components of a tree plan are identification of e�sting trees, identification of trees to be removed, a protecrion program for retained trees, and mitigation for trees greater than 12 inch caliper to be removed. The tree plan cannot be revised once approved because it will not be subject to review by the public. Please see attached comments from the City Arborist. 4. Pre-a��licarion Notes. Please provide copies of the Planning and Engineering pre- application conference notes. Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 5. Sight Distance Certification. Please provide a preliininary sight distance certification for the proposed driveway location in accordance with 18.705.030.H.1. 6. Additional Co�ies and Mailing Envelo�es. Once your application is deemed substantially complete, you will be sent a letter requesting additional copies of application materials and mailing envelopes for notification purposes. Should you have any questions with regard to these items, please contact me at 503-639- 2437. Sincerely, �����,� C� Cheryl Caines Associate Planner c: MLP2009-00001 Land Use File Steven Sanders, Owner 12390 106t" Partition Com leteness Item Met Not Met N/A Comments 18.745.020: X Not addressed in narrative. Applicability 18.745.030: X Not addressed in narrative. General Provisions 18.745.040: X -Street trees are required along 106th Street Trees and Johnson. These need to be chosen from the Ti arg d list and shown on the plans. The species should differ between 106th and Johnson in order to increase diversity. -Street trees are required to be 2" caliper min. and spaced appropriately. 18.745.050: X -Not addressed in narrative. Buffering and Screening 18.745.060: X -Not addressed in narrative. Re-vegetation 18.790.030: X - The arborist report should have a table Tree Plan that assigns numbers to the trees that Requirement correspond to numbers on the Tree Preservation Plan for easy identification. The table also needs to identify which trees have/will be removed and retained. -The arborist needs to provide mitigation calculations. -The arborist report needs to have tree protection specifications and fencing requirements, -The fencing specifications in the revised arborist report need be transferred accurately to the Tree Preservation Plan(to scale) and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. -The arborist needs to provide documentation that the 14 inch birch was removed due to hazard if an exemption from mitigation is requested. 18.790.050: X Permit Applicability Todd Prager City Arborist March 27, 2009 ' i:AND USE APPL11"�TION Project:_r���a oV q - ��>��� , Date:_ �--��,-0� COMPLETENESS REVIEW � �MP�ET�E� ,[�INCOMPLETE ST NDARD INFORMATION: DeedlTitlelProof of Ownership oo g. i av�s, , [�USA�rvice Provider Letter Envelopes with Postage(Verify Count) �� #Sels Of Appiication Maferials/Plans-"Paper Copies" re pp ica i � _ (2_#Seis Of/�i�_ lans—'� — - PROJECT STATISTICS: � e ❑ %of Building Impervious Surface On Site ❑ Lo� Square Footage PLANS DIMENSIONED: 0' Building Foolprint �•,�•a h�.,t��, � Q- - �ark{rig-�e pirr�ensrons(��c��ae Acc�ssirn�-a-aixe aark�r�)❑ Truek L�adrng �—'��9-�9�t [�---P�c�ss-A�a�t��nd Aisle [� Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: [' Vicini(y Map an Tree Inventory [� Existing Conditions Plan � � -._�__,,,, o, � �-� LGIIUJl.2�CTZQfT . Site Plan �- lighti�g,�la� .r------ (TR�E PLAN 1 MITIGATION PLAN � � �'�� �i 4, c„ti ; �, ; ❑ ��r��c�-i � �;� r-r' ,-�, u�lit� ry'"1 f � ��C,c�� O�'� AD ITIONAL REPORTS: list any special repoRs) �". ,/'11� � �J-�c�nC�L- - � ❑ f ❑ ❑ ❑ RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18 330 ICond�tional Usel ❑ 1 B.F)3O(Washington Square Reg�onal Centerj ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review� ❑ 18 340(Director's Interpretation) [� 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) ❑ 18]80(Signs) ❑ 1 S.35O(Planned Devebpment) ❑ 1$.710(Accessory Residential Unils) ❑ 18.785(Tem ora Use Permits) ❑ 18.360(Site Development Review)� 18.715(Density Computations) 18J90(Tree Removaq �_[] 1H.3�O(Variances/Ad�ustment�� NIA � 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) � 18.38�(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ❑ 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.79$(Wireless Communication Facilities) ❑ 18 390(Decision Making ProceduresAmpact Study} 18.7 (Exceptrons To Develooment Standardsl ❑ 18.810(Street 8 Utiiity Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) 18.740(Histonc Overiay) ❑✓� 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.7 ils ❑ 1$43O(5ubdivlsions) 18.745(Landsca in 8 Screening Standards :-� Q� 18.51 O(Residential Zoning Districts) -rPc�� >������'� 18.750(ManufacturedlMobil Home Regulations) ❑ 18.520(Commercial Zoning Distncts) ��"``I � ❑ 18.755(Mixed Sohd Waste/Recyclinq Storage) ❑ 18 530(Indusinal Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.760(Nonconform�ng S�tuations) ❑ 18.620(Tigard Tnangle Deslgn Standards) � 1S.76S IOH-SUeet ParkmglLoading Requirements) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: I \curpin\masterslforms-revisedlland use application completeness review dot REVISED: 6-Jun-07 �� - 12390 106th Partition, 2"d Round Com leteness Item Met Not Met N/A Comments 18.745.020: X* *Provisions are applicable to MLPs and A licabilit ma be conditioned. 18.745.030: X* *Provisions are applicable to MLPs and General Provisions ma be conditioned. 18.745.040: X* *Street trees need to be shown on the Street Trees plans with spacing appropriately scaled. The arborist's sketch is not to scale, and therefore does not meet the condition. 18.745.050: X* *This requirement appears to not be Buffering and applicable. Screenin 18.745.060: X Re-ve etation 18.790.030: X Tree Plan -The applicant needs to select one of the Requirement tree plan alternatives. -The 14 inch birch is subject to mitigation because a certified arborist has not deemed it hazardous. -The fencing specifications in the revised arborist report need be transferred accurately to plan to scale and include a signature of approval from the project arborist. -Street trees are not eligible for mitigation credit. The mitigat�on plan will need to be revised once one of the tree lan alternatives is selected. 18.790.050: X Permit Applicability Todd Prager City Arborist May 6, 2009 • � _ PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: MLP 09-01 COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Dafe: Apri13. 2009 rev. Mav 7, 2009 GRADING � Existin and ro osed contours shown. ❑ Are there radin im acts on ad'acent arcels? No ❑ Ad'acent arcel rades shown. N.A. ❑ Geotech stud submitted? N.A. STREETISSUES � Ri ht-of-wa clearl shown. ❑ Centeriine of street(s) clearly shown. Easement for future street improvements 27 ft, from centerline re uired. � Street name s shown. � Existin / ro osed curb or ed e of avement shown. ❑ Street rofiles shown. Not re uired ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo Not required on ad'acent arcel s , etc. ❑ Traffic Im act and/or Access Re ort N.A. ❑ Street rades com liant? N.A. ❑ Street/ROW widths dimensioned and a ro riate? N.A. ❑ Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width N.A. a ro riate? � Other: Recorded agreement. Agreement to comp/ete street improvements when directed by Cify Engineer will be re uired. SANITARY SEWER ISSUES � Existin / ro osed lines shown. ❑ Stubs to ad�acent arcels re uired/shown? N.A. WATER ISSUES � Existin / ro osed lines w/sizes noted? TVWD � Existin / ro osed fire h drants shown? � Pro osed meter location and size shown? ❑ Pro osed fire rotection s stem shown? N.A. STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES ❑ Existin / ro osed lines shown? N.A. ❑ Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention N.A. rovided? ❑ Water ualit /detention facilit shown on lans? N.A. � Area for facilit match re uirements from calcs? N.A. ❑ Facilit shown outside an wetland buffer? N.A. ❑ Storm stubs to ad'acent arcels re uired/shown? N,A.t The submittal is hereby deemed � COMPLETE ❑ INCOMPLETE REVISED: 05/07/09 - 'a By: Date: Mav 7. �_ .,9 REVISED: 05/07/09 C - City of Tigard, Oregon � 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tzg�.�, OR 97223 �� . . May 11, 2009 � Gary P. Shepherd - :�° ��. ���.:.��*�-�` Oregon Land Law 3ll 5 SE Salmon St. Portland, OR 97214 RE: Completeness Sanders Minor Land Parriti�n, Case File No. MLP2009-00001 Deax Mr. Shepherd: The City has received your application for a minor land partition (MLP2009-00001) to divide a .34 acre site into two parcels. The development site is located at 12390 SW 106`" Drive. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal marerials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before tlie application can be deemed complete: 1. Submit 8 copies of complete application packets. This includes full-size plans, narrative, and all application mateYials that have been submitted to the City. Please only include the revised version of all items. These packets must be collated and plans must be folded. 2. Submit 6 additional eopies of plan sets. These may be reduced copies (11' x 17') provided tl�ey are legible. 3. 1 compact disc with all materials in a searchable format (PDF for example). 4. Submit two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes. Properry owner list must be produced by Patty Lunsford in the Planning Department, 503-639-4171, ext. 2438. I have included the label request form for your convenience. Should you have any questions with regard to these items, please contact me at 503-639- 2437. Sincerely, (��-c,�� �.�-c-,-�� Cheryl Caines Associate Planner c: MLP2009-00001 Land Use File Steven Sanders, Owner Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 City of Tigard, Oregon ► 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tig. ,, oR 9n23 �� � ��:.. �L ,� `:`� �t� � May 20, 2009 Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law 3115 SE Salmon St. Pordand, OR 97214 RE: Completeness Sanders Minor Land Partition, Case File No. MLP2009-00001 Dear Mr. Shepherd: The City of Tigard received your original application submittal for a Minor Land Partition on March 6, 2009. The development site is located at 12390 SW 106`� Avenue. Staff has completed a preluninary review of the submittal materials and has determuied that yout application was complete as of May 18, 2009 for the purpose of beginning the 120-day review period for a final decision. 'I'he formal comment and review process typically takes 4 to 6 weeks. It should be noted that staff has not reviewed the application submittal for compliance with the relevant code criteria, and that additional items may arise during the application review which may requixe furtl�er clarification. Should you have any questions with regard to these items, please contact me at 503-639- 4171 x2437. Sincerely, C�� Ccv�-.,.c� Cheryl Caines Associate Planner c: MLP2009-00001 Land Use File Steven Sanders, Owner Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 �� � U � ro o s Q. o� L�� � � , , � , �'`' � o ������� . . �� �0 3115 SE Salmon Street Cq ��G PoRland,Oregon 97214 L SER (503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX &CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL City of Tigard Application for Minor Land Partition Applicant/Owner: Steven Sanders Property Address: 12390 SW 106`�' Tigard, Oregon Applicant's Representative: Gary P. Shepherd, Attorney Oregon Land Law ;] ]5 SE Salmon Street Portland, Oregon 972]4 (503) 233-1985 Ztech Engineers, Inc. 3737 SE 8`'' Avenue Portland, Oregon 97202 (503) 235-8795 ��V�E ��� ��Ar� � E� L��u� �f�Y�F�'I(�A�n PLANNIP!�!�t�(�I�:�ERING i�y L� � ��j __ _ �� • � � � O �� ^ . . ����I��U t � � 3115 SE Salmon Street ��q ��Gw APR 3 0 2009 portland,Oregon 97214 � s�� ClTY OF TIGARD PLANNIPl�/�PIGI�tEEA�� �503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX &CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL April 30, 2009 Cheryl Caines, Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Completeness Response - Sanders Minor Land Partition File No. MI,P2009-00001 Dear Ms. Caines: This letter and attachments constitutes applicant's response to the City's completeness letter dated Apri13, 2009. The additional material is intended to satisfy the City's request for additional information and ensure the application is complete for review. Applicant responds to the item numbers in order as they appear on the City's April 3, 2009 letter. 1. Rear Yard Setback: Section 18.730.OSO.D.3 provides: Open porches, decks or balconies not more than 36 inches in height and not covered by a roof or canopy, may extend or project into a required rear or side yard provided such natural yard area is not reduced to less than three feet and the deck is screened from abutting properties. COMMENT: A deck is in the rear yard of proposed Parcel 1. The deck is no more than 36 inches in height. The plans submitted and prepared by Ztec Engineers, Inc. show the wood deck at 173.23 feet. The deck is over a concrete pad with an average elevation of 171.80, making the wood deck 1.43 feet above the ground. Applicant's demonstration of compliance with the rear yard requirements of code � 18.730.OSO.D.3 is found on the revised preliminary plat plan. Applicant has revised the lot layout to provide 3 feet between the existing deck and the lot line between parcel 1 and parcel 2. However, given proposed lot layouts and existing and likely dwelling locations, the screening requirement in § 18.730.OSO.D.3 should be found not applicable. Screening is intended to promote privacy between neighboring uses. In this case, minimum lot size standards dictate that applicant present proposed parcel 2 with an extension of the yard behind the existing residence on proposed parcel 1. No residential dwelling will be located in the 17.58 foot wide yard area of parcel2. As such, there are no impacts to the use of the parcel 2 yard area emanating from the use of a small deck on parcel 1. There is no privacy interest that needs to be protected. The deck is less than one and '/2 feet above the ground. If staff finds the standard applicable, applicant proposes to plant a row of evergreen shrubs in the 3 foot wide natural yard adjacent to the deck to screen the deck from the proposed parcel 2. A condition of approval can ensure compliance with this standard. 2. Landscaaing and Screening: Applicant provides the following supplemental response concerning the standards in fi 18.745 as directed by the City's arborist. 18.745.020 - Applicability COMMENT: These standards are appropriately applied when actual structures are constructed or remodeled. Applicant is not proposing any construction at this time, but merely creating a lot for planning and future development purposes. Applicant is not proposing any site disturbing activities. The pre-application notes and conference discussion indicated that only the street tree portion of§ 18.745 is applicable to the subject request. However, as requested by staff, applicant demonstrates compliance with, demonstrates that the standards are not applicable, or the applicable standards of§ 18.745 can be made a condition of development approval. 18.745.030— General Provisions COMMENT: These standards are all future requirements (obligation to maintain landscaping, pruning required, installation requirements, protection, and care) and associated with ground disturbing activities and should be made a condition of approval as provided for in § 18.745.030.G which provides: "The review procedures and standards for required landscaping and screening shall be specified in the condition of approval during development review...." Applicant is not proposing any construction or ground disturbing activities, but merely creating a lot for planning purposes. Both parcel 1 and parcel2 are currently landscaped, as shown on aerial photos. The landscaping on parcel 1 will not be disturbed, as parcel 1 is currently developed with a single family residence. Parcel2 may be developed in the future, however, the extent and location of development impacts on existing landscaping is not known. As anticipated by § 18.745.030.D, applicant requests the landscaping requirements of§ 18.745.030 be made a condition of approval associated with certificate of occupancy for parcel 2. Only when and after parcel 2 is designed for development will applicant know the location and types of landscaping intended for the site. 18.745.040— Street Trees COMMENT: These standards require street trees for all developments fronting on a public or private street. Street trees can be placed in either the public right of way or on private property within 6 feet of the boundary. Applicant proposes to plant street trees in compliance with this standard; on private property within 6 feet of the public right of way boundary. 2 For the street frontage, applicant proposes trees consistent with the species, size and spacing requirements of 18.745. Applicant proposes to plant Dogwood trees (page 4 of the City's Tree List) along SW 106t" and Flowering Cherry trees (page 3 of the City's Tree List) along SW Johnson. The Flowering Cherry tree is considered a medium sized tree with heights up to 40 feet and a spread up to 35 feet. Section 18.745.040.C.2 states that medium sized trees up to 40 feet tall and 35 feet wide are to be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart. The Dogwood tree is considered a small sized tree with heights up to 30 feet and a spread up to 30 feet. Section 18.745.040.C.2 states that small sized trees up to 25 feet tall and 16 feet wide are to be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart. The City's tree list which identifies the Dogwood tree as small is inconsistent with the standards in 18.745.040.C.2. Despite that, applicant proposes feasible tree locations that satisfy any applicable standard. . The proposed locations are on the attached revised tree plan/inventory maps. The required size of the trees (2 inch caliper minimum), as well as the requirement to plant the trees, can and should be made a condition of development approval. Applicant requests that a condition of approval require the planting of trees on proposed parcel 1 in association with the final plat recording. With respect to parcel 2, applicant requests a condition of approval requiring the planting of trees on proposed parcel2 be timed with construction improvements and confirmed prior to occupancy. According to Gary Drendel, Arborist, delay in planting the trees on Parcel 2 will better ensure their proper location and survival during and after construction activities. Exhibit 10. As stated, applicant does not know the specifics of construction and design plans for parcel 2. Design and construction plans for parcel 2 will be developed if and when parcel 2 is developed with a residential use. The existing trees and landscaping on proposed parcel2 will remain until parcel 2 is developed. Mr. Drendel recommends that the street tree requirements of § 18.745 be made a condition of approval. Exhibit 10. Applicant requests a condition be imposed that obligates applicant to comply with street tree planting requirements on Parcel2 after construction and prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy as anticipated,by § 18.745.030.D. 18.745.050—Buffering and Screening COMMENT: These standards are not applicable to applicant's partition request. Section 18.745.OSO.A.2 states that "buffering and screening is required to reduce impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter...." Applicant is not proposing a use of a different type. The subject property and surrounding area is zoned for and developed with single family residential uses. Proposed parcel 1 is developed with a single family residential use. Proposed parcel 2 is also intended for residential use. // 3 18.745.050— Re-vegetation COMMENT: These standards are all future requirements, implicated by on-site disturbance and removing vegetation through grading, and should be made a condition of approval as provided for in § 18.745.030.G which provides: "The review procedures and standards for required landscaping and screening shall be specified in the condition of approval during development review...." Applicant is not proposing any construction or grading activities at this time, but merely creating a lot for planning and future development purposes. Both parcel 1 and parcel 2 are currently landscaped, as shown on aerial photos, are currently landscaped with a variety of plants, trees, shrubs, and lawn, thereby satisfying the landscaping/vegetation requirements of this standard.. The landscaping on parcel 1 will not be disturbed, as parcel 1 is currently developed with a single family residence. Parcel 2 may be developed in the future. If and when the site is developed in the future, disturbed areas not occupied by the structure will be re-vegetated, planted and landscaped in compliance with this section. The extent of site disturbance and re- vegetation required in the future is not know, nor can it be known at this time as no site specific development plans have been or are required to be prepared. Applicant requests that the standards of§ 18.745.060 be made a condition of development approval and associated with a certificate of occupancy for parcel 2 as anticipated by � 18.745.030.D. 3. Tree Plan• COMMENT: No trees are proposed for removal on proposed parcel l, as the site is fully developed. Applicant will plant street trees on parcel 1 as indicated on the revised tree plans and stated elsewhere in this supplemental narrative. Although applicant is not proposing any tree removal or construction on proposed parcel 2 at this time, for purposes of this review, staff has requested that applicant assume that all trees within the largest possible building pad will be removed. Applicant objects to this approach. Applicant is not proposing to remove any trees associated with this division application. A partition application merely requires an applicant to demonstrate it is feasible to meet the tree protection and mitigation requirements. Applicant has provided all necessary information for the City to make a finding of compliance and conditions of partition approval can ensure compliance. In addition, assuming trees will be removed will result in a decision that requires applicant to mitigate for trees that may not be removed during construction. That is not the intent or function of the standards. Pursuant to the City's code, only trees that are in fact removed or displaced by construction activities must be mitigated for. To remedy this situation, applicant requests that any mitigation requirements be finally determined and imposed after construction on proposed parcel2 and as a prerequisite to obtaining a certificate of occupancy. As requested by staff, applicant submitted revised tree plans. The plans detail all potential scenarios for tree removal; Alternative 1 — no removal; Alternative 2 —tree no. 6 removed; Alternative 3 —tree no. 7 removed; and Alternative 4 —tree nos. 6 and 7 removed, although it is not know whether these trees will in fact be removed when the site is developed with a dwelling. As requested, the plans include a table that assigns numbers to the trees for easy identification. As represented on the tree plans; all trees, except trees identified as potentially being removed, will remain. 4 For protection and fencing requirements, generally, arborist Drendel recommends one foot of protection for every one inch in tree diameter. For example: if a tree is 8 inches in diameter, an 8 foot buffer is to be installed to protect the tree from development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. The 14 inch birch was removed this early spring and prior to the application being filed due to a hazard. The prior location of the removed tree is identified on the revised tree plans as tree no. 8. The tree was removed from the site prior to the arborist conducting a site tree survey and assessment. All that remains of the tree is a small stump, which is not adequate to establish the safety threat that the tree posed after damage by winter storms. Applicant Sanders and this office provided a signature that the facts and statements represented in the application are true. Mr. Sanders stated to this office that based on his observation, the tree was diseased and dying and was substantially damaged during the December/January storm event, threatening the existing residence. Given these undisputed and substantiated facts, applicant requests that the Birch tree not be included in mitigation calculation requirements. Since applicant does not know which trees will be removed, applicant provides the following mitigation calculations representing each possible scenario of tree removal, including different calculations dependent on the status of the removed Birch tree. A tree plan is provided for each scenario. No trees removed (,Tree Plan Alternative 1): If no trees are removed, no mitigation is required. Section 18.790.030.B.d states that"retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation." Including the removed 14 inch Birch, there are 6 trees over 12 inches in caliper. If no additional trees are removed, 83.3%of trees over 12 inches in caliper would remain and no mitigation required. Not including the Birch, there are 5 trees over 12 inches in caliper. If no additional trees are removed, 100% of trees over 12 inches in caliper would remain and no mitigation required. Protection: Trees that may be impacted by construction on parcel 2 are tree nos. 5, 6 and 7. Protective fencing around tree nos. 5, 6, and 7 is depicted on tree plan alternative 1. An eight foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 5, a 13 foot fence around tree no. 6, and a 23 foot fence around tree no. 7 to protect the trees from development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. // // 5 If only Tree No. 6 (13 inch Deador cedar) is removed - Tree Plan Alternative 2: If the Birch does rieed to be mitigaled for, there are 6 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.c states that"retention of 50%to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated for in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D." Removing tree no. 6 would result in 66.7% of trees over 12 inches in caliper remaining, requiring 50 percent of the trees to be removed to be mitigated. The following is the required mitigation calculation to be used if tree no. 6 is removed, including the Birch tree. To mitigate for 50 percent of the trees removed (50% of 27 inches total = 13.5 inches), applicant proposes to replace the cedar tree with an evergreen tree selected from the City's tree list. There is no local market for a 13 inch cedar/evergreen tree. As such, applicant proposes to plant 1 four inch replacement evergreen tree. Applicant also is planting six 2 inch trees along the street frontage, thereby exceeding the replanting mitigation requirements. If the Birch does riot rreed to be mitigated for, there are 5 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.d states that "retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation." Removing tree no. 6 would result in 80% of the trees remaining and no mitigation required. Protection: The only trees that may be impacted by construction on parcel2 are tree nos. 5 and 7. Protective fencing around tree nos. 5 and 7 is depicted on tree plan alternative 2. An eight foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 5 to protect the tree from development impacts. A 23 foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 7 to protect the tree from development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. If onl,y Tree No. 7 (23 inch Tuli�) is removed - Tree Plan Alternative 3: If the Birch does need to be mitrgated for, there are 6 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.c states that "retention of 50%to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated for in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D." Removing tree no. 7 would result in 66.7% of trees over 12 inches in caliper remaining, requiring 50 percent of the trees to be removed to be mitigated. The following is the required mitigation calculation to be used if tree no. 7 is removed, including the Birch tree. To mitigate for 50 percent of the trees removed{50% of 37 inches total = 18.5 inches), applicant proposes to replace the tulip tree with a deciduous tree. There is no local market for an 18 inch tulip tree. As such, applicant proposes to plant 1 four inch replacement deciduous tree and 1 three inch replacement deciduous tree to be selected from the City's tree list. Applicant also is planting six 2 inch trees along the street frontage, thereby exceeding the replanting mitigation requirements. If the Birch does riot rieed to be mitigated for, there are 5 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.d states that "retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation." Removing tree no. 7 would result in 80% of the trees remaining and no mitigation required. 6 Protection: The only trees that may be impacted by construction on parcel2 are tree nos. 5 and 6. Protective fencing around tree nos. 5 and 6 is depicted on tree plan alternative 3. An eight foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 5 to protect the tree from development impacts. A 13 foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 6 to protect the tree from development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. If both Tree No. 6 (13 inch Deador cedar) and Tree No. 7 (23 inch Tuli� are removed - Tree Plan Alternative 4: If the Birch does need to be mitrgated for, there are 6 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.c states that"retention of 50%to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated for in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D." Removing tree nos. 6 and 7 would result in 50% of trees over 12 inches in caliper remaining, requiring 50 percent of the trees to be removed to be mitigated. The following is the required mitigation calculation to be used if tree nos. 6 and 7 are removed, including the Birch tree. To mitigate for 50 percent of the trees removed (50% of 50 inches total = 25 inches), applicant proposes to replace the tulip tree with a deciduous tree and the cedar tree with an evergreen tree, to be selected from the City's tree list. There is no local market for a 25 inch tree. As such, applicant proposes to plant 1 four inch replacement deciduous tree and 1 four inch replacement evergreen tree to be selected from the City's tree list. Applicant also is planting six 2 inch trees along the street frontage. If the site is unable to accommodate additional tree plantings, applicant will request the remaining mitigation (5 inches) be accomplished off-site or a fee paid in lieu. Applicant will not know if the site is able to accommodate additional tree plantings until after parcel2 is designed for a specific development proposal. If the site is able to accommodate additional plantings, the remaining required mitigation may be satisfied on-site or a combination of on-site and off-site/fee paid in lieu. If the Birch does fiot�reed to be mitigated for, there are 5 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.c states that"retention of 50%to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated for in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D." Removing tree nos. 6 and 7 would result in 60% of trees over 12 inches in caliper remaining, requiring 50 percent of the trees to be removed to be mitigated. The following is the required mitigation calculation to be used if tree nos. 6 and 7 are removed. To mitigate for 50 percent of the trees removed (50% of 36 inches total = 18 inches), applicant proposes to replace the tulip tree with a deciduous tree and the cedar tree with an evergreen tree, to be selected from the City's tree list. There is no local market for an 18 inch tree. As such, applicant proposes to plant 1 two inch replacement deciduous tree and 1 four inch replacement evergreen tree to be selected from the City's tree list. Applicant also is planting six 2 inch trees along the street frontage, thereby meeting the replanting mitigation requirements. Protection: The only tree that may be impacted by construction on parcel2 is tree no. 5. Protective fencing around tree no. 5 is depicted on tree plan alternative 4. An eight foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 5 to protect the tree from 7 development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. 4. Pre-application Notes: Copies of the planning and engineering pre-application conference notes are attached. 5. Site Distance Certification: Attached is a preliminary sight distance certification for the proposed driveway location serving proposed parcel 2 in accordance with § 18.705.030.H.1. The certification was prepared by Ztech Engineers. Of note, two existing access/driveway locations are south of the proposed driveway on parcel 2. These access points'provide safe and efficient access to existing residential uses. This is further evidence that the proposed driveway location on parcel 2 represents a safe and adequate access point. 6. Additional Copies and Mailin�Envelopes: Applicant will provide the requested number of copies. Applicant will provide mailing envelopes for notification purposes as requested. I thank you for your assistance in processing this application. Sincerely, ,.__--� � � � � , c�. . _ Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client 8 City of Tigard Planning Division Community Development 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Applicant/Owner: Steven Sanders Property Address: 12390 SW 106`�' Tigard, Oregon Tax Map/Lot: Map 2S103AA, Lot 01916 Location: Corner of SW 106��' and SW Johnson Zoning Designation: R 4.5 — Residential Comprehensive Plan Designation: Residential Request: Minor Partition Approval I. INTRODUCTION This narrative submission addresses the applicable standards and review criteria of the City of Tigard's Community Development Code (CDC). CDC 18.390. The application materials quantify the effect of the minor partition on public facilities and services and address • the feasibility of future improvements. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is the deed confirming ownership by applicant Steve Sanders. Applicant seeks minor partition approval to divide the 15,024 square foot property into two lots. Applicant also seeks relief from certain street improvement requirements pursuant to � 18.810.030A.5. The proposal is consistent and compatible with existing area structures and uses and satisfies all applicable standards of the CDC. The subject property is located on the corner of SW 106`�' and SW Johnson, fronting SW 106th. The 15,024 square foot site is zoned R 4.5 - Residential and planned for residential development. The zoning permits one unit per 7,500 sc�uare feet. The property is currently developed with a single family residence. After approval, the existing residence will remain on proposed Parcel 1. No building improvements or land form alterations are proposed with this application. The partition is intended to create a unit of land capable of supporting future single family development. The partition promotes the City of Tigard's and Metro's policies and objectives for infill development. Page 1 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition The surrounding area is characterized by single family development in all directions. The property, adjacent lots, and street configuration were designed and developed in 1962. There are no sidewalks or planting strips serving the historical subdivision or area properties. Exhibits 3 and 4. The properties are highly parcelized and developed. Exhibits 4, 5 and 6. II. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA A. Community Development Code 18.390 — Decision Making Procedures/Narrative/Impact Study 18.420 — Land Partitions 18.510 — R 4.5 - Residential Zoning District/Dimensional Standards 18.705 —Access Requirements 18.715 — Residential Density Calculations 18.745— Landscaping 18.765 —Off Street Parking 18.725 —Env. Performance - Clean Water Services (CWS) Standards 18.780 —Signs 18.790—Tree Removal Plan & Mitigation 18.795 — Clear Vision Area 18.810 - Street and Utility Improvement Standards III. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA The applicable approval standards are in bolrl itrilic print. Applicant's response to each follows the standards as a COMMENT. A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPME2�T CODE 18.390—Decision Muking Prncedures/Narr�titi�e/Inzpact Stucly COMNIENT: The requested Minor Land Partition is reviewed pursuant to Type II procedures. § 18.390.040; § 18.420.030.A. The following, together with exhibits and documentary submissions, constitutes applicant's narrative statement required by fi 18.390.040.B. Attached as Exhibit 9, is applicant's impact study required by § 18.390.040.B.2.e. A preapplication conference was held September 25, 2008 as required by � 18.390.040.A. 18.420—I.anrl Partitions COMI�IENT: Applicant is the recorded owner of the property. Exhibit 1. Attorney Gary Shepherd is applicant's authorized representative. The application includes required City forms, all information required for a Type II application, a preliminary lot line map and existing conditions map, an impact study, and all necessary information to approve the request. As demonstrated by this narrative statement, exhibits, and attachments, the proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance regulations and there are adequate public facilities Page 2 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition available to serve the proposal. The proposed lots conform to the minimum dimensional standards, can support a minimum width building envelope for the R 4.5 district, can meet setback standards, have adequate frontage and access, and meet required lot area standards. Although county records and legal descriptions describe it as being .35 acres or 15,246 square feet (Exhibit 7), the property has been surveyed to be 15,024 square feet — not including prior right of way dedications—thus capable of division into two lots and meeting the one unit per 7,500 square foot lot area standard. Exhibits 2 and 3. During preliminary application proceedings, staff opined that the lot area standards could not be met because of ordinance right of way dedication requirements to be exacted as a condition of approval. Staff opined that, pursuant to fi 18.715, an approximately 500 square foot required right of dedication for frontage on SW 106`�' and SW Johnson would reduce the lot area below minimum standards and thus violate the dimensional requirements, preventing approval without a variance. ln response, applicant's engineering representative, Ztech Engineers, surveyed the site, located the existing right of way, and determined that there is adequate existing right of way along both SW 106t" and SW Johnson (50 foot wide right of way with 32 foot wide paved surfaces), and that no additional right of way is to be dedicated. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. If additional right of way is in fact required to be dedicated, this office also disagrees with staff's legal conclusion, as it is inconsistent with the City's definitions of"lot area" and "dedication," violates well established exaction law and the process of exacting property, and is unconstitutional as explained below. In this case, the subject site was developed in 1962. At that time, all required right of way dedications were made in exchange for development approval. Those dedications resulted in the 15,000+ square foot property. Consistent with fi 18.715.020(3), applicant is not counting the land previously dedicated in his l 5,024 square foot lot area calculations. Density calculation standard §18.715.020— stating that "all land dedicated for public rights-of-way" — cannot be interpreted to require the "dedication" deduction in advance of development approval to determine "lot area." Importantly, "dedication" is defined by City code as a"grant by a property owner allowing the use of property by the public for specific purposes." This definition recognizes the timing of the dedication, which is a grant by the property owner which occurs after and in exchan e�for a�proval. A property owner will not and does not make the dedication until approvals are received. Established judicial precedence states that right of way dedication requirements can be exacted — required as a condition of development approval — only if they are constitutional under the No/laf� and Dolafr analysis. The City's enactment of dedication requirements as an ordinance does not and did not relieve the City of the obligation to follow the constitutionally required process. McCl����e ►�. City of SJ�ri�1g�'ie/d, 175 Or App 425 (2001). Under polafr and the Takings Clause of the US and Oregon Constitutions, a governmenta] body must demonstrate a "rough Page 3 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition proportionality" between certain conditions that it "exacts" and the"impacts" of the development that it approves subject to the conditions. ('lirrk ►�. ('ity cfAlbarry, 137 Or App 293 (1995). It is well understood that a private grant of land to the public can be exacted or required as a condition of development approval. In that process the public receives private property — property it would have to otherwise pay for— in exchange for development approval. In other words, rather than paying money for valuable property, the government exacts the property by requiring a dedication of private property to the public in exchange for issuing a valuable development right. In this context, exactions are imposed through an adjudicatory or quasi-judicial process in the following manner. Roger.s Mach. ��. Wash. (�011il/y�, 181 Or App 369 (2002). An applicant applies for development approval. A government ordinance or otherwise requires an applicant to dedicate a possessory interest in property that is owned at the time of the application. That demand or required dedication of a property interest is made in exchange for development approval, and attached as a condition of approval. An exaction cannot result in lot area reductions to defeat a partition request where the lot area prior to the exaction exceeds the minimum area necessary— in this case 15,000 square feet of land to create two lots. Only pursuant to an approval is the ordinance's right of way dedication requirements implicated. The City's code defines "lot area" as "the total horizontal area within the lot lines of a lot exclusive of public and private roads...." The definition is consistent with the exaction process. Prior to the exaction —which only happens upon partition approval — applicant has a lot area, as that term is defined, of 15,000 plus square feet, thus meeting the lot area standard. Ztech Engineers has determined and applicant asserts that no additional right of way dedications are required. If additional dedications are required that, after the dedication, result in a lot area of less than 15,000 square feet, rather than challenge the City's opinion on a constitutional front, applicant may apply for a variance to the lot area dimensional standards. If necessary, a potential variance request represents a means by which applicant can exhaust his administrative remedies as well as an opportunity to approve the partition request in full compliance with the City's procedural and substantive development standards. If the City requests applicant to apply for a variance, applicant is not waiving the arguments or rights set forth above. 18.S10 —R 4.5- Residentia/Zoning District/Dimensional.Standarcls COMMENT: The subject property is zoned R-4.5 Low Density Residential which is designed to support detached single family homes. The zoning supports one unit per 7,500 square feet. The property has been surveyed to be 15,024 square feet, thus capable of supporting 2 lots and 2 detached units. Exhibits 2 and 3. fi 18.510.020.D and table 18.510.2. The lot is intended for single family residential use, an outright permitted use. � 18.510.030 (table 18.510.1). Section 18.510.050 and table 18.510.2 establish minimum development standards for R- 4.5 zoned property. The proposed partition satisfies all applicable standards. The lots front on Page 4 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition SW 106`h Drive. Exhibits 3 and 4. The code standard for minimum lot width for detached units is 50 feet. The width of proposed Parcel2 along SW 10`�' Drive is nearly 65 feet. The width of proposed Parcel 1 along SW 106`�' Drive is 85 feet. Exhibit 2; oversized preliminary plat map. The R-4.5 code standard for minimum setbacks is 20 foot front yard; 15 foot side facing corner lot, 5 foot side yard; and 15 foot rear yard. The setback standards for the existing residence on proposed Parcel 1 are met. The side yard (with Parcel 2) setback is 5 feet, the preexisting side yard setback to the south exceeds 5 feet, the preexisting front yard setback exceeds 20 feet, and the rear yard setback (with Parcel 2) exceeds 15 feet. Exhibit 3; oversized preliminary plat map. The setback standards for proposed Parcel 2 can be made a condition of approval. Applicant demonstrated it is feasible to meet required setback standards with a sample building pad. The demonstrative building pad shows a corner lot side yard setback of 15 feet, a front yard setback of 20 feet, a rear yard setback of 15 feet, and a side yard (with Parcel 1) set back of 5 feet. Exhibit 3; oversized preliminary plat map. The maximum height standard on Parcel 2 can be made a condition of approval. The house on Parcel l is preexisting and is less than the maximum height permitted. The home is one story with a daylight basement. 18. 705—Access Reyuirements COMMENT: For the R-4.5 zoned property, the standards require all lots to have public street access and a minimum of one access point, with a width of 15 feet and pavement width of 10 feet to be established and maintained. As demonstrated by existing conditions, proposed Parcel 1 has an access driveway connecting to SW 106`�'. The driveway is 33.9 feet wide and paved. Exhibit 3; oversized existing conditions map. Proposed Parcel 2 has ample room to access either SW 106th or SW Johnson, depending on future building and development plans. Parcel 2 has approximately 65 feet of frontage on SW 106t" and 100 feet on SW Johnson. The access location will be developed in conjunction with future construction of a single family residence. A need for additional access is not created by this partition approval, as applicant does not propose to construct a building at this time. Only after the site is designed for development, will the access location be determined and located. Additional requirements of� 18.705 can be made a condition of approval and associated with building or other permits. 18. 71 S—Residenti�rl Density Calculations COMMENT: As required by City code and the Oregon and US constitution, the number of residential units allowed on the subject site and through this application request is calculated by dividing the pre-dedication area of land as legally described by the number of square feet required for each lot in the R 4.5 zoning district (7,500 square feet). Although county records and legal descriptions describe it as being .35 acres or 15,246 square feet (Exhibit 7), the property has been surveyed to be l 5,024 square feet — not including Page 5 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition prior right of way dedications—thus capable of division into two lots and meeting the one unit per 7,500 square foot lot area standard. During preliminary application proceedings, staf�'opined that the lot area standards could not be met because of ordinance right of way dedication requirements to be exacted as a condition of approval. Staff opined that, pursuant to § 18.715, an approximately 500 square foot required right of dedication for frontage on SW 106`�' and SW Johnson would reduce the lot area below minimum standards and thus violate the dimensional requirements, preventing approval without a variance. In response, applicant's engineering representative, Ztech Engineers, surveyed the site and determined that there is adequate existing right of way along both SW 106`�' and SW Johnson (50 foot wide right of way with 32 foot wide paved surfaces), and that no additional right of way is to be dedicated. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. If additional right of way is in fact required to be dedicated, this office also disagrees with staff's legal conclusion, as it is inconsistent with the definitions of"lot area" and "dedication," violates well established exaction law and the process of exacting property, and is unconstitutional as explained below. In this case, the subject site was developed in 1962. At that time, all required right of way dedications were made in exchange for development approval. Those dedications resulted in the l 5,000+ square foot property. Consistent with � 18.715.020(3), applicant is not counting the land previously dedicated in his 15,024 sc�uare foot lot area calculations. Section 18.715.020— stating that "all land dedicated for public rights-of-way" — cannot be interpreted to require the "dedication" deduction in advance of development approval to determine "lot area." Importantly, "dedication" is defined by City code as a "grant by a property owner allowing the use of property by the public for specific purposes." This definition recognizes the timing of the dedication, which is a grant by the property owner which occurs after and in exchange for a�proval. A property owner will not and does not make the dedication until approvals are received. Established judicial precedence states that right of way dedication requirements can be exacted — required as a condition of development approval — only if they are constitutional under the Nollaf2 and Dolaf� analysis. The City's enactment of dedication requirements as an ordinance does not and did not relieve the City of the obligation to follow the constitutionally rec�uired process. McClr�re v. City of SJ�rifl�ie/d, 175 Or App 425 (2001). Under polafl and the Takings Clause of the US and Oregon Constitutions, a governmental body must demonstrate a"rough proportionality" between certain conditions that it "exacts" and the"impacts" of the development that it a�proves subject to the conditions. Cla�-k v. C iry qf Albarry, l37 Or App 293 (1995). It is well understood that a private grant of land to the public can be exacted or required as a condition of development approval. ln that process the public receives private property — property it would have to otherwise pay for— in exchange for development approval. In other words, rather than paying money for valuable property, the government exacts the property by Page 6 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition requiring a dedication of private property to the public in exchange for issuing a valuable development right. In this context, exactions are imposed through an adjudicatory or quasi-judicial process in the following manner. Rogers Mach. >>. L�'ash Corrrrty, 181 Or App 369 (2002). An applicant applies for development approval. A government ordinance or otherwise rec�uires an applicant to dedicate a possessory interest in property that is owned at the time of the application. That demand or required dedication of a property interest is made in exchange for development approval, and attached as a condition of approval. An exaction cannot result in lot area reductions to defeat a partition request where the lot area prior to exaction exceeds the minimum area necessary— in this case 15,000 square feet of land to create two lots. Only pursuant to an approval is the ordinance's right of way dedication requirements implicated. The City's code defines "lot area" as "the total horizontal area within the lot lines of a lot exclusive of public and private roads...." The definition is consistent with the exaction process. Prior to the exaction —which only happens upon partition approval — applicant has a lot area, as that term is defined, of 15,000 plus square feet, thus meeting the lot area standard. Ztech Engineers has determined and applicant asserts that no additional right of way dedications are required. If additional dedications are required that, after the dedication, result in a lot area of less than 15,000 square feet, rather than challenge the City's opinion on a constitutional front, applicant may apply for a variance to the lot area dimensional standards. If necessary, a potential variance request represents a means by which applicant can exhaust his administrative remedies as well as an opportunity to approve the partition request in full compliance with the City's procedural and substantive development standards. If the City requests applicant to apply for a variance, applicant is not waiving the arguments or rights set forth above. 18.725—Enti�ironmenta!Perfornutnce Standards COMMENT: Section 18.725 regulates and prohibits uses which emit noise, emissions, vibrations, and odors in excess of established thresholds. Applicant's proposed partition will not result in uncommon or excessive noise, emissions, vibration, odor, glare or insects/rodents. Parcel 1 will remain in residential use. Parcel 2 will be developed with residential uses in the future. Anticipated impacts upon future residential development are customary, such as that created by residential use and vehicle access, are minimal and non-offensive. Exhibit 9. Compliance with the environmental performance standards can also be made a condition of development approval. 18.745—LandscaPing COMMENT: These standards require street trees for all developments fronting on a public or private street. Street trees can be placed in either the public right of way or on private property Page 7 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition within 6 feet of the boundary. Applicant proposes to plant street trees in compliance with this standard. For Parcel 1, applicant proposes two trees consistent with the species, size and spacing requirements of 18.745; one north of the existing access drive and one south. The tree locations have been deemed appropriate by Gary Drendel, certified arborist. Exhibit l0. The required types and size of the trees, as well as the requirement to plant the trees, can be made a condition of development approval. For Parcel 2, applicant does not propose to construct any building or alter the landscape, nor does applicant seek permission to remove trees in association with this partition application. The proper location of street trees, at least 20 feet from the corner and required distance from driveways, can only be determined after the site is planned for building development and utility extensions. According to Gary Drendel, delay in locating and planting the trees on Parcel 2 will better ensure their proper location and survival during and after construction activities. Exhibit 10. The street tree requirements of� 18.745 can be made a condition of approval and associated with building or other permits. Exhibit 10. 18.�65— Off.S'treet Pnrking COMMENT: The parking standards require one off-street parking space per dwelling unit. The existing residence on Parcel 1 has a driveway and garage to satisfy the parking standards. Exhibit 3; oversized existing conditions map. The parking standard, as it applies to Parcel 2, can be made a condition of approval. The plans demonstrate there is adequate lot area to locate off- street parking to satisfy the one off-street space requirement, through a driveway and/or garage. Delay in locating and designing the parking space that complies with this standard is better left to the building permit stage, after construction and site plans are designed. 18. 780—.Signs COMMENT: Applicant does not propose or seek approval to erect any sign. This standard is not applicable, or compliance can be made a condition of development approval. 18. 790— Tree remoi�a!and mitigation COMMENT: Applicant does not propose to remove any trees in association with this partition application. Applicant located and identified the size and species of existing trees on site 6 inches in caliper or greater. Exhibits 3 and 10; oversized existing conditions map. Prior to the application submission, a 14 inch Birch was cut down. The tree was located on the northwest corner of the concrete pad, north of the existing residence. The tree was previously diseased and dying and was substantially damaged during the December/January storm event, threatening the existing residence. Page 8 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition For Parcel 1, applicant proposes to plant two trees consistent with the species, size and spacing requirements of 18.745; one north of the access drive and one south. The tree locations were deemed appropriate by Gary Drendel, certified arborist. Exhibit 10. For Parcel 2, applicant does not propose to construct any building or alter the landscape, nor does applicant seek permission to remove trees in association with this partition application. The location of trees intended for removal, those that will require protection, and proposed location of new plantings as mitigation can only be determined after the site is planned for building development and utility extensions, which applicant is not proposing at this time. According to Gary Drendel, certified arborist, delay in requiring compliance with 18.790 on Parcel 2 will ensure the required tree protection and mitigation and promote survival during and after construction. The requirements of� 18.790 can be made a condition of approval and associated with building permits. Applicant retained the services of Gary E. Drendel, a certified arborist to conduct a tree assessment and survey. The tree inventory done by Mr. Drendel has been incorporated into the plans and maps prepared by Ztech Engineers. Exhibits 3 and 10; oversized existing conditions map. The assessment and plans identify each tree by species, size, and location. The 23 inch Tulip, 21 inch Norway Maple, 14 inch Wild Mountain Ash, and the 8 inch Cherry trees are co- dominate, which represents weakness. Only 5 trees are"qualified" trees having a dbh of 12 inches or greater. Exhibits 3 and 10; oversized existing conditions map. Mr. Drendel also recommends tree protection and mitigation requirements be made a condition of development approval to ensure tree protection and mitigation and promote survival of newly planted and retained trees during and after construction. I8.795—Clear Vision Area COMMENT: The existing conditions map and aerial photos demonstrate that the visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 can and will be met by the proposed development. Exhibits 3, 4 and 5. The property is served by local streets(25 m.p.h.) and is located at the intersection of SW 106`h and Johnson. SW Johnson is a straight street, that dead ends, with no existing impediments to clear vision. SW 106'�' is also a straight street, with no impediments to clear vision. Applicant will maintain required clear vision areas at the intersection of the access points and local streets. This requirement can also be made a condition of approval. I8.810—Street& Utility Im��roi�ement.Stan�larrls COMMENT: The subject site is served by all needed and necessary streets, public facilities and services. Exhibit 9. The locations of the public facilitates have been surveyed and are depicted on the existing conditions and plat maps. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. The property, adjacent lots, street configuration and improvements were designed and developed in 1962. At the time, and in exchange for development approval, needed right of way was dedicated and streets constructed to safely serve the subdivision. Page 9 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition Customarv Residential Services: Fire and emergency services are provided by the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. Sewer services are provided by Clean Water Services. Water is provided by the City of Tigard. The school district is Tigard-Tualatin No. 23J and the parks district the City of Tigard. Cable, gas, sewer, water and electrical service already extend to the property. The location and size of existing facility lines are depicted on the preliminary plan and existing conditions map. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. A fire hydrant is located in the NVV corner of the property, with water lines extending north and south on SW 106`�' and east and west on SW Johnson. The water line is available and has suff'icient capacity to serve a future single family residence on proposed Parcel 2. Eight inch sanitary sewer lines are located in both SW 106'�' and SW Johnson St and currently serve the property. The sewer line is available and has sufficient capacity to serve a future single family residence on proposed Parcel 2. The site is characterized as being flat and gently sloped. The area of minimal slope is already developed with the existing residence on Parcel 1. The topography/elevations of the site are depicted on Exhibits 2 and 3 and the oversized plans. Stormwater is controlled on site through natural percolation and downspouts. Parcel 1's residence has downspouts which are depicted on Exhibits 2 and 3 and the oversized plan maps. The site drains from the high point of the existing residence, to the northeast property corner towards SW Johnson Street. There are four existing weep holes in the curbs, all depicted on Exhibits 2 & 3 and the oversized plans. Compliance with stormwater standards for any new residential structure can be made a condition of development approval. No public improvements, except an extension of customary services from existing mains are needed or necessary for the proposed partition. There will be minimal to no development impacts in creating one additional lot. See Exhibit 9 — Impact Study. Underground facilit�rec�uirement: Pursuant to�18.810.120, applicant requests the right to pay a fee-in-lieu of under-grounding costs. A condition of approval can ensure compliance. .Section 18.810.120.C. proi�irles: "1. The rleneloper shall nay a_fee in lieu of under-grounding costs ivhen the dei�elopntent is propose�l to tr�ke plan on rr street ivhere�risting utilities fvhich �tre not underground ivi11 seri�e the development anrl he npproi�al audioriry determines that the cost and technical difficulty�f undergrnunrling the utilities outrveig/is Nze benefit of under-grounding in conjunction ivith the �lenelopment. The cletermination shull be on ri case-by-case basis. The niost comnzon, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage developnzent for ivhich unrler-grounrling would result in the placen:ent of adclitionrrl poles, r�ither thrcn the rentoi�nl of abni�e ground utiliry fncilities. 2. An t�pplicant_for«rlei�elopment fvhich is serti�ed by utilities ivhich �cre not unrlerground and ivhich �tre located across a puhlic right of ivay.from «l�plicant's property shall��uy the,fee in- lieu of undergrounding." Page 10 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition The subject partition is proposed in an established neighborhood with above ground power and cable facilities. As is customary for older neighborhoods, utilities are currently provided to the site, through preexisting overhead power lines. The power poles, with lights, are located offsite across the street (SW 106t�') 40 feet from the NW corner of the property, and 80 feet to the east on SW Johnson. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. Power lines to Parcel 1 come from across the SW 106`" right of way, to the southern portion of Parcel 1. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. The cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities for this one 15,000 square foot property outweighs any benefit by having the utilities under ground. The relatively short amount of street frontage would result in additional poles to accommodate locating the utilities under ground. Applicant's property would then be the only property with underground utilities in the area. Transportation: The subject corner lot fronts on and is served safely and adequately by two public streets, SW 106t" and SW Johnson Street. Both streets are located in a 50 foot right of way with 32 foot wide paved surfaces and curbs. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. The local street system serves a limited number of residents. Exhibits 4, 5, and 6. SW Johnson Street provides access to 5 lots. SW 106`h is"j" shaped local through road and provides access onto SW Walnut Street and SW Tiedman Avenue. The existing payment width on both SW 106`" and SW Johnson exceeds current minimum pavement rec�uirements for local streets. There are no sidewalks or planter strips adjacent to or near the property. Exhibits 4, 5, and 6. Consistent with § 18.810.030.E., the 32 foot wide paved surface on SW 106`�' and SW Johnson is wider than the minimum pavement width currently required. As well, the 50 foot right of way width meets minimum standards. For SW Johnson Street, a local street serving only 5 homes and having less than 200 ADT, table 18.810.1 states a right of way width of 42 to 46 feet and a paved width of 20 to 24 feet, supporting 2 lanes, a 5 to 6 feet wide sidewalk, and a 5 foot wide landscaping strip. Currently, SW Johnson is located in a 50 foot wide right of way, has a paved width of 32 feet, curbs on both sides of the street, supporting 2 lanes of traffic and no sidewalk or landscaping strip. The only improvements missing are the sidewalk and landscaping strip, although no adjacent properties are developed with a sidewalk and landscaping strip. Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. For SW 106th, a local street with less than 500 ADT, table 18.810.1 states a right of way width of 46 to 50 feet and a paved width of 24 to 28 feet, supporting 2 lanes, a 5 to 6 feet wide sidewalk, and a 5 foot wide landscaping strip. Currently, SW 106`" is located in a 50 foot wide right of way, has a paved width of 32 feet, curbs on both sides of the street, supporting 2 lanes of traffic and no sidewalk or landscaping strip. The only improvements missing are the sidewalk and landscaping strip, although no adjacent properties are developed with a sidewalk and landscaping strip. Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Applicant seeks relief from '/2 street improvement requirements pursuant to�' 18.810.030.A.S, namely the requirement to tear out the existing curb, reduce the pavement width, and install a sidewalk and planter strip at this time. .Section 18.810.030.A.S states: "If the City Page 1 I of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition could nnd ivoulrl other►vise reyuire the apPlicant to proi�i�le street iniproi�ements, the City Engineer rrttty accept�r.future inzprovenzents gurrrantee in lieu of street iniproi�ements if one or more of the fol/mving conclitions exist: ... c. Due to the nature of existin�dei�elopment on ac jacent properties it is unlikely that street improvements tivould be�rtenderl in the foreseeable future and the inzpronenzent associ�iterl with the project under rei�ie►v does not, by itself,provide a significant improi�ement to street safet�� or capacity; or ... e. The in:provements is associriterl ivith an appronerl land partition on property Z�ned residential and the proposerl lanrl Pnrtition does not create�rny ne►v streets. " Applicant agrees to execute a future improvements guarantee in lieu of street improvements. A condition of approval can ensure compliance. The proposed partition on land zoned residential does not create any new streets. The standard in § 18.810.030.A.5.e, is satisfied. The standard of§ 18.810.030.A.5.c is also satisfied. Requiring applicant to construct a sidewalk and planter strip would result in applicant removing the existing curb cut, reducing the pavement width, and redesigning the street only in front of applicant's property. Requiring those actions is of no benefit to the City, does not significantly improve the efficiency of the street system, and is inconsistent with adjacent development and the character of the immediate neighborhood. Due to the nature of existing development on the subject and adjacent property, it is very unlikely that street improvements, including planter strips, sidewalks and new curb cuts would be constructed and the roadway width reduced in the foreseeable future. The subject 15,000 plus square foot lot was created and developed, along with public facility and street improvements, in 1962 pursuant to subdivision approvals. At the time, the right of way dedications and street improvements were constructed pursuant to applicable transportation standards. The subject corner lot fronts on and is served safely and adequately by two public streets, SW 106`" and SW Johnson Street, both with 32 foot wide paved surfaces and curbs. The local street system serves a limited number of residents. SW Johnson Street provides access to 5 lots. SW 106`'' is "j" shaped local through road and provides access onto SW Walnut Street and SW Tiedman Avenue. The existing payment width on both SW 106'" and SW Johnson exceeds current minimum pavement requirements for local streets. There are no sidewalks or planter strips adjacent to or near the subject property. Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Adjacent lots are fully developed. Given zoning standards, there is little to no chance area property will be further divided. Given existing development patterns and code standards, SW Johnson and SW 106`�' adjacent to and in the neighborhood around applicant's property will not be developed with planter strips, sidewalks, and new curbs pursuant to today's standards. Requiring applicant to construct sidewalks and planter strips will result in only two lots with those improvements. Page 12 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition The existing system provides safe and efficient access to and from area residents for owners, visitors, the public and emergency access. Constructing sidewalks, planter strips, and new curbs in front of applicant's property alone, will not, by it self, significantly improve street safety or capacity. This standard is met. Clean Water Ser►�ices.St�tnd�crrls— CW.S Rdr O 07-20 COMMENT: Prior to submitting this application, applicant requested CWS conduct a sensitive area pre-screening assessment. Consistent with R&O 07-20, CWS issued a responsive service provider letter. The form, attached as Exhibit 8, states that sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or within 200 feet of the site. III. CONCLUSION Applicant respectfully requests approval from the City of Tigard for Minor Partition Approval to allow single family residential infill development consistent with area development and uses. Applicant addresses and demonstrates compliance with all applicable approval criteria. Respectfully submitted, � , ._--, �--� �. ,- .- �- _.._ .�:_- � � � ..� l _ .. % -_.__.. � Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law Page l3 of 13 — Sanders: Application for Minor Partition , 2S 1 03AA 2S 1 03AA '�, ,;: ;j,�;,,,, _ , , � �,�.b �� € :•=��:�':-•";= !� �k � _ `'r � ' � I -- / -'r`----- �y I_ — � ,� .I _.... ° ---..-. _ ... .--- -----»- � ,Hn. a.�n.'°�r,. . ++y�• •,�--1__��: . ��,�' . Nn �._ � � t�... . ';i"."^.y. . F...�e�r � �,_,,, � i � "j t1 � ' J� :_ _ _____.— --- �'"fJ � � � �� ��� �����. ,a�M--- ..�1 �N �W ".�1. I T .... I I ' <---soum uee�oHx i waaw oaea r �, � � P'• � 3a � �.� � .� . ��,. ". �.: �- �a111n uxE ao1N�nlqtup o�c a1 - � � �.'. . � iib1�' l.uN����un�r +New. d�ir� I I � ,� .c� � �. � .'�. .�:-.1. r" � � ! 'i \f l -� ��g��� � <��= . .+an'r�'iM�Y ,ini��• rshv .ep6,_ � w•'. I 9: �. � � i . \ _ _ -. . � �' �:f � �� 1 � �"�� � � —.�i<__. �.�� �� f � i � ., � i, �'� . I � $ ;��P �s�� � i � �. � zi .: , '�� r,. . � : � r �� �l �_ � �p� � � � ..m°,,c ' �� �c1, �tj- n�a�_ � � � ; � �' � J �.� ���. � � �t � - � � � �I�;.� � WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON ,;..�,, i i i� � /�' `\ �'� f NE1/4NE714S��ONO3�SR7WW.M. � j I '. . ' w.�on � � � J I # '.�� _.� 1} - - .. �`------'��a�= �6 � �� � :�. f� -r' "- - --�---_ � �uii __ -�_'�' ." rl i � .� ..��. . 3d �3F- 32�33,1.31 �36��36 roi �.. � -_ 3t�.a i I '— :i--� - - - -.. - „ � �.�..:,:Y,.,,,,,,�.,,,..K::ed��t.� j .w.s.�n�.�� � ��6 :�.c � .�°,',c � � ,�� ���� �� ...w...,.,..� t B.�. 5 x � a 4 i 7:� I f1 9'V i � ��"��� ��i� ��I I � � �j �i �� a�,�v ��� ,,H� 8 � ,z >�.� e a,7�;a z, ��� �� o I I ..,� � 16 99 �► w , �,: � ln'33„"'rn'°'y�+h4�•""�f33""'�? S v!,,,:.A'Y�iqi", k�+'lYa...�„`r,bSi` � t � � : ; '�. "s...�.. ,�,........��„�,. 7s re.� .i> ,�„6 �r� .�r1 te '� � � �s ��� ���� s°°° �� i���� atoo � � xeoo ��voo �� ��'' xaao � � 4t 19�. Rd 2� �¢� � �21 fA.� � q y, � d d I 3 8 x3oo �; 'Y. � � s p rn�cr�, 6 i _ � L �.. � . ��r�_ _-�� I * i� �V°• llj, :eoo � `� 8, 25 �.30�'��z8�'2e�a7 aa � ao : � 00 '°-.fi�'-Y yy � / ]s00 � � p : t01 _'_ �__ " _ � ��� l ! �F� � N-�-�.SW ��'g�� � �'�, �i�i.,�� �ti„� �/�� �4. S j 36 3t.'9-'' 3'S-��31 35 .JQ� �87� � -�p s ��� �'1 .•y�= a000 t. }� < I d � ✓_4'°^rt'� sh. � zeoo C�`R io �t�- 4j t s 3 � � � ' �' � uaa � ��� i�� a�,' ��� ����� �r�ALE �� -� �- - -�-� -�� �� �B- i i �: � 24 �'� a� q �j.�_ °� �� �� - FONAOOIiIONALMAPSVISROURWEBS?EAT i ��------ -- - ---- 1 ..£ -- ; ���. te � 'piir,sW CiYD�Sp P -.•!,s n..r_- �o�� �.co.nes�lnppnar.us � I . fi r�e.,y 0,'g ��` �� s�---��.w - C " '-`:t . �. ♦300 �� <� 8200 If � � � xa ti u 3a � a000 � �k'�a. F. �l. � r �.. r a 6.,: � 8B�� BA :�.AB I M IB Q L �7�y 9, 7600', 11 � i � R ¢e, '� �' . �„ s � �.,� s i6 -`n �.ye„ ' . �,._.:..J- A.: . �, �� � amoo �9�aoo�� ��� � -1 !-�.. ..�fi � . 8�--�-- . �,u � �S �� x: a s� i"� oea Z t a�oo s '� � ',s -', ( ee. Bp .. . Y' .�- ]300 ��i . d4 , AD�. �� , w�nsa .�. 14 � � �j� xo t v eI r ta �� � .:°:c � � � i� �� T" ""��„,,,,l,��y NI:,. ...�-�c�.���,,...a....:....,.y�tt,,..,,,,;rj ` -������ � ��. I �BOE 1807 � � v' . CB CA. 09 DR . 1 ,9 .i�.c R I i � �� a ��1 ,0 3� � ' _ _ - � �,� r.uw I �'� �� - • r —'__ 1910 i 1881 9I 1912 , �C .� 0 ± .�+I _�1_ '°°' uua �/ m.r � '•,h.^ � ---�---�-_b � �a 22)� $� �� �� �:�.SX: CD ..DC '�DD` zo.wn � M w.� � � , . � 1906 � I f _�,' '1 �. enrm .' � . M r � �aae �� �:� ,�,.,k.,'f�..``R'�4�1a,.K.Q,tl...�..,,,..�-,,,ag�.,.,��..,.�„��.,., �e..�YVA��F���__'^,,,,,,�y'...:...STREET b i� - "-- �s� » aI y r SW JOHNS N STREET c�e��er���.�zs,os,,n 1 � � . \ E00�0.]03.�OO100.��09.601� � I I I I A\ �, � N�' ` IM.) r �� \ �� p� ' � I I I ' � ! I � 3 �, `°�°. '� �-� ,a�. � ,eaa _ < r -r-„,. ,� � � em aoo � � i � � � . � ��i�� ' a, �s s ►►� �� -•-� ' �^� ���I� �c �,K� • �sao ieoo • J � ,� �,� ,e�e G �ais i �� � "1� �� � 1001 I 100R i �� .t�K I YK �I'-}�t� !r� '--� � � ___2 �___ni^��=ni� � � 13 S� tl 'I� 196t '� �e3 � . � � ; � T y �j�; I .w�c eia �too I j (� .w�c �na� L no� �� , iso� � �; -- _ � :,� 1 E ��Ae `` , i 1^C I .N�c \ '�.x�t� � A'. I I ` I , � � � g�� ,eox �' } � ('.i ��� � � �,�� L)°J 6 i9oi ¢rn a.��."-tiq� � r � rr � � �p� � ��,- � �'• �,� . s {$1 �,�'� > � #��� � �,� �w+� 6 � � I ar � nw __-� .. . 8', 1917 # 'rq ��FW��`� . . �� . '^'1�( . �_ _.. 1 � I i R �"°^ �s��„ � � .o �o ' � I �1,1 c�o�r�►� I �w z= �.,,. ►q, � ,soo �,. --� � ___�___ � . Y .IO�C _ .... - �..� �e� , _ qCN � ��� � �� �- _ t° � <� �� 'i � �i ..,� „ .: � ,.,,, �T T > „ F �� ea��� ea: � � � � �"� I; � � ��. �,;� ��8 �„� •,�b��5 RE�T q ���-�� PLOT DATE:January 16,2008 ��a�(�� ��� I �Y ��,� �� ' �t� I` � f"� . �p .�`°" � �.: �CI�.-� .. �'.�, _.���'l,.f' . � FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES 1£� I I I I 17W 7103 � � kL H�C s ° ` � d C F ONLY-DO NOT RELY ON i woo � 1� J'..a�c .a..c -e W� ` �Y�� ,�4� I ..,,c � �� aoc I , �""�• �r n,,, ` � 4,� � �l : FOR OTHER USE I f0�t I^ �� �� L ".\ � I � � sa� ' , enaflkWretsdM'eRMrPe�'Me�Oasoe�Mee�MC � j I � Nem �i� rc+o�.� � »�e q� .c�o +�C i � \ �re�.�.a��o�Ne�amer�mr�aeeromeman � I S� �tl �� � � ��m� ; �' G)�� �,�,,�c�Y�ta" '+oa � i - a�ooerom�u�ar�rwro��„�.M�enm�ewmw �w--�-v�e- � � �3J� � 4��c ����� _p .�1 �� j�� �,ty �, b i . _ e � o i. � 1 " 1 ' . _ RROL STfREET �� C ..�,. o 0 o Q� � n�1 �; v _ - �-r_�i_r ;� � _ � r r2�,'.a j�} . �� - ��. � ,•� � �.�`@�"�" u r �.�: t 1.-°-""_-�^\�^"r-_.-';�� . �.m ,,,;,� m�-' �,a . . �.,� 24�.�„ �,� t1. tiv.,` .:,��? �, =,".` TIGARD dw�,�os 2S 1 03AA 2S 1 03AA EXHIBIT LIST Exhibit 1 Deed — Ownership Record Exhibit 2 Preliminary Plat (not to scale) Exhibit 3 Existing Conditions Map (not to scale) Exhibit 4 Aerial Photo —close up Exhibit 5 Aerial Photo —distant Exhibit ba Tax Map 6b Tax Map — close up Exhibit 7 Title Company/Metroscan Property Profile Exhibit 8 Clean Water Service Provider Letter Exhibit 9 Impact Statement Exhibit 10 Certified Arborist Report OVERSIZED: Existing Conditions Plan (to scale) Preliminary Plan (to scale) � � �� � � r �. � t� �. '"'�''"�.�"�°°^",°"°°" 2U07-065411 OB/12l2007 03:34:16 PiN ,�_. 0-0to crr■� an■t� CwNin s�o.00 ta,uo s+t.00•Tow■s� . After recording,return to: I ` II I I I I��I1��II�)I�I��I� I � I �!I������I�Ilt�� � I � ! Nancy L.Cowgill I�� �� 011YT2tS200700834110a20022 Stoel Rives LLP I,Rlehud He6�mIeM,Dlnctor of b�asm��t�ne °'�"`'�, T�xdlon�ndE:-ORVelaCounq�Cl�rYforlNUhlnptan . � '� 900 SW Fifth Avenue ca,my,or.QOr,,aah.rybr�.renya,.�a,.�n�ni� Suite 2600 In�trum�rdMMMtlnpw��natwd� oro.6�nv�. eook ol neord�d�dd e t�. Portland,OR 97204 R1chWHObfmIMtO�t� arofAautm�/�� • TuWe�,Ex�Mlcla CourdY CI�rM _._._ — _ . . _...... Mail all tax statements to: Steven W. Sanders 2647 SW Talbot Road Portland,OR 97201 Tax Account No. R4b9736 STATUTOR�C'BARGAIN AND SALE DE�:D STEVEN W. SANDERS and BARBARA L. SWANSON-SANDERS, husband and wife, Grantors, convey to STEVEN W. SANDERS, Grantee, the following described real property located in Washington County,Oregon. Lot l3,COTTONWOOD PLACE,in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, Subject to Restrictions, Reservations, Easements, Covenants, Oil Gas or Mineral Rights of Record,if any The true consideration for this conveyance is$0.00. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPT[NG THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEL' 'CITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS,IF ANY, UNDER ORS 197352, TH]S INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED 1N THIS INSTRUMENT 1N VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE S[GNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,'TI-IE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK W[TH THE APPROPRIATE C[TY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACT[CES AS DF.FINED [N ORS 30.930 AT1D TO MQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, 1F ANY,UNDER ORS 197.352. UATED this 30`h day of April,2007. �� � 3teven W. Sanders Barbara L. Swanson-Sanders � Portlnd I-2257464.1 0041293•00001 � / �X�-l/� /l �, ��>,� Z t . STA'fE OF OREGON ss. Coanty of Multnomah This instrument was acknowledged before me on April 30, 2007, by STEVEN W. SANDERS and BARBARA L. SWANSON-SANDERS. '/� � �/��/L/\.l`_ ( i Notary Public for Oregon ,..� � My Commission Expires: a�c��s�►. NANCY L COWQ1l.L NQTARY PUBUGORE(�ON COMMiSS1dN N0.412512 A4YC0'1�MISSIONEXPIRESFEBRUARY 1U,2611 Portlndi-2257464 1 0041293-00001 LEGEND• ,�5 89'11_00_W w.� ' FD.S/C'lR..U.5'BIMtK�-�I '�^ � !BQlL T.S.P.,O.B ,� • DENOIES MOIAl11ENT5 iWNp AS NOTED pW�l E7fIS11NG WA7ER METER S 00'1d00'W 0.17 POINT �A� � � iD.5/8'I.R.,01'BUPoED O DENOIES S/E'�p0'IRON ROD �( EkIS71NC f1RE HYDRANT 0.?.,HELD N17M A YEIIMI pLA571C CAP STAMPED I �� 1944' m DOSIINC Wh7ER VALVE ���:,� 3 i j , m EbS11NG SAMiIRY MANHOIE . � LR DEN07ES IRON ROD O� E%ISTINC GJS MEIER � LP. OENOTFS IRON PIPE pEM E%1S1MG 0.ECiRIC ME7ER � $ . � N. OENOIES FWND oMB EIASTING MARB07f ° �) 3 t� r` � T.SP. DENOIES TIED STRAICHT POR110N o05 EX�SIrt�G DOxNSpWi ior�9 ior ie � n 1PC OENOlES YEILOW PU511C CAP �3'C' E7GS7RIC VTA11Y PIXF MM 57REET UCMT 'J ' �'� $ __ �.:'� g� � (F� DENO7ES IAEASURED O E705TMC TREE " � N e i (P) DFHOIES COTTONY�ODD PLACE� ...._'y•:..••-..... EJ0S71NC COHTOUR � ��� � fD.1/Y tR..0.3'BURIEO. BENT,T.S.P.,O.U. QP. DDlOTES OPoGMµpLAT CdINER -SA- �S�'� '� � POINT 'E' I s o0��9'00•e o.�s'� ��,. -WA- E10511NG WA7ER O.U. �ENOIES OPoqN UNKNOMN � � $S AIH _ �tilSi �:w N 89'71'00'E �� 2t9.30'(AI) 12000'(P) .,�' -G- EfO511NC GAS LNE RM 165.12 ------ - ----- _' s -a ' pW ..; o[r+ohs raoaAico i.c w(s)iso.n � SN DENOIES SUR4M MAABER,MASFANCTON -P- EMSiMG QfCTRIChI LMlE I.E M(N)180.17 ; 'ro..._ � � �;;,rRB ^ ��„M�c� oM �� I.E dli(E)16007 0 S.W. JOHNS�N ST ����;z,b .,sb :_ -� _' —s--- sn s� —sA—�— . - -- sw(�) s�saze� v/o �x oanc S " 2 j , 4 �° ��I. ., 2 . CURB � . fiE f1�1511 f100R ElEV�5TI0N � _- W _ ..- v fA CLFAN dli F/0 LINE N 89' '00'F-.49.66'(�) �f00.0'(P) .. ' ..�/'��� � .d i.E rt+(W)Ia8.42 ^� DS DONN SPOUT - ,- . 3q . . . c .. .�:� - 1'`• � 80.00'(P)4�HEL� � �.E.OUi(E) �� iBA1 -� � OVERH AD PONfR � CAAIE BOk �CnPLE�X > � �— nasm+c sPOT nEV�nai .�_�a.,��ss.LU � � POINT 'D' 'T 32. 1 w00D?uNtER TS.P./O.UR.,BENT ,�_ �� gq.��p,�7p� ° � BOARD !D.1/2'I.R.,OU ��PARCEIJ �3'DEA�CEOAR � �� --� D ��f SA X ^ � � I-'S N 8921'00'W 0.25� C000 FOR NORTMNG =V { � ! a 4 af g. \��_ 2 7500$0.Ff.. ° =u � q � � - ; o � � s. � �� P0598CE� ���K�.. i $ �� � x o ��� _ � F, a ,'r��a. � s ,�� � Q f0 V ,� S{ �. �, N1.,^ N l0i ta �) � � � ',K o N 90'00 TE 8.07' Et� �: 1� N ^'� g �S � � � �a� � ��PROG09ED�� �5 V x 8'C WOOD fENCE 7�P� �1 INTERSEC710N Y1510N iRIANGIE �� T � �� � N �y .� E%iSTiNG HOUSE i ' � 0 �� . > ,P R O P E q T V� N11�90 �. . ��0 M S U A L C L E�RAN C E A R EAS PER CDC SECTiON 18J95 ' � �NE 7���� 3 ° �~ n E%iSTINC wEEP HOIE IN CtlRB � O � FD.S/B'I.R�0.5'BURIED , ..� CGrat..-,, �p W000 $ r g :,�� .� t BENi.T.S.P..O.P. . �R�� ��K h C � POSSIBLE fFE ��] OS POSSIBIE EXISTINC PUMP DISCM�RCE WEEP HOLE. _ S E930'00'E DJ4'-� �� Sa ��� ��+ g 7i„�. n 3� Wpr MAPLE � � AC �n PARCEI 1 �I 3 ' W000 OECN OO F�SSIBLE FUTURE 20'N1DE DRIVEW�Y LOCATION M1TH CURB ;f �j7�W�� 7524 S0.Ff. I 1)58 OVER CONC.PA710 VISION CLEARANCE NOTED. NARRATIVE: ' �• r 20 r;: {� -s sonot° BASIS 0�BEFRMCS; N OJ'03'/9'E BETN'EEN iHE S/Y IRON RODS FOUND Ai PdNT$�'A'ANO b', + � �' . X � '$HED +I�RAVE� �CHAM�INR�` AS CA�Ct1LA1ED fRpA 7HE PUT OF'COTTONNDOD PLACE� .. � ��.:--S�_�O�EftnEAD .-.-�-y_' "JFENCE� �.� � 2 � �� � P�31V�R -���• �pl�t �S PqNT'A'10 PdNT�'=5 0}•03'49'W (BASiS OF BEARING PURPOSE OF SUROEY: TD PARiI11di�LOT 17 OF iME PLAT OF'COTTONWDOp plA(�'MTp 2 .....,. ....N.. TV a9.15'(P)h HELD � (u) 457.9Y(P) /76.21' PARCElS AS SHONN. • CABLE BOX . »"APPLE F/0 JBOX 50'R.O.w ;� `05`BURIEID,WBE T, 5?'s rM)��?(P� POINT G y���REA=15.024 50.FT. HEID 1NE S/8'IRON R00 iOUND AT POINT'A'AS AN ORIdNAL PLAT MONlI1RNT ANO f1ElD 1HE ,. ..�.. �S/B'qtOH ROD.SEi BY SN 28297.Ai PdNT'B'(SN 2E297 REPLACED 1HE OAIGM�L PLAT 5/6' � ��... � � T.S.P. 20NE:R�.S LOW DENSITY RESIDENTI�I AtON ROD)AS BEMC AT 7XE OAICMAL pLAT CORNER HELp 1!£%/R BEARMC ON S 00'IdOD'W FD.3/�'I.P..D.U. fROM POMT'A'AND NOR7H 1435b0'EA57 FROM PqNT'9'�Np M7EItSEC7El1 TNESE LIHE$AT in�..': g S 2�'2Y�5'E D.52' S 76'SO'7)'E 2.06• MIN.l0i S�ZE=7500 50.FT. PdNT'C'. NEXT.1ME pLAT BEARMC OF S 89R1'00'W MAS HEID FROIA iHE S/B'IRON ROp I � a LOl 7 FOUND AT PdHT�;AND M7ERSECTE�MTH 1FIE EAST RNiiT-OF-WAY 11NE OF SM.1067M pRIVE '... �. 5? RN t ss MH POI�dT 'F' � AT PdNT'f'. 1FIE REAILIING dSTANCE UP TO PdNT��•is ie�.�c�u+o n�vuT cws roa en�n4.n POINT 'C' �B3.8U• 1XE NORTHESAT CORHEk Of 7ME PROPER7Y NAS ESTABLI9IED AT 1HE PUi qS1ANCE OF LE.IN(SE)166.�1 W` �Fo.Sie•,.R., BENCHMARK: �`� E0.00 FFET fRq/TNE S/E'IRON ROD i'OUND AT POMT U'. NEXT,iHE SWiMMESi CONNER OF LE.OUT(N)�65.9� � 0.5'BURKD,BENT,TS.o.,o a. ELEVtiTiONS ARE BASED ON WASHiNCTON CWN1Y LOT 13 NAS ESTABUSFIEp BY MOIDING A PRORATED p$TANCE OF 50,19 fEET 50.16 PLA fRpA g a/ S 393700'E 0.55' � O BENCHIAARK N0.316,A BRASS D4R IN iHE S.W.CORNER PdNT�C,TF1EN POINT T M'AS HELD AT TME PUi BEARINC AID dSTANCE 0�N 84'J6'}0'f A N D �-. of ME COnCREIE PO�tCn qT ST.�NinOrir SCnDO,i!+ � ti9•�s FEET iRd►1 SAID Sd1TN11EST CONNER 0�LOT U. lAS1LT,7HE PUi BEARMG OF 5 � 71CARO,EAST uAIN FNiRANCE i0$CHOOI. � 00'10'07 M NAS IEID FR011 THE N.E CORNER OF TIIE PROPERTY ANp MAS Rt1EN5EC7ED N11M iHE 2� FDIN1 �8� E�EV._�69.50(UNf}07) PUT BEARINC OF SW1H 75DSb0'EAST iROM PdNT 1'�AT PqNT'C.'. d'� F�.5/B'I.R.N1TN MC ��SiAMPED,�Uq(lES PLS 22A' 1BM: TOP OF 1A'IN NUELLER ON flftE nrpRANi Pt rHc ♦ SE7 Ory SN(1)k HELD NW CORNER OF SITE. ELEV.=167.t0 ]OB�/: 53810-1 GRAPHIC SCALE DA7E: 1/22/09 ZTEC ENGINEERS INC. REGISTERED STEVE SANDERS 30 0 15 30 60 �y0 3737 SE. Bie AvE., PORTUND, OREGON 97202 PROFESSiONAL SC�� �^ � PH: (SOJ) 235-8795 fnx: (503) 233-7889 �/ND SURVEYOR DRAIIN: ,1W5 �M�� Cfttm: CCF � Itult. so� LOCATED tN THE N.E. t/a OF SECTiON 3. OREGON T. 25., R. 1W., W.M., IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, '�'�����.�g& }7Lfi: 51610-IPRE2 WpSHINGTON COIINTV, OREGON CHRIS 9144HBORN pRELIMINARY PLAT PLOT: 5-14-b9 aer+ew.�o�rc� i/��zao S 89'21'00'W 50.00' LEGEND: fD.5/B�I.R.,0.5'BURIEO J t BENT.T.S.P.,O.P. �/ �p01NT 'A' • DENDiES MONUNENTS FqJND AS NOTE� ❑� E%ISTING WAIER METER S 00'10�00'W 0.17 � N1A i FD.5/8"I.R.,02'BURIEO O DENOTES 5/8'X30'IRON ROD � EXISIINC FIRE HYDRANT O.P.,HELD i M11N A YELLOW PLAS7IC CAP STAMPED I -\ Z7EC l5 19�4' m EXISIING WAiER YALVf 3 . � SET ON � (s� EXISIINC SANITARY IAANHOIF � I.R. �ENOIES IRON R00 pGMI E%IS71NG GAS ME7ER S II.P. DENDIES IRON PIPE pE1A E%IS71NC ELECTRIC MEffR FD. DENOIES FWNO o1AB E%IS71NG MAILBO% Q i ' 3� �• 1.S.P. DENOTES TIED SIRAIGHT PORiION o�5 E%IS71NC DONNSPWT � �O L0�19 I L01 18 � � YPC DENOTES YELLOW PLASTIC CAP E%IS11NG UTllitt POLE N11X STREET L1GMT � M �ENOTES MEASURED � � () � E%ISTING TREE � , � ' FD.1/2'I.R.,0.3'BUHIED, P DENOffS'COTiONWOW PLACE' � E%ISTING CONiWR S � (� � � BENT,1.S.P.,O.U. � D.P. DENOIES ORICINAL PUT CORNER -SA- E%ISTINC SEMER � � . � �� POINT �E S DD'39'00'E O.J2' � O.U. OENOIES ORIqN UNKNONN -WA- EX6TING WATER SS�H � E%i5r Rp.W. N 89'21'00'E 219.30'(M 220.00' P ____ _______ RIA1 165.12 �' -G- El(IS11NC CAS LINE . .�/W PR. DENO7E5 PRORAiED LE.M(S)160.17 � �- � � � -P- EXISIING ELECTRICAI LINE LE.IN(N}160.17 3 �� �-CURB SN DENOTES SUR�fY NUMBER,WASHINGTON I.E.WT(E)160.07 � S.W. JOHNSON ST. a°avc�3.z,6 356' I COUNiY SURVEY RECORDS n/H OYfRHEAD '�\� .A -Sa Sq SA _ SA-�-SA SA -54 SA� -� SN(1) SN 28Y97 � � FIBER OPTIC g.. a � 2 � 2 � 3 ��� . f CURB PINISH FLDOR ELEYATION � � ._ . SS MH N B9'2'00'E .99.66'�4) 100. '(P) . ��W\i . W� I.E.IN(W)149.42 �N OUT F/0 UNE � iS..g 0 . �.., � � �.�'(P)k HELO � LE Wi(E) 'UUi `-� � �TBN =' L pVERnEAD POWER CABLE BOR POINT D O 'T ELEVAPON �: ChBLE�O% 1 _3pSSIglLSS.Lp7-� pp,��p•I.R.,BENT � G -37� ^� BOARD f0 1/1'IR.,OU. �/� CONC.PATCH � ��� WOpp PUNTER�__ � T.S.P..D.U. G000 FOR NORTHING �A l� � --SA--1� � .2 ...FARCEL,2 � � N 89'11'00'W 0.25' O 73'DEADV CEDAR � 8 20'- 7500 S0.i'T, -15 iDea '6 9�. Q ! �P I BUILDING ' �' �i p P>` �O - x �e `s[raACK i � ° N POSS19LE SS CO CpNC. � E., �3 z3"rucp„ � � � � �o� a ���0 Os`r�0 - � a� b �� N 90"U000 E 79.65' �� �N H d �� ;° g �. . .. � c`. of°'� qj► �az �w p�pppgpS DS "' 8�C RRY �FENCE P�P O1 INTERSECTION NSION TRIANp E C� � �'�' b PROPER7V E%ISiING yO��E � � 3 �p0 NSUAL CLEAR�NCE AREAS PER I� P/�- � ��'.:��� .. .. :LWE k12390 3 g �N� CDC SEC710N 18 795 V7 ' � � 7�UOG- �o t� I � 41ED , � C�'.-� 17.10 �� '�� � ALK 8 $ O2 EXISTING NEEP NOLE IN CURB �j� �� p , CURB , POSSIB!E�FE -''� aP .li� Sn � � �8 27' p•u4clf O} POSSBLE E%ISnNG PUMP �� �f � � �3� '^ DISCM�RGE NEEP HOLE. '��O' cu�e '" f m o�_^ 15Y4 50 FT. 9'S0"00 NARRATIVE: J 20+/ M 20.°" WOOD DECK 7' � }' `��SHF�- �CP.AVFI 'CHNN LINK N OVER CONC.PATIO . BASIS OF BEARINGS: N U391'19'E BETNEEN THE 5/8'IRON RODS fWNO AT PdNiS F'n!�(:�3'. � j t OYERHEAD t- fENCE ,�i AS CALWUTED fRql TME PUT OF'COTfONW00D PUCE.' 2 PONER �_� �a�''M'_J u' AS, PqNi'A'TO PpNT�'�S 03'03'19'W (BA515 OF BEAr. n %1RPOSE Oi SUR4EY: TO PAR11110N LOT 11 OF THE PLAT OF'CDTTONNOOD PUCE'NTO 2 . ..'^- TV l9.15(P)k HELD i . ''.9 PlE �1623'(AI) �57.91'(P) `[I PARCELS AS SHONN. C�50ER.O.W �s a�•�� w Sz��Snstw•W POINT 'G' �,\ HELD THE 5/B'IRON ROD FWND AT POINT'A'AS AN ORIpNAI P�AT MONUNENi FND lfflD 1HE �/0 JBO% � 0.5'BURIED.BENT, (�, 5ZB?�P� � SIIE AREA=15,024 SQ.FT. 5/B'IRON RDD,SET 8Y SN 28297,AT PpNT�'(SH 28297 REPUCED 7HE CRIpNAI PIAT 5/8' � 5? T,S,p, 20NE: R4.5 LOW DENSITV RESIDCNTIAL � IRON ROD)AS BEING AT 1HE ORIqNAL PLAT CORNER. HELD TME PLAT BEARIHC ON S 00'10'00'W � g 5 2�Zy25 E O.S2' �'3���I.P.,O.U. MIN.lOT SIZE=7500 50.FT. FROM PqNT'A'AND NOR7H 1155'00'EAST FR01A PqNT'B'AND INTERSEC7ED iHESE 11NE5 AT S 76'S0'27 E 2.06' �� PpNT'C. NE%T,THE PUT BEARING OF S B9'17'DO'W WA$HELD fROAI THE 5/B'IRON R00 LOi 3 � fOUND AT PpNT b'.AND IHTERSECIED NITH 1FIE EFST PoCHT-OF-WAY t1NE OF S.M.106M DPoYf n yM '� � POINT 'F' BENCHMARK: yAT PpNT l'. 7HE RESULTING qSThNCE UP TO PpNT'A'IS 183.76'AINI TNE PUT CAILS FOR RIM 17�.11 POINT C 183.80'. THE NOR7MESAT CORNER OF THE PROPERtt WAS EST�BIISlffD hT 7FIE PIAT pSTANCE OF LE.IN(5E)166.01 4! �FD.5/B'I.R., ELEYATIqlS ARE BASED ON WASHINCTON CWNTY 80.00 FEET FROM THE 5/B'IRON ROD FWIN AT PqNT�'. NEXT,ME SOUTMMEST CORI[It Of I.E.OUi(N)165.91 g�; 0.5'BUMED,BENi,T.S.P.,O.P. BENpiuAlM N0.316,A BRA;;DISN IN T�tE S.w.CORNER lDT 13 wAS ESTABLISMED BY MOIDING A GRORti1ED qSTM1LE OF 50.19 FEET(50.16 PIAn FROM ,�, d� S 393700"E 0.55' OF T11E CONCRETE PORCM AT ST.ANTHqJY SpI00l IN NPqNT'C.7HEN POINT T'WAS HELD AT 7HE PLAT BEARING AND qSTANCE OF N 81'J6'JO'E AND ; TICARD,EAST YAIN ENTRANCE TO SCHOOL. 49.15 FEET fRpl SAID SOUTMNEST CORNER OF LDT 13. LAST�Y,THE PLAi BEAPoNC OF 5 I 00'IU00'W WAS HELD fRqA THE N.E.CORNER OF THE PROPER7V AND WAS MIERSECTED MITH 1ME 2�� POINT �B� EIEV.=169.50(UNE 3�7) PLAi BEMING Of Sq1TH 75'OS'00'EAST FROII PpNi'F',AT PpNT'G'. � FD.5/8'I.R.1M1H WC TBM: i0P OF ll'IN MUELLER ON FMtE XYDRANT Ai MC �STAMPED,�UCKLES PLS 1131' NW CORNER OF SIIE. ELEY.=167.10 L $ET ON SN(1)8 HELD ,°B�: 5'e,°-, REGISTERED STEVE SANDERS GRAPHIC S�ALE DATE: 1/22/09 ZTEC ENGINEERS INC. PROFESSIONAL 50 0 15 30 60 720 SCALE: 1"=30' 3737 S.E. BTH AVE., PORTLAND, OREGON 97202 LAND SURVEYOR PM� (503) 235-8795 fAX: (503) 233-7889 � DRAIIN: JWS . � �N�,�,� CNKD: CCF LOCATED IN THE N.E. 1/4 OF SECTION 7, OREGON 1 INCH� 30�er 7. y5., R. 1W., W.M., IN THE ci�r or ncnrt�, cnRls`FiscN�oKti pRELIMINARY PLAT FILE: 5381D-IPRE7 Wq$HINGTON COUN7Y, OREGON 1944 PLOT: 3-2-09 n[NEw��o�r[-. i/i/2ao S 89'�1'00'W 50.00' LEGEND: r�.s�e'i.e.,o.s'eur�eo 1 - k BENT,T.S.P.,O.P. � �POINT �A� � • DENOTES MONUMENiS FWND A$NOIED LJ'� EXISTING WAffR MEIER S OU�O�DO�W 0.12' f FD.5/8�I.R.,0.1'BURIED O DENOIES 5/81(30'IRON ROD t� E%IS11NG FIRE HYDRANT 1 O.P.,HELD I M1111 A YFLLDW PLAS7IC CAP STAMPED �� 2TEC LS 191f �' E%IS11NC WAiER YALYf 3 i SET ON �5 EKISIINC SAN1IFRY MANHOLE I I.R. DENOIES IRON ROD ❑GU E%ISTINC CAS METER ' I'I I.P. DENOIES IRON PIPE c> $ '� ❑CI� E%ISTING ELEC7RIC MEffR i FD. DENOTES FWN� u a I oFIB EXISTING MARBOX 3 LS.P. DENOlES TIED STRAIGMT PORTION o�S EXISTINC DONNSPOUT � �° �Oi I9 LOl 18 '�, � 1PC �ENOlES YELLOW PUS11C CAP E}-4 EXISIING UTILITY Pq.E NITM STREET LIGHT � � ^ � � (u) DENDTES 4EASURED Q EXISTINC 1REE e � (P) DENOTES'COTTONN1]OD PLACE' EXISIINC CONTWR Q � U/G GAS F0.1/I'I.R.,0.3'BURIED, I . BENT.T.S.P..O.U. O.P. DENOTES ORICINAI PLAT COHNER S?— EXISTING$ENfR � S 00'39'00'E 0.32' O.U. DENOffS ORIGIN UNKNONN —WA— E%ISTINC WAIER SS AIH N EXi51 R G.W N 89'21'DO'E Y19.X1'(N 210.40'(P) _ __ _ _ PR. DENOTES PRORATED —�— EXISTINC CAS lME �.E.M(S)160.17 U . � � � P— E%1511NG ELFCTPoCA LINE I.E.IN(N)160.17 ; l�o � �CURB 3 SN DENOffS SUROEY NUMBER,WASFNNCTON I.E.WT(W)160.07 :s S.W. JOHNSON ST. a'vuc s 1.z�x 356' o CWN7Y SURVEY RECORDS xxX EXISTING SPOT ELEVA710N 3�� . Sn —=a �a SA SA " Sn Sn— Sa —sn— —� SN(1) SN 2B297 0� OVERHEID � a I � 2 CURB�J� } � � �'_ F/0 FIBER OPTIC CONC.PATpI U '8. � � � �—� �� i R I M S 6M 7� F/0 LINE N 99 1'00'E.Q9.41'(Y) ID0. '(p) � ..�� ��H LE.iN(W)t48A2 1 F�E FIMSM ROOR ElFVA710N � ,p M ;.x'S�.4�i n' � .1: � 80.25'(Y)80.00'(P) ` �.E.WT(E) CG CLEAN Wi 2 � CABLF/g0% POSSIBLE S�Ai J CABLE BO% `FD.1/2'I.R.,O.U. CS DONNSPWT � � O BOARD t?'pEAUOR DaR FD.1/Y I.R.,BENT G00�FCit NORTMMG ._ �r �� WOOD PUNTER�I.�}-�, T.SP..O.U.(HELD) .." DONNSPWT -,F�- �Y ... I VI I Q'. �� 1 A Z �" �e .�.�:, OSSIBLE SS CO CONC. E+ e�8 H� 23'tU��,�� o �� �'��Q �� 6"'e��u�'` ��:1,� �,� Fi. . , � e c- s m � x� p5 5'��_?kv � p�P O1 IN7ERSECTION NSION TPoANCLE �� I�� � m�� . E%ISiiNG HOUSE � _ 0�� NSUAL 0.EARANCE AREAS PER g W�ONC.����� 8 �,'�� CDC SEC710N 18.795 � WALK ° ?'D(!CWO�C FD.5/8'I.R.,0.5'BURIED \ 0 173.ID �._ �g ° O2 EXISTING NEEP MOLE IN CURB 3 BENT,T.S.P.,O.P. / � � POSSIBLE FFE �� S 89'SO'00'E Q71'J SA� _ S?� 2''Y Av usPtE .-.31J' . 33.g'� � � O3 PO551&E E%ISTMG WYP DISCFfARCE NEEP HOLE. ' E�Si.A.C� GARAGE � � VEWAY NUOD FENCE 3 o�" ' f -�p-� Q T � WOOD DEC�c � �SNED i�A`�� O�FR CONC.VATIO N �'--_____'___� ClF 50.0'RA.Y. �� 1 � � •.a'w��L��1.a � -��r� �� !HEID ` ' CABLE BO% \ `9S gC36'30 'M � 5270'75qg�0' � 19"APPLE , �FD.S/8'I.R..O.P. �'�� 5?.B?(p� ` � �/0 JBO% � iD 0.5'BURIED,BENT, �-�__ � � T.S.P. fD.3/4'I.P..O.U. \ � g S 247725'E 0.57 S 76'S0'2T E 2.06' 1 � LOT 3 SS MH � � � Riu n,.n Q� �os'e a�eo'e�N,,rs.a,oP BENCHMARK: lE.IN(SE)166.01 ��- LE OUi(N)165.91 � 5 395700'E 0.55' EIEVAT10N$ARE BASED ON WASHINGTDN COUNIY BENLIIMARK N0.316,A 9RA55 DISK IN THE S.W.CORNER � � OF THE CONCRETE PORCH AT ST.ANIHONY$CHOOL Na ?s TICARq EA51 MAN ENTRANCE TO SCMOOI. 2� FD.5/B'I.R.XI7H YPC ELEV.=169.50(LINE 307) � STAYPED,'gUCKLES PLS 2231' �SET ON SN(1J t HELD TBM: TOP 0{'ll'IN AIUELLER ON FIRE HYDRANT Ai THE � NW CORNER Oi 9TE. EIEV.=167.10 '°e": S'8,°-, ZTEC ENGINEERS INC. REGtSTERED STEVE SANDERS GRAPH]C SCALE DATE: 30 0 15 30 60 120 3737 S.E. BTN AVE., PORTLAND, OREGON 97202 PROFESSIONAL SCALE: t"=J0' PH: (503) 235-8795 FAx�. (503) 233-7889 LAN� SURVEY�R DRA1fN: JWS ( �u eerr) CHKD: CCF � t 1NCH= 3o FeeT LOCATED W THE N.E. 1/4 OF SECTION 3, OREGON T. 25., R. 1W., W.M., IN Tne ciTr or TiGnRD, ��Y°�"a' EXISTING CONDITIONS FII.E;S3a70-1ExH.e. WqSHINGTON COUNtt, OREGON CHRIS F9144HBORN PLOT: 3-2-09 avr.aw�i n��r� inronn Page 1 of 1 'f� J � *�. �� �"' , - '�� � P . - ;• 'r. ',�'� ��il�, �: � F�,. � , �. � � � ''3+' . y� . :'� �►. ° t,�. -��-"I�ir'�,' i � � - . , :� _ � � � - _,�-� �,,�;�� � �f �.,_� � A ` s i � � � , � ', �, � � sw�aHwsoM � i �r j ea' .cr.� o "'� � � A r _,�' '� �� �� �yN r�`- � f ' ' �:-� , :r� �� . J , � . ,�,� ., �� �' �� k� -r � ,� � �� } .i,.. ' . , � � ��•I � '* . � 4 r � , ,�- " !' , ;.�,y� ��*� ��► { � a � �.i -'��i �Y °.�: .i � r!� S� Y � �t(i ' _ e � ' '� r � ,� �.'t. , -i'°"' +v Y �� � � .. �l:`-. ��� ..Y�� r � # � •� ' ��*#. > � . ; �� ? ' (� ��� ����' .T ' �, � _�� .f' ��l� f� +, ��� J b111 ' ;t- . � i� ` �re'��:s_� 1 ��//,�� http://washims.co.washington.or.us/arcims/output/intermap_washims440585662044.jpg 2/18/2009 12390 SW 106th Dr. - Aerial Ma �,, .�_. j Legend Places :'-0.4;,,,,4,e4'''' 1 jr e city lull c xY . r • ,;,f 1�. LN brary " �` S' ' Hospital fine Station { { Li sLitool L3 k >1 i. ,:6 r t Streets taxtots • • �. a d , ..� -. _ �1 U r bark Growth x - Bo u rich rye � il �- � i. 2006 aerial photo '* 2006 rural photo 40 ru�lFa ,* F ad " � re li,di a ri � K ...04- .3'. *4 � �' • Ia � W / -V st. I + .. ..S y,,,, � � � ' r° �l L ,, * r3 ., •44„,` a loo.r —a{ � w4 $ Y x +� �aa b ^°i t k 9" r _J -apf4 440.43. .,,,y„ , ,. .,,,,,,, , .,„. , .,,,, 4t3 , , * „ , 1,,,,.. ,,,,,, -7- i'4 , 44, Al.-4,,,,.. . 4410114,,,, .,—1` i . ' Ago - ' 2, .,,,AW 4'.: ,. , ",M,4., .,' , / , 4r, , 4:,„„, ,t, V, ,, --, ',sr,' 333; .- ,, ; 3'3,,,54- it* .,„1„...fcft ,.4,fteev" 3",;3 ,i4‘73; 4. -73,4, 4 tie1:1`.', ,;43',,,I, 4 ,,, ;0 „,.,11,,,, , loott , ,i.,,,, ‘i,•; 1 '',*,7.?'., ;11,'''''''''' �(; �rt `+-. 4 y ',, 'N* !'. ,' k p ,,, *y1let to,.. '' ,_,„,''� r created by Nero Odea itetotirte Center's itAtarQM4pWWW nrr.{ntttrc-{=yi_tt -Ig;utc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ � ,� �, � i � • ,, , _.tqsaa �.�. `��.��_ ! ^ 19 Z �� 18 ^� �� �y�'� ',;y `_`_,�' Z� � �, `< <s. i80� � � < , , „ • . , ',,:� 8 � 1908 �� �ttaoo�Z� 41�.�tw.00 � �seaa ,,•'. ,; °--- � � __.. . � � 11 � . o a, � � � SW J�NNSpN STREE � _,�.�. ,,,, ,�.�. I p T ,,��: � Ca ._._______..__. �` � ncefi �_ �..... � . R --- - --- ° �oaap �__.�_ , 800 ___ ... •^� ( ��� � � ,`/ '� eo.00 eo.00 'wa�a • ;` � 1944 �TM 1909 a� '� •�� � � �� 72 ") tT1 '��, I if4.iEY � gp I g �� .�' � �a $ 19t6 a 1915 N 1913 ` o� 1914 3 ix•,,� � ss.ae R_Y"" � 8`a.ta � �� 13 14 �� 18 n� 16 r_� � �,��. �g43 �, i + � � � � .,. .2d AC � � g T •` � � 01 ' �� � 4816 U 6� I :�•� �3:` �'i 1902 1 ? I F I s� ��� �+ �-) E 5 � 190i j� °p���=�a i I �",�� • ;< ra s� f ,g,,•' q i$ t- �`iy�, `;; .x�'mP ., A* s8 ! > ������ ro K,, . rv�.�11 � � � kJ�;� r����7 . ��H p tttt�, �! ��t��S> � � J 1917 ~ i54� ��, ,�, �, � i'.;i;',��� ��. �.'r d g �� �` - � r�. �' �. �f� -.. �o3ge � sa �' �� i900 ' ' ,C' • > }� .. � � � .70 AC � dR�ti�` ,, J °�°�r ��t��� ='�tar � ' �� �.� ,^, . ,� �1����` -- --�. r" �,-"' /S�S� PLfJ � `�Y +�eo a�arog� J. + ��itc ` �� � ' ,�" ' ,� �Q '�� '.�8 AC S, `f�'f��_ -`-F ,`� ",� � R � ;��. ,� '� rss�, �-,.� `���}�R� �--.,..� :� � � .�( <' � � .,`.'^`' '1, �,.�;,. �ti�it�;�� ``'. Y; ''.� �, , c 't 2sro?s� '�:�� aisiazsa� �� s��aa� ti�tlt� �' "-ti.. "' ��. � �,. ?� � ' '' .�,.� �y, � �,,��.'-. � d?ap a�eRs <'� 7 .`�' '.3@AE•$ . �'�rA�. , �??q � ��`�1lll��y„ �`�• `'` �` ' p&f18tn8 �o1ec' �� :�Y t. ,,� •r•�, ?r',` ���..�u• ss� E111t 1� `.�. �t ` currerrf pro � � �� ,.� � �. � ry� ��� I � ��� SA t � ' � ' a, i I' ` : � �, ,Y ,� ��, {� ++"� ��' , ,lZ,`, '� �r��:}.• I�����I�. ,-=� ---..81sj' �?�,, J .}�� .�"•, . . �>'. '�' .sarozec, `,ya� I,��� `• � _ � ` �J • -��� •,�,v�'� �.,�b �.t' ,Mp7p_'< � N°16C'" f'1 1 �ato�c �} r ' ..- • � . ,,e. "' t � :L4 �� ' ' . �• . 'a��� �' . �'�i. 2` .� .°p�� =�,,� I� .39 kC . � , . �a. .%' . . . , . \. . . 9 ri", . . , 2S 1 03AA • - S �T � N � Map No. 2S103AA 01916 t�' - TRANSNATION TITLE AGENCY OF OREGON . 12360 East Burnside Portland, OR 97233 Phone (503) 256-1163 Fax (503) 254-6992 This plat map is for your ald in locating your parcel with reference to streets and other properties. While this plat map is believed to be correct,the company assumes no liability for any loss occuRing by reason of reliance thereon. �x�H�� �T 6 c3 _ TRANSi�ATION TITLE AGENCY Or OREGON 12360 East Burnside Portland, OR 97233 ' Phone(543) 256-1163 Fax (503)254-6992 Metroscan Property Pro�le Washington (OR) OWNERSHIP INFORMATIOPI Reference Parce!# :2S103AA 01916 Parcel Number : R0464736 � R: O1 W 7:02S S: 03 Q:NE QQ:NE Owner : Sanders Steven W CoOwner . SiteAddress : 12390 SW l06th Dr Portland 47223 Mail Address :2647 5W Talbot Rd{No Mail)Portland Or 97201 Telephone : Owner: Tenant: SALES AND LOAN INFORMATION Transferred :06/12/2007 Loan Amourrt . Document# :65411 Lender . Sale Prrce . Loan Type . Deed Type :Bargain&Sale Interesl Rate . %Owned : 100 Vesting Type . ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATION Market Lund :5253,1 I 0 Exemp!Amoxnt : Market Slructure :$136,690 Exemp!7'ype . Market Other . %Improved ;35 Market Total ;$389,800 Levy Code :02374 07-08 Taxes :$3,203.86 Millage Rate : 16.4706 Assessed Total :$194,520 School Drst :Tigard PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Map Grid :655 D4 Class Code :F Census :Tract: 3]9.03 Block:4 NbrhoodCod e : WTIG Mi!lRate . Sub/Plar :Cottonwood Place Land Use : 1012 Res,Improved Legal :COTTONWOOD PLACE,LOT 13,ACRES.35 A ' PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS ' Bedrooms :3 Lot Acres : 35 Year Built : ]962 Balhrooms :3.00 Lot SqFt ; 15,246 E.f)`3'earBlt : 1962 Hea1 Method:Forced BsmFin SF : 897 Floor Cover ;Carpet Pool . BsmUnftnSF: 197 Foundation :Concrete Ftg Appliances : BsmLowSF : Roo,J Shape ; Dishwasher : Bldg SgFt :2,468 Roo,�Mat! ;Comp Shingle Hood Fan . IstFlrSqFt : 1,374 lnteriorMat :Drywall Deck . UpperFlSF : Paving Matl :Asphalt Garage Type:Attached Porch SqF1 : Const Type :Wd Stud\shtg Garage SF :400 Attic SqFt . Ext Frnish :251 Deck SgFt : The!»formalion Provided ls Deemed Reliable, But!s Not Guaranleed �X 1`/l�� /7 ( �� n - � � � vV 1 �_ � ' 1 '',�I �� ��`°�E s �t � t (,;' �' _ ' i,�; C��� �' �`i , , . •_,�: � • � ) ���� - � + `�� Clean Water Servlces File Number � � '�� ,' (� _vUrl �a ��5; . _- -��'1��-��i��r �c.r��ces Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment 1. Jurisdictfon: City of Tigard 3. Owner Information � 2. Property Information {exampfe 1S234A8014001 Steve Sanders- please contact applicanYs ; Tax fot!C�(s}: 2S103AA-01916 ___ Name: re resenlative-Gary Shepherd, Attorney Company: P Address: Site Address: 12390 SW 1 U6th City, State,Zip: City, State,Zip:Tigard, Oregon 97223 Phone/Fax: — Nearest Cross Street: Corner of SW 106ih&SW Johnson E-Mail: p - y pp�� 5. Applicant Information 4. Develo ment Activit (check al!thot a l� [,� Ad�liti�n to Sin,yle F2mily Reaidence(rc,oms,dec3<,naraga) Name:Steve Sanders-c/o Gary Shepherd, Attorney �� Lot Line Adjustment lj� Minor Land Partition Company:Oregon Lanc� Law �r,,,l Residential Condominium ❑ Commercial Condominium Address:3115 SE Salmon Street I„j Residential 5ubdivision (,,,,; Commercial Subdivision City,State,Zip: Por118nd, OR 97214 ❑ Single Lot Commercial l_,I Multi Lot Commercial Phone/Fax:503 233-1985 other ar ore onlandlaw.com E-Mail:9 Y@ 9 6. Will the project invoive any off-site work? ❑Yes 2St No �Unknown Location and descri�tion of off-site work 7. Add[tional comments or Information that may be needed to understand your project Please see attached drafl preliminary site plan. This application does NOT replace Grading and Erosion Control Permits,Connection Permits,Building Permlts,Site Development Permits,DEQ 1200-C Permit or other permits as issued by the Department of Environmental Quality,Department of State Lands andlor Department of the Army COE. All required permits and approvals must be obtained and completed under applicable local,state,and federal law. . By signing this form,the Owner or Owner's authorized agent or representaGve,acknowledges and agrees that employees of Clean Water Services have authority to enter the project site at all reasonable Gmes for the purpose of inspecting project site conditions and gathenng information related to the project site. I certify that 1 am familiar with the intormation contained in this documenk�nd to the best of my knowiedge and belief,this infam�tion is We,complete,and accurate. Ga P. She herd Print/Type Title Attorney PrinUType Name rY P Feb 10, 2009 �. _..._.-.� Date Signature -- FOR DISTRICT USE ONLY 0 Sensitive areas potentially exist on site or within 200'of the site. THE APPLICANT MUST PERFORM A SI7E AS5ES5MENT PRIOft 70 ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER. If 5ensi6ve Areas exist on the site or within 2D0 feet on adacent properties,a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required. �BASed on review of the submitted metenals and best available infomiation Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or hnthin 200'of the site.This Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment does NOT elimin�to the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered.This document will senre as your Service Provider letteras required by Resdution and Order 07-20, Section 3.02.1. All required permits antl approvals mustbe obtained and cotnpleted under applicable local,State,and tederal law. [,� 6ased on rcaiew of ths suF,rnitted matz�ials and best fwadable infoirna5on 1he�h�e rsferencad prujgct uvill nuc slgnificantly imp2ct the existirig or putanti�lly sensitive area(s)found near the site.This Sensi6veArea Pre-5creening Site Assessmentdces NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and prolect additional water quality sensitiue areas if they are subsequently discovered.This documant will serve as your Service Provider letter as required by Resolution and Order 07-20,Section 3.02.1. All required permits and approvals must be o6tained and completed under applicable local,state and federal law. ❑This Servlce Provider Letter is not valid unless CW5 approved site plan(s)are attached. (,�The proposed activity dnas nr,t meet tho dofini5on of development or the Ini v,�pl��tt�d aftr,r 91�/95 OFu 92.D40(2)• NO S�TF 5SEu5l Ei�IT OP, ScRVICC PRCVIC�ER L[T7Ef;IS�2CCtUIREG. - ' :� _ Date �Z '�)� — � c . - o-!t.- - " - u -�. ' 'u,'� _ _� ' , ��� �` a -., . <° e'e " .. �ss � %2�"< x�.wr � � � S�r,3�4.GF�yL� t 2���� t� � iG...6n _ �'tGYr.L:� ��'�. %r :�; .:,}�,� y.,h t {�1 ` �:1.. y.f �.,,. hN::af^''1.. �� ,'.nl.•::�1�g� ::�.i::%;ba�'/+'f:'Y,f%�t'i4`::..........::i:,;:fRFi�4�?:ui� .... ,i . � �x�r� �r � �� v �� LA1�r� � � � • � v �' � O � . . C � 3115 SE Salmon Street �G',� �1G� Portland,Oregon 97214 � SEg (503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX &CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL City of Tigard Planning Division Community Development 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Ore�on 97223 Applicant/Owner: Steven Sanders Property Address: 12390 SW 106`�' Tigard, Oregon Tax Map/Lot: Map 2S 103AA, Lot 01916 Location: Corner of SW 106'}' and SW Johnson Zoning Designation: R 4.5 —Residential IM PACT STUDY: The following constitutes applicant's impact study required by § 18.390.040.B.2.e. The exhibits referred to are the exhibits submitted with applicant's narrative statement. This study is also an exhibit submitted in support of the application request. The study quantifies the effect of the minor partition on public facilities and services. The study addresses the transportation system, park system, drainage system, water system, sewer system, and the noise impacts of the minor partition. The study identifies improvements necessary to meet City standards and to minimize the impact of the minor partition on the public at large. The subject site is served by all needed and necessary streets, public facilities and services. The locations of the public facilitates have been surveyed and are depicted on the existing conditions and plat maps. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. The property, adjacent lots, street configuration, public facilities, and improvements were designed and developed in 1962. At the time, and in exchange for development approval, needed right of way was dedicated and streets constructed to safely serve the subdivision. // Page 1 of 4 — IMPACT STUDY �X��-�� T �� l oF � Transportation System The subject corner lot fronts on and is served safely and adequately by two public streets, SW 106`h and SW Johnson Street. Both streets are located in a 50 foot right of way with 32 foot wide paved surfaces and curbs. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversize plans. As depicted by the maps, the local street system serves a limited number of residents. SW Johnson Street provides access to 5 lots. SW 106th is "j" shaped local through road and provides access onto SW Walnut Street and SW Tiedman Avenue. Exhibits 5 and 6. Consistent with fi 18.810.030.E., the 32 foot wide paved surface on SW 106t" and SW Johnson is wider than the minimum pavement width currently required. The 50 foot right of way width meets minimum standards. There are no sidewalks or planter strips adjacent to or near the property. Exhibits 4 and 5. For SW Johnson Street, a local street serving only 5 homes and having less than 200 ADT, table 18.810.1 states a right of way width of 42 to 46 feet and a paved width of 20 to 24 feet, supporting 2 lanes, a 5 to 6 feet wide sidewalk, and a 5 foot wide landscaping strip. Currently, SW Johnson is located in a 50 foot wide right of way, has a paved width of 32 feet, curbs on both sides of the street, supporting 2 lanes of traffic and no sidewalk or landscaping strip. The only improvements missing are the sidewalk and landscaping strip, although no adjacent properties are developed with a sidewalk and landscaping strip. For SW 106th, a local street with less than 500 ADT, t�ihle 18.8111.1 states a right of way width of 46 to 50 feet and a paved width of 24 to 28 feet, supporting 2 lanes, a 5 to 6 feet wide sidewalk, and a 5 foot wide landscaping strip. Currently, SW 106`�' is located in a 50 foot wide right of way, has a paved width of 32 feet, curbs on both sides of the street, supporting 2 lanes of traffic and no sidewalk or landscaping strip. The only improvements missing are the sidewalk and landscaping strip, although no adjacent properties are developed with a sidewalk and landscaping strip. In its application narrative, pursuant to § 18.810.030.A.5, applicant requests and provides support for applicant seeking relief from '/z street improvement requirements, namely the requirement to tear out the existing curb, reduce the pavement width, and install a sidewalk and planter strip at this time. Applicant agrees to execute a future improvements guarantee in lieu of street improvements. A condition of approval can ensure compliance. The proposed partition on land zoned residential does not create any new streets. The proposal results in only one new residentially zoned lot, intended for future single family residential development. There is little to no impact to the existing transportation system from one additional residence. Traffic from the development will not increase the traffic on the existing system to unacceptable levels and will not degrade the level of service. Requiring applicant to construct a sidewalk and planter strip would result in applicant removing the existing curb cut, reducing the pavement width, and redesigning the street only in front of applicant's property. Requiring those actions is of no benefit to the City, does not significantly improve the efficiency of the street system, and is inconsistent with adjacent development and the character of the immediate neighborhood. Due to the nature of existing development on the subject and adjacent property, it is very unlikely that street improvements, Page 2 of 4 — IMPACT STUDY including planter strips, sidewalks and new curb cuts would be constructed and the roadway width reduced in the foreseeable future. The subject 15,000 plus square foot lot was created and developed, along with public facility and street improvements, in 1962 pursuant to subdivision approvals. At the time, the right of way dedications and street improvements were constructed pursuant to applicable transportation standards. The subject corner lot fronts on and is served safely and adeyuately by two public streets. Adjacent lots are fully developed. Given zoning standards, there is little to no chance area property will be further divided. Given existing development patterns and code standards, SW Johnson and SW 106'�' adjacent to and in the neighborhood around applicant's property will not be developed with planter strips, sidewalks, and new curbs pursuant to today's standards. Requiring applicant to construct sidewalks and planter strips will result in only two lots with those improvements and will not, by it self, significantly improve street safety or capacity. The existing system provides safe and efficient access to and from area residents for owners, visitors, the public and emergency access. There is little to no impact to the existing transportation system from one additional residence. Storm Water System The site is characterized as being flat and gently sloped. The area of minimal slope is already developed with the existing residence on Parcel 1. The topography/elevations of the site are depicted on Exhibits 2 and 3 and the oversized plans. Stormwater is controlled on site through natural percolation and downspouts. Parcel 1's residence has downspouts which are depicted on Exhibits 2 and 3 and the oversized plan maps. The site drains from the high point of the existing residence, to the northeast property corner towards SW Johnson Street. There are four existing weep holes in the curbs, all depicted on Exhibits 2 & 3 and the oversized plans. Compliance with stormwater standards for any new residential structure can be made a condition of development approval. Sanitary System Sewer services are provided by Clean Water Services. Eight inch sanitary sewer lines are located in both SW 106t�' and SW Johnson St. and currently serve the property. Exhibits 2 and 3 and the oversized plans. Sewer service is currently provided to the residence on Parcel 1. The sewer line is available and has sufficient capacity to serve a future single family residence on proposed Parcel 2. Development of the site will include a single connection to the existing public sewer line. As such, the impacts to the existing system will be minimal. Water Svstem A fire hydrant is located in the NW corner of the property. Fire and emergency services are provided by the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. Public water lines extend north and south on SW 106`" and east and west on SW Johnson, along the property frontage. Exhibits 2 and 3; oversized plans. Water is currently provided to the existing residence on Parcel 1. The water Page 3 of 4 — IMPACT STUDY line is available and has sufficient capacity to serve a future single family residence on proposed Parcel2. Development will result in one additional connection to the water line. The impact to the general public and water service district will be minimal. Parks Svstem The subject property is in the City of Tigard parks district. The proposed development does not include any land for public parks. Parks associated with Fowler Middle School are northwest of the site and Woodard Park is north and northeast of the site. The minor partition will result in one additional lot capable of supporting a single family residence. This will have a negligible effect on the City's park system. Noise Impacts The proposed minor partition will result in one additional lot capable of supporting single family development. In the future, when the residence is constructed, short term noises will be generated by site development. After construction, noises typical of residential use will be created; such as users coming to and from the site, trash pickup, and typical neighborhood noises. As a result, noise impacts from the proposed site will be negligible and consistent with area uses. Conclusion No public improvements, except an extension of customary services from existing mains are needed or necessary for the proposed partition. There will be minimal to no development impacts in creating one additional lot. Based on the availability of existing and proposed transportation, storm, and sanitary services and improvements, applicant requests the subject application be approved. Page 4 of 4 — IMPACT STUDY City of Tigard Planning Division Community Development 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 9722> RE: 12390 SW l O6t�' Drive, Tigard, Oregon Tree Survey Dear Planning Staff: I, Gary L-. Dr�ndel, Certif�cd .�ruori�t, �vas retained by Steve Sanders �o con�luct a tr�ez assessment on the above referenced property. ��� /� On February 20, 2009, I located, measured a identified all trees on the property 6 inches or more in caliper size— measuring four feef from ground level. My findings are incorporated into the existing conditions and/or preliminary plat plans done by Ztech Engineers for Mr. Sander's partition application. The plans identify each tree by species, size, and location. The 23 inch Tulip, 21 inch Norway Maple, 14 inch Wild Mountain Ash, and the 8 inch Cherry trees are co-dominate, which represents weakness. Applicant informed me, and the site visit confirmed that a 14 inch Birch was recently cut down. The tree was located o�l the northwest corner of the concrete pad, north of the existing residence. Applicant stated the tree was previously diseased and dying and was substantially damaged during the December/January storm event, threatening the existing residence. Applicant informed me that no additional trees are intended for removal at this time, as no construction permits are sou�ht in conjunction with the partition application. Certified trees greater than 12 inches in caliper that require removal for construction purposes, along with tree protection measures and required tree mitigation can be determined and completed in association with constniction or land disturbing activities on proposed Parcel 2. It is recommend tree protection and mitigation requirements be made a condition of development approval. This will ensure the required tree protection and mitigation and promote survival of newly planted and retained trees during and after construction. Applicant also informed me that he intends to plant two street trees on proposed Parcel 1, one north and one south of the existing driveway. Those locations are appropriate. Gary E. rendel Certif d Arborist # PN360 Dated: ..� —�Z,�—O %�, 2009 �xH/6 � l� _s e97roo'w so.00',l ���� � !�� LEGEND: ro.s/a•i.a.,o.s'euR�o-% T ,/ !BENT,T.S.P.,O.P. � �POINT 'A' Y • DENO7E5 MONUMENTS FWND AS NO7ED �'� EXIS7ING WATER METER S 00�0'00'W D.12' � qy Fp,5/B"I.R.,0.2'BURIED O DENOTES 5/B'k30'IRp!ROD �S E1(iS71NC FlRE M19RU�T ��P"�� A P R 3 �O O G NI1H A YELLDW P1A571C CAP STAAIPED I�� Z7EC LS 1941' � EXISTINC WATER VAL1f ' 3 �T°N ,� EXl$TING SANITARY YM91DlF �"� ClTY OF IGAFC� LR. DENOTES MtON R00 LGU EbSTINC GAS MEiER � PLANNf��'L7I�N INEERI�(��' I.P. DENOTES NlON%PE ��EA� E%IS71NG ELECTRIC ME7ER "� 1 FD. DENOTES FWND �•MP E1US71NG YAILBO% 3° � ''J T.S.P. DENOiES TIED STRAICHT PORTION .:G`: E%IS71NC DOMNSPWi � � 10'19 LOt iB II YPC DENOTES YELLOW PIASTIC CAP �{--p EIOSIINC UillJtt POLE NI1H SIREET L1pIT .. s � (M) DENOTES MEASURED � E%IS11NG 7REE � 'O E%1571NG CONTOUR � FD.1/2'I.R.,0.3'BURKD, (P) DENO7ES"COTTDNWOOD PLACE' � BENT,T.S.P.,0.11. Sa— EIOSTINC SENER bd � � P��NT �E� S 00'39'00'E 0.32' O.P. DENO7E5 IXt�GINAI PLAi CORNER i O.U. DENO7ES ORICIN UNKNOMN ---WA— E%IS11NG WATER SS 11H ry - :%iS: '':!,v N 8971'�0'E j 219.30'(M) 220.00'(P) �__ - EKISIINC GAS IINE R�M 165.12 ;.a 1' D/W PR. DENOTES PRORA7ED ° I.E.IN(5)160.17 —P— exismrc e�cnncu�n� �E �"(")��'� ; S.W. JOHN50N ST. Pvc°o�n. ��e' � $N �ENOIES SUR�EY NUTABER,WASMNGTON LE.WT(E)160.07 � CWNTV SURVFY RECOROS ' 0/H OOfRHEAD a S%. ---- .SA -`a--�-SA Sa-- St�- Sn--�/s 8 � 2 } . E J $N(1) SN 2829J Fj0 FlBER OP71C � a N � CURB v SS MN rrr FIMSH(LODR EIfYAlIOH � W Rlu 156.77 N 89 '00�E�.99.66'(Y) 100: '(P) �`.. , ��/N'�\� .. � i.E.iN(W)1a8t2 _; CLEIJI Wl F/0 UI$ �� �� L- i �... . 1.���� 1 � 80.00'(P)t HELD � LE.WT(E) - DOMN SPW7 T�u - OYERHEhD PONER CABLE BOl( POINT D y� CA9LE�OX 4 _ .Pp�$��5c�st_� Fp.1/1�I.R..BENT FD 1 2 I.R..O.U. E%IS11NG SPOi EIFVAiION �32'. R � BOMD �y T,S.P.,O.U. /• t CONC.P0.TCH '� Wppp PLANIER�� G000 FOR NORMINC aA a ^"�-� ..p+p�.y 13"DEAD CEDAR � N 89'21'00'W Q25' �r� � � $. �o'—T�`_/7500 50.it. �5' A ��, � — � I POSSIBIE tlUILDINC . � o o rx � .W � �� \/' SS CO SEiBACC�C. I ° a F., ° v'323'TUC�P- s _ a ,- p. x o g-'� N �1�0 2.07 �' �, VfN� � �.,, .r m 8 �y . , . 'c°� . �a� "��pRDpOYDS �S X 9"C. ��N� p`-�� O1 INiERSECT10N V1510N TRIANGLE ��' g �.PRpPEqfV ERISTING HOUSF I � �� p�� NSUAL CLEARANCE AREAS PER fAC SECiION 18795 � � �a .. -. �.� Ki2390 � � � �N'�G � '��� i'DOG 1` O2 EXISTINC%fEP HOLE IN Cl1RB FD.5/B'I.R.,05'BURIE� � � � �Y�( K � 173.10 ��JOOii b . � g ,.�0 k BENT,TS.P..D.P. / "�Rg I � COSSIBLE FFE ��(� g O3 POSSIBLE E%ISTING PUMP DISCHARGE NfEP HOLE. 5 89'S0'00�E 0.74'J -SA—{ �S _� �3 N 21" RWAY AIAPLE I � �� , - O POSSIBLE FUTURE 20 N1DE DRIVEWAY IOCATION 1NTH � a a.0 �ARCEL 1 I WDOD DECK NSION CLEFRANCE N07ED. CURB `�� � OW��k" 7524 S0.Ff. I 17.58' OVER CONC.PA110 NARRATIVE: ,Ir ���°�°°� r �`� I Sy[p GRAVEL JCHAIN LINK H BASIS OF BEARINGS: N 03'03'49'E BETNfEN 1HE 5/8'IRON RODS FOUND AT PqNTS'ti AND'8', � �-- " � FENCE I e AS CALCULAtED FROM iHE PLAT OF'COTTONWOOD PIhCE.' i ��ERHEAD__�, � PqNT'A'i0 PqNT'B'=S 03'03'a9'w (B�S�S OF BEnmNGS) 2....Q iy . P�6V�R "�1' L�Mi.AS J 476.21'(AI) 457.95'(P) PURPOSE Of SURYEY: TO PARTITION LOT 13 OF THE PLAT OF'CDiTONW00D PUCE'INTO 2 �' 49.15�(P)�HE� � �9"nr'aL= PARCELS AS SMOMN. CA�ER�O� ��5/8'I:W O.P. SZts�MIbS�2 POINT �G� HELD TME 5/8"IRON RDD FWND AT POINT'A'AS AN ORIpNAL PLAT A10NUAIENT AND HEID iHE f/D JBO%-� I '= 0.5'BURIED,BENT, �P� �� SI1E AREA=15,024 50.Fi. 5/8'IRON ROD,SET BY SN 29297,AT PqNT'9'($N 28497 REPLACED ME ORIpNA PUT S/B' �� � � T,S.P. 20NE:R4.5 LOW DEN9tt RESIDENTiAL IRON ROD)AS BEING AT 1HE ORMINAI PUT CORNER. HELD ME PLAT BEARING ON 5 00�0'DO'W 5 2127Y5'E 0.52' �'1/�'I.P.,O.U. MIN.LOT SIZE=7500 S0.FT. FRON PpNT'A'AND NORTH U'S5'00'EAST FRpA PqNT'9'AND INTERSECTED THESE lMES AT I�'-� � g 5 76'S0'2Y E 2.06' PqNT'C'. NE%T,ME PLAT BEARING OF S 89'21'00'W WAS MEL�FROG THE 5/8'IRON ROU �� �Oi LOi! FOUND AT POINi'U',AND INIERSEC7ED N17H THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE Oi S.W.1061H DRI�E SS YH � � POINT 'F' AT PqNT'E'. 7HE RESULTINC qSTANCE UP TO GqNT'A'IS 181J6'ANO ME PLAT CALLS Fqt RIN 174]1 �POINT C' BENCHMARK: 181.80�. ME NORIHESAT COFiNER OF iNE PROPERTY WAS ESTABUSF�D�T IFIE PLAT qSTANCE Oi I.E.IN(SE�166.01 W� iD.S�B�I.R., ELEVAilONS ARE BASED ON WASHINGiON COUNiY 80.00 FEET FRON THE S/8'NtON ROD FWND AT PqNT V'. NE%1,1HE SWiM'MFST CORNER DF i.E.OUT(N)165.91 t O.S�BIMIED,BENT,T.S.P.,O.P. BENCXAIARK N0.316,A BRAS$q5K IN 1NE S.W.LCRNER lOT 13 WAS ESTABLISMEO BY MOLDiNC A PRORATED DIST�NCE OF 50.19 FEET(50.16 PUT)fRp/ �o' S 39'S700'E 0.55' OF ME CONCRETE PORCH AT 5T.MITMONY SCMOOL IN PqNT'C,THEN PWN7 S'WAS HELD�T 1HE PLAT BEARiNG u!D pS7ANCE DF N 84'36'30'E u+D g; TICARD,EAST YAIN ENTRINCE TO SCHOOL. 19.15 FEET fROM SAID SW7HMEST CORNER OF lOT 13. USRY,MC PUi BEARING OF S =,� PaNT � ELEV.-169.50(LINE 307) 00�0"00'W WAS HELD FRW 1HE N.E CORNER OF THE PROPERTY AND W�S INTERSELIED YAM TME PLAT BEAPoNG OF S(M1TH 75V5'00'EAST FROIA PqNT'F',AT PqNT'C'. p FD.S/B'I.R.MI7H 1PC iBY:TCQ OF 1'M 4UElLER ON FIRE HYDRANT AT 7ME p�STAYPED,'gUCKLES PLS 2131' NW CORNER OF SIIE. EIEY.=167.10 ♦ SET ON SN(1)k MELD GRAPHIC S�A�.F D TE: t/22/09 ZTEC ENGINEERS INC. REGISTERED STEVE SANDERS 3737 S.E. BTH AVE., PORTLAND. OREGON 97202 PROFESSIONAL 30 p 15 30 6G 120 SCALE: t'=30' PH: (503) 235-8795 FAX: (503) 233-7889 �AND SURVEYOR DRA1Ri: JWS ,/� CHI(D: CCF �—""'� ( IN FEET) LOCATED IN THE N.E. 1/4 OF SECTION 3, OREGON 1 7NCH � 30 �� T. 2S., R. 1W., W.M., IN THE CIlY OF TICARD, CHRS�fiSCHBORN pRFT.iMTNARY PT,AT Ftt.Re 539t0-+GRE4 ...._....."'.. __...._. _..___.. ��.. _ _ _ _ � � E�EIV�D � ,, 2009 ,PR 3 0 ZTec En ineers Inc. � `�'�fY4rENG1�EEa�''� 9 r , �.�.r��,�, Civii ♦ Structural ♦ Surveying 3737 SE 8m Ave. John McL. Middieton, P.E. Portland, OR 97202 Ronald B. Sellards, P.E � Chris C. Fischborn, P.L.S. (503) 235-8795 FAX: (503) 233-7889 E-mail: iohn@ztecengineers.com April 9, 2009 City of Tigard CD- Development Engineering, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 PRELIMINARY INTER5ECTION SIGHT DISTANCE CERTIFICATION Sanders Minor Land Partition Case File No. MLP2009-00001 The center of the proposed driveway for the future home on Parcel 2 is located 48 feet south of the site's north properly line, onto SW 106�' Dr. The speed limit along SW 106�' Dr. is 25 M.P.H. based upon the posted speed limit, requiring 250 feet of sight distance in both directions, in accord with Tigard Development Code Section 1$.705.030.H.1. As required by Code Section 18.705.030.H.1, sight distance from the driveway to SW 106th Dr. was measured to be 390 feet to the north of the driveway in one direction and 190 feet south of the driveway in the other direction. These Code sections respectively require that measurements be based on an eye height of 3.5 feet and an object height of 4.25 feet above the road; and be assumed to be 10 feet from the near edge of pavement to the front of a stopped vehicle, (actual measurement is taken 15 feet from pavement edge). The proposed driveway location exceeds the required sight intersection distance to the north but is less than the desired distance to the south. This is due to the constructed profle af SW 1�6th Dr. which has a crest curve between the proposed driveway and the intersection of SW 10bth Dr. and SW Walnut St. to the south. The north of the travelled way of SW Walnut St. is 246 feet from the center of the proposed driveway. The lowering of the crest in SW 106m Dr, to improve sight distance to the south is not feasible. Conclusion: The driveway location is the most practical for the proposed development of Parcel 2, if it were located on the north side of the lot it would be too close to SW ]ohnson St. The Gity requires a minimum of 3D feet between an intersecting right of way and the closest driveway edge. The distance with the proposed driveway is 38 feet. SW 106th Dr. has a very low traffic volume, less than 2,000 ADT, so potential traffic conflicts with driveway exit trips are low. Driveway location should be approved. _,��. P � John McL. Middleton P.E. (#9692) o�aNR1 l�f � , J�, ► �� '�t L A1109 I l r 4Y' �. a r IS �EC�iv�� . APR �3 0 200� �� I�t° ` 3 CITY 4F TIGA�� � PL11Ni��1�'�!�'�l�R�l"dEEPti�vG� o �------- �^ 2 v 3 �' 0 � v� a 2 CURB � W - ° � tc��.� � i :VATION F/0 LlNE o � N 89 '00" E 99. ' (M) 100.0 (P) �� ��� � � ����� "' 30 / IST. R.O.W. ,1.. 80.00' (P) & HELD - -�`—� THM` � � L OVERHEAD P4WER CAB�E BOX ������`��� CABLE�30X� _ �QSSIBLESSIAI-- ( .EVATION 32' ° r BOARD � "' �• �/2� I.R., BENT 1 WOOD PIANTER T.S.P., O,U. C4NC. PATCH SA o � I ' , „ , `V ppRt�L 2 13" DEADO CEDAR N 89'2100 W 0.25 � � a? 4 � °o N 0' 2 7500 SQ. FT.. �15' � ° � � �R"�E ��� A �' � � I POSSIBLE � BUILDfNG � � � � � SS CO SETBACK � � � ° oo „ CONC. � � C�c//rt"��"-�' C,U�'.G����u7:/�'S � x ° ``' N �23 TU 1 � � H = o �'� N� �--- ,d.. ���P�5 E�'\ I�� �n� S W W� � � o � � N 90'00 00" E 82.07' �� $ p,S� N LOT 14 � � ) � o � � 5 � N O W N d �QZ o " PRQP05 D �S � 8 C WOOD FENCE � cn � EXISTING HOUSE I � � 0 � � � PRQPEf�TY 12390 I 3 o N w � ` � ' �!1 °O Z CONC. L�E # 7'� DOG o o � C � � � � FD. 5/8" I.R., 0.5' BURIED �� CURB 8 ALK � 173.10 � WOOD o 0 & BENT, T.S.P., O.P. o POSSIBLE FFE o N S 89'S0'00" E 0.74' � SA 33. ' I � 3, ° 21" ' RWAY MAPLE Q "' \ pqR(� � I WOOD DECK "' A,C. /' CURB �' � °OW �"' 7524 SQ. FT. f 17.58' OVER CONC. PATIO �� � . _ ; �'" _ � s�'5o'00'� z � GRAVEL � J .7' o � SHED _JCHAIN LINK N AND 'B', 1 — -------- --- �NCE � -� �N ��� � �VERHEAO_ — � � 2 P�4WER � �1 " ILD�MT. AS 2 � TV 49.15 (P) & IiELD N J 19" APPLE CABLE BOX � � ad•��'30" W �., �S� s�,,..,. _� �n i n i T 'r' � � � Tree Inventory performed by Gary Drendel, Certified Arborist: Date of Inventory: 2/20/09 Location, size and species size of trees are identified on topographic survey map. Tree #: Existin�: I- 14 inch Wild Mountain Ash—tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 2- 19 inch Apple 3- 21 inch Norway Maple—tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 4- 7 inch Dogwood 5- 8 inch Cherry 6- 13 inch Deador Cedar 7- 23 inch Tulip —tree is co-dominate, representing weakness Removed: 8- 14 inch Birch—removed prior to inventory Pro�osed Street Trees: 9- 2+ inch Dogwood 10- 2+ inch Dogwood 11- 2+ inch Dogwood 12- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 13- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 14- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry �� ; 3 I�f W„ � - o `�'- 2 3 v 0 � cn a. 2 CURB W - :VATION '} g �c.'��c � I � � N 89 'QO" E 99. ' (M) 100.0 (P) �i ��W I �' ��-��J F/0 LINE - ^ r, �30 � IST. R.O.W. .1, 80.00' (P) & HELD l°C , �� �?�f��,�.LD — TBMf r' OVERHEAD POWER CABLE BOX �� O � ` �c�s i oCABLE�80X� _ �QSSISLES�.L9�� � � FD. 1/2° I.R., BENT .EVAT10N ���,`� . � 32 "' 1 WOOD PLANTER� � O,U. P���br��TC� o � � r.s.P., �N�� SA "' I P�� 2 13'�pEADO �DAR N 89'21'QO" W 0.25 r-. � ' °O M �+� �T 15 N 4 M O N ��� 75W ai. r 1. ``� �-' FL� O � I N ���� �'� �`) Q � � �-'' `f- POSSIBLE BUILDfNG f � o � �, � ��SS CO SETBACK � ,� �- ] � �' � coNC. C A L'rE"��J�l 1%� � � W N �23" TU t ,r,� � � �; y� � g o � � ' „ — �. a S�N�, � ^ LOT 14 x � � o N 90'00�0 E 82.07' P J �! w ° o � � � � S � `� �S ,� �Qz o X PROPOSED cn � N � EXISTING HOUSE I n`��-.. 3 ��� FENCE �0 ` � � o PROPEf�E #12390 I, 3 `oo � O N w 0 ' � o � 7� DOG = o � FD. 5/8' i.R., 0.5' BURIED `� ��RB B c�ALK � 173.10 � �IOOD o g " C 0 & BENT, T.S.P., O.P. a POSSIBLE FFE o cn S 89'S0'00" E 0.74' � SA � , I � 3, ° 21" RWAY MAPLE Q "' \ pqR(� � I WOOD DECK , CURB � ��W_�"'• 7524 SQ. FT. I 17.58' OVER CONC. PATIQ _ �. 20 �' S�'50'00 G�• . ' I GRAVEL � � G�� ,, •7 ° ( SHED _�CHAIN LINK N AND 'B', '`'�° — ------- --- � �� �� O � FENCE � � -� �VERHEAD_ _ � � 2 �{TWER � �1 " LD�MT. AS TV , J 19" APPLE Z � 49.15 (P) & HELD N CABLE BOX � � ad•-�'30" W fi,. �S� s�,,... _1 �niniT 'r' � � � L Tree Inventory performed by Gary Drendel, Certified Arborist: Date of Inventory: 2/20/09 Location, size and species size of trees are identified on topographic survey map. Alternative 1 Tree #: Existin�: 1- 14 inch Wild Mountain Ash— tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 2- 19 inch Apple 3- 21 inch Norway Maple—tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 4- 7 inch Dogwood 5- 8 inch Cherry 6- 13 inch Deador Cedar 7- 23 inch Tulip — tree is co-dominate, representing weakness Removed: 8- 14 inch Birch— removed prior to inventory Proposed Street Trees: 9- 2+ inch Dogwood ' 10- 2+ inch Dogwood 11- 2+ inch Dogwood 12- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 13- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 14- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry Mitigation: No additional trees are removed, no mitigation is required. Section 18.790.030.B.d states that "retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation." Including the removed 14 inch Birch, there are 6 trees over 12 inches in caliper. If no additional trees are removed, 83.3% of trees over 12 inches in caliper would remain and no mitigation required. Not including the Birch, there are 5 trees over 12 inches in caliper. If no additional trees are removed, 100% of trees over 12 inches in caliper would remain and no mitigation required. Protection: Trees that may be impacted by construction on parcel2 are tree nos. 5, 6 and 7. Protective fencing around tree nos. 5, 6, and 7 is depicted on tree plan alternative 1. An eight foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 5, a 13 foot fence around tree no. 6, and a 23 foot fence around tree no. 7 to protect the trees from development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. 3 r '� � �' � 3 � w.,, .., � - o ^? 2 3 v � cn a 2 CURB :VATiON �� '� � I�'��� � i W _ r F/0 LWE o N 89' '00" E 99. � (M� 100:0 (P) �� ��� I � -�''��,,�,�J f'' 3p � IST. R.O.W. ,1. 80,00� (P) dc HELD -. ....h �; � ��.����J.�� - - TBM�1 � � OVERHEAD P4tNER CABLE BOX CABLEBOX� _ �QSSISLESS.IAI— .EVATION �� ` � ' _ �� 32' ° r BOARD � � �� �I2� 4.R., BENT r f•_��� �2'����C. �ATC �, � 1 WaQD PLANTER T.S.P., O.U* � .�tix_,N� �2�� ��p���-��� SA � � � pq�� 2 13" DE DO CEDAR N 89'2100 W 0.25 I � � 4 "� °o _ 0'--� 7500 S{2. FL �--15' � Q a ° N � � � � �� �L.►�'t N � � � °�`'"r''�P.OSSIBLE $ETBACK f rn `��° � �� � `i � � ° ``' �, �23 TU I ����CO CONC. � � �/�LY�. �-Nfi 1 1 v^� 2' � � ; o o i a � �_ L O T 1 4 � W►v� � � S �n � � � — fs�• S�.Nr� � �x � � o � N 9 0'Q O 0 E 8 2.0 7' P � N � � r� o w � • �e, c� ' �aZ o x PROP05 D �S � $�� WOOD FENCE cn � EXIS�N 390 USE { 3 �' o O N p 0 ' � o PROPEf�lY , w � � � ' � o �E 7� DOG- r o � Z FD. 5/8' I.R., 0.5' BURIED �`� � oO B COALK 1 173.10 � WOOD � g " � 0 & BENT, T.S.P., O.P. ��RB o POSSIBLE FFE o N S 89'S0'00" E 0.74' � SA � , � � ° 21" RWAY MAPLE � � 3 � � q,�\ �M PARCEL 1 � WOOD DECK CURB � ��W � 7524 SQ. FT. I 17.58 OVER CQNC. PATIO - 20; /fr'? � S�'S0'00"E � � 3 � GRAVEL � � ,7 0 � SHED _JCHAIN LINK N AND 'B', 1 — +------ --- FENCE I -S �VERHEAD_ — � � � j�� � �c.� 2 P�(SVYE R � �� ° LD�M T. A S � TV J 2 CABLE BOX I 4g'�5� �P� & HE� N 19" APPLE � ad•��'�o" W �„ 75� s�,,..� _�— D(11�IT '�' � � � Tree Inventory performed by Gary Drendel, Certified Arborist: Date of Inventory: 2/20/09 Location, size and species size of trees are identified on topographic survey map. Alternative 2 Tree #: Existin�: 1- 14 inch Wild Mountain Ash —tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 2- 19 inch Apple 3- 21 inch Norway Maple —tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 4- 7 inch Dogwood 5- 8 inch Cherry 6- 13 inch Deador Cedar 7- 23 inch Tulip —tree is co-dominate, representing weakness Removed: 8- 14 inch Birch — removed prior to inventory Proposed Street Trees: 9- 2+ inch Dogwood 10- 2+ inch Dogwood 11- 2+ inch Doewood 12- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 13- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 14- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry Mitigation: If the Birch does need to be mitigated for, there are 6 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.c states that "retention of 50%to 75%of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated for in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D." Removing tree no. 6 would result in 66.7% of trees over 12 inches in caliper remaining, requiring 50 percent of the trees to be removed to be mitigated. The following is the required mitigation calculation to be used if tree no. 6 is removed, including the Birch tree. To mitigate for SO percent of the trees removed (50% of 27 inches total = 13.5 inches), applicant proposes to replace the cedar tree with an evergreen tree selected from the City's tree list. There is no local market for a 13 inch cedar/evergreen tree. As such, applicant proposes to plant 1 four inch replacement evergreen tree. Applicant also is planting six 2 inch trees along the street frontage, thereby exceeding the replanting mitigation requirements. If the Birch does not need to be mitigated for, there are 5 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.d states that "retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation." Removing tree no. 6 would result in 80% of the trees remaining and no mitigation required. Protection: The only trees that may be impacted by construction on parcel 2 are tree nos. 5 and 7. Protective fencing around tree nos. 5 and 7 is depicted on tree plan alternative 2. An eight foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 5 to protect the tree from development impacts. A 23 foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 7 to protect the tree from development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. �r�� , � �� V � � - �n �- - � � �? 2 3 �I � v� a 2 CURB :VATIQN �� '� � !��€� � � � - „ F/0 LINE � N 89' '00° E 99. ' (M) 100.0 (P) �i D/� � � -���,t-,J - "' �30 � � IST. R.O.W. ,1. 80.00' (P) & HELD ��r��,J-L„� - - TBMf ^ OVERHEAD P4WER CABLE B�X �� �� - CABLE�30X� _ .�Q��gL��A�.P" ' .EVA�IQN � Q �, _ �2(�'�G�'� �� 32' ,.°, r BQ�RD � ~,y� FD. 1/2" I.R., BENT � ' -r CONC. PATCH �, � 1 WOOD PLANTER T.S.P., O.U. ��C���J � `....' , 1��= SA � o I 2 PAR(;EL 2 13" DEADO�(,�DAR � N 89'21'00° W 0.25' i � - `` � � 4 "� o N 0 7500 SQ. FL 15 .� ° � � �� £ � ��-�1�� � A � � � I POSSIBLE � BUILDING f � � � o ►�+ � n SS CO SETBACK � � 1 � `� CONC. � � � C..T'�'(L-!L1�"� ��}� � N ° ``' N �2 " TU I r � � � o o � "'� �, a N� ,-- �' LOT 14 w � � � o � � N 90'00 00° E 82.07' PS�.' N .-�I � o c~n � `.°- � � - � �QZ o X PROP05ED �S �'$ WOOD FENCE . >� o PROPEI�7Y EXIS�N 390 USE ± 3 ' , Q o N w � p a ` Q t o ��E 7� D O G- = o � � Z FD. 5/8" I.R., 0.5' BURIED ,`� � � B ��A�K � 173.10 � W�OD o Q " G & BENT, T.S.P., O.P. CURB o POSSIBLE FFE o N S 89'S0'00" E 0.74' � SA "' I , ° 21" RWAY MAPLE ;�,33.� � 3 Q '�' A.C. PARCQ 1 I WOOD DECK CURB � � °�W �"' 7524 SQ, FT. I 17.58' 4VER CONC. PATIO � � G� �� 20 M S�'50'00"E - . " J' o � SHED GRAVEL i ^ � G - M _�CHAIN �INK AND 'B', � - -------- --- FENCE I �.► �# �Jir/ �l"nv � �VERHEAD_ - � I �v 2 P�3WER � �1 " ILD�MT. AS � CABLE BOX I TV 4g�5a(P�'O HW D �., N �5� s�,,... 1�-P�ni n i T '�' � � � Tree Inventory performed by Gary Drendel, Certified Arborist: Date of Inventory: 2/20/09 Location, size and species size of trees are identified on topographic survey map. Alternative 3 Tree #: Existin : 1- 14 inch Wild Mountain Ash—tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 2- 19 inch Apple 3- 21 inch Norway Maple— tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 4- 7 inch Dogwood 5- 8 inch Cherry 6- 13 inch Deador Cedar 7- 23 inch Tulip —tree is co-dominate, representing weakness Removed: 8- 14 inch Birch— removed prior to inventory Proposed Street Trees: 9- 2+ inch Dogwood 10- 2+ inch Dogwood 11- 2+ inch Dogwood 12- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 13- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 14- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry Mitigation: If the Birch does rieed to be mitigated for, there are 6 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.c states that "retention of 50% to 75%of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated for in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D." Removing tree no. 7 would result in 66.7% of trees over 12 inches in caliper remaining, requiring 50 percent of the trees to be removed to be mitigated. The following is the required mitigation calculation to be used if tree no. 7 is removed, including the Birch tree. To mitigate for 50 percent of the trees removed (50% of 37 inches total = 18.5 inches), applicant proposes to replace the tulip tree with a deciduous tree. There is no local market for an 18 inch tulip tree. As such, applicant proposes to plant 1 four inch replacement deciduous tree and 1 three inch replacement deciduous tree to be selected from the City's tree list. Applicant also is planting six 2 inch trees along the street frontage, thereby exceeding the replanting mitigation requirements. If the Birch does not need to be mitigated for, there are 5 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.d states that "retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation." Removing tree no. 7 would result in 80% of the trees remaining and no mitigation required. Protection: The only trees that may be impacted by construction on parcel 2 are tree nos. 5 and 6. Protective fencing around tree nos. 5 and 6 is depicted on tree plan alternative 3. An eight foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 5 to protect the tree from development impacts. A 13 foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 6 to protect the tree from development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. �� �'t- � 3 � W/1 J v o N 2 3 �' � v� a. 2 CURB \6I " � ti YP - I L'��.� iD � :VATION °; � N 89 b0° E 99. ' (M) 100:0 (P) �i ��W � � F/0 L1NE °� -��'R�C.�� "' 30 IST. R.O.W. ,1.. 80.00' (P) & HELD x, , �€Hr,C���,� — — -' TBM1 " � � OVERHEAD P01NER CABLE BQX �. ' - , _ � � oCABLE�t30X� _ �QSSI�I.F SS_1AI— � FD. 1/2" I.R., BENT .EVA�ION r � '► P('�OTc c,T� � 32 �' 1 YVOQD PLANTER aARD T.S.P., O.U. ' t R.C`� CONC. PATCH o � , „ � �P��i��� ��•.-, SA 4 � o � � 2 PAR{�L 2 �1 5 v N 89'2100 W 0.25 13 D ADO CEDAR � � � � o N 0 7500 SQ. FT. � .- p � � � ��� �� Q � ^ � I POSS�BLE � BUILDING f � � �. �t L.'rt✓�l�`�t U�' `� � xi o W � SS CO SETBA CONC. � � � � , � � r.. � �, a �, 2 ' TU I ,�.,� � N � � � p � LOT 14 W O � O � � N 9��0���~ E 82.0/ � a PS�Ni� r N f• • S T"+ n O W N ' � � tD �QZ o x P R O P 0 5 D �S ��� " WOOD FENCE � Q . � o L E E X I S�N239Q U S E I � `� 0 0 N O O � o PROPEI�IY , � � o � 7� DOG- r o � � FD. 5/S' I.R., 0.5 BURIED �\ � � B c�A�K � 173.10 � WOOD o g " G Q & BENT, T.S.P., O.P. ��RB o POSSIBLE FFE o N S 89'S0'00' E 0.74' � SA 33 9,� � � 3� ° 21" RWAY MAPLE � � q�� �M pq(��� � I , WOOD DECK � � �,��4���� CURB � ��W_ • 7524 SQ. FT. ( 17.58 OVER CONC. PATIO - zo; � s�•5o'00'� 3 � � _ I GRAVEL � ,7 0 � SHED _�CHAIN �INK N AND 'B', 1 — -------- --- FENCE I �ri �.cJ 3 Cod -� �(VERHEAO_ — � � >, I � 2 P�WER �1 ILD�MT. �1S 2 CABLE BOX� TV 4915, �P� & �ELD 19" APPLE c AA•�F��O� W c.. N 7Jr' ��n.... _1 DlII�IT �(`' � � � ��.- Tree Inventory performed by Gary Drendel, Certified Arborist: Date of Inventory: 2/20/09 Location, size and species size of trees are identified on topographic survey map. Alternative 4 Tree #: Existin : 1- 14 inch Wild Mountain Ash— tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 2- 19 inch Apple 3- 21 inch Norway Maple — tree is co-dominate, representing weakness 4- 7 inch Dogwood 5- 8 inch Cherry 6- 13 inch Deador Cedar 7- 23 inch Tulip —tree is co-dominate, representing weakness Removed: ' 8- 14 inch Birch—removed prior to inventory Proposed Street Trees: 9- 2+ inch Dogwood 10- 2+ inch Dogwood 11- 2+ inch Dogwood 12- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 13- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry 14- 2+ inch Flowering Cherry Mitigation: If the Birch does need to be mitigated for, there are 6 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.c states that "retention of 50% to 75%of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated for in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D." Removing tree nos. 6 and 7 would result in 50% of trees over 12 inches in caliper remaining, requiring 50 percent of the trees to be removed to be mitigated. The following is the required mitigation calculation to be used if tree nos. 6 and 7 are removed, including the Birch tree. To mitigate for 50 percent of the trees removed (50% of 50 inches total = 25 inches), applicant proposes to replace the tulip tree with a deciduous tree and the cedar tree with an evergreen tree, to be selected from the City's tree list. There is no local market for a 25 inch tree. As such, applicant proposes to plant 1 four inch replacement deciduous tree and 1 four inch replacement evergreen tree to be selected from the City's tree list. Applicant also is planting six 2 inch trees along the street frontage. If the site is unable to accommodate additional tree plantings, applicant will request the remaining mitigation (5 inches) be accomplished off-site or a fee paid in lieu. Applicant will not know if the site is able to accommodate additional tree plantings until after parcel 2 is designed for a specific development proposal. If the site is able to accommodate additional plantings, the remaining required mitigation may be satisfied on-site or a combination of on-site and off-site/fee paid in lieu. If the Birch does not need to be mitigated for, there are 5 trees over 12 inches in caliper. Section 18.790.030.B.c states that "retention of 50%to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated for in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D." Removing tree nos. 6 and 7 would result in 60% of trees over 12 inches in caliper remaining, requiring 50 percent of the trees to be removed to be mitigated. The following is the required mitigation calculation to be used if tree nos. 6 and 7 are removed. To mitigate for 50 percent of the trees removed (50% of 36 inches total = 18 inches), applicant proposes to replace the tulip tree with a deciduous tree and the cedar tree with an evergreen tree, to be selected from the City's tree list. There is no local market for an 18 inch tree. As such, applicant proposes to plant 1 two inch replacement deciduous tree and 1 four inch replacement evergreen tree to be selected from the City's tree list. Applicant also is planting six 2 inch trees along the street frontage, thereby meeting the replanting mitigation requirements. Protection: The only tree that may be impacted by construction on parcel 2 is tree no. 5. Protective fencing around tree no. 5 is depicted on tree plan alternative 4. An eight foot perimeter will be established with protective fencing around tree no. 5 to protect the tree from development impacts. The fence is to be installed prior to any construction. No grade changes, no material storage, nor dirt storage, and no equipment are to be inside the fence area. The fence is to remain until construction is complete. PRE-APPLICATIDN � 4 ��=•• ��l ii�. = CONFERENCE REQUEST !�/� Cit��of Tigard Penuit Center 13125 SU°Ha//Blt�d., 7 rgard, OR 97223 �O ' � � PGowe: 503.639.4171 Fax:503.598.1960 8 _ � GENEI2.AI,INFORMATION , Applicanr. �"�-' � ���ZS FOR STAFF USE ONLY Address:7�co�� S�.J \��� � Phone:S�li 7-� �4Z Cin�: �_C�' `w-.r� ��• "l.ip:�Ctl'ZL7 � CaseNo.: Q�G �CU�Q��f'1� c l _ �c e �� ,�l� g�2� Receipt No.: Contact Person: ��t.rE JM�� t�7s Phone: Application AccFpted B��: S� (� 5�.��.e�� �d� Z��-15�5 4�qlDg Property Owner/Deed Holder(s): �_�.v \ra .Sa.�.���t5 Date: DAT'E UP PRE-APP.: Address: Phone: T1riE OT'PRF.-,APP.; Cin�: "Gip: PRE-APP.HELD�`'1TH: ____ l z 3R D sc.v I vcQ� R��.>>„o; Property Address/T..ocation(s): �:���\nw>�C���a u�r�pplications\Pre-Tpp Reyurst:1pr.duc �,2UIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Tax I�1ap&Ta�I.ot#(s): �s��3 � • ���l T" (iVote: applications will r�ot be accepted �4 S/ without the required submittal elements) Zoning: � ❑ Pre-Applic:tdon Conf.Reyuest Form Site Size:__ �� � �5�� �1 � 5 GOPLS EAGH OF TF�L FOLOWING: ❑ Brief Descripdon of the Proposal and any PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE INFORMATION site-specific yuestions/issues that you would like to have staff research prior to the All of the informauon idendfied on this form are zequired to be submitted b� meeting. the applicant and received b}� the Planning Di�-ision a minimum Qf no e 111 ❑ Site Plan. The site �lan must show the ��eek�rior to officialla� scheduling a Rre-annGcation conference date/nme to proposed lots and/or building la}�outs drawn allow staff ample cime to prepace for the meeting. co scale. Also, show the location of the suUject properq• in relation to the neazesc A pre-application conference can usvall}'be ccheduled a�thin 1-2 weeks of the streets;and the locations of driveways on the Planning Division's receipt of the request for either Tuesday� or Thursda�� subject property and across the street. mocnin�s. Pre-applicarion conferences are one (1� hovt lon�and are typicall}' � Vicinit}�Map. held beraeen the hours of 9:00-11:00 AM. ❑ 'fhe Proposed Uses. PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCES ML3ST BE SCHEDUI.ED IN � Topographic Infonnadon. lncJude Contour PERSON AT THE COMMLJNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER Lines if Possible. FROM 8:00-4:00/MONDAY-FRIDAY. ❑ IF the Pre-Application Conference is for a IF MORE THAIV 4 PEOPLE ARE EXPEC'TED TO ATTEND THE b40NOPOLE �,roject, the applicanc must PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IN YOLJR GROUP, PLEASE attach a copy of the letter and proof in the INFORM THE CITY IN ADVANCE SO TFiAT ALTERNATE ROOM form of an affida��it of mailing, that the ARRANGEMENTS CAi� BE MADE TO ACCOMMODA,TE THE collocation protocol was completed (see GROUP. Secdon 18J98.080 of the Tigafd Communit�• Development Code). ❑ Filing Fee S370.00 I � a- l o-t �.��-- � -�'� � r d �� � � , � �. � ��� � ����v �v cv� �-, � � a��, o� P . ,� � � �.�� ��� � �� �� �� �� � ►�� �a�� . � � � � � ( � _ �? . .� g n o s� �' �/ i �� Sa�d�rs �ot Ui � isio� 1 " = 20 ' . CD SW 106th Dr. 150' l3'O�� Front Set 9ack 20� 34' Exfeting Driveway Ex�eting T'ree ,,`,^'r;�'I..--------------- ----______________� 49,15' ••?•' i 32' 6" j i Watk i � i 20' 6" � j � D � I I 16�6" �i;n� j i � j I _ � � ; N ' ' E 'v + ' � i Propoead Bullding Envelope i 0 O � i m � ! � � S �9 I 63�0" X 65�0' � 3 Exletln9 Houee �l ' i �p � � � IY O I � �O � Y � I� 1 � � I ��N Q I I i N� � �� � � D I �� I 52.82� " � j 44'6" i i i � Deck i i i 20� X I6' � i i i i ! i ! �� ------_ i 20' Rear Set 6ack - 15' L J � l so' 160.12' �� L_`�Vj� � ' 1 1 • 1 V `�,� � �� • • C� ��i 311 S SE Salmon Street G',q �1G Portland,Oregon 97214 L- S ER (503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX & CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL September 10, 2008 City of Ti�ard Community Development Department ATTN: Shirley 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 9722� RE: 12390 SW 106`�' Drive, Tigard, Oregon 97223 Partition Proposal - PREAPP. NO. 2008-00044 Dear Commu�lity DeveloprY�ent Department: This office represents Steve Sanders, the owner of property at 12390 SW 106`�' Drive, Tigard, Oregon, Tax map/lot no. 2S 103AA01916. A preapplication conference is scheduled for September 25, 2008 at 10:00 am. This letter constitutes applicant's supplemental narrative statement. Mr. Sanders proposes to divide his property into two parcels. There is one e�cisting residence. No home is proposed for construction at this time. Mr. Sandei�s proposes to create one additional parcel. The subject property is located on the corner of SW 106'�' Drive and SW Johnson Street. The property, adjacent lots, and street configurations where designed and developed in 1962. At the time, right of way was dedicated and streets constructed to safely serve the small subdivision. The subject corner lot is served by two streets, both with 32 foot wide paved surfaces and curbs. 'fhe street system serves a very limited number of residents. The existing paveir,ent ���idth exceeds current minimum pavement requirements for local streets. The applicable standards are code Chapters 18.510 and 18.420 and specitically 18.420.050. The area and property are zoned R4.5-Residential or 1 unit per 7,500 square feet. The subject property is 15,246 square feet. Dividing the property into two lots would exceed the minimum lot area standard. Minimum lot widths and minimum building envelops are or can be met. Attached is a draft division plan. The site is served by adequate public facilities. No public improvements, except an extension of customary services to existing mains, are needed or necessary for the proposed partition. There will no minimal to no development impacts in creatin� one additional lot. r� • . 1• Attached to this letter is a 9/5/08 letter previously submitted to the plannin� departinent and concerning the subject application rec�uest. I thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, , -�� ":/ ` �_ Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client 2 Sa�d�rs l�ot DiYisio� � " 20 ' _ _ c� . � SW 106th Dr. I50' 13'O" �ront Set Baek � 20' 3�4' Exlat(ng prlveway Exlettr�g TFee "'�____'_._---.---�-�--- �---�-�-�--•-�--�-•- 49.15' t•`,,'!�: �' , i 32' 6" � r i Walk i � i 20' 6" � j i d j 1 I 16'6" m°;�� i i .a j 1 � ' N � ' E � 'v � i Propoeed Hufldtr� Envelope ! 0 0 M � p i i 0 5 Exletfng House � .�Ej � � 63'O" X 65'O' 3 � � i � �Y � m j� 0 ` 't'� im 3 q ; m i !�a� i ! � � � i• � � D N I �N SZ.b2� ' � � I i � 4•f'6" i i i � Deek � i i 20' X 16' � � � i i i I f � I � . �'_._._'_'___'_'_._'_'_'_._'_'_'_._._'_'_._'_'_'_._._ _'_'_._'_'_'_'_'_• 1 �' Reer Set Beck ' 15' � so' 160.12' i" p� L,�� ' • � � ► � � , d � � O � . . � 3115 5E Salmon Street ��AL SERJ�G� Portland,Oregon 97214 (503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX & CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL September 5, 2008 City of Tigard Community Development Department Current Planning 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: 12390 SW 106`�' Drive, Tigard, Oregon 97223 Partition Proposal Dear Community Development Department: This office represents Steve Sanders, the owner of property at 12390 SW 106`�' Drive, Tigard, Oregon, Tax map/lot no. 2S103AA01916. Mr. Sanders previously scheduled a pre- application conference to discuss the partition of his property into two lots. Before the meeting took place, Mr. Sanders was informed by staff that a partition application could not be approved. Staff stated that after a right of way exaction, the existing lot would not have sufficient land area to meet minimum lot size standards. Respectfully, this office disagrees with that preliminary assessment in fact and in law. The subject property is located on the corner of SW 106t1i Drive and SW Johnson Street. The property, adjacent lots, and street configurations where designed and developed in 1962. At the time, right of way was dedicated and streets constructed to safely serve the small subdivision. The subject corner lot is served by two streets, both with 32 foot wide paved surfaces and curbs. The street system serves a very limited number of residents. The existing pavement width exceeds current minimum pavement requirements for local streets. The area and property are zoned R4.5-Residential or 1 unit per 7,500 square feet. The subject property is 15,246 square feet. Dividing the property into two lots would exceed the minimum lot area standard. Attached is a draft division plan. As a matter of law, lot area for application purposes is calculated as existing before an application is filed. An exaction, such as for additional right of way, whether in the form of an easement or fee title, is made in exchange for application approval. To conclude that sufficient lot area does not exist because of an anticipated exaction, both assumes the exaction is in the form of a fee dedication and puts the exaction ahead of the approval decision. Only aftei- approval will Mr. Sanders' lot area be impacted by a right of way exaction. ,_ " ' . Certainly, there are creative approaches, expressly pro�ided for in the City's code, to both approve a partition request and ensure safe and sufficient access. A division would also ensure that the property develops at densities required and encouraged by the zone. This office requests that Mr. Sanders' partition application process proceed and a pre- application conference be scheduled. The City is in possession of Mr. Sanders' pre-application fee. Please contact me to arrange a pre-application meeting so that I can coordinate my schedule. I thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, � � �� C � �-�-�''_.� . . _- Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client 2 ; _ _ , _ _ _ _. -. . y _ . , , z_, � . _ :. . � Q~ — � w � � ^� � �1 � • • ��, �� 3115 SE Salmon Street G,9 J�G Portland,Oregon 97214 1- SER - -- ��� �� /(503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX & CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL � September 5, 2008 SEP 0 8 2008 City of Tigard Comi�nunity Development Department � Current Plannin� 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: 12390 SW 106`�' Drive, Tigard, Oregon 97223 Partition Proposal Dear Community Development Department: Tllis office represents Steve Sanders, the owner of property at 12390 SW 106`�' Drive, Tigard, Oregon, Tax map/lot no. 2S 10�AA01916. Mr. Sanders previously scheduled a pre- application coilference to discuss the partition of his property into two lots. Before the meetin� took place, Mr. Saiiders was informed b�� staff that a partition application could not be approved. Staff stated that after a right of way exaction, the existin� lot would not have sufticient land area to meet minimum lot size standards. Respectfully, this office disagrees with tllat preliminary assessment in fact and in law. The subject property is located on the corner of SW l06`�' Drive and SW Johnson Street. The property, adjacent lots, and street configurations where designed and developed in 1962. At the time, right of way was dedicated and streets constructed to safely serve the small subdivision. The subject corner lot is served by two streets, both with 32 foot wide paved surfaces and curbs. The street system serves a very limited number of residents. The existin� pavement width e�ceeds :ur;e►�t mi�iniurn ��avement requiremcni5 for iocal streets. The area and propert_y are zoned R4.5-Residential or 1 unit per 7,500 square feet. T'he subject property is 15,246 square feet. Dividing the property into two lots would exceed the minimum lot area standard. Attached is a draft division plan. As a matter of law, lot area for ap�lication purposes is calculated as existin� before an application is filed. An e�action, such as for additional right of way, whether in the form of an easement or fee title, is made in exchange for application approvaL To conclude that sutficient lot area does not exist because of an anticipated exaction, both assutYies the exaction is in the form of a fee dedication and puts the exaction ahead of the approval decision. Only ai-ter approval will Mr. Sanders' lot area be impacted by a right of way exaction. w M � • Certainly, there are creative approaches, expressly provided for in the City's code, to both approve a partition request and ensure safe and sufficient access. A division would also ensure that the property develops at densities rec�uired and encouraged by the zone. This office requests that Mr. Sanders' partition application process proceed and a pre- application conference be scheduled. The City is in possession of Mr. Sanders' pre-application fee. Please contact me to arrange a pre-application meeting so that I can coordinate my schedule. 1 thank you for your time ac�d attention to this matter. Sincerely, �� �Y�� ' ���. � Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client 2 Sa�ders �ot Di� isio� � " = 20 ' � SW 106th Dr, l3'O" 150' Front 8s! Bxk � 20' 34' Exfeting privewey Exletfng T�ree ,.�,_.__._._._.—_____---_ _---_______—__—___, 49.15' ,�'=:�••�• i 32' 6" i i W61 k i i i 20' 6" � j � � I I 16'6" �;�,� i i i ! � � ' E � � v ! ' � i Propoeed Bulidiru� Envelope i 0 O '�'� j i O Exletlrx� Houee � � � i 63'O" X 65'O' � � � � � � lY 0 I � O � 'f i � � � � I i�in Q ; � I �) xy i �� � �3 �I � � I 'N �JZ.SZ� � � � I 44'6" � � � i Deek i � i so' x it,' b ; ; i � i i � ____'_'_"_______--__-_-------- ------ -- i zo' Rear Se! Back 15' `�- L i . I 1 , , 70' � 160.12' -9 _ • , �J / � � / �� � / �' ��. W �"— > Q -_ , �� Z �— Q ) � : � 1 W � �06�. � � � ���� . ��. �� W- � ��-�� CLYDESDALE � � � �__,-- � � P L C O �_ � � ; '� SZ � � �O '/ 2 ��� i � �, ' - � i - r- �\ '-__ �, ' JOHNSON ST 'A� _� � j �65" O ��- _ � , � �t� � 2Si0�AA01916 "�O � �� � � ��� � � < , � ��� %?o'� � � � -- �, �' I / _ � , �' � � wA�NV ��� ; - TST , � , . � � � -- ��i�;� � - _�- � �O �- � �-_/ �'�-�/ �._. - cn _ _ } , , ��` G� - � ��� _ � �°� �� � ; � ��,�` � � � ,� % p P ��I, I �/ � � - � CiT /� �, � � J� , v Q. �. -�l��', � \ ` � � - \ ,� / � � � . , ��� � , =--� ►� 1 �� �� �--� � �- � r,ec;,aAan�.c � .i � _ . - - =�t" / VICINITY MAP � 12390 SW 106TH Q _--- Q _ _ � � � i�� , � o - �o6�,y w CLYDESDALE � � � O PL � �n � !" � 2N0 � ,' 2 � � _ ___ � SUBJECT SITE '� �� �j� ' J �.. ����� �� �� ���� � ---- --. . i3103AA01918 . �O� ' � � A � - __ _. ,. � . , wqCNV w T � S r ��� �� �- � ��'�S� ���� cn , �� . . — \ . , N G� �� �. ��' ''� � � �� 0 100 200 30o Feet � ' �\�� /� � � , /._ . 1 242 feet P P� �`���� ```-q��, � /� - � � ; � �, � � \\ , �� , - \ �*u ' � � . Information on ihis map is for general location only and � should be verified with the Developmenl Services Divisbn. I � 13125 SW Hall Blvd � � .. ���� � � Tigard.OR 97223 � (503�63&4171 , . ' . , . i http:/lwww.ci.tigard.or us Community Development Plot date:Sep 10,2008;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR ---. Th u rsday AUgUSt Zoo8 5eptember 2008 October 2008 2� 1 2 3 4 5 1 � 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 6 7 8 9 10 i 11 12 13 14 15 '.� "<-: 15 16 17 'I8 19 . 13 14 15 16 17 '. 18 19 20 21 22 r' 22 23 24 25 26 : 20 21 22 23 24 ` September 2008 25 26 27 28 29 : 29 30 27 28 29 30 31 Day 269,097 Left Week 39 Appointments 8 00 30 9 oa 30 1 O 00 Pre-App Steve Sanders/Gary Sheppard 503-220-0642/503-233-1985 12390 SW 706th 2 lot MLP �CR#1 -Pre-App 30 11 °° 30 12�� PM so � ao 30 2 00 30 3 �� 30 4 �� 30 5 �� 30 9/10l2008 1:49 PM 1/1 Network Services r'^" ,,�: PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES :J� � ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION \ CIN�fTlgard,0�egon Community�DcrrC�prrrent S�ia � A�etter Commun� PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map[sl: 2S1o3AA Tax LoUsl: 1916 Use i�lpe: MLP The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Riqht-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: � SW 106th Avenue to 27 feet from centerline plus radius at corner � SW Johnsone Street to 27 feet from centerline plus radius at corner ❑ SW to feet ❑ SW to feet Street improvements: � Half street improvements will be necessary along SW 106th Avenue, to include: � 16 feet of pavement from centerline � concrete curb � storm sewers and other underground utilities � 5-foot concrete sidewalk with 5 foot planter strip � street trees sized and spaced per TDC � street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: CITY OF TI6ARD Pre-Applicadon Conference Notea Page 1 of 6 E�glaeering Uep�rtmeatSecUo� � Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Johnson Street, to include: � 16 feet of pavement from centerline � concrete curb � storm sewers and other underground utilities � 5-foot concrete sidewalk with 5 foot planter strip � street trees sized and spaced per TDC � street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a finro-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, tra�c control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OF TI6ARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 Englneering oeoartmentSecUon ' ' ❑ Other: Aclreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1.) May be approved based on rough proportionality for both frontaqes �2.) Overhead Utility Lines: � Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, if approved by the City Engineer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is approved, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW Johnson Street adjacent to site and alonq 106th Avenue on opposite side. Must underground lines on Johnson Street or obtain approval for fee from Mike McCarthy in Engineerin� Prior to issuance of buildinq permits, the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is located in both Johnson Street and 106th Avenue. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to connect with separate laterals to the public sewer. Water Supplv: The City of Tigard (Phone:(503) 639-4171) provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: John Dalby, (503) 356-4723] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: CITY OF TI6ARD Pre-Applicadon Conf�rence Notes Page 3 af 6 Englneerin9 Beparpnent SectloA � ' �II proposed development 'iin the City shall be designed suc' �t storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public dra, �e system. The applicant will be �_ ��ired to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. Must connect to an approved public system. Storm Water Qualitv: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on- site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surFaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof. Please contact the Building Division for the current fee. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ❑ Construction of an on-site water quality facility. � Payment of the fee in-lieu. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF inay be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible o� when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. Pay the TIF CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Applicadon Conference No[es Page 4 of 6 Enllneering Oepartmen[5ectlon PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for any final design-related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant musi obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Diuision. BuildinA Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Applicadon Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Eogloearieg oepartment SecUon � ' Other Permits. ThF �re other special permits, such a� �chanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be rec, :d. Contact the Development Serv��..� Counter for more information. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: ����� �•2s� �� ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF UATE Phone: [5031639-4171 Fax: [50316240152 templatel Revised: September 2,2003 CITY OF TI6ARD Prc-Applicatlon Conference Motea P�ge 6 of 6 Englneering�eparunent SecUoa CITY Of TIGARD V PRE-APPLICATION CONfERENCE NOTES ° (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) � � � PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: September 25,2008 1 �`� � STAFF AT PRE-APP.: GBP�G n, ✓ j . RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: Steve W. Sanders AGENT: Gary Shepherd Phone: 503-312-8828 Phone: 503-233-1985 PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOfATION: 12390 SW 106m Avenue TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): 2S103AA-01916 NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: Minor Land Partition (MLP) PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: Partition sublect 15,245 square foot property into two (2) lots. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: R-4.5 tONIMS DISTRICT DIMEMSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.5101 MINIMUM LOT SIZE:7,500 sq.ft. Average Min. lot width:50 ft. Max. building height: 30 ft. Setbacks: Front 20 ft. Side 5 ft. Rear 15 ft. Corner 15 ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: _% Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: _%. GARAGES:20 ft. ❑ NEI6NBORHOOD MEETIN6 [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Nandoutl THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PR�PERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED PARTIES, AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. " NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 Residential Applica6onlPlanning Division Section � NARRATIYE IRefer to Code Chapter 18.390I The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. � IMPACT STUDY [Refer to Code Sectlons 18.390.040 and 18.390.0501 As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE AN IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. � ACCESS [Refer to Chapters 18.105 and 18.1651 Minimum number of accesses: 1 Minimum access width:15. Minimum pavement width:10 ❑ WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7051 Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING AREA, COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. � RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7151-SEE E1(AMPLE BELOW. The NET RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net area of the developable land by the minimum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from the gross site area: All sensitive lands areas includinq: � Land within the 100-year floodplain; � Slopes exceeding 25%; � Drainageways; and � Wetlands for the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts. Public riqht-of-wav dedication: :� Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities; or � Multi-family allocate 15% of gross acres for public facilities; or � If available, the actual public facility square footage can be used for deduction. 250 lineal feet x 2ft=approx.500 square feet ROW dedicatlon for frontage on lohnson and 106�. 15,246—500=14,746 square feet 14,746/2=7,373 spuare feet Therefore,18A20.050A.4.b is not met D(AMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE(3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS Single-Family I�ulti-Family 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 8,712 sq. ft. (20%)for public riqht-of-way 6,534 sq. ft. (15%}for public riqht-of-way NET: 34,848 square feet NET: 37,026 square feet + .050 (minimum lot areal � .050 (minimum lot area) = 11A Units Per Acre = 12.1 Units Per Acre O rne Devel�pment Code r�quires that me net site area e�tist for rne nextwhole dwelling unit NO ROUNDIN6 UP IS PERMITTED. O Minlmum Prelect Density is 80%of the ma�mum allowed density.TO DETERMINE TNIS STANOARU,MULTIPLY THE MIUUMUM NUMBER OF UNITS BY.S. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section ❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS [Refer to e Section 18.7301 � STREETS: feet from the centerline of : FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures. � ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained between each dwelling unit or garage. :- MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential developments. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size. Five (5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. [See applicable zoning district for the primary structures'setback requirements.l ❑ FLA6 LOT BUILDIN6 HEI6NT PROYISIONS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1301 MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 1'/z STORIES or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 2'/2 stories, or 35 feet in R-7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.C.2 are satisfied. ❑ BUFFERING AND SCREENIN6 [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7451 In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the CITY REQUIRES LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may o� be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFERS applicable to your proposal area is: Buffer Level along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. Buffer Level along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: � LANDSCAPIN6 [Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.7051 STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. ❑ RECYCLIN6 [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7551 Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of finro (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Pride Disposal can be reached at (503) 625-6177. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section � PARKIN6 [Refer to Code Cha s 18.765 a 18.7051 ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. : Single-family............ Requires: One (1) off-street parking space per dwelling unit; and One (1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. : Multiple-family.........Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms; and 1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms. Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of the total required parking. NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: : Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet, 6 inches. � Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet, 6 inches. � Handicapped parking: All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ❑ BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Sectlon 18.7651 BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. ❑ SENSITIYE LANDS [Refer to Code Chapier 18.7151 The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meetinq the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearlv indicated on plans submitted with the develoqment application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. ❑ STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Code Section 18.715.O70.C1 When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. � CLEANWATER SERVICES[CWSI BU�FER STANDARDS [Refer to CWS Ra0 07-20/USA Regulations-Chapter 3l LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Desiqn Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 ResidenGal Application/Planning Division SecUon TABLE 3.1 YE6ETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESI6N AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAURESOLUTION 8 ORDER 07-20 SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT 1 WIDTH OF VEGETATED TO SENSITIVE AREA CORRIDOR PER SIDE • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 15 feet I 10 to <50 acres I >50 to <100 acres 25 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow ♦ Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres • Natural lakes and onds • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% 30 feet � 10 to <50 acres � >50 to <100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in . Natural lakes and ponds <25%slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine3 Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds,whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. ZVegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 3The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet, if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. Restrictions in the Veqetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the USA Design and Construction Standards. Location of Veqetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the CWS R&O 07-20 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. � SIGNS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7801 SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. � TREE REMOYAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code 5ectlon 18.790.030.CJ A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section or conditional use is filed �otection is preferred over removal v e possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size, species, and condition of all existing trees greater than 6- inch caliper. ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking Iots: . Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; . Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; . Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; . Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATI�N LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. � MITI6ATION [Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.E1 REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. ➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: . The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. � CLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting streeYs functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. The applicant shall show the clear vision areas on CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 Residential ApplicaGon/Planning Division Section the site plan, and identifj y obstructions in these areas. ❑ RITURE STREET PUIN AND E1(TENSION OF STREETS [Refer to Code Sectlon 18.810.030.F.1 A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: :- Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 200 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division. � Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed. ❑ ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0601 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2'/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. ❑ BLOCKS [Refer to Code Sectlon 18.810.0901 The perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED 1,800 FEET measured along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development. When block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. CODECNAPTERS II 1 H.330(Conditional Use) II �8.6ZO(Tgard Triangle Design Standards) II �H.76O(Nonconforming Situations) II 18.340(Director's�nterpretation) II 18.630(washingmn Square Regiona�Center� �I 1 H.7C5(OffSveet Parkingl�oading Requirements) II 18.350(Planned Development) II 1 H.F>4O(Durham Quarry Desgn Standards) II �H.775(Sensitive Lands Review) Q �H.36O(Site Development Review) � �H.7O5(AccesslEgresslCirculation) � 18.780(Signs) � 18.370(varianceslAdjustments) II 18.71 O(Accessory Residentia�Units) Q 18.785 Remporary Use Permits) L! �H.38O(Zoning Map/rext Amendmenis) � 18.715(Densiry Computations) � 18.790(Tree Remova�) ❑ 18.385(Misce��aneous Permits) Q �H,T2O(Desgn Compatibility Standards) � 18.795(visua�C�earance Areas) � �H.39O(Decision Making Proceduresflmpact Study) � �5.725(Environmental Performance Standards) II 18.798(Wireless Communica6on Facili�es) II �H.4�O(Lot Line Adjustrnenis) Q �S.73O(Exceptions To Development Standarcls) � 18.81 O(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) Jol �H.4ZO(Land Partitions) II 18.740(Historic Overlay) II 18.430(Subdivisions) II 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) � �8.5'I O(Residential Zoning Districts) �I �5.�45(Landscaping 8 Screening Standards) II 18.520(Commeraa�Zoning Districts) ❑ �S.�SO(ManufacturedlMobil Home Regulations) II �$.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.755(M�ced So�id wastelFtecyding Storage) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 Residential ApplicationlPlanning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMME� , The aqplication must propose dedication of riqht-of-way required bv the development code to meet street ROW width standards (27 feet from centerline). If the_remaining lot area is insufficient to meet the minimum lot area requirement of 7,500 square feet for the R-4.5 zone, then you must apply for a variance to 18.420.050.A.4.b usinq the standards in 18.370.010.C. Your findinqs must provide a factual basis for meetinq the applicable criteria. Variances of this nature, if approved, increase the potential for appeal. PROCEDURE � Administrative Staff Review. [] Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. ❑ Public hearing before the Planning Commission. [] Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: A lications submitted b mail or dro ed off at the counter without Plannin ivision acce tance ma e returne . e anninq counter c oses at : Ma s submitted with an a lication shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8'/z" x 11". One 8'/i' x 11" ma o a ro ose ro ect s a a so e su mitte or attac ment to t e sta re ort or a ministrative decision. AppliCations wit un olde maps s all not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing willty pically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tig ard Hearin�s Officer . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. SUBDIVISION PIAT NAME RESERYATION [County Surveyors Office: 503-648-88841 PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicants are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section . � . recommended to con ` a Building Division Plans Ex ner to determine if there are building code issues t�._.. would prevent the structure from .,eing constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the Cit 's olic is to a I those s stem development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNL S OTHER ISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). e con erence an no es canno cover a o e requirements an aspects re ate to site planning that should ap ply to the develo p,ment of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not cons�ltute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospectiye applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask an questions of Cit staff relative to Code requirements prior to submittin an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: Gary Pagenstecher � - � fITY OF TIGARD PLAN SION - STAFF PERSON NOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-639-4111 FAX: 503-684-7297 DIRELT: 503-718-2434 EMAIL• gar�@tigard-or.gov TITLEI8(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNETADDRESS: WMIW.[1981'd-0�.90V H:lpattylmasterslPre-App Notes Residential.doc Updated: 12-Feb-07 (Engineering section:preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 Residential ApplicationlPlanning Division Section o L`� , ,� �� • � � , o �����, . . t� ��i 3115 SE Salmon Street C �G Portland,Oregon 97214 �t- SER� (503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX &CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL June 12, 2009 ����I�� Cheryl Cames, Associate Planner D City of Tigard JUN 1 5 2009 13125 SW Hall Blvd. C:�TY pF TIGARD Tigard, OR 97223 �',1�J��9�',��!�sf�;"cCERIf�G RE: Sanders Minor Land Partition File No. MLP2009-00001 Response to Comments Received Dear Ms. Caines: This letter and attachments constitutes applicant's response to comments received to date. Please include this letter in the record of these proceedings. Comment from Garry Helmer: Applicant is respectful of Mr. Helmer's comments. However, the subject partition request is consistent with City zoning and regional infill objectives. Applicant demonstrated it is feasible to meet all applicable zoning and development standards. The comment received from Richard Pearson demonstrates that other area residents are in support of the application. Comment from Richard Pearson: Applicant appreciates Mr. Pearson's comments and his effort to coordinate a response with area residents. Applicant is not currently requesting permission to build a home, but rather seeking to create lot for planning and future development purposes. If applicant were to build a home, applicant would welcome a neighborhood meeting to discuss building plans. Comment from Clean Water Services (CWS�: Many of the comments submitted by CWS are typical of a subdivision application where new facilities and construction closely follow the preliminary and final plat approvals. They are not specific to the subject application. Applicant objects to the timing of the obligations recommended by CWS. . CWS recommends its review and approval of grading and erosion control plans be completed prior to final plat approval. Requiring CWS review and approval prior to final plat approval and recording is not appropriate for the subject application. Rather, the conditions recommended by CWS should be applied before actual work on the site is performed. Applicant requests a condition be imposed that requires the property owner to obtain needed CWS review and approvals when construction, grading or other land disturbing activities take place on proposed Parcel 2. Applicant is not currently requesting permission to build a home on Parcel 2, but rather seeking to create lot for planning and future development purposes. The need for an erosion control and grading plan and a storm water connection permit will only arise when a new home is constructed on Parcel 2. Prior to that time, the site will remain in its existing condition and retain its vegetative cover. The existing residence on proposed Parcel 1 has all necessary services. The newly created Parcel 2 will only be disturbed and need sewer and storm services installed when it is developed. Concerning the specifics of the comments, the site area is well below one-acre, thus no 1200c permit is required. As well, since the partition can result in only one future residence and additional impervious surface on one 7,500 square foot lot,the development will be well below the threshold for water quality measures. Also, LIDA systems are an issue for the housing developer. I thank you for your assistance in processing this application. Sincerely, � Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client 2 �o� LA��� � � � • � .�.�� o �� . . C� �� 3115 SE Salmon Street C,9 ��G Portland,Oregon 972]4 t- SER (503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX & CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL July 7, 2009 Ron Bunch ��C E I 1�Ep Community Development Director ��� 0 7 2009 City of Tigard '�s Y QF TIGI4Rfl 13125 SW Hall Blvd. i-,, ����,.,�, ,--�;,���:F��tlt",� Tigard, OR 97223 `_�"° ���- ,` RE: Sanders Minor Land Partition—NOTICE OF APPEAL File No. MLP2009-00001 Dear Mr. Bunch: This letter constitutes applicant Steven Sander's Notice of Appeal. Applicant appeals the City of Tigard's Type II administrative decision entitled Minor Land Partition (MLP) 2009- 00001 dated 6/22/09. Applicant has standing to appeal. This appeal is timely. Attached with this appeal is the required filing fee. Listed and discussed below are the issues and conditions of approval that applicant is appealing. Issues involving the conditions of approval were not revealed to applicant until the notice of decision was received, and therefore applicant could not have, nor is applicant required as a matter of law, to raise those issues during the comment period. Otherwise, the issues appealed were discussed in a�plicant's narrative and supplemental narrative statements. Right of Way Width Required: Applicant appeals the imposition of condition of approval no. 1. The condition requires applicant to obtain a variance or adjustment to accommodate the City's conditional exaction of right of widths beyond what is required to conditionally approve the request and beyond what is proportional and constitutionally permissible. City staff stated that the 54 foot ri�ht of way width requested is needed to accommodate potential/future sidewalk and planter strips and to keep the existing roadway width of 32 feet. Said road width of 32 feet far exceeds current standards. Requiring applicant to meet both the past standards(32 foot wide pavement) and the cunent standards is inconsistent and not permitted. Respectfully, applicant is of the opinion that the decision to require dedications to ensure right of widths of 54 feet (27 feet from centerline) on both SW 106`" and SW Johnson is not consistent with the code. c Code section 18.810.030.F�regulates streets and right of way widths. That section directs us to table 18.810.1. The table states that for local residential streets with an ADT under 500 that the right of way width is 50 feet. It also states that for local residential streets with an ADT under 200 that the right of way width is 46 feet. These are not the skinny street widths and applicant did not request skinny street approval. The only situation that results in right of way widths of 54 feet is when the ADT is over 500. The current right of way on both SW 106`h and Johnson is 50 feet. A decision to require 54 feet of width, and thus 2 additional feet from applicant on both SW 106`t' and Johnson implies that the ADT on both streets is over 500. Factually, that is not correct. The decision does not indicate how the City applied the standard and table to warrant additional dedication on both streets. SW Johnson Street serves 5 homes. No additional homes can be served by the dead end street. Serving 5 homes results in an ADT of 50. The 1 single family unit to 10 trips ratio (rounded up) is from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. Having an ADT of less than 200, only 46 feet of right of way is required. Since SW Johnson Street already has 50 feet of right of way, no additional right of way dedication is required. SW 106`� Street serves as local access for at most 34 homes. The aerial photo provided with the application confirms this fact. Given that SW 106'�' is a local through street providing access to the north and south of the small subdivision, even less users travel in front of the subject site along SW 106`h. Serving 34 homes results in an ADT of 340. Having an ADT of less than 500, only 50 feet of right of way is required. Since SW 106`�' already has 50 feet of right of way, no additional right of way dedication is required. If no additional right of way is required on either or both of the street, than condition#1 that applicant either obtain a vaziance to the minimum lot size standard or an adjustment approval for a public sidewalk easement for both streets would not apply. Requiring a right of way width from applicant that is larger than necessary to accommodate any needed half street pursuant to City standards is an unconstitutional exaction; the condition is not roughly proportional to the development's impacts. Public Facilit�Permit Timing- Water Connection Permit/Timin�: Conditions of approval #7 and #8 involve a public facility improvement permit(PFIP) for lateral extensions and other work in the City right of way. The decision requires the pertnit prior to final plat approval. Likewise, Condition#14 requires a water connection permit prior to final platting. However, applicant is not proposing any construction improvements at this time and no lateral extensions are needed until a home is built on this infill lot. The City has not identified any standard that requires a PFIP and water permit prior to final plat recording. While the condition's timing may be appropriate for a subdivision requiring new lines and systems to serve an area, timing those conditions to the final plat is not appropriate for infill development with existing systems in place. Applicant acknowledges that a PFIP and 2 water permit is required prior to making improvements in the right of way and constructing utility connections to serve a future residence on Parcel 2. However, applicant is not requesting permission to make any improvements in the right of way at this time. Improvements in the right of way in the form of utility extensions will not occur on this infill site until Pazcel 2 is developed with a residence. The existing residence on Parcel 1 has all needed and necessary services. Applicant requests the condition relating to the need to acquire a PFIP and water permit be timed to when the right of way actions are actually taken, consistent with condition #34 which states prior to "final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements ...." Street Trees on Parcel 2: The decision has conflicting requirements concerning street tree planting for parcel2. Condition#12 states that prior to final platting, street trees shall be planted along the frontage of SW 106`�' and Johnson. This would require planting prior to construction on parcel2. The condition also does not distinguish between parcel 1 and 2 as is done elsewhere in the decision. The condition is also inconsistent with findings and recommended conditions made at page 12 of the decision. Page 12 states that street trees for parcel 1 are required to be planted prior to final plat and that for parcel 2 the planting is required prior to final building inspection. Conditions#4 and #37 appropriately reflect this intent. This will ensure tree survival and reduce interference with construction activities. Condition#12 is inconsistent with the decision's intent, findings, and other conditions. Sincerely, —� �� C��� Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client 3 d APPEAL FILING FORM - FOR LAND USE DECISI(��� ' ED PLANNING � � C,aty�of�l t�urd 1'crntit C-entcr 1 312�S((;�7�ull Blz�d.. �l l;u�zl. O1� �'2?z Plro�re: �03.G3J.-f 171 [��.ti�:>03.�91�.19G0 ��� �� � �QQ� C�TY C?F TIGARD The City of Tigard suppons the citizen's right to participa[e in local government. Tigard's Land Use Code,therefore,sets out speci�c requirements for tiling appeals on certain land use decisions. The following form has been developed to assist you in filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what filing fees will be required or to answer any questions you have regarding the appeal process, please contact the Planning Division or the Ciry Recorder at the phone/fax listed at the top of this form. GENERAI.INFORMATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Property Address/Locarion(s) and Name(s) of the Apptication � I_ } l ��P Case No.(s}: BeingAppealed: �►^C.�C� ��110( �n� Gr'['��J�• 2� 23 � t� Case Name(s): 1 � 5 w l 06 _ �j (��r ��� Receipt No.: How Do�'ou Qualify As A Party?: f I i_s+,n� A�vlication Accepted By: Date: ` 1 Apnroved As To Form By: Appellant's Name: ���I�C.✓� JG��I�((�S ��o �G�v� S �PO(�lQr a(� Date: Appellant's Address: �i�I S 5� j�A�-M�.N ST• Denied .�1s To Form By: City/State: �� (l°t h� d� z�P: ��L 1`'� Date: Day Phone Where You Can Be fteached:( �G� Z��" l���y �. �/1/0� i:\curpin\m�sters\lend use applicanons\appeal_land use app do<� Scheduled Date Decision Is To Be Final: 7 17 �O�1 Date Norice of Final Decision Was Given: �,7..Z ! 01 Specific Grounds For Appeal or Review: �QUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS ✓ Application Elements Submitted: � � ��' r^ � (�- �� ❑ Appeal Filing Fortn (compieted) ❑ Filing Fee(b�sed on criteria helow) �` O,` ��l � ➢ Ditttro�s Decision to Heanngs OfScer/Pluvung Comm�s�ion b '_?0 iYl ��1 � � � ! ➢ Expedited Reviev(deposit) f 3(M).o0 C � (^ � � J�/� )�� D Heiang Referce f 500 i)0 � v ( ➢ Plonnir�Comm�ssion/Hearing s Ofhccc to City Council f 2,513.!!0 �tci��re� i►�`"�y� 5 Utn�t�,�✓�"a o�� . .�u.� 2� � t�,I t�.�,) a G �� c�f' �C.�(J�!�l b C •L � �� ��� Signature(s)of A (s): ►T , �, , ► ,� � . . ,� CITY OF TIGARL RECEIPT 13125 5W Hall Blvd..Tigard OR 97223 503.639 4171 Receipt Number: 174269 - 07107/2009 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID MLP2009-00001 Appeal DD to HO 1003100-43116 $250.00 Total: $250.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Check 1303 KPEERMAN 07/07/2009 $250.00 Payor: Oregon Land Law, LLC Total Payments: $250.00 Balance Due: $0.00 Page 1 of 1 �" City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • T�gu,,�, OR 97223 /�'��C l�Z�� D��� s'� . :t. - Wednesday,Ju1y 08, 2009 �/����5�����D �"���=�r> ° - � : . ��� Steven W. Sanders and Barbara Swanson-Sanders 2647 SW Talbot Road Portland, OR 97201 RE System Development Charges, TDT&Parks, for Sanders Partition, MLP2009-00001. Attached are estimates of the TDT (Transportation Development Tax) and Parks System Development Charges (SDCs) that will become payable upon issuance of a building pernut for a new residence on Lot No. 2 under yc�ur land partition: $4,599 for TDT, $5,370 for Parks. The TDT rate of $4,599 per single family residence will apply 7/1/09 - 6/30/10 based on the date of building pernut issuance and will increase effective 7/1/10. The Parks rate of $5,370 per single family residence will apply 1/1/09 - 12/31/09 based on the date of building pernut application and will increase effective 12/31/09. Please let me kn if you have any questions. A1 ert S ds Pe � s/Projects Coordinator 50 -718-2426 cc: Land e File, Cheryl Caines. � Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 ✓ CITY OF TIGARD COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAX (TDT) NOTIFICATION OF FEE AND PAYMENT OPTIONS Please sign and return with Building Permit Application. This advises you that the TDT for this project is as shown below and outlines the a ment oprions that may be available to you. A copy of the fee calcularion works t is attac d amount will � increase on July 1 if payment is not received before then. T � s' ed and submi with your application for a builcling permit. Ciry of Tig Date: � � D Site Address: / � 39,v Ci�, 1 , � � s(il/ Project Land Use Case `' Name ' � or Permit #: 'r����a�b � Tax TDT Amount: _ / �� Lot #: ��lD3�A-p/9/ �iL `� . This constitutes my request to use the TDT payment option or combinarion of oprions I have selected below. [Thi.c selection can be changed up to the time a buildin�permit i.r issued.] I realize that'TDT charges are due and payable at the time a building permit is issued unless those charges are Deferred or are financed through Installment Payments. [Plea,re addre.r.r guestions about TDT or Deferral or In.rtallment Payment.r to Albert Shield.r, Permit Coordinator, 503-718-2426.] ❑ Cash, Check, or Credit Card,payment due at building permit issuance. ❑ Deferral un ' Occu ane ,payment due before issuance of an occupancy permit. � �aymen the TDT may be deferred until issuance o the occupancy permit if the TDT is greater than the ount for a sin le famil residence currend . In requesting this option I understand that deferred TDT must be paid prior to issuance o a Certificate of Occupancy and that the TDT will be recalculated at the time it is actually paid based on the TDT rates prevailing at that time. I further understand that TDT rates may increase each)uly IS�and that such increases are not subject to appeal. ❑ Credit Voueher (for developer-built required public unprovements, subject to approval, complerion, and acceptance of creditable improvements.) PLEASE NOTE: TDT Credits must be redeemed at the time TDT Payment is due, either at the time the building permit is issued or,if payment is deferred,prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. If you expect to claun TDT Credits be sure the improvements,any creditable payments, and your claim for Credits are complete either before your building permit is to be issued or,if payment is deferred, before you request an occupancy permit. No refund of TDT Payments will be made if Credits are submitted more than 30 days after issuance of the relevant building or occupancy permit. ❑ "Bancroft" or Installment Payments (separate application required.) OWNER/APPLICANT OWNER/APPLICANT DATE: DATE: I:\CURPI.N\Pcrmit Cnordinamr\7'I�'1'Forms\'I'U'1'Payment Option Form OG2209AMS . � �lty Of Tiga��t i���� TDT—COUNTY��UIDE T'ILANSPORTATIC�N DE�'ELOPME�IT TAX . . .' � Rate Calculation �Xlorksheet _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT �_/ ��� �GS��/`,� DATE � 8 � Y r I�G MAILING ADDRESS �/ � J d 7L� PREPARED BY -r CITY/ZIP/ PHONE ������ �� G� 77� � PLANS CHECK#����ZQD -�d � TAX MAP# PROJECT TITLE � �U��-A p � � � � �- ����J 1/"/`�'2�T!D SITUS#ADDRESS j Z 3 c�O ��' 1 Q���r—����' i� FORMER USE(S) U#E CODE UNITS X RATE _ �OUNT DESCRIPTION/NOTES 0 Zi� / � -��9 = �9 �� r��a �� s � - � - � - TOTAL TDT,FORMER USE(S) PROPOSED USE(S) U#E CODE UNITS X �TE = TOL NT DESCRIPTION/NOTES Zi0 � '� _ � q8 . ���� � - � - � - TOTAL TDT,PROPOSED USE(S) 4 LESS TOTAL TDT,FORMER USE(S) — TDT INCREASE/(DECREASE) �-/ (INCREAS =TDT DUE) PAYMENT METHOD CASH/CHECK NO S ����5 ' - CREDIT ���v� �.S� � 1 s r-r2 BANCROFTAGREEMENT ���p�Q�'�� — Z S/�/� (PROMISSORY NOTE) �L�e���,5.�_ � DEFER TO OCCUPANCY �X/�j�3�� � ��3 7�'d I/OFS/C�/FORMS/TDT Rate Calculation Worksheet.indd(Rev.4/22/09) • Cheryl Caines From: Gary Shepherd [gary@oregonlandlaw.com] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 11:40 AM To: Cheryl Caines Subject: Sanders Cheryl — I received a copy of the City's adjustment decision. Thank you for your time and assistance. I am reviewing the status of everything involved with the original partition decision so I can discuss the matter with my client and make sure he is comfortable with everything. I still have a concern with the conflicting conditions regarding the timing of tree planting on parcel 2, as reflected in our notice of appeal. If I could receive a letter on that issue from the City, it would make me more comfortable. After I take care of these few things and the adjustment appeal period expires, the partition appeal should be dismissed. Thanks. Gary (:ar�� N tihepherd ,�.�.;; Lq�� :lttorne� �C � ?I�`SE Salmon Strect � Ponlar�d.Orrgan�►721a � � ': • � TEL rSot��zi_��m� !�, F,qt(SUi�vIJ��1�7J t~. �'��� S f R��` Ran a orc�mlamlu�w.�om --__ -__ - ������ar�g�nlandla+�com NOTICE: DO NOT read, copy or disseminate this e-mail message unless you are the intended recipient. The information contained in this e-mail message is privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure, and any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you think you have received this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the sender at �y(a�oregonlandlaw.com or call (503) 233-1985. i Cheryl Caines From: Cheryl Caines Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 4:48 PM To: 'Gary Shepherd' Subject: RE: Sanders Gary, I had not scheduled it yet since it was unclear if you were moving forward or not. I must give 21 days notice for a public hearing. It looks like we could schedule for Sept 28`h, if you want to move ahead. Please let me know so I can schedule the Hearing's Officer and send out the notice. Cheryl From: Gary Shepherd [mailto:gary@oregonlandlaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 4:36 PM To: Cheryl Caines Subject: RE: Sanders Thanks Cheryl—I will consider that a resolved issued. 1 am going over all the paperwork with my client and will hopefully have an answer for you next week on the dismissal of the appeal. Can you please remind me when the appeal hearing was scheduled for in September, as I do not want to create scheduling conflicts for the City. Gary -----Original Message----- From: Cheryl Caines [mailto:cherylc@tigard-or.gov] Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 3:18 PM To: 'Gary Shepherd' Cc: Kim McMillan Subject: RE: Sanders Gary, I finally had a chance to speak with Kim about our conflicting conditions on street trees. We agree that planting the street trees prior to final plat for Parcel 1 and prior to final building inspection for Parcel 2 works best in this case. Please let me know if you have other questions. Cheryl i From: Gary Shepher� _ .►ailto:gary@oregonlandlaw.com] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 11:40 AM To: Cheryl Caines Subject: Sanders Cheryl— I received a copy of the City's adjustment decision. Thank you for your time and assistance. I am reviewing the status of everything involved with the original partition decision so I can discuss the matter with my client and make sure he is comfortable with everything. I still have a concern with the conflicting conditions regarding the timing of tree planting on parcel2, as reflected in our notice of appeal. If I could receive a letter on that issue from the City, it would make me more comfortable. After I take care of these few things and the adjustment appeal period expires, the partition appeal should be dismissed. Thanks. Gary .- � l.a,�; ., (;ar�• 1'. tihepherd ,-v� �� :'luornev ��-y ;i��s�s:���st� O � Punland.Or�gon`�721a � � � : TF L��c�:�±::.��JK� � h FA\;i��;p��la.i�J'J �e. q� ;: `'"i f- �r R.�� �� Ran a orc�mlanAlua.cum . ������nrce.�nfandla+�com NOTICE: DO NOT read, copy or disseminate this e-mail message unless you are the intended recipient. The information contained in this e-mail message is privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure, and any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you think you have received this e-mail message in error, please e- mail the sender at �uy�a�oreponlandlaw.com or call (503) 233-1985. z � Cheryl Caines From: Cheryl Caines Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 11:21 AM To: 'Gary Shepherd' Cc: Gus Duenas; Kim McMillan Subject: RE: Sanders Attachments: D00090109.pdf; D00090109.pdf Gary, Attached are the Tree Deed Restriction and Restrictive Covenant fornis that you requested. Cheryl From: Gary Shepherd [mailto:gary@oregonlandlaw.com] Sent: Tuesday, September O1, 2009 9:15 AM To: Cheryl Caines Subject: Sanders Cheryl— I am inquiring about obtain documents related to the conditions of approval for the Sanders partition decision. Specifically, does the City have standard forms it uses for 1) the tree deed restriction language (#5) and 2) for the restrictive covenant (non-remonstrance) agreement for future improvements (#13). If so, could you forward that to me for my review? Thanks. Gary ����L��, GHn• P. �hepherd .� � �f Attornt� ���'� i I:i 5E Salrnon Strr�t Or I':��lland.Ort�oh`�7?I�+ :r, • . • TEL��u;�:;3.i�m� ';`.. :o �", FA�lci�>;�91�•�N7� �`C•q�- s t���c , �an a urc�la�xllaw.cum _ ���ti��on-�onlzndla��com NOTICE: DO NOT read, copy or disseminate this e-mail message unless you are the intended recipient. The information contained in this e-mail message is privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure, and any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you think you have received this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the sender at �aryja�oregonlandlaw.com or call (503) 233-1985. i Q,�-;�;�-�.a.� u�-� " S e-r�f -b�i a-n n e� . " Community Development t--l��s�- � ��a/6 q � Request for Permit Action TO: CITY OF TIGARD Building Division Services Coordinator 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 Phone: 503.718.2430 Fax: 503.598.1960 www.tigard-or.gov FROM: ❑ Owner ❑ Applicant ❑ Contractor � City Staff (check one)• REFUND OR Name: Oregon Land Law,L.L.C. INVOICE TO• (�US;°«,or Ina����a��i� Mailuig Address: 3115 SE Salmon St. City/State/Zip: Pordand, OR 97214 Phone No.: 503-233-1985 PLEASE TAKE ACTION FOR THE ITEM(S) CHECKED (✓): � CANCEL PERMIT APPLICATION. � REFUND PERMIT FEES (attach receipt,if available). ❑ INVOICE FOR FEES DUE (attach case fee schedule and explain below). ❑ REMOVE CONTRACTOR FROM PERMIT (do not cancel permit). Permit #: MLP2009-00001 Site Address or Parcel #: 12390 SW 106�h DT. Project Name: Sanders Minor Land Paruuon Subdivision Name: Lot #: EXPLANATION: 'The applicant is withdrawing his appeal (see attached letter). Please xefund 100% of the appeal fee ($250.00). Signature: LA,�.r�-� Date: � ' 8 —d `j Cheryl Ca� es Print Name: R��,nd noli�� 1. The Director or Building Official may authonze the refund oE a) any fee wMch�vas enoneously paid or collected. b) not more than 80%of the land use applicanon fec when an application is withdra�vn or cancelcd before any re�-ic�v effort has been espended. c) not more than 80°�0 of the land use appGeation fee for issued permits. d) not more than 80°�0 oE the building plan re�-ie�v fec when an application is canceled before any plan re�•iew effort has been e�pended. e) not more than 80°%of the building perrnit fce for issued permits prior to any inspection rcyucsts. 2 lZcfund��vill bc rcturncd t�>th��nrifpnal Payer in thc,amc mc[h��d in�ahich Pa��mcnt�ca,cccciccd Plcasc allo�v 1-2 wccks for proccssing rcfunds. � ' � � Kte to S�s_1dn�in: I�.ue I3�� Rte to Bld _�dmin: Date Bv Refund Processed: Date B Invoice Processed: Date B Pernut Canceled: i�ate B Parcel Ta ,�dded: Date B Recei t# Date �lethod :lmount$ I:\Building\I�orms\RcyYcrrnitAccion.doc Rc��07/2G/07 0� LA.1�r� � � � • � �� � O � . . 3115 SE Salmon Street �� cw� RECEfII�D PLANNfNG Portland,Oregon 97214 �L SER�l �� SEP 0 S 2ppg (503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX &CONSULTATION ClTY OF TIGARD gary��Oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL September 4, 2009 Cheryl Caines, Associate Planner Community Development Department City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Sanders Minor Land Partition File No. MLP2009-00001 REQUEST TO DISMISS APPEAL Dear Ms. Caines: This office represents Steven Sanders. This letter constitutes Mr. Sander's request to dismiss his notice of appeal. A notice of appeal was filed on 7/7/09. The appeal was filed as a precautionary matter and to allow time to satisfy and resolve conditions of partition approval. The conditions at issue have since been resolved. An appeal fee of$250.00 was previously remitted. If permissible, since no appeal hearing was scheduled, applicant requests the return of all or a portion of the appeal fee. I thank you for your assistance in processing this application. Sincerely, ,-, ' �' � _� _ Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client � �i�y ���'ig���, �x�go� > ��1z���✓��u�lti�. �� �r� , Q� a���.� �� v . � �. October 2, 2009 . _ Oregon Land Law, LLC 3115 SE Salmon St. Pocdand, OR 97214 Attn: Gary� P. Shepherd Re: Permit No. MLP2009-00001 Dear Mr. Shepherd: The Ciry of Tigard has canceled the above referenced permit(s) and enclose a refund for the following: Site Address: 12390 SW 106`'' Dr. Project Name: Sanders Minor Land Partiuon ' Job No.: Refund: � Check #101039 in the amount of�250.00. ❑ Credit card "return" receipt in the amount of$ . ❑ Trust account "deposit" receipt in the amount of$ . Notes: Applicant has withdrawn appeal. Refund 100%of application fee. If you have anj� c�uesuons please contact me at 503.718.2430. Sincerely, /�����'! ✓����"�'—.- Dianna Howse Ruilding Division Sen�ices Super��isor Enc. I:\Building\Refunds\Adminisvation\LtrRefund-CancelPermitdoc Ol/1G/07 Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 = �� City of Tigard . . � Accela Refund Request "I�his f�,rm i. used for refund requests of land use, engineering and building application fccs. Receipts, documentation and the Reguest for Permit 1�rtion or Refund form (if applicable) must be actached to this form. Refund requests are due to Accela System Administrator by Friday at 5:00 PM for processing each Monday. Accounts Pa}'able will route refund checks to Accela S��stem Adininistrator for distribution. Please allow 1-2 weeks for processing. PAYABLE TO: Oregon Land La��, LLC DATE: ��2���� 3115 SE Salmon St. Pordand, OR 97?14 REQUESTED BY: Dianna Howse Attn: Gary P. Shepherd CAC TRANSACTION INFORMATION: Receipt #: 174269 Case #: I��.P2009-00001 Date: 7/7/09 Address/Parcel: 12390 SW 106�h Dr. Pa�� Method: Check Project Name: Sanders Minor Land Partiuon EXPLANATION: The applicant has u�ithdrawn appcal. Refund 100°��,of application fee. REFUND INFORMATION: Fee Descriprion From Receipt Revenue Account No. Refund Exam le: ULLD Pernut Fee Exam le: 245-0000-432000 $Amount A eal DD to HO 1003](10--�3116 �?�(1,(�0 TOTAL REFUND: $250.00 APPROVALS: IE under$500 Professional Staff _��...-----,, �_ r f f" If under$7,500 Division Manager � ��.�� ��_._ �_ If under$22,500 Department I�fanager .��^ If under$50,000 City Manager If over$50,000 Local Contract Re�•iew�Board FOR ACCELA SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY Refund Re uest Re��ie���ed: Date: ='��=, =;F, �; ���. �:'*y�j=�_ Case Refund Processed: llate: /'> > p �' g��; I:\Building\Refunds\RefundRequest.doc 04/13/09 . '� Community Development , , Request for Permit Action TO: CITY OF TIGARD Building Division Services Coordinator 13125 SW Hall Bl�-d.,'1'igard,OR 972?3 Phone: 503.718?430 Fa�: 503.598.19G0 www.tigard-or.go�- FROM: ❑ Owner � :lpplicant ❑ Contractor � Citv Staff ��h�����,,,��) REFUND OR Name: Oregon Land Law,L.L.C. INVOICE TO• (�U,�n�,.����n��;,��,�.��� Mailing rlddress: 3115 SE Salmon St. City/State/Zip: Pordand, OR 97214 Phone No.: 503-233-1985 PLEASE TAKE ACTION FOR THE ITEM(S) CHECKED (✓): � CANCEL PERI�7IT APPLIC,ITION. r- � � REFUND PERMIT FEES (attach receipt,if available). f�P�'Pa� -Kk o � �� . ❑ INVOICE FOR FEES DUE (attach case fee schedule and explain below). ❑ REMOVE CONTRACTOR FROM PE�TIT (do not cancel permit). Permit #: MLP2009-00001 Site r,ddress or Parcel #: 12390 SW 106`h Dr. Project Name: Sanders Minor Land Partition Subdivision Name: Lot #: EXPLANATION: 'I'he applicant is withdrawing his appeal (see attached letter). Please refund 100% of the appeal fee ($250.00). Signature: �Y�-�/ Date: �I ' 8 —d `� Cheryl Cai es Print Name: xcr'un�1>olic� 1. "1'hc llircctor��r Building Official inay authorizc thc rcfund of: a) any fcc which was cnoncously paid or collcctcd. b) not morc than 80°�„of thc land usc a�plication fcc�vhcn an apPlication is withdrawn or canccled bcfore any re�•ic�c cffort has been expendcd. c) not morc than 8U°o of thc land usc aPplication fcc for issurd pcmtits. d) not mom[han 81W<�of[hc building plan rccic���fcc�vhcn an aPplicatinn is eanccicd bcforc anv plan recicw effort has Uccn c�pcndcd. c) not mnre than lifl"„of thc buildin};Pcrmit fcc fnr issucJ Pcrmit,Pn��r u�am ins(+cetion rcyucsts. �. KrtiinJ.��ill l�r n�iurnc�i i���hc��nqm�.tl 1'.iccr in ihc sim��m��ih�nl�n�chirh t�.�cmrni�c�u r��cricr�l- I'lr.uc�all���c I-�n�cck.�r,r�rur�::in�rc�un�3.. � � � � Rt� tc�ti��, .ldmin: I�atc li� �� Rte t�>$ti1�.Admin: l�atelG �' �"�� 13�� ;.�_+:> Refund Processed: llate B� In�-oice Processed: llate � B�- Permit Canccicd: Datc B• Parccl Ta .lddcd: Datc Bv Recei t# Date �fethod _lmount$ 1:\Building\I�orms\RcyVcmtit:\ction.doc Rc�-07/2G/07 �p1`� L�� ' � � • o � � O � . . RECEIVED P�ANNiNG orti dE Oregon 97214 � ��A L S ER��G� SEP 0 8 2ppg (503)233-1985 TEL LEGAL SERVICES (503)914-0474 FAX &CONSULTATION gary@oregonlandlaw.com EMAIL CITY OF TIGARD September 4, 2009 Cheryl Caines, Associate Planner Community Development Department City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Sanders Minor Land Partition File No. MLP2009-00001 REQUEST TO DISMISS APPEAL Dear Ms. Caines: This office represents Steven Sanders. This letter constitutes Mr. Sander's request to dismiss his notice of appeal. A notice of appeal was filed on 7/7/09. The appeal was filed as a precautionary matter and to allow time to satisfy and resolve conditions of partition approval. The conditions at issue have since been resolved. An appeal fee of$250.00 was previously remitted. If permissible, since no appeal hearing was scheduled, applicant requests the return of all or a portion of the appeal fee. I thank you for your assistance in processing this application. Sincerely, �' r-�, —._ , C_ .: � _-� Gary P. Shepherd Oregon Land Law CC: client City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 S�Hall Blvd. • TZg�. , OR 97223 �� . � .:� v .>� � �� r ��.� - G r �a---. i __ ,���,.,—. June 28, 2010 Mr. &MYS. Steven Sanders 2647 SW Talbot Rd. Pordand, OR 97201 RE: Subdivision case number: MLP2009-0000�� Mr. &Mrs. Sanders: On April 27, 2010 the Tigard City Council passed an ordinance to amend the TigaYd Community Development Code (TDC) chapters 18.360 Site Development Review, 18.420 Land PaYtirions, and 18.430 Subeiivisions. The approved amendments were in response to the economic downtutn. Automatic extensions were gxanted to these three types of land use cases that would expire during a certain time fYame. Our records indicate that you received appYOVal for a Minor Land Partition (MLP) that may have been affected by this code amendment (see case number above). If your approved MLP has a lapsing date between July 1, 2008 and December 31, 2011, then the approval is automatically extended through December 31, 2012. The new approval pexiod will lapse after this date if: 1) the partition has not been recorded or has been improperly recorded with Washington County without the satisfactory completion of all conditions attached to the approval; or 2) the final recording is a departure from the approved plan. No action is required on your part for the extension because it is automatic. A copy of this letter will be placed in the land use file. A copy of the orclinance with adopted language for Land Partitions is enclosed. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the extension or code amendment, please contact me at (503) 718-2437 or cher,�(a�tigard-or.gov. Sincerely, C�� C�� Cheryl Caines Associate Planner Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 . . . � � City of Tigard '1'hursda�-, October 18, 2012 Ste�-en W. Sanders and I3arbara S�vanson-Sanders 2647 SW'I'albot Road Pc�rtland, OR 97201 RI�.: NOTICE OF F1PIR:1'I'I(�N OH'L_1ND USF .�PPROV.�L. Project Type: �linor I,and Partition Project Name: �andcrs Partition Project Number: �1I.P2009-000O1 Tax Lot Number: 251031�1�-1916 Expiration Date: December 31, 2012 Dear 1'roperty Owners: '1'he purpose of this letter is to serve as a courtes}� remindcr that the l.,and Use ��ppro�ral listed above �vill expire at close of business, 1�londa��, December 31, 2012. In recognition of the effects of the economic do�vnturn, th� 'I'i�;ard Cin� Council passed De��elopment Code 1�mendment (DC.�) 2010-00001 on .lpril 27, 2010�to e�tend unul December 31, 2012 the Land Use .�ppro��als for Sitc De�-clopmcnt Re�-iews and �linor Land Partiti�ns that otherwise �vould ha��e ea�ired behveen JulS� 1, 2O�R and December 31, 2�11. 'I'his is incorporated in 'I"igard �lunicipal Code 18.420.030.D.2 which states that "1�ppro�-al periods for land partitions lapsing bettveen July 1, 2008 and December 31, 2011 shall be automatically extended through December 31, 2012. No further estensions �vill be granted." .�ccordin� to our records, }�our original appro��al for the abo�-e project would ha�-e e�pired during that Jul�� 1, 2008 — I�ecember 31, 2011 period and that appro�-al �vas, therefore, e�tended b}• DC1�2010-00001 until December 31, 2012. No further e�tension is a�-ailablc. You can secure ��our I,and Use .1�pro�-al against etpiration if��ou submit a Yecorded final plat to this office prior to close ��f business, 1�londa}-, I�ecember 31, 2012. Please let us know if you anticipate submittin� a recorded plat. Sinccr° , , .�1 ert Shields Pro�ram Dc�-elopment �pecialist 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov