The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 01/22/2013 TIGARD City of Tigard TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING January 22, 2013 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED I:1Design & Communications \Donna \City Council \ccpkt3 1211c CI VT u_11 nl__i - •r+• 1 n .. - - -- - -- -- - . :7111 City of Tigard Tigard City Council Meeting Agenda TIGARD January 22, 2013 6:30 p.m. • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss labor negotiations and real property transaction negotiations under ORS 192.660(2)(d) and (e). All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. • STUDY SESSION (approximately 7:20 p.m.) Administrative Items: - Cities of Honor (airport ceremony) is scheduled for mid -day, probably around noon on May 16, 2013. - Council Calendar: January 29 — Special Council Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Red Rock Creek Conference Room February 5 — City Center Development Agency Meeting and Special Council Meeting — 6:30 p.m. February 12 -- Joint Meeting with City of Beaverton City Council — City of Tigard will host at Tigard Town Hall — 6:30 p.m. light dinner; 7 p.m. meeting. February 19 -- Tigard City Council Workshop Meeting — Tigard Town Hall — 6:30 p.m. February 26 -- Tigard City Council Business Meeting — Study Session, 6:30 p.m. in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room; Business Meeting, 7:30 p.m. in the Town Hall. January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 1 7:30 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING — JANUARY 22, 2013 A. Call to Order — Mayor Cook B. Roll Call: Mayor Cook to ask City Recorder Wheatley to call the roll. C. Pledge of Allegiance: Mayor Cook to ask for everyone to stand and join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. D. Council Communications & Liaison Reports: Mayor Cook to ask City Councilors for communications and liaison reports. Longer reports might be held over to be discussed at the end of the meeting— Agenda Item No. 8. E. Call to Council and Staff for Non - Agenda Items — (Non items to be discussed at Agenda Item No. 9) 7:35 p.m. — time is estimated. 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION A. Follow -up to Previous Citizen Communication — Report from City Manager Wine. B. Tigard High School Student Envoy — Associated Student Body President Megan Risinger (p ronounced "rice -n grrr') has a basketball game tonight. The Envoy report will be given by Associated Student Body Human Relations Officer Courtney Bither (pronounced bye- ther). C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce — Debi Mollahan, Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce Chief Executive officer. D. Citizen Communication — Mayor to call upon people who have signed in to speak to the City Council on a topic that is not on tonight's agenda. Speakers are asked to keep their remarks to about two to five minutes. If a large number of speakers have signed up, the Mayor might ask speakers to keep their comments closer to two minutes. January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 2 7:45 p.m. — time is estimated. Mayor Cook will review the items listed on the consent agenda: 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: A. Approve City Council Meeting Minutes for: 1. October 23, 2012 2. December 11, 2012 B. Approve Ten -Year Extension of the Broadband Users Group Intergovernmental Agreement • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items that do not need discussion. Mayor Cook to ask for a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilor: `7 move for approval of the Consent Agenda." Councilor: `7 second the motion." Mayor Cook: Is there any discussion on the motion? If there is no discussion the Mayor will ask for all who agree with the motion to signi by saying "Aye." For all who are opposed to the motion, the Mayor will ask they sign by saying 'Nay." After the vote, the Mayor announces the outcome of the vote: Sample wording suggestions: `The motion is approved by a unanimous vote." Or, `The motion is approved by a majority vote — 4 voting in favor and 1 opposed." Or, `The motion fails by a majority vote." 7:50 p.m. — time is estimated. Mayor Cook announces Agenda Item No. 4: 4. APPROVE PURCHASE OF THE BAGAN PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO COMPLETE THE PROPERTY PURCHASE - RESOLUTION Mayor asks for the staff report: Parks Facilities Manager Steve Martin (Public Works Department) will give the staff report. Assistant Public Works Director Rager will also be present. Mayor asks for council discussion /questions. The request by staff is for the City Council to consider a resolution. Below is a suggested script if the council decides to consider a motion to approve the proposed resolution. January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 3 Council Member: I move for adoption of Resolution No. 13 -01 Council Member: I second the motion Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the resolution? City Recorder: RESOLUTION NO. 13 -01 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF THE BAGAN PROPERTY, (TAX LOT 15135BD01400), AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY AC I TON TO COMPI FIE THE PROPERTY PURCHASE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion) All those in favor of adopting Resolution No. 13 -01, please say "aye." Mayor /Councilors (respond if in favor) Mayor: All those opposed to adopting Resolution No. 13 -01 please say "nay." Mayor /Councilors (respond if opposed) Mayor: Resolution No. 13 -01 (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Note: Tie votes = failure to pass. January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 4 8:00 p.m. - time is estimated Mayor Cook announces Agenda Item No. 5 and reads the title and description of the bearing (Mayor could opt to have someone else read the hearing description): 5. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING - ANNEXATION OF RIVER 1 ERRACE PHASE H (URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AREA 63 AND ROY ROGERS WEST) APPLICANT: Multiple applicants PROPOSAL: A request to annex to the City of Tigard approximately 268 acres of property (Metro Urban Growth Boundary expansion areas 63 and Roy Rogers West (including adjacent rights -of -way). LOCATION: Multiple parcels generally located east of SW Roy Rogers Road, west of SW 150th Avenue and north of SW Beef Bend Road and portions of SW Roy Rogers and SW 150th Avenue rights -of -way. Washington County Tax Assessors Map (WCFM) 2510700, Tax Lots 1200 and 1400. WCTM 2510800, Tax Lots 1400, 1401, 1402, 1403, 1404, 1405, 1406, 1500, 1501, 1503, 1504, 1505, 1506, 1507, 2900, 2901, 3000, 3100, and 3200. WC TM M 2S 108CA, Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, and 400. WCTM 25108CD, Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, and 400. COUNTY ZONE: FD20 Future Development, 20 -acre minimum lot side. The FD20 District applies to the unincorporated urban lands added to the urban growth boundary by Metro through a Major or Legislative Amendment process after 1998. The FD20 District recognkes the desirability of encouraging and retaining limited interim uses until the urban comprehensive planning for future urban development of these areas is complete. The provisions of this district are also intended to implement the requirements of Metros Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. EFU Exclusive Farm Use. The intent of the Exclusive Farm Use District is to preserve and maintain commercial agricultural land within the County. The purpose of the Exclusive Farm Use District is to preserve and maintain agricultural lands for farm use consistent with existing and future needs for agricultural products, forests and open spaces; to conserve and protect scenic resources; to maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the County and to establish criteria and standards for farm use and related supportive uses which are deemed appropriate. This EFU District is provided to meet the Oregon statutory and administrative rule requirements. EQUIVALENT CITY ZONE: Annexation areas will retain current Washington County honing until Tigard honing is applied with the future adoption of a communiy plan for the area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are described in Communiy Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Goal 1, Goal 11, Goal 12, and Goal 14; ORS Chapter 222; Metro Code Chapter 3.09. a. Open Public Hearing- Mayor b. Statement by Ci y Attorney Regarding Procedure c. Declarations or Challenges Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 5 Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? d. Staff Report. Community Development Staff e. Public Testimony Proponents Opponents Rebuttal /Final argument by applicant Staff Recommendation g. Close Public Heating— Mayor Cook closes the public hearing. h. Council Discussion and Consideration: Mayor asks if there is a motion to approve the proposed ordinance. Example script follows. Ordinances must be considered by a roll -call vote and the title and number of the ordinance must be read unless a member of the council requests the ordinance to be read in full. (Section 35 of the Charter) Council Member: I move for adoption of Ordinance No. 13 -01 Council Member: I second the motion Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the ordinance? City Recorder: ORDINANCE NO. 13 -01- AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING 268.14 ACRES OF LAND, INCLUDING TWENTY-NINE (29) PARCELS AND ADJACENT RIGHTS OF WAY; APPROVING THE RIVER TERRACE ANNEXATION— PHASE II (ZCA2012- 00003). Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): Will the City Recorder please conduct a roll -call vote of Council? City Recorder: Conducts a roll -call to record votes of Council members. Mayor: Ordinance No. 13 -01 (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Note: Tie votes = failure to pass. January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 6 8:10 p.m. — time is estimated Mayor Cook announces Agenda Item No. 6: 6. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING - SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FY 2013 ADOPTED BUDGET • Open Public Heating— Mayor Cook • Hearing Procedures — This is an informational public hearing in which any person shall be given the opportunity to comment. • Staff Report: Finance e Information Services Department • Public Testimony o Proponents o Opponents o Staff Response to Testimony • Staff Recommendation • Council Discussion /Questions • Close Public Hearing— Mayor Cook • Council consideration: Proposed resolution. (Script follows if the council chooses to consider the proposed resolution.) Council Member: 1 move for adoption of Resolution No. 13 -02 Council Member: I second the motion Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the resolution? City Recorder: RESOLUTION NO. 13 -02 - A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FY 2013 TO ACHIEVE THE FOLLOWING: ADJUSTMENTS TO THE CAPITAL IMROVEMENT PLAN, CITY OPERATIONS IN POLICE, COURT, AND CITY RECORDER, AND NON - APPROPRIATION ITEMS. Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion) All those in favor of adopting Resolution No. 13 -02, please say "aye Mayor /Councilors _ _ (respond if in favor) Mayor: All those opposed to adopting Resolution No. 13 -02 please say "nay." Mayor /Councilors (respond if opposed) Mayor: Resolution No. 13 -02 (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Note: Tie votes = failure to pass. January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 7 8:30 p.m. — time is estimated Mayor Cook announces Agenda Item No. 7: 7. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE URBAN FORESTRY CODE REVISIONS ADMINISTRATIVE RULE PROCESS The administrative rulemaking procedure is described in Tigard Municipal Code Section 2.04.070, and includes notice to both council and the public. Staff formally notified council of the proposed administrative rules on December 13, 2012. Councilors Woodard and Henderson both notified City Manager Marty Wine by the deadline that they desire to put the administrative rules for discussion as part of the next available council agenda. Public notice of the administrative rules discussion was sent on January 7, 2013. Council is scheduled to discuss the administrative rules on January 22, 2013 and, if needed, on Februay 5, 2013. • Open Public Hearing— Mayor Cook • Hearing Procedures — This is an informational public hearing in which any person shall be given the opportunity to comment. • Staff Report:: Finance & Information Services Department • Public Testimony o Proponents o Opponents o Staff Response to Testimony • Staff Recommendation • Council Discussion/ Questions • Close Public Hearing— Mayor Cook • Council consideration of two actions requested by staff (or continue hearing to February 5, 2013): Action 1. Motion: Direct the City Manager to approve the administrative rules proposed in the Urban Forestry Manual: Council Member: I move that the City Manager is hereby directed to approve the administrative rules proposed in the Urban Forestry Manual. Council Member: I second the motion. Mayor Cook: Is there any discussion on the motion? If there is no discussion the Mayor will ask for all who agree with the motion to signift by saying "Aye." For all who are opposed to the motion, the Mayor will ask they signi0 by saying 'Nay." After the vote, the Mayor announces the outcome of the vote: Sample wording suggestions: `The motion is approved by a unanimous vote." Or, `The motion is approved by a majority vote — 4 voting in favor and 1 opposed" Or, `The motion jails by a majority vote." Action 2. Consider a resolution to amend the Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule. Council Member: I move for adoption of Resolution No. 13 -03 Council Member: I second the motion January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 8 Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the resolution? City Recorder: RESOLUTION NO. 13 -03 - A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE CITYWIDE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE AS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 12 -22 TO INSTITUTE NEW AND REVISED FEES NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE URBAN FORESTRY CODE REVISIONS PROJECT. Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion) All those in favor of adopting Resolution No. 13 -03, please say "aye." Mayor /Councilors (respond if in favor) Mayor: All those opposed to adopting Resolution No. 13 -03 please say "nay." Mayor /Councilors (respond if opposed) Mayor: Resolution No. 13 -03 (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Note: Tie votes = failure to pass. S. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9. NON AGENDA ITEMS 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 9:30 — time is estimated 11. ADJOURNMENT January 22, 2013 Council Meeting Page 9 Tigard High School Agenda Student Envoy: Courtney Bither (ASB Human Relations) Meeting: January 22, 2013 Recent: Friday December 21 - THS Canned Food Drive collected 5, 800 pounds of food for the St. Vincent De Paul Food Pantry. Friday January 11 — Tigard Boys and Girl Basketball beat Tualatin in the "Battle of the Beasts" This Week: Monday January 21 — Martin Luther King Jr. Day — No School Friday January 25 - Semester Ends — Half Day of school Monday January 28 — Staff In- service Day — No school Tuesday January 29 — Second Semester Begins Future: Sunday February 17 — Senior Citizens Dance 1 -3 pm in THS Cafeteria February 11 -15 — Human Rights Week Wednesday February 13 — National Honor Society Blood Drive 8am —1 pm in THS gym SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR ) /Q /au ► 3 (DATE OF MEETING) C tYY) u n - CGTiI,tThn s Good Morning Tigard (GMT)— Business Networking — 7:30- 9:00am - FREE • 1/24/13 — Core Chiropractic • 9735 SW Shady Ln #303 Tigard, OR 97223 • (503) 684 -1273 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET • 1/31/13 - Burgerville FOR 0 I 3 • At their location on Pacific Highway (DATE OF MEETING) • 2/7/13 — The Superior Group, location TBD rs Corn man ?6i Other Chamber Events Tigard Young Professionals has launched o Evening networking 1 Tuesday 6 -8 p.m. o Breakfast of Champions 4 Tuesday 8 -9 a.m. — Education and Breakfast Washington County Chambers of Commerce /Legislators Reception Wednesday, January 30, 2013 5:00 - 7:00 P.M. The Stockpot Boiler, 8200 SW Scholls Ferry Rd., Beaverton, OR 97008 Lunch Local, 2nd & 4th Wed 11:45 - 1:00 - No Host January 23rd Burgerville February 13th House of Bread - NEW MEMBER Now accepting Scholarship Applications for Tigard Chamber /Pride Disposal scholarships. • Must live or go to school in 97223/4 zip codes, plan to pursue career in business or non - profit sector, have volunteer or work experience. — Download an application from the Scholarship Application icon on the chamber website at tigardchamber.org. Will be awarded at Tigard Shining Stars Community Awards Celebration Friday 4/26/13. Coming soon, request for award nominations for Tigard First Citizen, From the Heart Volunteer Award and a Youth Volunteer award. Stay tuned to the Tigard Chamber website and other media outlets Quick Connections 2/14/13 — 7 -9 a.m. Embassy Suites Multi- Chamber fast paced networking Tigard's Third Tuesday, After Hours — 02/19/13 @ Burgerville 5 -6:30 p.m. their location Bowl -o -Rama- Saturday 3/2/13 — Tigard Bowl, come strike up some new friendships For more about these and other events, go to http : / /business.tigardchamber.org /events /calendar/ To sign up for our newsletter, e-mail info @tigardchamber.org and put newsletter in the subject line Find us on Facebook & Twitter at tigardchamber and Linkedln Group and Company Tigard Chamber IGARD AREA 1111 (Please keep remarks to around 2 -5 minutes. If a large number of citizens have signed in, the Mayor may ask that testimony be kept to around 2 minutes.) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: J No ,y Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will L o 1 r ki P help the presiding officer pronounce: Address Yo 'Co C o . ✓4 L f ( City 1 2f 1- bag State Zip I d 8 Phone No. Cr k3 7 ?-o - Y7 33 Name: Ka t a e N c N o 2 g - Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address 1 Oq 0 4 r-44°c F4-- City W� i USN ti State (As Zip ° C - 20(t, Nt? Phone No. 3 /2-D Name: 6 ACt r ∎ V iowk0 V\ Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address xpl e4 City tl`) e Sk r\ h (410 I State Zip Phone No. SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET January 22, 2013 FOR 1 /dam) QC') 3 (DATE OF MEETING) City Commissioners, Mayor of Tigard. Thank you for hearing me today. f i - , C3 Corp/nun My name is Karlene Norby and I live on Kenthorpe Way in West Linn. c at-LzYts I am here today to express my disappointment in statements made to the West Linn City Council by Gretchen Buehner last week. Here is a picture of her testifying. Ms. Buehner's testimony was sarcastic and I found her hostile statements very disturbing. She said quote: "I'm concerned about the overwhelming public opposition to the LOT project. I am also sorry for the 1,000 citizens who have been duped into signing a petition ". She also states "The problem is the opinions of the opponents are demonstratively false opinions, and are not relevant to the code that governs land use process." Does she think we don't have a brain? Is this how Gretchen treats her citizens of Tigard? Now granted, I am not an attorney, nor am I schooled in all the governing city codes. However, I am a citizen in West Linn and I live in a quiet, peaceful neighborhood. I want to protect my tranquil residence, and protect my property values. I want to protect my rights and pursuit of happiness — which have been threatened. LOT has been denied the application to build. The LOTWP permit denial came from our educated Planning Commissioners. They were using facts, not opinions. The vote was 7 -0, a UNANIMOUS VOTE to deny LOTs application. Ms. Buehner, are you discrediting our Planning Commissioners when they were following our city codes? Gretchen, if it is your passion to find a water source please rely on the available water Wilsonville and Portland would love to sell. They have told us they have adequate water supply for Tigard. This is fact. Also, it will be a whole lot less expensive, and your citizens, won't have to pay 2 or 3 times as much for their water JUST to satisfy your vanity. Better yet, if it is truly your passion, then build a water treatment plant next door to your home. Thank you for hearing my concern about Gretchen Buehner discrediting my fellow citizens. Karlene Norby 4040 Kenthorpe Way West Linn Or 97068 z SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET ,. , POK � ; 1 .2 � y L� �'►, L �1 / 7 /4- yN (DATE OF MEETING) i/121, -) , -3 ,., o r , 1 n 4 , , i _ ,, rig i : ' 1 r 4 It C :le 111 CITY OF yr r IL , , est 1 a v,, lotto • till ie Iii* 14,$14 _. .. 22500 Salamo t Mk «.,.- West unrt, Oregon 9l 4 :18 latajimatriiiinneleganamy 4- lk. ,. , Clary COUNCIL 3 ' rile ....---------A �• MEETING i , Monda January 14, 2013 1 ` 1 02:41:25 / 03:03 :33 5;30 - Pre - Meeting Work Session Council L � � U e e t , - Rosemont Room : .4 6:00 p.m. - Public Hearing - Council • t. Call to Order & Pledge of Allegiance Chambers • 2. Approval of Agenda h 1 A t ....6.-...- 0 zIIt t MC4aci Jr14 A. AIS -1155 3. A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01/22/2013 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Tide: Approve City Council Meeting Minutes Submitted By: Cathy Wheatley, Administrative Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Public Hearing: Publication Date: Information ISSUE Approve City Council meeting minutes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve minutes as submitted. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Minutes for the October 23 and December 11, 2012, City Council Meetings are attached. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N /A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments October 23, 2012 Council Meeting Minutes December 11, 2012 Council Meeting Minutes ■ AIS -1134 3• B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01 /22/2013 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Approve Ten -Year Extension of the Broadband Users Group Intergovernmental Agreement Prepared For: Louis Sears Submitted By: Louis Sears, Financial and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Public Hearing: No Publication Date: t ■ Information ISSUE Should the Tigard City Council extend the current Broadband User's Group (BUG) IGA for 10 years? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Extend the current BUG intergovernmental agreement (IGA) for 10 years. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The BUG is composed of 17 local government agencies. The BUG provides Internet, connections between agencies, security, monitoring and support, with each agency paying a fee according to the amount of bandwidth used. Instead of each agency needing to setup firewalls, Internet connection, and security, there is a central BUG technical team which performs these functions allowing for both a more secure Internet and reducing costs to provide the services. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The City of Tigard could leave the BUG and setup their own Internet connection, security, and multiple IGAs to access and share data with other agencies. This would require both additional hardware and staff to setup, monitor and maintain the Internet connection. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS The reauthorization of this regional agreement does not directly relate to a 2012 City Council goal. However, the efficiencies gained by the organization of the Broadband Users Group and the resulting IGA meets the Tigard City Council's overall objective of promoting the City of Tigard's interests in the region. This agreement contributes toward the financial stability goal by leveraging a successful regional model to provide Internet access and security for city computers, and maximizes internal and external assets. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Approximately January 2008 Fiscal Impact Fiscal Information: The City is already part of the BUG and this would be a 10 year extension of the IGA. The BUG maintains the Internet connection, security, and the ability to connect with other local agencies. One of the reasons for the formation of the BUG was to support smaller agencies in their ability to connect to local agencies without the need to setup their own security and maintain the Internet connection. The greatest fiscal impact on the City should the IGA not be extended would be the need to purchase equipment, configure the equipment, and enter into multiple intergovernmental agreements to contintue to access other agencies data. Attachments BUG IGA 10 Yr Ext AIS -1090 4. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01/22/2013 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Approve Purchase of the Bagan Property and Authorize the City Manager to Complete the Property Purchase Prepared For: Steve Martin Submitted By: Greer Gaston, Public Works Council Business Meeting - Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Main Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required ?: No Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the council consider a resolution: • Approving the purchase of the Bagan property as outlined in the Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions? • Authorizing the city manager to take all necessary action to complete the property purchase on behalf of the city? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In November 2010 Tigard voters passed a $17 million park bond measure. Eighty percent of park bond proceeds were dedicated to acquiring park land and open space. In late 2010 the Park and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) was tasked with evaluating more than 60 potential park properties. The Bagan property ranked near the top of the PRAB's acquisition list. The 2.9 -acre property is located at 10910 SW Greenburg Road in Tigard and is adjacent to another city-owned property. A vicinity map is attached. Approximately 1.91 acres of the property cannot be developed as they lie within the Ash Creek floodplain and adjacent wetlands. Just under one acre of the property is developable, and the zoning is R12 — medium density residential. There is an existing structure on the property; it is in "tear down" condition and has no value. If the resolution is adopted: • The property would become a publicly -owned park and open space. • The city will purchase the property for $192,000 per the terms of the Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions. This document is fairly standard and has been reviewed by the city's real estate attorney. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The council could choose not to adopt the resolution; the city would not purchase the property. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS 2012 Tigard City Council goal 1.c. - "Deliver on the promise of the voter - approved park bond by identifying all acquisition opportunities and completing the majority of park land acquisitions and improvements by the end of 2012." DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION December 6, 2012 - Via a confidential memo, the council received an update on the Bagan property negotiations in its Thursday packet. October 23, 2012 - The council authorized staff to negotiate the purchase of the Bagan property during executive session. Fiscal Impact Cost: $192,000 Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where Budgeted (department /program): CIP - Park Bond Acquisitions Additional Fiscal Notes: Based on council direction, the city negotiated the purchase with the seller. The city and the seller have agreed to a purchase price of $192,000— subject to council approval. Park bond dollars will be used to purchase the property; park land acquisition is included in the 2012 -2013 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Attachments Resolution Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions Vicinity Map AIS -705 5 Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01 /22/2013 Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes Agenda Title: Annexation Hearing for River Terrace Phase II (UGB Area 63 & Roy Rogers West) Submitted By: Cheryl Caines, Community Development Council Business Meeting - Item Type: Public Hearing - Quasi - Judicial Meeting Type: Main Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required ?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: 01/10/2013 Information ISSUE Consider adoption of an ordinance to annex approximately 268 acres of land (River Terrace Phase II) into Tigard including adjacent right of way consisting of land east of SW Roy Rogers Road and north of SW Beef Bend Road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that City Council find that the proposed annexation (ZCA2012- 00003) meets all the approval criteria as identified in Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 222, Oregon Administrative Rules 660, Metro Code Chapter 3.09, Tigard Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, and the following Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Goal 1.1; Goals 11.1, 11.2, and 11.3, Goal 12.1, and Goals 14.1 and 14.2. Staff also recommends approval of ZCA2012 -00003 by adoption of the attached ordinance. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY History Metro expanded the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) in 2002 by adding land that included UGB Expansion Areas 63 and 64, totaling approximately 449 acres. The boundary was amended again in 2011. This expansion included 49 acres known as Roy Rogers West that connect areas 63 and 64. All three of these expansion areas now make up an area known as River Terrace (see River Terrace Plan Area Map). In August 2011, Tigard City Council approved an ordinance approving an owner initiated annexation of Area 64. This proposal is to annex the remaining areas (63 and Roy Rogers West) into the city boundary. The City of Tigard is currently developing a community plan for River Terrace that will provide land use designations, development code regulations, and financing and public facility plans, which are all necessary for urban level development. This plan will be based upon the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan approved by Washington County Board of Commissioners in November 2010 (Resolution & Order 10 -105). The anticipated completion date of the River Terrace Community Plan is June 2014. As a first step in the community plan process, Tigard City Council passed an ordinance in December 2012 (ORD 12 -38) to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan map to include land use designations for the River Terrace Community Plan area that are based on recommended land uses found in the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan. The ordinance also amended Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 14: Urbanization Policies. These new policies guide the development of the River Terrace Community Plan. Proposal Information The area to be annexed is made up of 29 parcels totaling approximately 268 acres and is generally located east of SW Roy Rogers Road, west of SW 150th Avenue and north of SW Beef Bend Road (see River Terrace Phase II Annexation Map). It is contiguous to Tigard because it lies south of recently annexed Area 64. The proposed annexation also includes the adjacent portions of SW Roy Rogers and SW 150th Avenue rights -of -way. A majority of the property owners (60 percent), which represent 73 percent of the land area and 64 percent of the total assessed value, of the area submitted petitions to annex to the City of Tigard. These percentages meet what is known as the "triple majority" method of annexation, which does not require a public election. However, a public hearing before the Tigard City Council is required. The purpose of the request is to obtain urban services from the city needed to urbanize the area and provide housing and employment opportunities as envisioned by Metro when the subject area was added to the UGB in 2002 and 2011. The annexation request has been reviewed against applicable local, regional and state regulations and /or policies from the Tigard Community Development Code, Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Metro Code, Oregon Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules. The attached staff report (Attachment 4) outlines how the proposal satisfies the applicable requirements. Many of these requirements are related to servicing the River Terrace area with utilities, streets, public safety and parks /open spaces. Conceptual plans for utilities, parks and transportation facilities were part of the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan. Coordination between the city and affected agencies and jurisdictions has been important throughout this process and will continue if annexation is approved. This coordination is necessary for preparation of intergovernmental agreements and the community plan. Also annexation to the Metro and Clean Water Services boundaries will occur following annexation to the city. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council has the option to deny the annexation request. Additional findings would need to be made to support a decision to deny the request. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS The proposed annexation is not directly related to any Council goals. However, annexation of the area is required for urban level development as envisioned when the areas were brought into the Urban Growth Boundary by Metro. In addition, annexation is a necessary step in completion of the River Terrace Community Plan being developed by the city. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION None. Fiscal Impact Cost: Unknown Budgeted (yes or no): No Where Budgeted (department /program): Unkown Additional Fiscal Notes: Annexed parcels will not be assessed city taxes until the fiscal year starting July 1, 2014 which is intended to be after the adoption of the River Terrace Community Plan. Then taxes will be phased in over a three year period as outlined in Resolution 12 -38. Attachments Draft Ordinance Exhibit A - Legal Description Exhibit B - Legal Maps Exhibit C - Staff Report Annexation Area Map River Terrace Plan Area Map AGENDA ITEM No. 5 Date: January 22, 2013 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN -UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING - ANNEXATION OF RIVER TERRACE PHASE II (URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AREA 63 AND ROY ROGERS WEST) ZCA2012 -00003 APPLICANT: Multiple applicants PROPOSAL: A request to annex to the City of Tigard approximately 268 acres of property (Metro Urban Growth Boundary expansion areas 63 and Roy Rogers West (includi g adjacent rights -of -way). LOCATION: Multiple parcels generally located east of SW Roy Rogers Road, west of SW 150th Avenue and north of SW Beef Bend Road and portions of SW Roy Rogers and SW 150th Avenue rights -of -way. Washington County Tax Assessors Map (WCTM) 2510700, Tax Lots 1200 and 1400. WCTM 2510800, Tax Lots 1400, 1401, 1402, 1403, 1404, 1405, 1406, 1500, 1501, 1503, 1504, 1505, 1506, 1507, 2900, 2901, 3000, 3100, and 3200. WCTM 2S108CA, Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, and 400. WCTM 2S108CD, Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, and 400. COUNTY ZONE: FD20 Future Development, 20 -acre minimum lot size. The FD20 District applies to the unincorporated urban lands added to the urban growth boundary by Metro through a Major or Legislative Amendment process after 1998. The FD20 District recognizes the desirability of encouraging and retaining limited interim uses until the urban comprehensive planning for future urban development of these areas is complete. The provisions of this district are also intended to implement the requirements of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. EFU Exclusive Farm Use. The intent of the Exclusive Farm Use District is to preserve and maintain commercial agricultural land within the County. The purpose of the Exclusive Farm Use District is to preserve and maintain agricultural lands for farm use consistent with existing and future needs for agricultural products, forests and open spaces; to conserve and protect scenic resources; to maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the County and to establish criteria and standards for farm use and related supportive uses which are deemed appropriate. This EFU District is provided to meet the Oregon statutory and administrative rule requirements. EQUIVALENT CITY ZONE: Annexation areas will retain current Washington County zoning until Tigard zoning is applied with the future adoption of a community plan for the area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are described in Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Goal 1, Goal 11, Goal 12, and Goal 14; ORS Chapter 222; Metro Code Chapter 3.09. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony 1 /ADM /Cathy /CCSignup /QJPH 1 30122 AGENDA ITEM No. 5 Date: January 22, 2013 PLEASE PRINT Proponent — (Speaking In Favor) Opponent — (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. 1 75'33 A) IV Po- 14 4-e. 3 0 13Ca� O , g 7c06 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. • Name, Address & Phone No. When you are called to testify, please come forward to the table. Please begin your testimony by giving your name, spelling your last name, and give your full mailing address including zip code. If you represent someone else, please say so. If you have any exhibits you want us to consider, such as a copy of your testimony, photographs, petitions, or other documents or physical evidence, at the close of your comments you must hand all new exhibits to the City Recorder who will mark these exhibits as part of the record. The City staff will keep exhibits until appeal opportunities expire, and then you can ask for their return. I: \adm \cathy \cca \quasi judicial rules of procedure \rules of procedure - river terrace phase ii annexation.doc AIS -1103 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01/22/2013 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Informational Public Hearing - Supplemental Budget Amendment to FY 2013 Adopted Budget Prepared For: Toby LaFrance Submitted By: Carissa Collins, Financial and Information Services Motion Requested Council Resolution Business Public Hearing - Legislative Meeting - Item Type: Public Hearing - Informational Meeting Type: Main Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required ?: Yes Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: 01/10/2013 Information ISSUE A second quarter supplemental amendment to the FY 2013 Adopted Budget is requested. The purpose of the supplemental is to account for revenues and expenses that were unknown at the time of budget adoption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve the FY 2013 Second Quarter Supplemental Budget Amendment. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The following is a list of items that require council action for the FY 2013 Adopted Budget: A. Capital Improvement Program 1. Pavement Management Program - Additional $260,000 of funding for crack sealing and evaluation of street inventory. Paid with actual beginning fund balance that exceeds budget. 2. Park Land Acquisition - Additional $2,200,000 of funding for park land acquisition related to the $17 million parks bond. Action will also use most of the available resources in the Parks System Development Charge Fund, bringing the ending fund balance near $0. B. City Operations 3. State Farm Insurance Grant - Recognition of $5,000 grant to support the Distracted Driving Program in Police Department. 4. Municipal Court Contracted Services - Recognition on additional costs related to interpreter services and collections totaling $8,500. The additional costs in collection payments is offset with higher collections revenues. Interpreter costs will use General Fund Contingency. S.City Recorder Legal Services - Additional $6,000 of appropriations from Central Service Fund Contingency to pay for legal services due to the citizen light rail initiative and City Council referendum. 6.Vehicle Repair & Maintenance - Additional $5,648 in vehicle repairs due to accidents. Costs are reimbursed through insurance. 7. Police Vehicle Equipment - Additional $10,000 of funding is requested to outfit two new police vehicles. Funding will come from $21,000 in proceeds from vehicle trade -ins. The remaining $11,000 of unspent proceeds will add to the General Fund Reserve for Future Expenditure. C. Non - Appropriation Items 8. Sunrise Park - Move $400K of the budgeted $445K development dollars from 92020 - Sunrise Park to 92027 -Park Development. Sunrise Park development is projected to spend $45K in FY13. There is no impact on appropriations, but the allocation of the appropriations between projects is adjusted. 9. library Director - During the FY 2013 budget process, the Library Director volunteered to take a 10% reduction in pay as part of the budget reductions. At the time that the budget was adopted, this also reflected a 0.1 FIE reduction. The intent was to have the paycut only and not a reduction in hours. The Library Director has maintained her full-time schedule at the 10 percent lower pay. This action will correct the budget to match the intent and restore the Director's position from 0.9 FIE to 1.0 FTE. No additional appropriations are necessary. 10. Permit Technician Assistant - The Community Development Department hired the position at 1.0 FTE due to internal staffing reorganization; however, the position was adopted as a .80 FTE. An action is being requested for the additional .20 FTE. No additional appropriations are needed for FY 2013. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Do not approve the second quarter amendment to the FY 2013 Adopted Budget. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Financial Stability DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Fiscal Impact Cost: 4,686,648 Budgeted (yes or no): No Where Budgeted (department /program): Multiple Additional Fiscal Notes: The total impact of this action will increase the Fiscal Year 2013 Budget by $4,686,648. Although the supplemental consists of increased requirements, they are offset by additional resources including grants, insurance, equipment sales, and actual fund balance that is higher than budget. Only Item #2 negatively impacts reserves for future expenditures in the Parks Bond Fund by $900,000 and the Parks SDC Fund by $1,884,624, brining the Parks SDC Fund reserve near $0. The Exhibit -A has the details of each budgetary item. Attachment #1 summarizes the items by fund. To help the reader cross reference Attachment #1 to the Exhibit A, the page for each fund also references which items are impacting that fund. The Attachment #1 concludes with the total impact of the supplemental on all city funds. This summary for all city funds shows that the supplemental will increase the total city budget by $4,686,648 to a total of $119,848,748 and that total requirements will increase by $1,913,024 to $221,912,324. The reason that total requirements increase by less than the total budget is due to the budgeted use of reserves in the supplemental. Attachments Proposed Resolution Exhibit A Attachment #1 AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: January 22, 2013 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN -UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before the City Council on: A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FY 2013 TO ACHIEVE TH 1 4; FOLLOWING: ADJUSTMENTS TO THE CAPITAL IMROVEMEI\ T PLAN, CITY OPERATIONS IN POLICE, COURT, AND CITY RECORDER, AND NON - APPROPRATION ITEMS. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: January 22, 2013 PLEASE PRINT Proponent — (Speaking In Favor) Opponent — (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. 1 0 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. AIS- 1111 7 Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01/22/2013 Length (in minutes): 60 Minutes Agenda Title: Informational Public Hearing on the Urban Forestry Code Revisions Administrative Rules Process Submitted By: Marissa Daniels, Community Development Resolution Special Item Type: Public Hearing - Informational Meeting Type: Meeting Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required ?: No Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: 01/17/2013 Information ISSUE Should Council take the following actions to implement the Urban Forestry Code Revisions adopted on November 27, 2012? • Direct the City Manager to approve the administrative rules proposed in the Urban Forestry Manual, and • Approve a resolution to amend the Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Direct the City Manager to approve the Administrative Rules and approve a resolution to amend the Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Urban Forestry Code Revisions is a comprehensive project intended to revise and update Tigard's urban forestry regulations. In February 2010, City Council directed the Community Development Department staff to undertake this update of Tigard's urban forestry codes as an implementing action to the Urban Forestry Master Plan. The final step in this multi -year project is council's discussion of the administrative rules and Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule. Council held six public hearings on the Code Revisions package, and on November 27, 2012 adopted changes to the city's Municipal Code, Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. Materials for this meeting are divided between two categories: Urban Forestry Manual — Administrative Rules Staff has prepared several amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual based on council direction during the public hearing process. Attachment 1 details council amendments for consideration, and previous amendments. Attachment 2 is an updated version of the Manual incorporating changes approved by Council on November 27, 2012. Attachment 3 responds to Council's initial list of 47 "issues of interest" related to the administrative rules. Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule Attachment 4 describes the amendments to the Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule. Attachment 5 is the Master Fees and Charges resolution and accompanying attachments. At the January 22, 2013 meeting: • Staff will provide a brief report summarizing council amendments for consideration and proposed changes to the Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule; • Council will receive public testimony on the amendments; • Council may direct the city manager to approve, modify or reject the administrative rules. • Council consideration of the Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule resolution. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Additional time has been reserved to continue the Administrative Rules discussion to February 5, 2013. If additional time is needed, this will delay implementation of the code from March 1, 2013 to April 1, 2013. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS • Goal 1.b.i. Implement the Comprehensive Plan through code revisions, including tree code. • Comprehensive Plan Goal 2, Section 2. Tigard's Urban Forest • Urban Forestry Master Plan DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Council previously considered this matter on the following dates: • February 16, 2010 (council direction to pursue a comprehensive set of code revisions) • October 19, 2010 • November 9, 2010 • November 23, 2010 • January 25, 2011 • July 19, 2011 (staff presentation and council input on draft code revisions) •January 24, 2012 • July 10, 2012 • July 24, 2012 (first public hearing on planning commission recommended code revisions) • August 14, 2012 • September 11, 2012 • October 23, 2012 • November 13, 2012 • November 27, 2012 (adoption of Tigard Municipal Code, Development Code and Comprehensive Plan changes) Fiscal Impact Cost: N/A Budgeted (yes or no): N/A Where Budgeted (department /program): N/A Additional Fiscal Notes: The code amendments contained in the Urban Forestry Code Revisions package do not have a direct impact on the city's revenue and expenditures. Certain fees are proposed to be created and other to be adjusted. These fees, their purposes, and calculation methodologies are contained in the Resolution and its exhibits attached to this agenda item. The amount of funds collected in the Urban Forestry Fund may be affected by the proposed change from the existing "tree mitigation" fee to the proposed "tree canopy" fee. Attachments Potential Amendments Memo UFM Administrative Rules Memo Fees and Charges Memo Fees and Charges Resolution City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Tigard City Council From: Marissa Daniels, Associate Planner Re: Potential Administrative Rules Amendments Date: January 22, 2013 Hearing council's desire for additional flexibility in the Administrative Rules, staff has prepared several amendments for your consideration on January 22, 2013. Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual Throughout the public hearing process for the code, staff heard from council several additional potential revisions to the Urban Forestry Manual to be made during the administrative rules adoption process. Most of the revisions are aimed at increasing flexibility of the manual. The following table summarizes the potential revisions, the relevant sections of the manual, whether the requirement is already flexible, staff's recommendation, and the reasons for staffs recommendations. While staff recommends council limit their approval to amendments 1, 2, 5 and 7, amendments have been prepared for all 7 items. The specific text of the amendments is included on the following pages. Council will have an opportunity to ask questions of staff and deliberate on the revisions at the January 22, 2013 meeting. Requirement Potential Identified for Urban Forestry Amendment Potential Manual Already Staff Reason for Staff Number Amendment Sections flexible? Recommendation Recommendation 1 Sheet size 10.1.A, 10.2.A, No Increase flexibility Flexibility OK as long 12.3.B, 13.3.B as alternate sheet size is legible 2 Bar scale 10.1.D, 10.2.D No Increase flexibility Flexibility OK as long as alternate bar scale is legible 3 Driplines 10.1.J, K, L, No Do not increase Locating tree driplines (to scale) 10.2.H,I, 10.2.L, flexibility on site plans is a best M practice and ensures conflicts are avoided 4 Tree lists Appendices l es Do not increase Already flexible, 2 -6 flexibility applicants not limited to trees on lists 5 Tree spacing 10.2.L.1 -4, No, except Increase flexibility Allowing building and building 10.2.M.1 -5 for building setback flexibility for setbacks setbacks constrained sites is downtown OK 1 6 Tree setbacks 10.2.L.5 -8, No Do not increase Setbacks from from pavement 10.2.M.6 -9 flexibility pavement and utilities and utilities protects these infrastructure elements 7 Twice monthly 11.1.E No, except Increase flexibility OK as long as trees inspection not required are far enough away requirement when no from planned active construction activities development Previous Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual At the November 27, 2012 meeting, council adopted revisions to the Tigard Development Code and Tigard Municipal Code to implement the Urban Forestry Code Revisions. Some of the code amendments required revisions to the Urban Forestry Manual for consistency purposes. An updated version of the Urban Forestry Manual, which incorporates the revisions from the November 27, 2012 meeting is provided as part of this council packet. The revisions include: • Differentiation between residential and non residential requirements for the maintenance of trees planted with development (Urban Forestry Manual Section 11.2); • Housekeeping amendments to the tree risk assessment methodology (Urban Forestry Manual Section 1 and Appendix 1); and • Housekeeping amendment to correct the spelling of a tree's common name (Urban Forestry Manual Appendix 2). 2 Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual Potential Amendment 1: Increase flexibility on sheet size requirement. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 10, Part 1 (Urban Forestry Plan Standards — Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Requirements:) A. The plan shall be standard size D (24" x 36 "), a reduced legal ledger size (11" x 17 ") and a PDF, and include all items in part 1.B -O below. When required for clarity, the development impact area information in part 1.I may be detailed separately on multiple plan sheets provided that all of the remaining items in part 1 are included for reference. .Alternate sheet sizes may he allowed if approved by the city manager or designee. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 10, Part 2 (Urban Forestry Plan Standards — Tree Canopy Site Plan Requirements:) A. The plan shall be standard size D (24" x 36 "), a reduced legal ledger size (11" x 17 ") and PDF format, and include all items in part 2.B -O below. ,\lternate sheet sizes may he allowedif approved by the city manager or designee. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 12, Part 3 (Street Tree Soil Volume Standards — Soil Volume Plan Requirements:) B. A standard size D (24" x 36 "), a reduced legal ledger size (11" x 17 ") and a PDF soil volume plan by a registered landscape architect (the project landscape architect) that includes all of the following elements (alternate sheet sizes may be allowed if approved by the city manager or designee): Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 13, Part 3 (Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards — Parking Lot Tree Canopy Plan Requirements:) B. A standard size D (24" x 36 "), a reduced legal ledger size (11" x 17 ") and a PDF parking lot tree canopy plan by a registered landscape architect (the project landscape architect) that includes all of the following elements (alternate sheet sizes may he •.-• .•• • •• • .• .n.• -r• •- • tail : Note: Revising the term "legal" to "ledger" in the sections above corrects a scrivener's error. 3 Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual Potential Amendment 2: Increase flexibility on bar scale requirement. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 10, Part 1 (Urban Forestry Plan Standards — Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Requirements:) D. Bar scale as follows ( • - • • - ..i - ... • - . . • - u •• • • • _ . • • , - 1. Less than 1.0 acres: 1" = 10' 2. 1.0 - 5.0 acres: 1" = 20' 3. 5.0 — 20.0 acres: 1" = 50' 4. Over 20.0 acres: 1" = 100'. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 10, Part 2 (Urban Forestry Plan Standards — Tree Canopy Site Plan Requirements:) D. Bar scale as follows ( • - • . - +.i • -. • • - '. •• <.. • . ,• . 1. Less than 1.0 acres: 1" = 10' 2. 1.0 - 5.0 acres: 1" = 20' 3. 5.0 — 20.0 acres: 1" = 50' 4. Over 20.0 acres: 1" = 100'. 4 Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual Potential Amendment 3: Do not require driplines of trees to be shown on site plans to scale. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 10, Part 1 (Urban Forestry Plan Standards — Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Requirements:) J. The trunk locations, tifipliftes numbers and "X" marks when applicable (indicating trees proposed for removal) for the following trees within the development impact area and within 25 feet of the development impact area: 1. Trees greater than or equal to 6 inch DBH; and 2. Other trees that require a permit to remove by Title 8 and are less than 6 inch DBH. K. The trunk locations, driplinc3 and assigned numbers for the following trees that are not within the development impact area: 1. Open grown trees greater than or equal to 6 inch DBH; and 2. Other trees that require a permit to remove by Title 8 and are less than 6 inch DBH. L. The dfiplittes locations of stand grown trees greater than or equal to 6 inch DBH that form a contiguous tree canopy. The tlripliftes location of stand grown trees may be delineated at the outer edge of the stand. Each stand shall be assigned a number. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 10, Part 2 (Urban Forestry Plan Standards — Tree Canopy Site Plan Requirements:) H. The trunk locations, driplinca and assigned numbers for trees to be preserved in parts 1.J and 1.K. Each tree on both the tree preservation and removal site plan and tree canopy site plan shall be assigned the same number on both plans. I. The locations of stand grown trees proposed for preservation greater than or equal to 6 inch DBH that form a contiguous tree canopy. The thipliffes location of stand grown trees may be delineated at the outer edge of the stand. Each stand shall be assigned a number. Each stand on both the tree preservation and removal site plan and tree canopy site plan shall be assigned the same number on both plans. I.. The location, species, caliper (in inches for deciduous) or height (in feet for evergreen) and assigned numbers : - : : - • - :: - : - - -- -. -. • - - - - -- ; - - : - manager or dcaigncc) for all trees to be planted and maintained as open grown trees... M. The location, species, caliper (in inches for deciduous) or height (in feet for evergreen) and assigned numbers : :: :: -• .: identified on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city maftager-er-designee} for all trees to be planted and maintained as open stand grown 5 Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual trees. The species of trees planted and maintained as stand grown trees shall be selected from the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual. e Note: Revision of the word "open" to the word "stand" in item M above is to correct a scrivener's error. Potential Amendment 4: Revise tree lists. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Appendices 2 -6 (Street Tree List, Parking Lot Tree List, Columnar Tree List, Native Tree List and Nuisance Tree List) Note: Council will need to provide staff with direction on which species to add or delete if they decide to revise the lists. 6 Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual Potential Amendment 5: Increase flexibility of setbacks between trees and buildings. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 10, Part 2 (Urban Forestry Plan Standards — Tree Canopy Site Plan Requirements:) L. ...Open grown trees shall be located as follows: 1. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 10 feet from the face of habitable buildings. - .. - • - ; - - - . •. = • • - Di3trict, MU CBD), tlhe setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 2. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings. - - : - = ; - - • - . - - - - ' - :e, N e setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 3. Trees categorized as large stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings. - .. •• - : - _ • - - . •. :. - _ e setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 4. Trees determined by the city manager or designee to have a mature spread of less than 20 feet shall be considered small stature, and shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 10 feet from the face of habitable buildings. - .. • - . • - - • .5 • t 1 I e setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 5. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; 6. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual • • • - • • •• , • . _ -r • • - is • - shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1 /2 feet from any hard surface paving; Note: The addition of "or by the city manager or designee" to item L.6 above is to correct a scrivener's error. M. ...Stand grown trees shall be located as follows: 3. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry 7 Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings. In downtown Tigard (Mixed Use - - E ' - - - - ' - = E D _he setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 4. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings. Usc Central Businc33 District, MU CBD), tThe setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 5. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet from the face of habitable buildings. - . ; '' - ; - - Central Bu3inc33 District, MU CBD), tlhe setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 6. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; 7. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 '/a feet from any hard surface paving; Note: The addition of "or by the city manager or designee" to item M.7 above is to correct a scrivener's error. 8 Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual Potential Amendment 6: Increase flexibility of setbacks between trees and pavement and utilities. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 10, Part 2 (Urban Forestry Plan Standards — Tree Canopy Site Plan Requirements:) L. ...Open grown trees shall be located as follows: 5. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving uillc&s • - -,• •r• -: • h- it m,n,• I,"-; 6. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1/2 feet from any hard surface paving • • , 01.I . .•• • -. • 1 - - i O. ,•'r • .- J ••; 7. Trees categorized as large stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks loser than 3 feet from any hard surface paving unkaa otherwise approved by the city manager or designee; 8. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines unless otherwise ,•• • .• • •. •\ 1•.1■• • •- �1" ; and Note: The addition of "or by the city manager or designee" to item L.6 above is to correct a scrivener's error. M. ...Stand grown trees shall be located as follows: 6. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving b less otherwise approved by the city manager or designee; 7. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1 /2 feet from any hard surface paving - • • - \.a - . 1 1 • 1 • 1 " • \ 11.1.1" • • • 191 • -; 8. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving ualcis 9. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines unless otherwise 9 1 Potential Amendments to the Urban Forestry Manual approved by the city manager or designee; and Note: The addition of "or by the city manager or designee" to item M.7 above is to correct a scrivener's error. Potential Amendment 7: Increase flexibility of the biweekly inspection requirements. Code /Manual Section: Urban Forestry Manual Section 11, Part 1 (Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards — Inspection Requirements:) B. Following the completion of item a above, the project arborist or landscape architect shall perform biteeethly semimonthly (twice monthly) site inspections for tree protection measures during periods of active site development and construction, document compliance /non - compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the city manager or designee within one week of the site inspection. The frequency of site inspections may he decreased if approved by the city manager or designee. E. Prior to final building inspection for any lot or tract with an at-five urban forestry plan that is still in effect, the project arborist or landscape architect shall perform a site inspection, document compliance /non - compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval to the city manager or designee. Note: The revision of the word "active" to the term "in effect" in item E above corrects a scrivener's errors and ensures consistency in terminology used throughout the code and manual. 10 L \ v lam• 1 \ 1 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Project 4,Alo, 46 • s • VOLUME IV I URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL (Administrative Rules) I Rev. JANUARY 2013 City of Tigard COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I IGARD www.tigard-or.gov/trees Volume IV: Table of Contents Organization of the Urban Forestry Code Revisions Documents 1 Urban Forestry Manual 3 Table of Contents 5 Section 1 - Hazard Tree Evaluation and Abatement Procedure 9 Section 2 - Street Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards 11 Section 3 - Street Tree Removal Standards 15 Section 4 - Median Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards 17 Section 5 - Median Tree Removal Standards 21 Section 6 - Sensitive Lands Tree Removal and Replacement Standards 23 Section 7 - Development Tree Removal and Replacement Standards 27 Section 8 - Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal and Replacement Standards 31 Section 9 - Heritage Tree Designation and Removal Standards 35 Section 10 - Urban Forestry Plan Standards 37 Section 11 - Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards 49 Section 12 - Street Tree Soil Volume Standards 53 Section 13 - Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards 57 Appendices 61 Organization of the Urban Forestry Code Revisions Documents The Urban Forestry Code Revisions project is presented in five volumes. Volume I provides the project overview and describes the process used to develop all of the elements. Volume II is the land use elements of the code, and Volume III the non land use elements. Volume IV contains the Urban Forestry Manual. Volume V contains technical reports and research that contributed to the code revisions along with details of the public input and deliberations to date. Volume I I Project Overview Project Overview includes the following sections: • Project Introduction • Overview of Key Elements • Key Element Summaries o Urban Forestry Standards for Development o Tree Grove Preservation Incentives o Tree Permit Requirements o Hazard Trees o Urban Forestry Manual Appendix A includes additional detail about the information used to shape the Urban Forestry Code Revisions Project, and includes the following sections: • Process summary • Summary of Community Ideas and Concerns • Summary of Planning Commission Deliberations • Existing Conditions Volume II I Land Use Elements Community Development Code (Title 18) is the Planning Commission's recommended draft of the Development Code. This section includes commentary on the amendments. Peer Review demonstrates how the Planning Commission's recommended draft of the Development Code and Urban Forestry Manual will work in application. Tree Grove ESEE Analysis is a report that addresses Statewide Planning Goal 5 - Natural Resources requirements for the preservation of Significant Tree Groves. Staff Report and findings includes the staff recommendation for approval of the land use elements (Title 18 and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment) and the findings that demonstrate the land use elements meet the necessary approval criteria. Volume III I Non Land Use Elements Tigard Municipal Code is the staff proposed draft of the Municipal Code (Title 8 and other Municipal Code titles). This section includes commentary on the amendments. Volume IV I Urban Forestry Manual (Administrative Rules) Urban Forestry Manual consists of administrative rules that implement the technical details of the urban forestry related code provisions in Title 8, Title 18 and other applicable titles in the Tigard Municipal Code. Volume V I Additional Background Materials Planning Commission Deliberations details Planning Commission discussion and decisions during the public hearing process. Amendment Requests Document for the Planning Commission lists code amendment requests received in response to the first Planning Commission public hearing and staff responses. Outstanding Issues for the Urban Forestry Code Revisions includes additional information on the outstanding issues that were further deliberated by the Planning Commission before making their final recommendation to City Council on May 7, 2012. Log of Input lists the input received and any code changes from the last meeting of the CAC to the staff proposed draft of the Urban Forestry Code Revisions to Planning Commission. CAC Guiding Principles includes the consensus view of the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) developed to help guide the legislative adoption process. Tree Values includes information and current research on the environmental, economic, social and aesthetic benefits of trees. Canopy Standards explains the reasons for adopting tree canopy cover requirements as well as the methods used to arrive at the requirements. Soil volume details research about the soil volume required to support a mature tree canopy. Tree Canopy Fee discusses research used to develop a square foot value for tree canopy. Regulatory Comparison is an excerpted report prepared by Metro and the Audubon Society that summarizes and compares regional urban forestry programs and regulations. Urban Forestry Master Plan is the City of Tigard's recommended plan for achieving the urban forestry goals in the Comprehensive Plan. I' » TIGARD City ofTigard URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL Introduction The Urban Forestry Manual consists of administrative rules that implement the details of the urban forestry related code provisions in Title 8, Title 18 and other applicable titles in the Tigard Municipal Code. The city manager or designee has the authority to amend the Urban Forestry Manual pursuant with the provisions in Chapter 2.04 of the Tigard Municipal Code. The city manager or designee is authorized to administer the Urban Forestry Manual. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 Hazard Tree Evaluation and Abatement Procedure Section 2 Street Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards Section 3 Street Tree Removal Standards Section 4 Median Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards Section 5 Median Tree Removal Standards Section 6 Sensitive Lands Tree Removal and Replacement Standards Section 7 Development Tree Removal and Replacement Standards Section 8 Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal and Replacement Standards Section 9 Heritage Tree Designation and Removal Standards Section 10 Urban Forestry Plan Standards Section 11 Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards Section 12 Street Tree Soil Volume Standards Section 13 Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards APPENDICES Appendix 1 Tree Risk Assessment Form Appendix 2 Street Tree List Appendix 3 Parking Lot Tree List Appendix 4 Columnar Tree List Appendix 5 Native Tree List Appendix 6 Nuisance Tree List Appendix 7 Example Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Appendix 8 Example Tree Canopy Site Plan Appendix 9 Example Supplemental Report Template Appendix 10 Example Tree Canopy Site Plan for an Individual Lot Appendix 11 Example Soil Volume Calculations for Street Trees Appendix 12 Example Soil Volume Plan Appendix 13 Example Soil Volume Plan for a Single Lot Appendix 14 Example Covered Soil Volume Plan Drawings and Example Covered Soil Specifications for Street Trees Appendix 15 Example Soil Volume Calculations for Parking Lot Trees Appendix 16 Example Parking Lot Tree Canopy Plan Appendix 17 Example Covered Soil Volume Plan Drawings and Example Covered Soil Specifications for Parking Lot Trees Appendix 18 Example Parking Lot that Meets the 30% Minimum Canopy Cover Requirement Section 1 - Hazard Tree Evaluation and Abatement Procedure Part 1. Informal Reconciliation: Notes: If interpersonal communication is not feasible or is unsuccessful, the claimant shall contact the respondent by concurrently sending a regular and certified letter that explains the reasons they believe there is a hazard tree on the respondent's property, demonstrates how the claimant's life, limb or property has the potential to be impacted by said tree, and offers to negotiate a solution that is in compliance with all applicable rules and regulations either directly or through a third party mediator. The claimant is encouraged to support their claim with documentation by a tree risk assessor. The respondent shall have seven calendar days or less from receipt of the certified letter or 14 calendar days or less from the postmarked date of the regular letter (whichever is sooner) to respond to the claimant's proposal in writing by concurrent regular and certified mail. In order to become eligible for formal reconciliation, the claimant's letter shall cite Tigard Municipal Code sections 8.06.020 and 8.06.030, explain the respondent's written response deadlines and include all of the other required elements listed above. Part 2. Formal Reconciliation: If the results of informal reconciliation are not acceptable to the claimant or there has been no response for 21 calendar days or more since the claimant sent the concurrent regular and certified letters, the claimant may seek resolution through formal reconciliation by completing a hazard tree dispute resolution application, paying a See Master Fees and deposit for all applicable hazard tree dispute resolution fees and Charges Schedule for providing the city all documentation of informal reconciliation current fees including but not limited to any letters to and from the respondent, proof of certified mail delivery and proof of certified mail receipt (if available). The city shall use all readily available tools and technology when assigning the hazard tree owner or responsible party as defined in Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 8.02. If the city determines that the claimant's previous correspondence was with the incorrect respondent, then the claimant shall be required to complete the previous steps of the hazard tree evaluation and abatement procedure with the correct respondent before proceeding with formal reconciliation. If the claimant or respondent disagrees with the city's assignment of the hazard tree owner or responsible party, the city shall be presented a land survey by a professional land surveyor that demonstrates the location of the tree in question in relation to property lines within all listed deadlines in order for the city to consider a reassignment of the hazard tree owner or responsible party. Section 1 — Hazard Tree Evaluation and Abatement Procedure Pagel -1 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: Within seven calendar days of receipt of all the required application materials, the city shall gain access to the respondent's property either voluntarily or with a warrant pursuant to Chapter 1.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code, conduct a tree risk assessment by a tree risk assessor using the tree risk assessment See Appendix t for methodology in Appendix 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual, determine if the Tree Risk definition of hazard tree in Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 8.02 has been met Assessment Form and, if necessary, prescribe hazard tree abatement as defined in Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 8.02. If the city determines the definition of hazard tree has been met, the city shall send a concurrent regular and certified letter to the respondent, explain that the definition of hazard tree has been met, explain the required hazard tree abatement procedures and require that hazard tree abatement be completed in seven calendar days or less from receipt of the certified letter or 14 calendar days or less from the mailing date of the regular letter (whichever is less). The city shall also bill the respondent for all applicable hazard tree dispute resolution fees, and refund the claimant previously deposited hazard tree dispute resolution fees. If the respondent fails to complete the hazard tree abatement within the required timeframe, the city shall gain access to the property either voluntarily or with a warrant, abate the hazard, bill the respondent for the cost of abatement including administrative costs or place a lien on the property for the cost of abatement including administrative costs pursuant to Chapter 1.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code. If the city determines the definition of hazard tree has not been met, the city shall send a concurrent regular and certified letter to both the claimant and respondent explaining that the definition of hazard tree has not been met and close the case. BM OF SECTION age1 -2 Section 1 — Hazard Tree Evaluation and Abatement Procedure City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 2 - Street Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards Part 1. Street Tree Planting Standards: Notes: A. Street trees shall be planted in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. Street trees shall have a minimum caliper of 1 1/2 inches at the time of planting. C. Street tree species shall be from the street tree list, unless otherwise See Appendix 2 for approved by the city manager or designee. Street Tree List D. Street tree species shall be appropriate for the planting environment as determined by the city manager or designee and seek to achieve a balance of the following: 1. Consistency with previously approved street tree plans given space constraints for roots and branches at maturity; 2. Compatibility with space constraints for roots and branches at maturity; 3. Providing adequate species diversity citywide and reasonable resistance to pests and diseases; and 4. Consideration of the objectives of the current street tree planting proposal. E. Street trees shall be provided adequate spacing from new and existing trees according to the following standards wherever possible: 1. Street trees categorized as small stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet on center and not closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted street trees or any existing tree that has been in the ground for over three years; 2. Street trees categorized as medium stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet on center and not closer than 20 feet on center from other newly planted street trees or any existing tree that has been in the ground for over three years; 3. Street trees categorized as large stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet on center and not closer than 30 feet on center from other newly planted street trees or any existing tree that has been in the ground for over three years; and 4. Any tree determined by the city manager or designee to have a mature spread of less than 20 feet shall be considered a small stature tree, and spaced accordingly when used as a street tree. F. Street trees shall be placed according to the following standards: Section '-Street Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards Page2 -1 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: 1. Street trees categorized as small stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; 2. Street trees categorized as medium stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1 /2 feet from any hard surface paving; 3. Street trees categorized as large stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; 4. Not closer than 4 feet on center from any fire hydrant, utility box or utility pole; 5. Not closer than 2 feet on center from any underground utility; 6. Not closer than 10 feet on center from a street light standard; 7. Not closer than 20 feet from a street right of way corner as determined by the city manager or designee. The city manager or designee may require a greater or lesser corner setback based on an analysis of traffic and pedestrian safety impacts; 8. Where there are overhead utility lines, the street tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines; and 9. Any other standards found by the city manager or designee to be relevant in order to protect public safety and public or private property. G. Root barriers shall be installed according to the manufacturer's specifications when a street tree is planted within 5 feet of any hard surface paving or utility box, or as otherwise required by the city engineer. See Code Section 11. Street trees planted prior to the adoption of the most current version 8.08 and Manual of the street tree planting standards shall be exempt from the most Section 3 for Street current version of the street tree planting standards. However, the Tree Removal most current version of the street tree maintenance standards and the Standards most current version of the street tree removal standards shall apply. See Master Fees and If street tree planting is required by another section of the Urban Charges Schedule for Forestry Manual or Tigard Municipal Code, the city manager or current fees designee may allow for an "in lieu of planting fee" equivalent to the city's cost to plant a street tree per the standards in Section 2, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual and maintain a street tree per the standards in Section 2, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual for a period of three years after planting. Payment of an in lieu of planting fee shall satisfy the street tree planting requirement. Page - Section 2 — Street Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Part 2. Street Tree Maintenance Standards: Notes: A. Street trees shall be maintained in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. Street trees shall be maintained in a manner that does not impede public street or sidewalk traffic consistent with the specifications in section 7.40.060A of the Tigard Municipal Code including: 1. 8 feet of clearance above public sidewalks; 2. 13 feet of clearance above public local and neighborhood streets; 3. 15 feet of clearance above public collector streets; and 4. 18 feet of clearance above public arterial streets. C. Street trees shall be maintained so as not to become hazard trees as defined in Chapter 8.02 of the Tigard Municipal Code. FA W END OF SECTION Section 2 — Street Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards Page -3 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 3 - Street Tree Removal Standards Part 1. Street Tree Removal Standards: A. Street trees shall be removed in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. The city manager or designee shall approve the removal of a street tree if any one of the following criteria are met: 1. The tree is a "hazard tree" as defined in Chapter 8.02 and "hazard tree abatement" as defined in Chapter 8.02 cannot be completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. 2. The tree is dead. 3. The tree is in an advanced state of decline with insufficient live foliage, branches, roots or other tissue to sustain life. 4. The tree is infested with pests or diseases that if left untreated will cause the tree to die, enter an advanced state of decline or cause other trees to die or enter an advanced state of decline. 5. The tree has sustained physical damage that will cause the tree to die or enter an advanced state of decline. If the physical damage was caused by a person in violation of Chapter 8.08 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the enforcement process outlined in Section 8.02.030 shall be completed prior to approval. 6. The tree is listed on the nuisance tree list. See Appendix 6 for 7. The tree location is such that it would not meet all of the street Nuisance Tree List tree planting standards in Section 2, parts lE and IF of the Urban Forestry Manual if it were a newly planted tree. 8. The tree roots are causing damage to paved surfaces, infrastructure, utilities, buildings or other parts of the built environment. 9. The tree location conflicts with areas of public street widening, construction or extension as shown in the Transportation System Plan. 10. Tree removal is required for the purposes of an approved building or land use permit, utility or infrastructure installation or utility or infrastructure repair. 11. The tree is recommended for removal by a designated fire marshal for Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue because it presents a significant fire risk to habitable structures or limits emergency access for rescue workers, and the risk or access issue cannot be abated through pruning or other means that results in tree retention. Section 3 — Street Tree Removal Standards Page3 -1 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual 12. The tree is part of a stand of trees, and a certified arborist or certified forester determines that thinning of interior trees within the stand of trees is necessary for overall stand health, the thinning will result in no less than 80 percent canopy cover at maturity for the area to be thinned, and that thinning of non- native trees is maximized prior to thinning of native trees. C. Unless removed for thinning purposes (part 1.B.11above) the city manager or designee shall condition the removal of a street tree upon the planting of a replacement tree in accordance with the Street Tree Planting Standards in Section 2, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual. The city manager or designee may consider existing trees as replacement trees if they meet all applicable species, size, condition and location requirements in Section 2, part 1 and were not already required to be planted or preserved by the Tigard Municipal Code. D. If the Street Tree Planting Standards in Section 2, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual preclude replanting within the same right of way abutting on, fronting on or adjacent to the property as the tree was removed or on private property within 6 feet of the same right of way as the tree that was removed, the applicant shall be exempt from planting a replacement tree. urn OF SECTION Page3 -2 Section 3 — Street Tree Removal Standards C i t y of T i g a r d U r b a n F o r e s t r y Manual Section 4 - Median Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards Part 1. Median Tree Planting Standards: N otes: A. Median trees shall be planted in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. Median trees shall have a minimum caliper of 1 1 /2 inches at the time of planting. C. Median tree species shall be from the street tree list, unless otherwise See Appendix 2 for approved by the city manager or designee. Street Tree List D. Median tree species shall be appropriate for the planting environment as determined by the city manager or designee and seek to achieve a balance of the following: 1. Consistency with previously approved median tree plans given space constraints for roots and branches at maturity; 2. Compatibility with space constraints for roots and branches at maturity; 3. Providing adequate species diversity citywide and reasonable resistance to pests and diseases; and 4. Consideration of the objectives of the current median tree planting proposal. E. Median trees shall be provided adequate spacing from new and existing trees according to the following standards wherever possible: 1. Median trees categorized as small stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet on center and not closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted median trees or any existing tree that has been in the ground for over three years; 2. Median trees categorized as medium stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet on center and not closer than 20 feet on center from other newly planted median trees or any existing tree that has been in the ground for over three years; 3. Median trees categorized as large stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet on center and not closer than 30 feet on center from other newly planted median trees or any existing tree that has been in the ground for over three years; and 4. Any tree determined by the city manager or designee to have a mature spread of less than 20 feet shall be considered a small stature tree, and spaced accordingly when used as a median tree. Sec o — Median Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards Page4 -1 Cite of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: F. Median trees shall be placed according to the following standards: 1. Median trees categorized as small stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; 2. Median trees categorized as medium stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1/2 feet from any hard surface paving; 3. Median trees categorized as large stature on the street tree list or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; 4. Not closer than 4 feet on center from any fire hydrant, utility box or utility pole; 5. Not closer than 2 feet on center from any underground utility; 6. Not closer than 10 feet on center from a street light standard; 7. Not closer than 20 feet from a street right of way corner as determined by the city manager or designee. The city manager or designee may require a greater or lesser corner setback based on an analysis of traffic and pedestrian safety impacts; 8. Where there are overhead utility lines, the median tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines; and 9. Any other standards found by the city manager or designee to be relevant in order to protect public safety and public or private property. G. Root barriers shall be installed according to the manufacturer's specifications when a street tree is planted within 5 feet of any hard surface paving or utility box, or as otherwise required by the- city engineer. H. Median trees planted prior to the adoption of the most current version See Code Section of the Median Tree Planting Standards shall be exempt from the most 8.08 and Manual Section 5 for Median current version of the Median Tree Planting Standards. However, the Tree Removal most current version of the Median Tree Maintenance Standards and Standards the most current version of the Median Tree Removal Standards shall apply. If median tree planting is required by another section of the Urban Forestry Manual or Tigard Municipal Code, the city manager or designee may allow for an "in lieu of planting fee" equivalent to the city's cost to plant a median tree per the standards in Section 4, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual and maintain a street tree per the standards in Section 4, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual for a period of three years after planting. Payment of an in lieu of planting fee shall satisfy the median tree planting requirement. Page4 -2 Section 4 — Median Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Part 2. Median Tree Maintenance Standards: Note.: A. Median trees shall be maintained in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. Median trees shall be maintained in a manner that does not impede public street or sidewalk traffic consistent with the specifications in section 7.40.060A of the Tigard Municipal Code including: 1. 8 feet of clearance above public sidewalks; 2. 13 feet of clearance above public local and neighborhood streets; 3. 15 feet of clearance above public collector streets; and 4. 18 feet of clearance above public arterial streets. C. Median trees shall be maintained so as not to become hazard trees as defined in Chapter 8.02 of the Tigard Municipal Code. ENO OF SECTION Section 4 — Median Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards Pagc4 -3 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 5 - Median Tree Removal Standards Part 1. Median Tree Removal Standards: Notes: A. Median trees shall be removed in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. The city manager or designee shall approve the removal of a median tree if any one of the following criteria are met: 1. The tree is a "hazard tree" as defined in Chapter 8.02 and "hazard tree abatement" as defined in Chapter 8.02 cannot be completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. 2. The tree is dead. 3. The tree is in an advanced state of decline with insufficient live foliage, branches, roots or other tissue to sustain life. 4. The tree is infested with pests or diseases that if left untreated will cause the tree to die, enter an advanced state of decline or cause other trees to die or enter an advanced state of decline. 5. The tree has sustained physical damage that will cause the tree to die or enter an advanced state of decline. If the physical damage was caused by a person in violation of Chapter 8.08 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the enforcement process outlined in Section 8.02.030 shall be completed prior to approval. 6. The tree is listed on the nuisance tree list. See Appendix 6 for 7. The tree location is such that it would not meet all of the Nuisance Tree List median tree planting standards in Section 4, parts lE and 1F of the Urban Forestry Manual if it were a newly planted tree. 8. The tree roots are causing damage to paved surfaces, infrastructure, utilities, buildings or other parts of the built environment. 9. The tree location conflicts with areas of public street widening, construction or extension as shown in the Transportation System Plan. 10. Tree removal is required for the purposes of an approved building or land use permit, utility or infrastructure installation or utility or infrastructure repair. 11. The tree is recommended for removal by a designated fire marshal for Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue because it presents a significant fire risk to habitable structures or limits emergency access for rescue workers, and the risk or access issue cannot be abated through pruning or other means that results in tree retention. Section 5 — Median Tree Removal Standards Page 5-1 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: 12. The tree is part of a stand of trees, and a certified arborist or certified forester determines that thinning of interior trees within the stand of trees is necessary for overall stand health, the thinning will result in no less than 80 percent canopy cover at maturity for the area to be thinned, and that thinning of non - native trees is maximized prior to thinning of native trees. C. Unless removed for thinning purposes (part 1.B.11 above) the city manager or designee shall condition the removal of a median tree upon the planting of a replacement tree within the same median as the tree was removed in accordance with the Median Tree Planting Standards in Section 4, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual. The city manager or designee may consider existing trees as replacement trees if they meet all applicable species, size, condition and location requirements in Section 4, part 1 and were not already required to be planted or preserved by the Tigard Municipal Code. I) . If the Median Tree Planting Standards in Section 4, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual preclude replanting within the same median as the tree was removed, the applicant shall be exempt from planting a replacement tree. BID OF SECTION Page 5-2 Section 5 — Median Tree Removal Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 6 - Sensitive Lands Tree Removal and Replacement Standards Part 1. Sensitive Lands Tree Removal Standards: N"te A. Native trees in sensitive lands shall be removed in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. The city manager or designee shall approve the removal of a native tree in sensitive lands if any one of the following criteria are met: 1. The tree is a "hazard tree" as defined in Chapter 8.02 and "hazard tree abatement" as defined in Chapter 8.02 cannot be completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. 2. The tree is dead. 3. The tree is in an advanced state of decline with insufficient live foliage, branches, roots or other tissue to sustain life. 4. The tree is infested with pests or diseases that if left untreated will cause the tree to die, enter an advanced state of decline, or cause other trees to die or enter an advanced state of decline. 5. The tree has sustained physical damage that will cause the tree to die or enter an advanced state of decline. If the physical damage was caused by a person in violation of Chapter 8.10 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the enforcement process outlined in Section 8.02.030 shall be completed prior to approval. 6. The tree roots are causing damage to paved surfaces, infrastructure, utilities, buildings or other parts of the built environment. 7. The tree location conflicts with areas of public street widening, construction or extension as shown in the Transportation System Plan. 8. Tree removal is required for the purposes of an approved building or land use permit, utility or infrastructure installation or utility or infrastructure repair. 9. The tree is recommended for removal by a designated fire marshal for Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue because it presents a significant fire risk to habitable structures or limits emergency access for rescue workers, and the risk or access issue cannot be abated through pruning or other means that results in tree retention. 10. A certified arborist or certified forester determines that thinning of interior trees within a stand of trees is necessary for overall stand health, the thinning will result in no less than 80 percent canopy cover at maturity for the area to be thinned, and that thinning of non - native trees is maximized prior to thinning of native trees. Section 6 — Sensitive Lands Tree Removal and Page6 -1 Replacement Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: C. Unless removed for thinning purposes (part 1.B.10 above) the city manager or designee shall condition the removal of each tree in sensitive lands upon the planting of a replacement tree in accordance with the Sensitive Lands Tree Replacement Standards in Section 6, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual. D. If the Sensitive Lands Tree Replacement Standards in Section 6, part 2 preclude replanting within the same property as the tree that was removed, the applicant shall be exempt from planting a replacement tree. Part 2. Sensitive Lands Tree Replacement Standards: . Replacement trees shall be planted in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. The minimum size of a replacement tree shall be 2 feet in height (from the top of the root ball) or equivalent to a 1 gallon container size. C. Replacement trees shall be selected from the native tree list in the See Appendix 5 for Urban Forestry Manual. Native Tree List l). The city manager or designee may consider native trees that are less than 6 inches DBH as replacement trees if they meet all applicable species, size, condition and location requirements in this section and were not already required to be planted by the Tigard Municipal Code. E. The location of replacement trees shall be as follows: 1. As close as practicable to the location of the tree that was removed provided the location complies with the other standards in this section; 2. No closer than 10 feet on center from newly planted or existing trees; 3. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings; 4. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings; 5. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet from the face of habitable buildings; 6. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; Page6 -2 Section 6 — Sensitive Lands Tree Removal and Replacement Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual 7. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in Notes: the Urban Forestry Manual shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1 /2 feet from any hard surface paving; Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; and 8. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines. F. The city manager or designee may allow for an "in lieu of planting fee" See Master Fees and Charges Schedule for equivalent to the city's cost to plant a tree in sensitive lands per the current fees standards in this Section and maintain a tree in sensitive lands per the standards in Section 8.10.030 of the Tigard Municipal Code for a period of three years after planting. Payment of an in lieu of planting fee shall satisfy the sensitive lands tree replacement requirement. END of SIMON Section 6 — Sensitive Lands Tree Removal and Page6 -3 Replacement Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 7 - Development Tree Removal and Replacement Standards Part 1. Development Tree Removal Standards: Notes: A. Trees subject to the requirements of Chapter 8.12 shall be removed in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. The city manager or designee shall approve the removal of trees subject to the requirements of Chapter 8.12 if any one of the following criteria are met: 1. The tree is a "hazard tree" as defined in Chapter 8.02 and "hazard tree abatement" as defined in Chapter 8.02 cannot be completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. 2. The tree is dead. 3. The tree is in an advanced state of decline with insufficient live foliage, branches, roots or other tissue to sustain life. 4. The tree is infested with pests or diseases that if left untreated will cause the tree to die, enter an advanced state of decline or cause other trees to die or enter an advanced state of decline. 5. The tree has sustained physical damage that will cause the tree to die or enter an advanced state of decline. If the physical damage was caused by a person in violation of Chapter 8.12 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the enforcement process outlined in Section 8.02.030 shall be completed prior to approval. 6. The tree is listed in the nuisance tree list. 7. The tree roots are causing damage to d surfaces See Appendix for g a g a paved Nuisance Tree List infrastructure, utilities, buildings or other parts of the built environment. 8. The tree location conflicts with areas of public street widening, construction or extension as shown in the Transportation System Plan. 9. Tree removal is required for the purposes of an approved building or land use permit, utility or infrastructure installation, or utility or infrastructure repair. 10. The tree is recommended for removal by a designated fire marshal for Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue because it presents a significant fire risk to habitable structures or limits emergency access for rescue workers, and the risk or access issue cannot be abated through pruning or other means that results in tree retention. 11. The tree is part of a stand of trees, and a certified arborist or certified forester determines that thinning of interior trees within the stand of trees is necessary for overall stand health, the thinning will result in no less than 80 percent canopy cover at maturity for the area to be thinned, and that thinning of non- native trees is maximized prior to thinning of native trees. Section 7 — Development Tree Removal and Pagel -1 Replacement Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual C. Unless removed for thinning purposes (Part 1.B.11 above) the city manager or designee shall condition the removal of each tree upon the planting of a replacement tree in accordance with the Development Tree Replacement Standards in Section 7, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual. 1). If the Development Tree Replacement Standards in Section 7, part 2 preclude replanting within the same property as the tree that was removed, the applicant shall be exempt from planting a replacement tree. Part 2. Development Tree Replacement Standards: Replacement trees shall be planted in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. li. The replacement tree shall be located so as to replace the function of the tree that was removed. For example, trees removed from parking lots shall be replaced in parking lots and trees removed from landscape buffers shall be replaced in landscape buffers. If planting in the same location would not comply with the other standards in this section, the replacement tree shall be planted as close as practicable to the tree that was removed in compliance with the other standards in this section. See Appendices 2 -5 C. The replacement species shall be the same stature or greater (at for Approved Tree maturity) as the tree that was removed. If planting the same stature or Lists greater tree would not comply with the other standards in this section, the replacement tree shall be the most similar stature practicable as the tree that was removed in compliance with the other standards in this section. 1). If the tree that was removed was part of a stand of trees, then the following standards apply to the replacement tree: See Appendix 5 for 1. The replacement tree shall be selected from the native tree list Native Tree List p in the Urban Forestry Manual unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee; 2. The minimum size of the replacement tree shall be 2 feet in height (from the top of the root ball) or equivalent to a 1 gallon container size; and 3. The replacement tree shall be located as follows: a. No closer than 10 feet on center from newly planted or existing trees; b. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings; c. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings; mei Section 7 — Development Tree Removal and Replacement Standards Cite of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual d. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree Notes: list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet from the face of habitable buildings; e. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; f. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1/2 feet from any hard surface paving; g. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; and h. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines. E. If the tree that was 1. removed was an open grown tree, then the following standards apply to the replacement tree: The replacement tree shall be selected from any of the tree lists See Appendices 2 -5 in the Urban Forestry Manual (except the nuisance tree list) for Approved Tree unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee; Lists 2. The minimum size of the replacement tree shall be 1'/2 inch er deciduous or p height for decid 6 feet in hei ht for evergreen; and See Appendix 6 for Nuisance Tree List 3. The replacement tree shall be located as follows: a. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 10 feet from the face of habitable buildings; b. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings; c. Trees categorized as large stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings; Section 7 — Development Tree Removal and Pagel -3 Replacement Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: d. Trees determined by the city manager or designee to have a mature spread of less than 20 feet shall be considered small stature, and shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 10 feet from the face of habitable buildings; e. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; f. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1 /2 feet from any hard surface paving; g. Trees categorized as large stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; and h. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines. 1 ' . The city manager or designee may consider existing trees as replacement trees if they meet all applicable species, size, condition and location requirements in this Section and were not already required to be planted or preserved by the Tigard Municipal Code. See Master Fees and G. The city manager or designee may allow for an "in lieu of planting Charges Schedule for fee „ equivalent to the city's cost to plant a tree per the standards in current fees this Section and maintain a tree per the standards in section 8.12.030 of the Tigard Municipal Code for a period of three years after planting. Payment of an in lieu of planting fee shall satisfy the development tree replacement requirement. . END OF SECTION Page7 -4 Section 7 - Development Tree Removal and Replacement Standards C i t y of T i g a r d Urban F n r e s t r v Manual Section 8 - Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal and Replacement Standards Part 1. Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal Standards: Notes: A. Trees subject to the requirements of Chapter 8.14 shall be removed in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. The city manager or designee shall approve the removal of trees subject to the requirements of Chapter 8.14 if any one of the following criteria are met: 1. The tree is a "hazard tree" as defined in Chapter 8.02 and "hazard tree abatement" as defined in Chapter 8.02 cannot be completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. 2. The tree is dead. 3. The tree is in an advanced state of decline with insufficient live foliage, branches, roots or other tissue to sustain life. 4. The tree is infested with pests or diseases that if left untreated will cause the tree to die, enter an advanced state of decline or cause other trees to die or enter an advanced state of decline. 5. The tree has sustained physical damage that will cause the tree to die or enter an advanced state of decline. If the physical damage was caused by a person in violation of Chapter 8.14 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the enforcement process outlined in Section 8.02.030 shall be completed prior to approval. 6. The tree is listed in the nuisance tree list. See Appendix 6 for 7. The tree roots are causing damage to paved surfaces, Nuisance Tree List infrastructure, utilities, buildings or other parts of the built environment. 8. The tree location conflicts with areas of public street widening, construction or extension as shown in the Transportation System Plan. 9. Tree removal is required for the purposes of an approved building or land use permit, utility or infrastructure installation or utility or infrastructure repair. 10. The tree is recommended for removal by a designated fire marshal for Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue because it presents a significant fire risk to habitable structures or limits emergency access for rescue workers, and the risk or access issue cannot be abated through pruning or other means that results in tree retention. 11. The tree is part of a stand of trees, and a certified arborist or certified forester determines that thinning of interior trees within the stand of trees is necessary for overall stand health, the thinning will result in no less than 80 percent canopy cover at maturity for the area to be thinned, and that thinning of non- native trees is maximized prior to thinning of native trees. Section 8 — Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal and Page8 -1 Replacement Standards ,,,t, C. Unless removed for thinning purposes (part 1.B.11 above) the city manager or designee shall condition the removal of each tree upon the planting of a replacement tree in accordance with the Urban Forestry Fund Tree Replacement Standards in Section 8, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual. D. If the Urban Forestry Fund Tree Replacement Standards in Section 8, part 2 preclude replanting within the same property as the tree that was removed, the applicant shall be exempt from planting a replacement tree. Part 2. Urban Forestry Fund Tree Replacement Standards: 1. Replacement trees shall be planted in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. See Appendices 2 -5 I; The replacement species shall be the same stature or greater (at for Approved Tree maturity) as the tree that was removed. If planting the same stature or Lists greater tree would not comply with the other standards in this section, the replacement tree shall be the most similar stature practicable as the tree that was removed in compliance with the other standards in this section. See Appendix 5 for C. If the tree that was removed was part of a stand of trees, then the the Native Tree List following standards apply to the replacement tree: 1. The replacement tree shall be selected from the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee; 2. The minimum size of the replacement tree shall be 2 feet in height (from the top of the root ball) or equivalent to a 1 gallon container size; and 3. The replacement tree shall be located as follows: a. No closer than 10 feet on center from newly planted or existing trees; b. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings; c. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings; d. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet from the face of habitable buildings; e. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; Page8 - Section 8 — Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal and Replacement Standards f. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree Notes: list in the Urban Forestry Manual shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1/2 feet from any hard surface paving; g. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; and h. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines. D. If the tree that was removed was an open grown tree, then the following standards apply to the replacement tree: 1. The replacement tree shall be selected from any of the tree lists See Appendices 2 -5 in the Urban Forestry Manual (except the nuisance tree list) for Approved Tree unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee; Lists 2. The minimum size of the replacement tree shall be 1 1/2 inch See Appendix 6 for caliper for deciduous or 6 feet in height for evergreen; and Nuisance Tree List 3. The replacement tree shall be located as follows: a. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 10 feet from the face of habitable buildings; b. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings; c. Trees categorized as large stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings; d. Trees determined by the city manager or designee to have a mature spread of less than 20 feet shall be considered small stature, and shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 10 feet from the face of habitable buildings; e. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; Section 8 — Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal and Page 8 -3 Replacement Standards Notes: f. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1 /2 feet from any hard surface paving; g. Trees categorized as large stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; and h. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines. I The city manager or designee may consider existing trees as replacement trees if they meet all applicable species, size, condition and location requirements in this section and were not already required to be planted or preserved by the Tigard Municipal Code. See Master Fees and 1' . The city manager or designee may allow for an "in lieu of planting Charges Schedule fee" equivalent to the city's cost to plant a tree per the standards in for current fec this section and maintain a tree per the standards in section 8.14.030 of the Tigard Municipal Code for a period of three years after planting. Payment of an in lieu of planting fee shall satisfy the urban forestry fund tree replacement requirement. am CF SECTION Page8 -4 Section 8 — Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal and Replacement Standards Section 9 - Heritage Tree Designation Removal Standards Part 1. Heritage Tree Designation Removal Standards: NotC : A. Heritage trees subject to the requirements of Chapter 8.16 shall be removed in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. The city manager or designee shall approve the removal of heritage tree designation if any one of the following criteria are met for a designated heritage tree: 1. The heritage tree is a "hazard tree" as defined in Chapter 8.02 and "hazard tree abatement" as defined in Chapter 8.02 cannot be completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. 2. The heritage tree is dead. 3. The heritage tree is in an advanced state of decline with insufficient live foliage, branches, roots or other tissue to sustain life. 4. The heritage tree has sustained physical damage that will cause the tree to die or enter an advanced state of decline. If the physical damage was caused by a person in violation of Chapter 8.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the enforcement process outlined in Section 8.02.030 shall be completed prior to approval. 5. The tree is recommended for removal by a designated fire marshal for Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue because it presents a significant fire risk to habitable structures or limits emergency access for rescue workers, and the risk or access issue cannot be abated through pruning or other means that results in tree retention. 6. The heritage tree is part of a stand of heritage trees, and a certified arborist or certified forester determines that thinning of interior heritage trees within the stand of heritage trees is necessary for overall stand health, the thinning will result in no less than 80 percent canopy cover at maturity for the area to be thinned, and that thinning of non - native heritage trees is maximized prior to thinning of native heritage trees. C. Replacement of heritage trees is not required unless a heritage tree is also subject to other provisions of the Tigard Municipal Code that require replacement. _ r wa r END OF SECTION Section 9 — Heritage Tree Designation Removal Standards Page9 -1 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 10 - Urban Forestry Plan Standards Part 1. Urban Forestry Plan — Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Notes: Requirements: A. The plan shall be standard size D (24" x 36 "), a reduced legal size and See Appendix 7 for Example Tree a PDF, and include all items in part 1.B -O below. When required for Preservation and clarity, the development impact area information in part 1.I may be Removal Site Plan detailed separately on multiple plan sheets provided that all of the remaining items in part 1 are included for reference. B. Date of drawing or last revision. C. North arrow. D. Bar scale as follows: 1. Less than 1.0 acres: 1" = 10' 2. 1.0 - 5.0 acres: 1" = 20' 3. 5.0 — 20.0 acres: 1" = 50' 4. Over 20.0 acres: 1" = 100'. E. Site address or assessor's parcel number. F. The location of existing and proposed property lines. G. Location of existing and proposed topographic lines at 1 -foot contours unless otherwise approved. H. The location and type of sensitive lands areas. L Proposed activities within the development impact area, including but not limited to: 1. Construction of structures and walls; 2. Paving and graveling; 3. Utility and irrigation installation; 4. Construction parking and construction equipment storage; 5. Landscaping; 6. Grading and filling; 7. Stockpiling; 8. Demolition and tree removal; 9. Trenching and boring; and 10. Any other activities that require excavation or soil disturbance. J. The trunk locations, driplines, assigned numbers and "X" marks when applicable (indicating trees proposed for removal) for the following trees within the development impact area and within 25 feet of the development impact area: 1. Trees greater than or equal to 6 inch DBH; and 2. Other trees that require a permit to remove by Title 8 and are less than 6 inch DBH. K. The trunk locations, driplines and assigned numbers for the following trees that are not within the development impact area: 1. Open grown trees greater than or equal to 6 inch DBH; and Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards Page 104 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: 2. Other trees that require a permit to remove by Tide 8 and are less than 6 inch DBH. L. The driplines of stand grown trees greater than or equal to 6 inch DBH that form a contiguous tree canopy. The driplines may be delineated at the outer edge of the stand. Each stand shall be assigned a number. M. The location and type of proposed tree protection fencing. If the location of the tree protection fencing will be phased, indicate the location of the tree protection fencing for each corresponding phase. Tree protection fencing shall be minimum 5 -foot tall metal unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee. Y �' g gnee. N. Any supplemental tree preservation specifications consistent with tree care industry standards that the project arborist or landscape architect has determined are necessary for the continued viability of trees identified for preservation. O. A signature of approval and statement from the project arborist or landscape architect, attesting that the tree preservation and removal site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual. See Appendix 8 for Part 2. Urban Forestry Plan — Tree Canopy Site Plan Requirements: Example Tree A. The plan shall be standard size D (24" x 36 "), a reduced legal size and Canopy Site Plan PDF format, and include all items in part 2.B -O below. B. Date of drawing or last revision. C. North arrow. D. Bar scale as follows: 1. less than 1.0 acres: 1" = 10' 2. 1.0 - 5.0 acres: 1" = 20' 3. 5.0 — 20.0 acres: 1" = 50' 4. Over 20.0 acres: 1" = 100'. E. Site address or assessor's parcel number. F. The location of proposed property lines. G. The location of proposed building footprints, utilities and irrigation, streets and other paved areas. H. The trunk locations, driplines and assigned numbers for trees to be preserved in parts 1.J and 1.K. Each tree on both the tree preservation and removal site plan and tree canopy site plan shall be assigned the same number on both plans. I. The dripline locations of stand grown trees proposed for preservation greater than or equal to 6 inch DBH that form a contiguous tree canopy. The dripline may be delineated at the outer edge of the stand. Each stand shall be assigned a number. Each stand on both the tree preservation and removal site plan and tree canopy site plan shall be assigned the same number on both plans. J. The location of existing or potential areas of tree growth limiting soils due to compaction, drainage, fertility, pH, contamination or other factors. P age 10 -2 Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual K. Methods for improving areas of tree growth limiting soils if tree Notes: planting is proposed in those locations. L. The location, species, caliper (in inches for deciduous) or height (in feet See Appendices 2 -5 for evergreen), assigned numbers and depiction of the mature tree for Approved Tree Lists canopy (in feet as identified on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee) for all trees to be See Appendix 6 for planted and maintained as open grown trees. The minimum size for all Nuisance Tree List trees planted and maintained as open grown trees is 1 1/2 inch caliper for deciduous or 6 feet in height for evergreen. Open grown trees shall be selected from any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual (except the nuisance tree list) unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee. If an open grown tree approved for planting is not identified on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual, then the project arborist or landscape architect shall determine the average mature tree canopy spread using available scientific literature for review and approval by the city manager or designee. The city manager or designee may consider trees less than 6 inch DBH as equivalent to newly planted trees if they meet all applicable species, size, condition and location requirements in this section. Overall, the selection of open grown trees shall result in a reasonable amount of diversity for the site. Open grown trees shall be located as follows: 1. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 10 feet from the face of habitable buildings. In downtown Tigard (Mixed Use - Central Business District, MU -CBD), the setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 2. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings. In downtown Tigard (Mixed Use - Central Business District, MU -CBD), the setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee ; 3. Trees categorized as large stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings. In downtown Tigard (Mixed Use - Central Business District, MU -CBD), the setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards Page10 -3 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: 4. Trees determined by the city manager or designee to have a mature spread of less than 20 feet shall be considered small stature, and shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet on center from other newly planted or existing trees and 10 feet from the face of habitable buildings. In downtown Tigard (Mixed Use - Central Business District, MU -CBD), the setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 5. Trees categorized as small stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; 6. Trees categorized as medium stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1 /2 feet from any hard surface paving; 7. Trees categorized as large stature on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; 8. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines; and 9. Where there is existing mature tree canopy or other areas with significant shade, the species selected shall be an understory tree according to available scientific literature. However, understory trees shall only be planted when the planting of non - understory trees is precluded due to site constraints. See Appendix 5 NI. The location, species, size (in height or container size), assigned for Native Tree number and depiction of the mature tree canopy dripline as identified List in the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual (delineated at the outer edge of the stand) for all trees to be planted and maintained as stand grown trees. The species of trees planted and maintained as stand grown trees shall be selected from the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual. The depiction of the mature tree canopy dripline shall be consistent with dimensions in the native tree list. The minimum size of stand grown trees shall be 2 feet in height (from the top of the root ball) or equivalent to a 1 gallon container size. The city manager or designee may consider trees less than 6 inch DBH as equivalent to newly planted trees if they meet all applicable species, size, condition and location requirements in this section. Overall, the selection of stand grown trees shall result in a reasonable amount of diversity for the site. Stand grown trees shall be located as follows: 1. No closer than an average of 10 feet on center from newly planted or existing trees; 2. No further than an average of 20 feet on center from newly planted or existing trees; Page10 -4 Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual 3. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Notes: Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 15 feet from the face of habitable buildings. In downtown Tigard (Mixed Use - Central Business District, MU -CBD), the setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 4. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 20 feet from the face of habitable buildings. In downtown Tigard (Mixed Use - Central Business District, MU -CBD), the setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 5. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall be spaced no closer than 30 feet from the face of habitable buildings. In downtown Tigard (Mixed Use - Central Business District, MU -CBD), the setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee; 6. Trees categorized as small stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 feet from any hard surface paving; 7. Trees categorized as medium stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 2 1 /2 feet from any hard surface paving; 8. Trees categorized as large stature on the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual or by the city manager or designee shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving; 9. Where there are overhead utility lines, the tree species selected shall be of a type which, at full maturity, will not interfere with the lines; and 10. Where there is existing mature tree canopy or other areas with significant shade, the species selected shall be an understory tree according to available scientific literature. However, understory trees shall only be planted when the planting of non - understory trees is precluded due to space constraints. N. Any supplemental specifications that the project arborist or landscape architect has determined are necessary for the viability of trees proposed for planting. 0. A signature of approval and statement from the project arborist or landscape architect, attesting that the tree canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards Page10 -S City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: Part 3. Urban Forestry Plan — Supplemental Report Requirements: :1. The supplemental report shall be provided by the project arborist or See Appendix 9 for landscape architect in paper and PDF format, and include all items in Example Supplemental Report part 3.B -P below. Template B. Date of the report. C. The name, address, telephone number, email address and ISA certified arborist number of the project arborist or stamp and registration number of the project landscape architect. 1). The following inventory data in table or other such organized format corresponding to each tree in parts 1.J and 1.K in the tree preservation and removal site plan: 1. The assigned tree number; 2. The genus, species and common name; 3. DBH (in inches); 4. Average tree canopy area (in square feet), calculated as follows: a. Average tree canopy area = (average tree canopy spread /2) x 7t; 5. Open grown tree or stand grown tree; 6. Heritage tree? (Y or N); 7. Numerical condition rating (0 -3) as follows: Factors considered Condition Overall Tree Amount of History Pests Extent rating vigor canopy deadwood of failure of decay density 0 Dead to <30% Large; major More Infested Major, severe scaffold than one conks decline branches scaffold and cavities 1 Declining 30 -60% Twig and Scaffold Infested One to a branch branches few dieback conks; small cavities 2 Average 60 -90% Small twigs Small Minor Present branches only at pruning wounds 3 Good to 90- Little or none None Minor to Absent excellent 100% Insignificant to present only at pruning wounds Page10 -6 Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual 8. Numerical suitability for preservation rating (0 -3) as follows: Notes: Rating Considerations 0 The tree is a "hazard tree" as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Tigard Development Code and "hazard tree abatement" as defined in Chapter 18.120 in the Tigard Development Code cannot be completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. 1 The tree is dead, in severe decline or declining but may be retained if desirable for wildlife or other benefits because it is not considered a "hazard tree" or "hazard tree abatement" could be performed. 2 The tree has average health and /or structural stability that could be alleviated with treatment; the tree will be less resilient to development impacts and will require more frequent management and monitoring after development than a tree rated as a "3 ". 3 The tree has good to excellent health and structural stability; the tree will be more resilient to development impacts, and will require less frequent management and monitoring after development than a tree rated as a "2 ". 9. Proposed for preservation? (Y or N); and 10. Additional comments. E. The following inventory data in table or other such organized format corresponding to each existing stand in the tree preservation and removal site plan: 1. The assigned stand number; 2. The genus, species and common name of the tree species estimated to be dominant in the stand; 3. The genus, species and common name of the tree species estimated to be the second and third most common in the stand; 4. The estimated average DBH (in inches) of the dominant tree species in the stand; 5. The estimated average DBH (in inches) of both the second and third most common tree species in the stand; 6. The estimated average condition rating (per part 3.D.7) of the dominant tree species in the stand; 7. The estimated average condition rating (per part 3.D.7) of both the second and third most common tree species in the stand; 8. The total on site tree canopy area (in square feet) of the stand; 9. Numerical suitability for preservation rating of the stand (0 -3) as follows: Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards Page10 -7 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: Rating Considerations 0 Nuisance trees are the dominant species in the stand and /or continued viability of the stand is unlikely due to pests, diseases, competition from nuisance tree or plant species, hydrologic changes or other factors. 1 The stand requires a currently cost prohibitive level of investment and management of pests, diseases, nuisance tree or plant species, hydrology or other factors to become viable. 2 The stand is viable but requires more frequent management and monitoring of pests, diseases, nuisance tree or plant species, hydrology or other factors for continued viability than a stand rated as a "3 ". 3 The stand is viable and requires less frequent management and monitoring of pests, diseases, nuisance tree or plant species, hydrology or other factors for continued viability than a stand rated as a "2 ". 10. The total on site tree canopy area (in square feet) of the stand proposed for preservation; and 11. Additional comments. F. Supplemental specifications regarding the location and type of proposed tree protection fencing. If the location of the tree protection fencing will be phased, indicate the location of the tree protection fencing for each corresponding phase. Tree protection fencing shall be minimum 5 -foot tall metal unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee. G. Supplemental specifications consistent with tree care industry standards that the project arborist or landscape architect has determined are necessary for the continued viability of trees identified for preservation. 11. Supplemental specifications consistent with tree care industry standards that the project arborist or landscape architect has determined are necessary for the continued viability of stands identified for preservation. I. A general accounting of soil characteristics on site. Areas of existing or potential tree growth limiting soils due to compaction, drainage, fertility, pH, contamination or other factors shall be clearly identified. Methods for improving areas of tree growth limiting soils if tree planting is proposed in those areas shall be specifically addressed. The following inventory data in table or other such organized format corresponding to each open grown tree proposed for planting in the tree canopy site plan: 1. The assigned tree number; 2. The genus, species and common name; 3. The caliper (in inches for deciduous) or height (in feet for evergreen); Page10 -8 Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual 4. The average mature tree canopy spread in feet) as identified on Notes: any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual. If an open grown tree approved for planting is not identified on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual, then the project arborist or landscape architect shall determine the average mature tree canopy spread using available scientific literature for review and approval by the city manager or designee; 5. The average mature tree canopy area (in square feet) calculated as follows: a. Average mature tree canopy area = (average mature tree canopy spread /2) x 7E; 6. The proposed available soil volume (in cubic feet) for each tree according to the methodology in Section 12, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual. If the available soil volume is greater than 1000 cubic feet, then it is OK to note soil volume as simply "over 1000 cubic feet "; and 7. Additional comments. K. The following inventory data in table or other such organized format corresponding to each stand proposed for planting in the tree canopy site plan: 1. The assigned stand number; 2. The genus, species and common name of trees proposed for planting in the stand; 3. The average spacing (in feet) and total number of each tree species proposed for planting in the stand; 4. The height (in feet) or container size (in gallons) of each species proposed for planting in the stand; 5. The mature tree canopy dripline area of the stand (in square feet) delineated at the outer edge of the stand; and 6. Additional comments L. Any supplemental specifications consistent with tree care industry standards that the project arborist or landscape architect has determined are necessary for the viability of trees proposed for planting. M. A summary in table or other such organized format clearly demonstrating the effective tree canopy cover that will be provided for the overall development site (excluding streets) and for each lot or tract in the R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R -7 districts (excluding streets) as follows: 1. The area (in square feet) of the overall development site and each lot or tract; and 2. The effective tree canopy area that will be provided for the overall development site and each lot or tract which shall be considered the sum of the following: Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards Page10 -9 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: a. Double the canopy area in square feet) of all open grown trees in the tree canopy site plan proposed for preservation within the overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way, excluding median trees). Only trees with both a condition rating and suitability for preservation rating of 2 or greater are eligible for credit towards the effective tree canopy cover. The overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way) with the largest percentage of the trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses shall be assigned the effective tree canopy cover area for the corresponding tree; b. Double the canopy area (in square feet) of all stands in the tree canopy site plan proposed for preservation within the overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way, excluding median trees). Only stands with both a condition rating and suitability for preservation rating of 2 or greater are eligible for credit towards the effective tree canopy cover. The eligible tree canopy area shall be the portion directly above the overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way). The canopy area of any stand grown tree with the largest percentage of the trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses outside of the overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way) shall not be eligible for credit towards the effective tree canopy cover requirement for that development site or lot or tract; c. The mature canopy area (in square feet) of all open grown trees in the tree canopy site plan, except for those from the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual, to be planted and maintained within the overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way, excluding median trees); d. 1.25 times the mature canopy area (in square feet) of all open grown trees from the native tree list in the Urban Forestry Manual in the tree canopy site plan to be planted and maintained within the overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way, excluding median trees); Page 10-10 Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: e. 1.25 times the mature canopy area (in square feet) of each stand in the tree canopy site plan to be planted and maintained within the overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way, excluding median trees). The eligible mature tree canopy area shall be the portion directly above the overall development site and each lot or tract (or associated right of way); and f. Divide the tree canopy area (calculated per part 3.M.2.a -e above) for the overall development site and each lot or tract by the total area of the overall development site and each lot or tract respectively to determine the effective tree canopy cover for the overall development site and each lot or tract. N. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for the overall development site shall be at least: 1. 40 percent for R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R -7 districts, except for schools (18.130.050(J)); 2. 33 percent for R -12, R -25, R -40, C -N, C -C, C -G, C -P, MUE, MUE -1, MUE -2, MUC, MUR and I -P districts, except for schools (18.130.0500)); and 3. 25 percent for MU -CBD, MUC -1, I -L and I -H districts, and for schools (18.130.0500)) in all districts. 0. If the percent of effective tree canopy cover is less than the applicable standard percent in item n above for the overall development or less than 15 percent for any lot or tract in the R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R- 7 districts (when the overall development site meets or exceeds the standard percent effective tree canopy cover in item n), calculate the tree canopy fee required to meet the applicable standard percent effective tree canopy cover in item n above for the overall development site or 15 percent effective tree canopy cover for each lot or tract in the R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R -7 districts (only if the overall development site meets or exceeds the standard percent effective tree canopy cover in item n but individual lots or tracts in the R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R-4.5 and R -7 districts do provide 15 percent effective tree canopy cover) according to the methodology in Section 10, part 4 of the Urban Forestry Manual. P. A signature of approval and statement from the project arborist or landscape architect, attesting that: 1. The tree preservation and removal site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; 2. The canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual; and 3. The supplemental report meets all of the requirements in Section 10, part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Part 4. Urban Forestry Plan — Tree Canopy Fee Calculation Requirements: ;1. The tree canopy fee shall be calculated as follows: Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards Page10 -11 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual I Notes: 1. If the percentage of effective tree canopy cover is less than the applicable standard percentage in part 3, item n above for the See Appendix 9 for overall development site find the difference (in square feet) Example between the proposed effective tree canopy cover and the Supplemental Report Template with applicable standard effective tree canopy cover for the overall formula for development site and multiply the difference (in square feet) by: calculating the Tree a. The most recent wholesale median tree cost Canopy Fee established by the PNW -ISA for a 3 inch diameter deciduous tree in the Willamette Valley, OR divided by 59 square feet. 2. In cases where the overall development site meets the standard percentage in part 3.N above yet the percentage of effective tree canopy cover is less than 15 percent for any individual lot or tract in the R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R -7 districts, find the difference (in square feet) between the proposed effective tree canopy cover and 15 percent effective tree canopy cover for each deficient lot or tract and multiply the difference (in square feet) by: a. The most recent wholesale median tree cost established by the PNW -ISA for a 3 inch diameter deciduous tree in the Willamette Valley, OR divided by 59 square feet. Part 5. Urban Forestry Plan — Significant Tree Grove Preservation Considerations: A. Connects with and does not become isolated from the remaining portion of the significant tree grove on or off the site; B. Preserves the most dominant, resilient and healthiest native trees; C. Preserves a diversity of species, ages and sizes of native trees; D. Preserves native understory and supports natural succession; E. Preserves and minimizes disturbance to native soils and tree roots; F. Does not preserve hazard trees or trees likely to soon become hazard trees particularly those subject to windthrow (low live crown ratio, high height to diameter ratio, suppressed root development) and exacerbated by newly created edges and /or removal of adjacent trees; and . G. Does not preserve trees currently or likely to soon be severely impacted by large scale weed, pest or disease outbreaks and /or changing site conditions (hydrology, light, temperature, wind). PIM END OF SECTION Page10 -12 Section 10 — Urban Forestry Plan Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 11 - Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards Part 1. Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards — Inspection Notes: Requirements: A. After tree protection measures are installed and prior to any ground disturbance other than what is necessary for the installation of tree protection measures and erosion, sediment and pollutant controls measures, the project arborist or landscape architect shall perform a site inspection for tree protection measures, document compliance /non - compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the city manager or designee within one week of the site inspection. B. Following the completion of item a above, the project arborist or landscape architect shall perform bimonthly (twice monthly) site inspections for tree protection measures during periods of active site development and construction, document compliance /non- compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval directly to the city manager or designee within one week of the site inspection. C. When the land use review type will result in the division of land into See Appendix 10 for multiple lots or tracts the applicant provide the building shall rove on te un site Canopy pie Tree p pp p g i C Site Plan plan for each resulting lot or tract, the information detailed in Section (Section 10, Part 2) 10, part 2.B -N of the Urban Forestry Manual consistent with the for an individual Lot approved urban forestry plan. Prior to issuance of any building permits for each resulting lot or tract, the project arborist or landscape architect shall perform a site inspection for tree protection measures, document compliance /non - compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval with the building permit submittal documents. D. When the land use review type will result in the division of land into multiple lots or tracts, the project arborist or landscape architect shall perform a site inspection for tree protection measures for all lots or tracts that are not proposed to be associated with a building permit, document compliance /non - compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval to the city manager or designee prior to the issuance of the first building permit resulting from the land use review type. E. Prior to final building inspection for any lot or tract with an active urban forestry plan, the project arborist or landscape architect shall perform a site inspection, document compliance /non- compliance with the urban forestry plan and send written verification with a signature of approval to the city manager or designee. Section 11 — Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards Page 11-1 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: Part 2. Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards — Tree Establishment Requirements: See Master Fees and A. Prior to any ground disturbance work, the applicant shall provide a Charges schedule for tree establishment bond for all trees to be planted per the approved current fees urban forestry plan. The total bond amount: 1. For subdivisions and minor land partitions shall be equivalent to the city's average cost to plant and maintain a tree per the applicable standards in the Urban Forestry Manual for a period of two years after planting multiplied by the total number of trees to be planted and maintained; and 2. For all other land use review types shall be equivalent to the city's average cost to plant and maintain a tree per the applicable standards in the Urban Forestry Manual for a period of one year after planting multiplied by the total number of trees to be planted and maintained. I Following final building inspection or upon acceptance by the city manager or designee when there is no final building inspection, the tree establishment period shall immediately begin and continue: 1. In subdivisions and partitions, for a period of two years or until such time as each lot is sold; and 2. In all other land use review types, for a period of one year. (.. When the land use review type will result in the division of land into multiple lots or tracts, there shall be a separate tree establishment period for each resulting lot or tract where trees are shown to be planted in the approved urban forestry plan. I ). Following the applicable tree establishment period for each lot or tract, the bond shall be correspondingly reduced based on tree survival following a site inspection, documentation of successful tree establishment and /or replacement according to items E and F below, and receipt by the city manager or designee of written verification of findings and a signature of approval by the project arborist or landscape architect. E. For planted open grown trees, successful establishment shall be considered 80 percent survival of the open grown trees planted on the lot or tract, and replacement of 100 percent of the remaining open grown trees planted on the lot or tract that did not survive. 1. For planted stand grown trees, successful establishment shall be considered survival of at least 80 percent of the original stand grown trees planted on the lot or tract. G. If successful establishment for open grown trees is less than 80 percent for any lot or tract, the applicable tree establishment period shall reset for that lot or tract and the establishment process for open grown trees described in part 2.B -F above shall be repeated until the successful establishment requirement for open grown trees is met. Page11 -2 Section 11 — Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual H. If successful establishment for stand grown trees is less than 80 Notes: percent for any lot or tract, the applicable tree establishment period shall reset for that lot or tract and the establishment process for stand grown trees described in Part 2.B -F above shall be repeated until the successful establishment requirement for stand grown trees is met. Part 3. Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards — Urban Forest Inventory Requirements: Following documentation of compliance with the urban forestry plan by the project arborist or landscape architect for each lot or tract, the city shall collect spatial and species specific data for each open grown tree and area of stand grown trees for inclusion in a publicly accessible inventory of trees. See Master Fees and B. Prior to any ground disturbance work, the applicant shall provide a fee Charges Schedule for to cover the city's cost of collecting and processing the inventory data current fees for the entire urban forestry plan. / // • ENO OF SECTION Section 11 — Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards Pagell -3 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 12 - Street Tree Soil Volume Standards Part 1. Street Tree Soil Volume Standards — Soil Volume Requirements: A. Street trees required to be planted by chapter 18.745 shall be provided the following minimum soil volumes based on the width of the proposed right of way measured from the edge of the street (excluding curb) towards the subject site: Minimum Soil Right of Way Width Volume Requirement (feet) (cubic feet per tree) Up to 10 400 Over 10 up to 12 500 Over 12 up to 14 600 Over 14 up to 16 700 Over 16 up to 18 800 Over 18 up to 20 900 Over 20 1000 Part 2. Street Tree Soil Volume Standards — Soil Volume Calculation Requirements: See Appendix 11 for three Example Soil A. For open soil volumes, soil depth is assumed to be 3 feet if the tree Volume Calculations canopy site plan (per 18.790.030.A.3) and supplemental report (per for Street Trees 18.790.030.A.4) demonstrate that the tree will not be planted in an area of tree growth limiting soil or the area of tree growth limiting soil will be adequately amended to a depth of 3 feet in the specified planting area. B. Areas of tree growth limiting soils that have not been adequately amended shall not be eligible for credit towards the minimum soil volume requirements in part 1 of this section. C. For covered soil volumes, the soil depth is equal to the depth of the covered soil volume as demonstrated by the soil volume plan in part 3 of this section. D. Soil volumes for open soil volumes shall be calculated (in cubic feet) by measuring the open soil volume area (in square feet) times an assumed soil depth of 3 feet. E. Soil volumes for covered soils volumes shall be calculated (in cubic feet) by multiplying the area of the covered soil volume times the depth of the covered soil volume as demonstrated by the soil volume plan in part 3 of this section. F. The total soil volume provided for a tree shall be calculated (in cubic feet) by adding the available open soil volume (per part 2.0 above) to the available covered soil volume (per part 2D above) within a 50 foot radius of the tree. Section 12 — Street Tree Soil Volume Standards Page121 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Notes: G. The open and covered soil volumes are considered "available" to a tree only when they are directly connected to the tree by a continuous path of no less than 3 feet in width. I I. In addition, covered soil volumes are considered "available" to a tree only when demonstrated as available by the soil volume plan in part 3 of this section. I. All soil volumes calculated per this section shall be displayed for each corresponding tree in the required supplemental report. Part 3. Street Tree Soil Volume Standards — Soil Volume Plan Requirements: See Appendix 12 for A. A soil volume plan shall be required for any street tree required to be Example Soil planted by chapter 18.745 if a covered soil volume is proposed to be Volume Plan used to meet any portion of the minimum soil volume requirements in part 1 of this section. The soil volume plan shall include all items in part 3.B -E below. B. A standard size D (24" x 36 "), a reduced legal size and a PDF soil volume plan by a registered landscape architect (the project landscape architect) that includes all of the following elements: 1. Date of drawing or last revision; 2. North arrow; 3. Bar scale; 4. Site address or assessor's parcel number; 5. The name, address, telephone number, email address and license number of the project landscape architect; 6. The location of property lines or proposed property lines if different from existing; 7. The location of proposed building footprints, utilities and irrigation, streets and other paved areas; 8. The assigned numbers (consistent with the tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a concurrent urban forestry plan) of all trees; See Appendix 14 for 9. The location of each open soil volume area and each covered two alternative Example Covered soil volume area considered "available" for each tree; and Soil Volume Plan 10. The City of Tigard Example Covered Soil Volume Plan Drawings and an Drawings and Specifications unless otherwise approved by the Example Covered city manager or designee. If required for clarity, this Soil Specification for information may be detailed on a separate plan sheet. Street Trees C When the land use review type will result in the division of land into See Appendix 13 for multiple lots or tracts, the applicant shall provide on the building site Example Soil plan for each resulting lot or tract, the information detailed in —part Volume Plan for a 3.B.1 -10 of this section consistent with the approved soil volume plan Single Lot and a signature of approval from the project landscape architect. Page12-2 Section 12 — Street Tree Soil Volume Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual D. The project landscape architect shall document compliance /non- Notes: compliance (including but not limited to materials receipts and observations from site inspections) with the approved soil volume plan, and send written verification with a signature of approval to the city manager or designee prior to final building inspection for all lots, parcels, or tracts associated with each particular tree. When the land use review type will result in the division of land into multiple lots or tracts, the project landscape architect shall provide the documentation /verification described above for all lots or tracts that are not proposed to be associated with a building permit prior to the issuance of the first building permit resulting from the land use review type. When the land use review type does not involve a building permit, the project landscape architect shall provide the documentation /verification described above prior to final acceptance by the city manager or designee. E. If any subsequent modifications to an approved soil volume plan is required to meet the minimum soil volume requirements in part 1 of this section, a revised soil volume plan that meets the requirements of part 3 of this section shall be provided that reflect the revisions. ENO OF SECTION Section 12 — Street Tree Soil Volume Standards Page12 -3 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual Section 13 - Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards Part 1. Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards — Parking Lot Tree Notes: Requirements: A. Parking lot trees shall be planted in a manner consistent with tree care industry standards. B. Parking lot trees shall have a minimum caliper of 1 1 /2 inches (for deciduous) or height of a 6 feet (for evergreen) at the time of planting. C. Parking lot tree species shall be from the parking lot tree list, unless See Appendix 3 for otherwise approved by the city manager or designee. Parking Lot Tree List D. Parking lot trees shall not be planted with the center of their trunks closer than 3 feet from any hard surface paving, including curbs. E. Parking lot trees shall be evenly distributed within the parking area, and no greater than 6 feet from the parking area. F. Parking lot trees shall be provided a minimum of 1000 cubic feet of soil volume per tree. Part 2. Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards — Soil Volume Calculation Requirements: A. Soil volumes for open soil volumes shall be calculated (in cubic feet) See Appendix 15 for by measuring the open soil volume area (in square feet) times an three Example Soil assumed soil depth of 3 feet. volume Calculations B. Soil volumes for covered soils volumes shall be calculated (in cubic for Parking Lot Trees feet) by multiplying the area of the covered soil volume times the depth of the covered soil volume as demonstrated by the parking lot tree canopy plan in part 3 of this section. C. The total soil volume provided for a tree shall be calculated (in cubic feet) by adding the available open soil volume (per part 2.A above) to the available covered soil volume (per part2.B above) within a 50 foot radius of the tree. D. The open and covered soil volumes are considered "available" to a tree only when they are directly connected to the tree by a continuous path of no less than 3 feet in width, and demonstrated as available by the parking lot tree canopy plan in part 3 of this section. E. All soil volumes calculated per this section shall be displayed for each corresponding tree in the supplemental report (per 18.790.030.A.4) when an urban forestry plan is concurrently required. Part 3. Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards — Parking Lot Tree Canopy Plan Requirements: see Appendix 16 for A. A parking lot tree canopy plan shall be required unless the city Example Parking Lot manager or designee determines the requirements of a concurrent Tree Canopy Plan urban forestry plan per chapter 18.790 will meet the equivalent standards in part 3 of this section. The parking lot tree canopy plan shall include all items in part 3.B -E below. Section 13 — Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards Page13 -1 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual B. A standard size D (24" x 36 "), a reduced legal size and a PDF parking lot tree canopy plan by a registered landscape architect (the project landscape architect) that includes all of the following elements: 1. Date of drawing or last revision; 2. North arrow; 3. Bar scale; 4. Site address or assessor's parcel number; 5. The name, address, telephone number, email address and license number of the project landscape architect; 6. The location of property lines or proposed property lines if different from existing; 7. The location of proposed building footprints, utilities and irrigation, streets and other paved areas; 8. The location of areas of tree growth limiting soils due to compaction, drainage, fertility, pH, contamination or other factors; 9. Methods for improving areas of tree growth limiting soils if tree planting is proposed in those areas. If required for clarity, this information may be detailed on a separate plan sheet; 10. The location of all parking lot striping and the location of the limits of the parking area, which includes all parking spaces, all landscape islands and all parking aisles; 11. Assigned numbers (consistent with the tree canopy site plan per 18.790.030.A.3 and supplemental report per 18.790.030.A.4 of a concurrent urban forestry plan) of all parking lot trees; 12. The location, species and caliper (in inches for deciduous) or height (in feet for evergreen) of all parking lot trees; 13. Depiction of the average mature tree canopy spread (in feet as identified on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual) for each parking lot tree. If a parking lot tree is not identified on any of the tree lists in the Urban Forestry Manual, then the project arborist or landscape architect shall determine the average mature tree canopy spread using available scientific literature for review and approval by the city manager or See Appendix 17 for designee; two alternative 14. The location of each open soil volume area and each covered Example Covered Soil Volume Plan soil volume area considered "available" for each tree; and Drawings and an 15. If covered soil volumes are proposed to meet any portion of Example Covered the soil volume requirement in part 1.F of this section, the City Soil Specification for of Tigard Example Covered Soil Volume Plan Drawings and Parking Lot Trees Specifications unless otherwise approved by the city manager or See Appendix 18 for designee. If required for clarity, this information may be Example Parking Lot detailed on a separate plan sheet. that Meets the 30% C. A summary in table or other such organized format clearly Minimum Canopy demonstrating the proposed percent tree canopy cover at maturity Cover Requirement directly over the parking area as follows: per Code Section 1. The area (in square feet) of the parking area as shown in the 18.745.050.E.1.a.4 parking lot tree canopy plan; Page13 -2 Section 13 — Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual 2. The average mature tree canopy area for each parking lot tree Notes: as follows: a. Average mature tree canopy area = (average mature tree canopy spread /2) x rt; 3. The total combined mature tree canopy area (in square feet) of all parking lot trees less the percentage not directly over the parking area; and 4. The total combined mature tree canopy area directly over the parking area (in square feet) divided by the parking area. D. The project landscape architect shall document compliance /non- compliance (including but not limited to materials receipts and observations from site inspections) with the approved parking lot tree canopy plan, and send written verification with a signature of approval to the city manager or designee prior to final building inspection or prior to final acceptance when there is no final building inspection. E. If any subsequent modifications to an approved parking lot tree canopy plan is required, a revised parking lot tree canopy plan that meets the requirements of part 3 of this section shall be provided that reflect the revisions. ENO OF SECTION Section 13 — Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards Page13 -3 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual . • City ofTigard ,_ Tree Risk Assessment Form Hazard Rating: Probability + The Target + Size of = Overall Risk of Failure Area Defective Part Rating Recommended Hazard Tree Abatement Procedures: Property Address: Location: ❑ Public ❑ Private ❑ Right -of -Way Protected Tree: ❑ Yes ❑ No Tree Species: Diameter at Breast Height (DBH): Tree Height: Crown Spread: Tree Part Subject of Evaluation: Diameter of Subject Tree Part: Distance to Target of Subject Tree Part: Length of Subject Tree Part: Target: Occupancy of Target: ❑ Occasional Use ❑ Intermittent Use ❑ Frequent Use ❑ Constant Use Date of Evaluation: Tree Risk Assessor: ISA Number: Tree Risk Assessor Signature: *Fill out this and supplemental rating form completely and attach: 1) photos of the tree; 2) an aerial photo showing the location of the tree on the subject property; and 3) a supplemental tree risk assessment report more fully describing whether the definition of hazard tree has been met and, if necessary, recommended hazard tree abatement procedures. Appendix 1 Probability of Failure (1 - 5 points) (\ ) One Low Defect is not likely to lead to Minor branch or crown dieback, small wounds, minor defects. 1 point imminent failure, and no further action is required. In many cases, defects might not be recorded. Moderate One or more defects areas well- Several defects present. 2 points established but typically do not lead to • Shell wall exceeds minimum requirement failure for several years. Corrective • Cracks initiated but no extensive decay action might be useful to prevent • Cavity opening or other stem damage less than 30° o of circumference future problems but only if time and • Crown damage or breakage less than 50 " -0 of canopy (30 in pines) money are available. Not the highest • Dead crown limbs with fine twigs attached and bark intact priority for action, these are retain and • Weak branch union such as major branch or codominant stem with monitor situations used to inform included bark budget and work schedules for • Stem girdling roots with less than 40 "0 of circumference compressed subsequent years. • Root damage or root decay affects Tess than 33° 0 of roots within the critical zone • Standing dead tree that is recently dead (still has fine twigs) and no other significant defects Moderately One or more defects areas well - Areas of decay that may be expanding; trees that have developed a recent High established, but not yet deemed to be but not yet critical lean; cracks noted but may be stable; edge trees that 3 points a high priority issue. Additional may adapt and become more stable. testing may be required or, the assessor may feel the problems are not serious enough to warrant immediate action, but do warrant placing the tree on a list of trees to be inspected more regularly. These are Retain and Monitor trees. High The defect is serious and imminent One or more major defects present. 4 points failure is likely and corrective action is • Insufficient shell wall thickness required immediately. These cases • Large cracks, possibly associated with other defects require treatment within the next few • Cavity opening greater than 30". of circumference days or weeks. • Crown damage or breakage more than 50° of canopy (> 30 0 in pines) • Dead crown limbs with no fine twigs and bark peeling away. May be some saprophytic fungal evidence • Weak branch union has crack(s) or decay • Stem girdling root affects 40 °o or more of trunk circumference • More than 33 of roots are damaged within the critical zone • Tree is leaning. Recent root breakage, or soil mounding, or cracks, or extensive decay evident • Standing dead tree, has very few fine twigs, and no other significant defects Extreme The tree or component part is already Multiple high or extreme risk defects present. 5 points failing. An emergency situation where • Shell wall is already cracked and failing treatment is required today. • Major cracks already open, such as hazard beams or split trunks • More than 30% of circumference defective and cracks or decay obvious • Dead crown limbs, no fine twigs, no bark, decay present • Weak branch union has crack(s) and decay • Leaning tree with recent root failure, soil mounding, and cracks or extensive decay • Dead branches hung up or partly failed • Visual obstruction of traffic signs /lights at intersections • Any partly failed component or whole tree • Standing dead trees that have been dead for more than one season with multiple defects such as cracks, decay, damaged roots, shedding bark _ Appendix 1 The Target Area (1 - 4 points) (' ) One Low Sites rated at one point are very rarely used for any long period of time, and people passing through the 1 point area (regardless of how they travel) do not spend a lot of time within the striking range of the tree. There are no valuable buildings or other facilities within striking range. Examples are seldom used back country roads or trails, seldom used overflow or long -term parking, industrial areas where workers drive machines (trucks, forklifts, tractors) with substantial cab protection; natural or wilderness areas; transition areas with limited access; remote areas of yards, parks, or private lands open for public use within set hours. All of these sites have relatively low occupancy within any one day. Moderate Valuable buildings are at the edge off the striking distance, so they would not be seriously damaged even 2 points if the tree did fall down. The site has people within striking range occasionally, meaning less than 50% of the time span in any one day, week, or month, and do not stay within striking range very long. 1xamples include areas that are used seasonally; more remote areas of camping areas or parks; minor rural roads; picnic areas; low to moderate use trails; most park and school playgrounds. ** Moderate to low use parks, parking lots with daily use; secondary roads and intersections, dispersed camping sites, moderate to high use trails, works and /or storage yards. Moderate' The site has valuable buildings within striking range. People are within striking range more than 50% of y the time span in any one day, week, or month, and their exposure time can be more than just passing High by. Examples include secondary roads, trails, and access points; less commonly used parking areas and 3 points trails within parks; trails alongside fairways, bus stops. High The highest rated targets have a) a building within striking range frequently accessed by people, often 4 points for longer periods of time, or high volumes of people coming and going within striking range. Valuable buildings or other structures within striking range that would suffer major structural damage in the event of tree failure or; b) people within striking distance of the tree, or both, seven days a week, all year long, and at all times of the day. Examples include main roads, the busiest streets or highways; high volume intersections power lines;* paths through busy open space areas and parks; short-term parking constantly in use; institutional buildings such as police stations, hospitals, fire stations; shopping areas; highly used walking trails; pick up and drop off points for commuters; golf tees and greens; emergency access routes and /or marshalling areas; handicap access areas; high use camping areas, visitor centers or shelters; residential buildings; industrial areas where workers take outside breaks; development sites where work activity within striking range lasts more than a few hours at a time. *There are very specific safe work practices required when working close to Power Lines. These vary depending on location, but all employ similar principles. * *It is recognized that there is a tendency to rate playgrounds higher simply because children are involved. Most playgrounds are occupied for short periods of time in daylight hours. Overall, their use is infrequent when compared to other locations such as busy streets. Size of Defective Part (1 - 3 points) ('' ) One 1 point Branches or stems up to 10 centimeters (4 inches) in diameter 2 points Branches or stems between 10 to 50 centimeters (4 to 20 inches) in diameter. 3 points Branches or stems greater than 50 centimeters (20 inches) in diameter. *In some cases, there may be large areas of sloughing back bark, dwarf mistletoe brooms, branch stubs, or large bird nests in cavities that pose a risk. The assessor must use his or her judgment to assign a number to these components. In general, the lowest rating (1 point) is reserved for component parts that would not create much impact on a person or property if it were to fail. The highest rating is used for parts that have the potential to kill people or seriously damage property. Appendix 1 Overall Risk Rating and Action Thresholds (` ) One Risk Risk Category Interpretation and Implications Rating 3 Low 1 Insignificant — no concern at all. Y. 4 Low 2 Insignificant — very minor issues. 5 Low 3 Insignificant — minor issues not of concern for many years yet. 6 Moderate 1 Some issues but nothing that is likely to cause any problems for another 10 years or more. 7 Moderate 2 Well defined issues — retain and monitor. Not expected to be a problem for at least another 5 -10 years. 8 Moderate 3 Well defined issues — retain and monitor. Not expected to be a problem for at least another 1 -5 years. 9 High 1 The assessed issues have now become very clear. The tree can still reasonably be retained as it is not likely to fall apart right away, but it must now be monitored annually. At this stage, it may be reasonable for the risk manager /owner to hold public education sessions to inform people of the issues and prepare them for the reality that part or the entire tree has to be removed. 10 High 2 The assessed issues have now become very clear. The probability of failure is now getting serious, or the target rating and /or site context have changed such that mitigation measures should now be on a schedule with a clearly defined timeline for action. There may still be time to inform the public of the work being planned, but there is not enough time to protracted discussion about whether or not there are alternative options available. 11 High 3 The tree, or a part of it has reached a stage where it could fail at any time. Action to mitigate the risk is required within weeks rather than months. By this stage there is not tune to hold public meetings to discuss the issue. Risk reduction is a clearly defined issue and although the owner may wish to inform the public of the planned work, he /she should get on with it to avoid dearly foreseeable liabilities. 12 Extreme This tree, or part of it, is in the process of failing. Immediate action is required. All other, less significant tree work should be suspended, and roads or work areas should be closed off, until the risk issues have been mitigated. This might be as simple as removing the critical part, drastically reducing overall tree height, or taking the tree down and cordoning off the area until final clean up, or complete removal can be accomplished. The immediate action required is to ensure that the clearly identified risk of harm is eliminated. For areas hit by severe storms, where many extreme risk trees can occur, drastic pruning and /or partial tree removals, followed by barriers to contain traffic, would be an acceptable first stage of risk reduction. There is no time to inform people or worry about public concerns. Clearly defined safety issues preclude further discussion. The Table shown above outlines the interpretation and implications of the risk ratings and associated risk categories. This table is provided to inform the reader about these risk categories so that they can better understand any risk abatement recommendations made in the risk assessment report. Notes: Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Street Tree List - Small Stature Trees u 1 to 25' in hei ! ht at maturi Height Spread Canopy Suitable for Under Common Name Scientific Name (feet) (feet) Area Soil Type Powerlines Special Features /Considerations Paperbark Maple Acergriseum 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. all Yes* peeling bark, tolerates some shade Tatman Maple Atertatancum 20' 20' 314 sq. ft. all Yes tolerant of urban stresses Trident Maple Ater buergeranum 25' 20' 314 sq. ft. all Yes tolerant of urban stresses Serviceberry Amelanchier xgrandora 25' 15' 177 sq. ft. well drained Yes white flowers, edible fruit Western Serviceberry Amelanchieralnifolia 20' 20' 314 sq. ft. loam Yes native to Portland metropolitan region \merican Ilornbeam Carpinur caroliniana 25' 20' 314 sq. ft. all No needs ample water Eastern Redbud Cerris canadensis 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. all Yes pink flowers in spring before leaves emerge Glor) bower Tree Clerodendrum tr chotonum 20' 20' 314 sq. ft. all Yes colorful flowers in summer, blue berries in fall Kousa Dogwood Corms kousa 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. all Yes shade tolerant Flowering Dogwood Cornus flonda 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. all Yes large number of varieties available white flowers in May, orange -red fruit persist Lavalle Hawthorne Crataegus x lavallei 25' 20' 314 sq. ft. all Yes into Winter native to Portland metropolitan region, has Black I fawthorne Crataegus douglasii 25' 20' 314 sq. ft. all Yes thorns Golden Desert Ash Fraxinus excelsior 'Golden Desert' 20' 20' 314 sq. ft. all Yes golden twigs flowering . \sh Fraxinus ornus 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. all Ycs fragrant flowers Merrill Magnolia Magnolia x loebnen 'Merrill' 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. all No fragrant white flowers Southern \lalmolia Magnolia grandora'Victoria' or 'Little Gem' 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. all No broadleaf evergreen, large fragrant white flowers Prariefire Crabapple Malus.pp. 'Prariefire' 20' 20' 314 sq. ft. all Yes disease resistant lapanesc Stewartia Stewartiapseeudocamellia 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. loam No needs ample water Japanese Snowbell Stryaxjaponicus 25' 25' 491 sq. ft. well drained Yes white flowers hang down from branches a ne.c Tre Lila S'nn•a reticulata 20' 15' 177 s.. ft. well drained Yes sho , cream' white flowers *These trees have been approved by Portland General Electric (PGE) for planting beneath overhead powerlines Appendix 2 Street Tree List - Medium Stature Trees between 25' and 40' in hei : ht at maturi Height Spread Canopy Suitable for Under Common Name Scientific Name (feet) (feet) Area Soil Type Powerlines Special Features /Consideration Hedge Maple Acereampestre 35' 30' 707 sq. ft. all No tolerant of urban stresses Sunset Maple Acertruncatum x Acerplatanoides 35' 25' 491 sq. ft. all No many varieties available Strawberry Tree Arbutus 'Marina' 30' 30' 707 sq. ft. all No broadleaf evergreen European I lornbeam Carpinus betulus 35' 25' 491 sq. ft. all No dense crown Katsura Cenidipbydlum japonicum 40' 40' 1256 sq. ft. all No requires moist soils Yellowwood. Cladrastis kentuckia 35' 35' 962 sq. ft. all No fragrant, white, pendulous flowers Tune Snow Dogwood Cornus controverra June Snow' 30' 35' 962 sq. ft. well drained No wide spreading, flowers in May /June native to Portland metropolitan region, requires Pacific Dogwood Corner me tallii 40' 30' 707 sq. ft. loam No moist soil and some shade Dove Tree Davidia involucrata 35' 30' 707 sq. ft. well drained No dove -like flowers Raywood Ash Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood' 35' 30' 707 sq. ft. all No smog tolerant Goldenrain Tree Koelreuteriapaniculata 35' 35' 962 sq. ft. all No tolerant of urban stresses Yulan Magnolia Magnolia denudata 35' 30' 707 sq. ft. all No white, fragrant flowers broadleaf evergreen, many other varieties ,Southern Magnolia Magnolia grand ora 'Edith Bogue' 35' 20' 314 sq. ft. all No available Sourwood Oxydendrum arberrum 30' 20' 314 sq. ft. well drained No white, midsummer flowers American Hophomheani Ostrya virginiana 35' 25' 491 sq. ft. all No exfoliating bark texture is attractive Persian Parrotia Parrotiapersica 35' 25' 491 sq. ft. well drained No beautiful bark and fall color Amur Corktree Pbellodendron amurense 40' _ 30' 707 sq. ft. all No fragrant leaves and fruit Gallery Pear Pyrus calleyana 40' _ 25' 491 sq. ft. all No many varieties available Ca scara Rbamnuspurshiana 35' _ 25' 491 sq. ft. all No native to Portland metropolitan region pest and disease resistant, substitute for Frontier Elm Ulmus 'Frontier' 40' 30' 707 s . ft. all No American Elm Appendix 2 Street Tree List - Large Stature Trees over 40' in hei : ht at maturi Height Spread Canopy Suitable for Under Common Name Scientific Name (feet) (feet) Area Soil Type Powerlines Special Features /Consideration Red Maple Ater rubrum 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No many large stature varieties available • I Iackbcrry Celtic occidentalis 45' 35' 962 sq. ft. any No tolerant of urban stresses, deep rooted European Beech Fagus glvatica 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. well drained No beautiful bark Whit: . \sh Fraxinus americana 60' 45' 1590 sq. ft. any No plant seedless varieties Orcl'on Ash Fraxinur latifolia 60' 30' 707 sq. ft. any No native to Portland metropolitan region Green 1 s Fraxinuspennry1vanica 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No plant seedless varieties many large stature varieties available, plant males Maidenhair Tree Ginkgo biloba 60' 45' 1590 sq. ft. any No only I loncylocust Gleditsia triacantbo: var. inermis 45' 35' 962 sq. ft. any No thornless, tolerant of urban stresses Kentucky Coffeetree Gymnocladus dioicus 65' 50' 1963 sq. ft. any No fragrant flowers 'tulip Tree L eriodendron tulipifera 60' 30' 707 sq. ft. any No beautiful fall color Southern Magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 70' 60' 1963 sq. ft. any No broadleaf evergreen, large fragrant white flowers Blackgpm Nyssa glvatica 45' 25' - 491 sq. ft. any No beautiful fall color London Planetree Platanus x acenfolia 'Bloodgood' 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No disease resistant, pollution tolerant Scotch Pine Pinus cylvesdu 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No evergreen conifer, striking orange bark Oregon White Oak Quercusgarryana 65' 50' 1963 sq. ft. any No native to Portland metropolitan region Willow Oak Quercuspbelloc 60' 45' 1590 sq. ft. any No tolerant of urban stresses Red Oak Querrus rubra 60' 45' 1590 sq. ft. any No beautiful fall color American Linden Tilia americana 60' 30' 707 sq. ft. any No tolerant of urban stresses $terling Silver I,indea Tilia tomentosa 'Sterling Silver' 45' _ 30' 707 sq. ft. any No dark green leaves with silver undersides Zclkova Zelkova :errata 65' 50' 1963 s.. ft. an' No attractive shade tree Appendix 3 Parking Lot Trees (recommended for 1 arldn: lots, lar:e stature eight Spread Canopy Soil Suitable forinIM Special Features / Common Name Scientific Name ' _ „ (feet) (feet) Area Type Under Powerlines Consideration Bigleaf Maple Acermacrophyllum 65' 50' 1963 sq. ft._ any No native to Portland metropolitan region Red Maple Acerrubrum 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No brilliant red fall color European Beech Fagus.rylvatica _ 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft_ well drained No beautiful bark White . \sh Fraxinus americana 60' 45' 1590 sq. ft. any No plant seedless varieties Green Ash Fraxinus pennrykanica 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No plant seedless varieties many large stature varieties available, plant Maidenhair Tree Ginkgo biloba 60' 45' 1590 sq. ft. any No males only Kentucky Coffeetree Gymnocladus dioicus 65' 50' 1963 sq. ft. any No fragrant flowers broadleaf evergreen, large fragrant white Southern Magnolia Magnoliagrandiora 70' 60' 2826 sq. ft. any No flowers . \ustrian Pink Pinus nigra 55' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No evergreen conifer I {astern White Pine Pinar strobus 70' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No evergreen conifer Scotch Pine Pinus sylvest is 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No evergreen conifer, striking orange bark I .ondon 1'lanetrec Platanru x acerifolia 'Bloodgood' 50' 40' 1256 sq. ft. any No disease resistant, pollution tolerant ( ) regon White Oak Quercusgarryana 65' 50' _ 1963 sq. ft. any No native to Portland metropolitan region Willow Oak (Quercusphellos 60' 45' 1590 sq. ft. any No tolerant of urban stresses Red Oak Querrus cobra 60' 45' 1590 sq. ft. any No beautiful fall color _ _ graceful vase shaped tree, disease resistant Accolade Elm Ulmus 'Morton' 70' 60' 2826 sq. ft. any No substitute for American elm I,acebark Elm Ulmusparvifolia 60' 50' 1963 sq. ft. any No interesting mottled bark rounded spreading crown, disease resistant Pioneer Elm Ubnus 'Pioneer' 50' 50' 1963 sq_ ft. any No substitute for American elm Oregon Myrtle Umbiaaolifermica 70' 50' 1963 sq. ft. any No broadleaf evergreen Zclkova Zelkova serrate 65' 50' 1963 sq. ft. any No attractive shade tree \ppcndix 4 Columnar Trees cano 1 s . read of less than 20 feet at maturi , small stature Spread anopv Soil Suita a for ..`. Common Name Scientific Name (feet) Area Type Under Powerlines Special Features/Considerations Armstrong Maple Acer rubrum 'Armstrong' 45' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No orange -red fall color Bowhall Maple Acerrubrum 'Bowhall' 40' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No bright red fall color Frans Fontaine Hornbeam Carpinu= betakes 'Frans Fontaine' 35' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No narrowest of the Ca rpinus b. cu ltivars Dawyck Put ple Beech Fagxr rylvatica 'Dawyck Purple' 40' 12' 113 sq. ft. any No purple leaves for entire growing season Princeton Sentry Ginkgo Gin biloba 'Princeton Sentry' 40' 15' 177 sq. ft. _ any No seedless, bright yellow fall color Arnold Tulip Tree Liriodendron tulipifera 'Arnold' 40' 10' 79 sq. ft. any No fast grower Edith Bute Magnolia Magnolia,grandiflora 'Edith Bogue' 30' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No broadleaf ever; een _ Galaxy Magnolia Magnolia x 'Galaxy' 30' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No showy pink flowers Tschonoskii Crabapple Malta tschonoskii 30' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No good fall color Arnold Sentinel Austrian Pine Pinar nigra 'Arnold Sentinel' 35' 10' 79 sq. ft. any No evergreen conifer Fastigiate White Pine Pinta strobtu ' Fastigiata' 30' 10' 79 sq. ft. well drained No evergreen conifer Quaking Aspen Popular tremuloides 30' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No native to the Portland Metro region Capital Pear Pyms calleryana 'Capital' 35' 12' 113 sq. ft. any No glossy summer foliage Chanticleer Pear Pyriu calleryana 'Chanticleer' 40' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No resistant to fireblight Columnar Sargent Cherry Priam saigentii 'Columnaris' 35' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No pink flowers and reddish bark Skyrocket Oak Quercur mbar 'Fastigiata' 45' 15' 177 sq. ft. well drained No may hold brown leaves into winter Quermt roburx2. alba Crimson Spire Oak 'Crimschmidt' 45' 15' 177 sq. ft. well drained No red fall color Giant . \ rborvitae evergreen conifer, species native to the " Virescens" Thujaplieata 'Virescens' 25' 12' 113 sq. ft. moist No Portland Metro Region Corinthian linden Tilia cordata 'Corzam' 45' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No narrowest of the linden cultivars Columnar Zelkova Zelkova serrata Musashino" 45' 15' 177 sq. ft. any No fine textured leaves Page 1 of 1 \Ppcndix 5 Native Trees Height Spread Canopy Suitable for • 1, ommon Name Scientific Name feet feet) Area Stature Under Powerlines Prima Habitat T 'es Grand Fir Adits a 150' 40' 1256 sq. ft. Large No Wetland, Riparian, Upland Big -leaf Maple Acermacropbylhan _ 65' 50' 1963 sq. ft. Large No Upland — Rcd Alder Alnus nrbra 100' 40 1256 sq. ft Large No Riparian, U_ Aland Madronc Arbntns menial 40' 30' 707 sq. ft. Medium No Upland Pacific Dogwood Cornea nuttaMi 40' 30' 707 sq. ft. Medium No _ Upland _ Black Hawthorn Crataegus douglasii 25' 20' - 314 sq. ft. Small Yes Wetland, Riparian, Upland Oregon Ash Fraxiaus latifolia 60' 30' 707 sq. ft. Large No Wetland, R parian Ponderosa Pin. Pinny ponderosa 200' 30' 707 sq. ft. Large No Upland Black Cottonwood Populus balsamifera sip. trichocarpa 175' 40' 1256 sq. ft Large No Wetland, Riparian (_>uaking \spen - - Populus tremuloides 30' 15' 177 sq. ft. Medium No Wetland, Riparian Bitter Cherry Prunus emarginata 30' 20' 314 sq. ft. Medium No Riparian, Upland Douglas Fir Psendotsuga mentiiesii 180' 40' 1256 sq. ft. Large No Upland Oregon White Oak Quer-ciesganyana 65' 50' 1963 sq. ft. Large No Upland Cascara Rhammupurrhiana 35' 25' 491 sq. ft. Medium No Riparian, Upland Pacific Willow Salix lxcida ssp. lasiandra 40' 30' 707 sq. ft. Medium No Wetland, Riparian Rigid Willow Salix rigida var. macrogemma 30' 20' 314 sq. ft. Small No Wetland, Riparian $couler Willow Salix scouleriana 40' 40' 1256 sq. ft. Medium No Wetland, Riparian, Upland Pacific Yew Taxer bnroifolia 40' 30' 707 sq. ft. Medium No Riparian, Upland Western Red Cedar _ Thrjaplicata 100' 30' 707 sq. ft. Large No Wetland, Riparian, Upland Western I lemlock Toga heterophylla 150' 40' 1256 sq. ft. Large No Riparian, Upland Appendix 6 Nuisance Tree List Common Name Scientific Name Photos Photos2 Photos3 Norway maple Acerplatanoides leaf detail fruit detail flower detail Sycamore maple Acer pseudoplatanus leaf detail fruit detail flower detail Tree -of- heaven Ailanthus altissima leaf detail fruit detail flower detail European white birch Betula pendula leaf detail fruit detail flower detail English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna leaf detail fruit detail flower detail English holly Ilex aquifolium leaf detail fruit detail flower detail Princess tree Paulownia tomentosa leaf detail fruit detail flower detail White poplar Populus alba leaf detail fruit detail flower detail Sweet cherry Prunus avium leaf detail fruit detail flower detail Black locust Robinia pseudoacacia leaf detail fruit detail flower detail European mountain ash Sorbus aucuparia leaf detail fruit detail flower detail Siberian elm Ulmuspumila leaf detail fruit detail flower detail NULL I IA,/ lt_v IAA," I1v 111-v. INCLUDING. Jr B NOT LIMITED ._ - I J A NO CHANGES SHALL BE MADE TO ANY ASPECT OF THE APPROVED URBAN FORESTER PIM WTNO T WRITTEN CONSENT FROM 1!E PROJECT AR9ORIST AND CRY ARBORIST. -- Gwt T -- _.. T- �� I _ Y � _. -- - vwv _ l_T — _ -'_ - - - B. TWINE FOR CLFMNC, GRADING. ND INSUUAIKN O Mu MIN PROTECTION MEASURES: WORK BEGN IN THREE (3) REELS OF PFT PERMIT INSURANCE BY THE CRY. TREE - _( ____ - - _ - _ - - _ r..a _ - , _ _ _ _ '- _ . -._ _ _ - PROTECTION WILL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY GROUND OISRIRBANCE WORK. CLEARING, AND GRADING 111.1. 111.1. FOLLOW. _._ o , R l _ _ >„„ _ C. O, ARKING PLACING NEAR TREES. NO PERSON WY CONDIICR NF! /CRAY WHIN THE PROTECTED AREA OF NW TREE DESIGNATED TO RERAN i P ' ^ - - _ . I EQUIPMENT. PUCING SOLVERS. STO BUENA BUL MARK NA SOL DEPOSITS, DUMPING CONCRETE WASHOUT AND LOOM BURN HOLES. - - - r N LANE SAp(T -- • % — - O -- D. ATTACHMENTS TO TREES DURING CONSTRUCTOR - PO PERSON 9MLL ATTACH NO OBJECT TO ANY TREE DESIGNATED FOR PRESERVATION ` MOW SDEYWK CURB 1K,YI TO PROTECT EXISTING TREES PROPOSED WATER ER $ E. PROTECTIVE BNIIER. PRIOR 10 NFY GROUND DISTURBANCE BY THE CONTRACTOR: -. - _ __ w.,- __ __ _ _ I I POS WAITRON T PROV6ED - I _ I - - - 1. SALE ERECT AID WIITAN AS SFOMN. RFNIL FENCES STAY VI57UF LL TREE BE CONSTRUCTED PROTELTIOM FENCNO 5 FOOT C ALONG iF TALL E MET OUTER H. SECURE D TO EDGE A ID COMPl EKOT FOOT E FOOT SIIRROIIHIIIG TALL LEON POSTS 110 . PROI P0615 SHALL N CCTFD AREA O BE ML PIACm PROlEC1ED FIAEIIER THAN TREES OR _ .. -, - \ a . .. - - w <� - I � ` - .G .. - TO STREET PLAN A \ 9D w • .. , ,�� GROUPS OF TREES T (or _ - .� . , - _ _ _ t ! ,t , W1 W IGAIION SLEEVE (DP.) 8 FEET O.C. MART. � ✓ - - ✓ , �I 2. MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAR WITH MULCH 70 A OEPIH OF AT LEAST SIX (6) INCHES, OR WITH PLTWOOD OR SIMILAR W1tRW OVER THE ROOT ZONE OF A TREE N ORDER TO ` �� _ E %6TING SfoRM PROTECT RaoTS FR011 DAMAGE GYISED g( ITEM / EEQUIPPER LE w:..G_ �, \� ^ / // � � v �:� ?_`Goo `�, - - b PROPOSED STORM S. SIMI PRO OBIT EXCAVATION OR COMPAC LNG OF FARM OR O HO PoENNM TLLY DAMAGING ACTMTIES WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTOR ZONE / A WSW WE STAND /1 Eb51$3 TREE SAN /2 A .T IAN; ..... ... -. �;. I 4. WY BE I✓EOURED TO MNIMQE ROOT MANGE BY EXCAVATOR O A TWO (2) 2 ) DFFP FEET . �� / M '` � / V Nu S z TREES R BE RETAINED. . AT THE EDGE OF ME TREE PROTECTION ZONE. TO CLEANLY SEVER ME ROOTS OF Q . / ` ` ` `C r NR GATION i $ , 1 _ . I 5. WY BE REQUIRED TREES T 70 ME CORRECIRE PRIAPIC PERFORMED B WEE ON PR6ERYFD TREES N OiOEN TO 601D DAVE FROM WpIF.R,' OR BUILDING ACTIVITY. . MAY BE RECORD) TO _ / �� YAM AN TREES 71ROIdOUT C016TRI1LTON PERIOD BY WOW AID FEWIIRNG. �. PRESERVED TREE STAND (IYP.) X 4 , 10' SETBACK 5,7� 4 d 1 11 M SMEAR I 6. SHALL MNN FENCING N N THE TREE PROTECTION FENCING PALE NAIL THE PROJECT PROW NO CITY AMORIST AUTHORIZES MDR MIEN& TRA A 10 SETB CK „ .�� T. SHALL ENSURE THAT ANY LANDSCAPING DONE N RE TREE PROTECTION ZONE SUBSEQUENT TO THE aEMOVAL of THE BARRIERS S *L BE AceOMPLrsnEu WITH uaT WORM WORM OR `��` ` SENSOR NANO ARIA 38.62 G to , I I� BlEM11C CNYFLOPE -• WAD LIBOR. 160 PUTT W7EAAlS WITH COIIPAIBLE WATER REOUItElENRs TO TREE TO BE PRESERVED AND DIRECT SPRAY BROWN WAY FROM 7RUNS. F. T _ \ �\ 4 SF \`P I / -1 A �� S, �� HE GRADE SITYLL NOT BE ELEVATED OR REDUCED WTDRI THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE RADIAL THE PROJECT MBORISFS AUTHORIZATION. THE PROJECT AMORIST WY MEOW COVERAGE } A .; I _ __ n _ OF UP TO ONE IOU OF DE AREA O THE TREE'S ROOT ZONE WTH LIGHT SONS (NO CLAY) 10 THE ANNUM DEPTH H:CESWO TO CARRY OUT GRADING OR LANDSCAPING PINTS. F R ' � v < \ \�, A A� - NIL NOT 11PEIR 710 SURVIVAL OF THE TREE AERATION DEICES WY BE REQUIRED 70 DONE THE TREE'S S1IRMML \ 1 A ' 1 T / 5' SIDEYMD SETBAK G F 111E GRADE ADJACENT TO A PRESERVED TREE 6 RASED SUCH TINT IT COULD SLOUGH OR ERODE IRO THE TREE PROTECTIN ZONE, R SHALL BE PERW/ENILY STARED TO \ / , a /f / G TREE PROTECTOR FENCE '�' ' � ow NA — 1 PREVENT SUFFOCATION OF THE ROOTS. / `�_ H. AN INERV BORL9RFACE SHALL NOT 8E ILS ONSTR WI IN 7110E PROTECTIN Z01E a NT EPEE M E PRESERVED NnDUT THE AURHORRAION OF THE PROJECT ARB OR ROOT if V\Y \. �/ , /� ( � 1�VIII NDIICED M111GE TO TIE IiERVl0115 SU6��ILSTRIILTION EIIODS ND�OR USE OF NRAIOM OEYICES TO ENSIWE THE TREES $URVNAL ND TO YINYIZE 110 POIENTML F ROOT / \ �' 1 5' REAR 1 � �X E71DTNG WEDND (IYP.) / / // \\ . ,� I. TO THE GREATEST EXTENT PRACTICA UH11Y TR UNDER EN O' CHES SHALL BE =WED OUTSIDE OF THE TREE PROTECTOR ZONE OF TREES TO BE PRESERVED. THE PROTECT AMORIST WY REWIRE 1_ / / � � �YI!- YARD SETBACK { THAT LIES BE TUNNELED ER THE ROOTS TREES TO BE PRESERVED IF TFE PROJECT ARBOWST DEIFAHIES 1WT TRENCHING WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE 710 ORAES O' / - \ ./ ,4/ � / / V I IAOTAT `� , r s _ �' . ` 1 , ` . , - -` - t / / , lilli ----'' \ , ` ` THE TREES SURVIVAL. I \ \ 1305" p r 9 'I j I J. DIECIOWL FELLING. DIRECTOR FELLING OF TREES SHALL BE USED TO AVOID DRAGE 10 TREES DEEGA1FD FOR PRESERVATION. / j I I VpUSE \' 111.111 J K. *IMMORAL REQUIREMENTS. THE PROJECT ARBORIST WY REQUIE MEMO & TREE PRESERVATION MEASURES WHICH ARE CONSISTENT WITH TREE CARE INDUSTRY STANDARDS. / ma c... w.. I'J SISNfrwT� / /� � � ) A :'; 8073 sF srt - ..- :I / DREW TREE STAND 1 II / � E�) / ' / / EIOSINC•) ' f .41? IX6ITNG TREE TO BE REMOVID X / 4 ' - . - __ _ . _ �� IXISIING TREE DRIP LINE �"`�`�"`�Y"�• , / - _ IXISIING TREE CANOPY AREA r / 1••LY�i - - PROPERTY LLE _ _ i --T w ' _ , ' ,-.'•• CANOPY AREA 1 ' 1 / A TREE PROTECTION FENCE 1 1 1 ,;' �u1; IrX 1 I R° / ITART / Tr' HAP C BD - ';), N' P ?S 101BE' 1, I PROPOSED SANITARY SAN ° $ / SCALE SHOWN 2S FOR FULL DOSING WATER w., \ / I SIZE SHEET ( 241(36') ONLY PROPOSED WATER WOM POSTS SHOULD BE =BMA= INN N Y STEEL O /RE NY ®[ PROPOSED WATER METER 1 1. ALL PO11S O LOTS 1 AND 2 NOT OCCUPIED BY BIEDNCS OR PAWING TO BE LANDSCAPE AID RR CANED. 8' O.C. MX WHY 2. ALL NON -WINE VEGETATKN WWII THE 50' STREAM BUFFER N TRACT A TO BE REVVED ND REPLACED WIM NM ? I,� * u 1)CR p i : W 6 f An m m TIPS VEGETATION MA 1ELPORNFY IRRIGATION FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR OR UNTIL FONTS ARE ESTABLISH.D. DOMING WATER METER 0 ROOT PROTECTION 701E NOON. I 7 SOME P GAUGE GAWV® 00)11)NG STORM ENOOACHIE7T ILO 11E ROOT PROTECTION ZONE 6 ALLOWED NTH PROJECT ARBORIST APPROVAL AS DESCRBED N DE I WE 11W1 ,,, FOLOMLG NOTES: PROPOSED STORM 1. EXMOOR N THE 10P 24 O THE SOIL N THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA SHOULD BEGIN AT THE EXCAVATION UNE THAT 6 CLOSEST TO 110 TREE. 2. 110 EXCAVATION SIOOLD BE DOZE BY WED /SHOVEL OR WITH MID A BHLIOOE A MAN WITH A SHOVEL, PRUNING SHEARS. ,�• .. �� EXISTING CAS � _ _ _ AND A PRUNING SAW. PROPOSED CAS 3. 0 DONE BY HAND, ALL ROOTS 1' OR LARGER SOLD BY PRUNED AT TIE EXCAVATION UIE MGM POSTS MOST OF EX6ING DIME . 4. IF DONE WITH A BACKHOE (MOST HOLY SCEWRO), 1104 THE OPERATOR SHALL STMT THE CUT AT TIE EXCAVATION LW I 0 I Eq )MALI I/3 If ND CAREFULLY 'FEEL' FOR R00TS/RESISUNCE M10N IH1E 6 RE56TNK:E. THE MR WTH THE SHOVEL IRNO DIGS TOTAL IOOIT OF POST — - - MR AROUND ARO 1H R0015 NO PRUNES Of ROOTS LARGER TURN 1' METER. PROPOSED ELECTRIC — — 1, JOHN ARBORIST, ATTEST THAT 1. WW. roa FOR WEE FRORCTIOI OM OMLt. PROPOSED IRRIGATOR THIS TREE CANOPY SITE PLAN 2 NUONES OF MORON ALA MLLE ESr40Bm M NE FEND N WE ABONM PIM 10 MINIBOOM/ MEETS ALL OF THE 3. MOWN OF PROTECTION /PEA SIDMW BE SAID NI RAIDED N NBORST APPROXIWTE 511011 BED LOCATION REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 10, 1 M DA *0 0 1 ° ' PART 2, OF THE CITY OF TIGARO 4. NM DAME Root ZONE DO NOT WW1 OR SW LARGE ROOTS MD URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL. s DOME WOAD E WOMB UROKRnR CORSIR CORN. MD L ■ AL TREE rFN�IM, FENCE SIONIFlCANT HABITAT BOUNDARY — '-- - - - - - AET JOHN ARBORiST, CERTIFIED ARBORIST I I PNN -0000 TREE PRESERVATION /REMOVAL PLAN BY JOHN AMORIST, CERTIFIED ARBORIST •PN -0000, WITH ABC COLLABORATIVE. DATE: 07 -11 -2011 REVISIONS: OFFICE LOCATED AT: =MP BY KRJ MANN In 9A EXAMPLE TREE 10061ST STREET. SUITE 1 'R"'°" DoT 1U& AS SHOW" EVERGREEN HEIGHTS PARTITION JOB NUMBER TIGARD. OREGON 97223 OFOED OK KRJ 2001 PRESERVATION AND PH (503) 555 -XXXX PR EPARED FOP: JCHN SMITH 190 SW 147TH ST. eirX FAX: (503) 555 -YXXX PO BOX 111 EMAIL: lNT'OAARf_CfILUWORATIVF _ flW y/ C CO TIGARD OREGON 91u3 SHEET REMOVAL SITE PLAN LICENSED IN OR. NA, N ID A .w.�An I „ „i,t, FR 503 - 909_5555 TI OREGON N a. AN n,M Gw. �, APPENDIX 7 1,7 FAX 503- 909 -5556 AXON OD TA%MAR 2 40 25 =... . °G. 1 STREET TREES E ' E RG E N LANE SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE COMMON SPACING -- £ Nvs rr+s Mrs - ` '''Alk ACER RURI1UM ' ARMSTRONG' ARMSTRONG RED MAPLE 2' CAL B&B AS SHOWN 1 - - 1 — l ---r— — - — - - ( / ,.... , - - - " - . _PLANTER STRIP: AREA OF POTENTIAL SOIL ■ 1. :. _ _ - _ t - - r- COMPACTION; SEE NOTES 1 & 2 THIS ,.:' - - - - - - PROPOSED SANITARY S SHEEP. SEWER I NOTE: _ - -- ' ARMSTRONG RED MARE I ROOT BARRIER PER 1. PLANTER STRIP AREAS ALONG EVERGREEN TARE AND SW 147TH ARE AREAS OF POTFNTNL SOL COMPACTION, LIMING TREE GROWTH. 5 0011 ,� p, R 'S COMPACTION OCCURS, BACKHOE TURNING SHOULD BE USED TO LOOSEN SOIL WNUF TION = \ SPECIFICATIONS / 2. BAC TURNING' REMOVE ANY LAYERS OF 6000 TOPSOIL. SPREAD 3' -4' OF ORGANICS NICK -UG NIN R OR ESCS (EXPANDED co - ■ ' ' 0 /4111102::: `__ _ 00 G 7 � ' 4:144.• 4:144.• SHALE/CALCINE CLAY) AMENDMENT O1ER THE AREA PRIOR TO TURNING THE SOIL MAINTAINING A SAE DISTANCE FROM PAYING, SIDEM'ALXS, SPE �J_` 4 ./ r — ( - - AND STRUCTURES, USE BACKHOE 00 TURN SOIL TO 36' DEPTH. BREAK SOIL INTO LARGE PEDS AID LOOSELY INCORPORATE THE SOIL !' - 1: I . ..\, -.p. � i -�- AMENDMENT. MINIM A SLOPE OF COMPACTED SOIL AT THE EDGE OF OF PAVING 50 AS N0T TO UNDERMINE 7HE PAVING SUB -BASE. NAND `�\ _ `` /' �. _ _ �. ` ` ` , L / / - .� ; 1 - � - C., TURNING MAY BE N Y ALONG THE WOES OF PAVING AND AT WALLS, DD NOT TILL TO A DEPTH GREATER TWN THE BOTTOM OF `, /- // �� ` 7 FOOTING. AFTER TURNING, 000IG, RE- SPREAD TOPSOIL AND ADD 3' -5' OF YARD WASTE ORGANIC AYQDMENi OVER THE SURFACE AND UGHILY TILL % / \ T\ SIDEWALK i • $- TO BREAK THE SOIL INTO TEXTURE SUITABLE TO FINE GRADE. ! //• �_ • _ 1 . S. . _ .,k ■ / � :1 16 - { � ______n!' / . -I I RRIGATION PROVIDED • / i g /10111 // i " .' I : - - 1 1 TO SIH ET PUNIER i •10002 ' k LOT 2 41:10 t /• O `\ DCV FOR IRRIGATION /1•000 / // 00 10007 �l �"` -. - 5;705 SF . • . ; • 5,056 SF . / 7 // / I 1 P. / ` + �- — --- -\ .... -\ _ . I W III DOSING TREE v � --- ��-' 1 000 _ , � \ v - PLANTED TREE MATURE DRIPUNE • 1 1 \' - _I EASING TREE CANOPY AREA //, \ � PAPA ' CANOPY AREA TRACT A \ / - . ] ' - LAWN ' v , i TREE PROTECTION FENCE • SENSITIVE LAND ARUM \ 10 � • • � 38,624 SF V 01 V ' � . ' . I I E%ISING . _ SAMTARf / + . 4�. 1 ` PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT - . i 50' STREAM BUFE,ER V 1 1 2 - ( PROPOSED SANITARY SAN � 21;4:4: �� // 1 COSTING WATER ,yJ J I PROPOSED WATER 1 4 /, ° L PROPOSED WATER METER . / 1 � • • r � � �Il 0 � SETBACK . , , _ . MOW WATER METER E / / TREE IMPURE EXISTING STORM . / / - �1 / PROPOSED STORM u =• � � • • _ •% /• DOSING GAS / . 1 018 X 15 REAR YARD SEf&CK - OO o:— - y PROPOSED GAS S �_ PROPOSED MFICAN HABITAT ' / �- 10021 r PROPOSED 10* //://// / � / � � 1 SIGNIFICANT HABITAT BOUNDARY y / �;' I - 1111111 SICNFENO fV�BITAT BOUILWYi // / I EK151M0 ND�E ' / /� I DECK I / / / / f II � SCALE 1" FEET )' , -1 / ,/ _ ` c I. / , ,/ ) 8,173 SF r J DATE: 07 -11 -2011 REVISIONS: x90400,: KRJ CRANK NO.: 9A EXAMPLE TREE OFFICE LIXArEU Al gAMN Or KR2 vNT AS SHOWN JOB NUMBER T °II 1ST STREET. SUITE 1 EVERGREEN HEIGHTS PARTITION 1 401— E 2001 1000 STREET. . SUI patn . KRJ CANOPY SITE PLAN P "' (353) 355 D, OREGON E PREPARED FOR JOHN 9,11111 9,11111 190 SW 147TH ST. 01: : I:i) 0ARC_C PO 80 0 FOR SINGLE LOT L IIC7 N : D I NAOR , I &R1IRAT 1YF. C SHEET , w IWAR1Ai.., NINA NIF...I,NAIµ P 0, -909 -N 5 ucENSen IN OR, IA, & In , w+ n PH: 503-909-5555 TIGARD OREGON JOHN � °.re7,e ®n APPENDIX 10 TAXLOT 1700 FAX 50.5 - 909 - 5556 TAXMAP 2 4E 25 °�°r "M^° I I q L J PLANT LEGEND -- • �_- ___ -T _.s_ __ __ STREET TREES I _ r ,:• -_ - - - -'"` SYMBOL ORES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING g - - -- - -- EVERGR: EN LANE RZ — J — 9 I I - - 3 ACER RUBRUM 'ARMSTRONG' ARMSTRONG RED MAPLE Y CAL B&B AS SHOWN MA -- _____- -- __ __ i _ -- - -- PROPOSED WATER METER -- __ - _ ,`., -- _ N ,. ' - - 4 WEROUA GRANDIFLORA'EDITH BOGUE' EDITH BOGUE MAGNIXMAGNOLIA 2 CAL B&B AS SHORN - -- - _ - COSTING SIDEWALK CURB TIGHT TO PROTECT EXIS/INC TREES <. _ _ i - ARMSTRO MAP LE -J I I - - L 4 0 q > / a ! L /�� t IRRIGATION SLEEVE (1YP . 14� * / , / i • // N A M� illi �� M 1 ' NG STORM TURNING SHOULD BE USED T I. R SRI O LOOSEN4SOIL AREAS OF FORMIC SOIL COMPACTION, UMR9RC TREE GROWTH. T SOIL COMPACTOR i . +� !S IRRIGATION PRONGED C b z. ROME TURNING: REMOVE ANY DYERS of GOOD TOPSOIL SPREAD 3 -4' OF ORGANICS ( -LXOUN COMPOST) OR ESCS (EXPANDED SHALE/CALCINE SHALE/CALCINE !�� CLAY) CLAY) AMENDMENT OVER THE AREA, PRIOR TO TURNING THE SOIL. NTANING A SAFE DISTANCE FROM PAM, SIDEWALKS, AND STRUCTURES, USE BACKHHOE \ � b � EXISTNIGG TREE STMp +1 / / EASING T REE STAND /Z " �� , £ o TO STREET PLANTER 1 b PROPOSED STORM TO ilAtN SqL TO JB' DEPTHS() BREAK SOIL KM LARGE PEDS MID LOOSELY NCORPORATE THE SOR AMETIDMENf. IWMAIN A OPE IPm OIL AT �� 4 ''' „ ' FOR NRIGIIION JL. TFE EDGE DF OF PAYNG 50 AS NOT TO UNOERIMNE THE PANNG S� -&SE HAND TURT9NC WY BE NECESSAIO' MONG TIE EDGES SL OF OF PA ACT AND S AT PUNTED TfEE / I WALLS, DD NOT 111 TO A DEPTH GREATER THAN THE BOTTOM OF FOOTING. AFTER TURING, RE- SPREAD TOPSOIL AND ODD J' -5' OF YARD WASTE ORGANIC m t STAND /2 / Rl TREE PROTECTION FENCE 11 - I _ �� I AMENDMENT OVER THE SURFACE AND UGHILY TEL TO BRE* THE SOIL INTO TEXTURE SIITABIE TO FILE GRADE. �, PRESERVED TREE SEAM °W.) 1 �I m Q m ,,, o o I 5 ,0513 SF II I aumm irtf TRACT ■ A s.ms STAND i1 �. _ A V \ , SEN SITIVE LAND AREA / � M X10 SETBACK I "I EU�fF BOOUE MAGNOLIA \00 sew ae szn SF 1, 1 ' — BUNG DDELO -- ,, I Tr; l )T ` - 1 , 1 j I, 5' SIDEYARD SE TBACK --I f ! �i EXSIERG T REE a9rxTNe ` - , - " _ 1�> 8 , W / H :? p j - , F I / // � , � TS' REAR YAR 3 ) / '9 % '' � SEr cK I� CANOPY AREA \ .. \ 34 4_ -.A. �� SIGNIFICANT HABITAT �� o,r TREE PROTECTION FENCE BOUNDARY � , .� A i NOT BAARIFA !MING SMEARY HOU A • - :k I - _ I PUNTER STEW: AREA OF PROPOSED SINTARf s "" dir# PMENBAL SOL CpIPACTION; • - � � , SEE NOTES 1 a 2 THIS w.. / 1 3 _ � SHEET. COSTING WATER I _7 SI(RAF1GVRf / 8.173 SF WBITAT BOUNDARY �' / / / , _ c , t o'' . / 'a i PROPOSED WATER EfOSTNG TREE STAND .J 1 - II . • � PROPOSED WATER METER / / / / I I I - � - Ill FASTING WATER METER D I / ; / ( , PUNTED TREE I e - _- Y - EXISTING STORM - - - - - - - - - I / T E%STIOM. STAID �3 fN PROPOSED STORM / / ) ' - i l.. 10019 _ - PROPERTY LNE EXISTING GAS • �_ - — - - - 'u — ,. ,./ FPO PROPOSED GAS o — l ' I / I 1 1 F:' 1 I i _ 70_1 SCALE 1 = 20 FEET COSMIC ELECTRIC — - - - — � ( Ltr OT 1 14 0 =1 '11 l ; / o W o P ROPOSED ELECTRIC I i / 1 SCALE E SHEET SHOWN !S FOR ONLY PROPOSED IRRIGATION AFRO%IW1E STREW BED LOCATION RETARD I` SIGW91GWf NMBTTAT BOUNDARY ---- - - - - -- I, JOHN ARBORIST, ATTEST THAT THIS TREE CANOPY SITE PLAN MEETS ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS N SECTION 10, PART 2, OF THE CITY OF TIGARD URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL. JOHN ARBORIST, CERTIFIED ARBO I T PNN-5000 DATE 07 -11 -2011 REVISIONS: or'r1rL ux.ATEIi Ar: m KRJ MAW a • 9A EXAMPLE HST STREET. SIi1TE 1 H>: WT JOB NUMBER ®IN TIGARD. OREGON 97225 0E0C KRJ wu: AS SHOWN EVERGREEN HEIGHTS PARTITION NA 2001 TREE CANOPY PH: (503) 5555 -XXX PREPARED PREPARED FOR: JOHN SWTH TAX: (503) Say -:IXXX PO BOX 111 190 SW 147TH ST. SHEET ETL: 1NPODAHC_COLLABORATTYE.. fl1N COLLABORATIVE B7YeJ OREGON AIBOIBf SITE PI AN G„ IN „a W> < �..,,...w,,., ..�, .. ,� A.,, PH. 503 SITS 5555 TIGARD GON - - - ..— 8 I 1 ROOT BARRIER PER TOTAL SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION FOR TREE 'A': MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS 0, go OPEN SOIL VOLUME = 100' x 5' x 3' = 1,500 C.F. 1 -- COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 0 C.F. `�\ ° TOTAL SOIL VOLUME = 1,500 C.F. * °*' 110 l' SIM w 1,500 C.F. IS GREATER THAN THE SOIL VOLUME REQUIRED BY A STREET TREE IN AN 18' RIGHT OF WAY (800 C.F.) THEREFORE THIS � I SOIL VOLUME MEETS CITY REQUIREMENTS. w .1111. W w Q r_ ( ..■ --- ,�� E 0 = TREE 'A' ( — \- IrAd cc In 0 o z CURB 1 \ _ I 18' RIGHT • "t7 ,r`\:. ? = .,': m OF WAY It ' r > ='. Z U r T REE 'A, Q t ` ::....:%, �- QCs. �,� lip Ao.r...r.L-2,:z.,_.-3.t.vt. ..,.. ., 4 ' I, iir, 6 ,, A, --;,.,..e . il- 1.,,,..? r ..,,,,.. ...,„„.,. 41 ✓'`'I- Te • 04 � ��. •i .` ,.,1 ii I, STREET ,�i 1; -. . r u44J� 5' PLANTER w - . 7 0 1 .W�W �� I STRIP u_ z ii! OPEN SOIL VOLUME SIDEWALK . OPEN SOIL i ROOT BARRIER PER MANUFACTURER'S VOLUME m SPECIFICATIONS o CURB w o a .--/ . r u. LL '- ( LL \-( 5 = •� � � ��. SIDEWALK &Eta �l ct o — o — , co - I 1 = 1 1 =1 1 1 = 11 =1 I I -1 1 1 =1 1 1 3' I \� \ __I - 111 - 1 I I -/ / / / IWUF '' III III - I I ' ' -1 I 111 111 111 - 111 - 111 =111 - 111 11 '111 111 . I I " ' ' -� i I -11 - 1 I I - 1 I - 1 I I - 1 I I - 1 I I -1 I I I I 1-1 I 1 III - III I'' Al. STREET li 18 RIGHT OF WAY I ' I COMPACTED SUBGRADE DRAINAGE NO SCALE PLAN PROFILE EXAMPLE SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION - STREET TREE DWG. NO. WITH OPEN SOIL APPENDIX 11 TOTAL SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION FOR TREE 'A': EE + + + + + + + ++ URB ` � OPEN SOIL VOLUME = 4' x 4' x 3' = 48 C.F. 18' RIGHT OF WAY COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 28' x 10' x 3' - 48 C.F. = 792 C.F. ,- + ++ TOTAL SOIL VOLUME = 840 C.F. + + + + + + ++ 840 C.F. IS GREATER THAN THE SOIL VOLUME REQUIRED BY A ry „ STREET TREE IN AN 18' RIGHT OF WAY (800 C.F.) THEREFORE THIS + + + SOIL VOLUME MEETS CITY REQUIREMENTS. + + + ++ ++ >.. + + LL SIDEWALK + + + ROOT BARRIER PER O + + MANUFACTURER'S �� " + + + I IL 'A' � + + + + SPECIFICATIONS = + + + + 0 1... - • DRIVE11VAY : • I t r N R' ■ .2a COVERED SOIL VOLUME J. . ri«} �=a I UNDER SIDEWALK � ` ;'� r , � .t. . fr' .Y 4,-%.4C. �`..,0 °:fit . . .t. ;'� r + + ++ + + + 4' X 4' TREE CUTOUT � ` `f I (OPENSOILVOLUME) 1 + „ ` ".yi: '� , 0 r li+ + 0 0 ' 1 y r •),:. .ry O STREET - - OPEN SOIL VOLUME 5 All W ill 4. w 7-00-wk'A ++ + Alio C7 %r =�� a + z j jj 4' X 4' TREE CUT OUT � + + 1 • -• E ROOT BARRIER PER co +��-+ MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS ' + + ▪ 9' + + TREE'A' p , COVERED SOIL VOLUME • U d CURB • Q DRIVEWAY allk COI STREET + + + +'+ + + + � I I I =III =III —I II •00000 ► . ,1800 0000 ��i i !i !-- !i i !i ✓ t + * + r + - I - III III - III - 3. - III '000 °0°• IO0000O00,. O O O \\ \ °°°°°° O,•nI' I - 11 III - III - III -I ++ + + + + ++ I III I III - III III I 000000 = III I -I I + + +\ + + + . - 1 — I 1 I 111 - 1il I = III . . °0 °0 °0 ° I - 1 =" -- + ** ++ 111 SIDEWALK I I El I I — III III I • W i ll DRAINAGE • + - �. - ++ ' III =1 I I =1 I =1 111 I I — I I °_ _ — I I IE�'" 4 + 1- III - III =III =III _ = I11- 111 =III= + + + + + + + + -I-I COMPACTED SUBGRADE =111=111=111=11 1 I -I I I=11 I- + `` -t + 0 + + + + + + + + + 18' RIGHT OF WAY + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + NO SCALE EXAMPLE SOIL VOLUME C ALCULATION - STREET TREE DWG. NO. PLAN PROFILE APPENDIX 11 WITH COVERED SOIL OPEN SOIL VOLUME = (PLANTER STRIP AREA + FRONT YARD AREA CONNECTED BY THE COVERED CONTINUOUS ROOT PATH) x SOIL DEPTH PLANTER STRIP AREA = 6 FEET X 22 FEET = 132 S. F. AREA CONNECTED BY CONTINUOUS ROOT PATH = 4,000 S.F. OPEN SOIL VOLUME = (132 S.F + 4000 S.F.) x 3'= 12,396 C.F. LIMIT OF AVAILABLE COVERED SOIL VOLUME = (SIDEWALK WIDTH) x (SIDEWALK LENGTH) x (STRUCTURAL SOIL DEPTH) SOIL (50' RADIUS) . — - -- – COVERED SOIL VOLUME = (6') x (3') x (3') = 54 C.F. TREE 'A' i BUILDING 7' TOTAL SOIL VOLUME =OPEN SOIL VOLUME + COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 12,396 C.F. + 54 C.F = 12,450 C.F. AP; 12,450 C.F. IS GREATER THAN THE SOIL VOLUME REQUIRED BY A S TREET _ _ _ / 3i i- TREE IN A 12' RIGHT OF WAY (500 C.F.) THEREFORE THIS SOIL VOLUME MEETS T: _ & ' o 3 1-' / / CITY REQUIREMENTS. _' ,,L�_, , ^� ., / 7-\ ---- ' , - .. 4 . .. , " "Itt,. alr' - " , `` \ te :r • 4' • / *rt-e`,..„,.. / LANDSCAPED FRONT A •,, ?'" \+ of v.„.._ iS . .,, ` _ f1� . \ • •' 1. .r,.,; • . ' �.. YARD 1 -2 .','..-'4;_ : • • o'=: t' ' (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) / " ; J / -% / C9 LIMIT OF AVAILABLE \ Z SOIL (50' RADIUS) i 6' ��Z' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ A J� OPEN SOIL VOLUME m OPEN SOIL VOLUME Ow O CURB iL A:°414k 'A' 0 �_ ROOT PATH COVERED SOIL ApO , . �_ �� VOLUME (MINIMUM WIDTH 3') I STREET STREET /\ III =III III =III =1 I =III :. o' o' o • o • • ' o . o ' i 77;7 i ROOT BARRIER PER � — — — — — •o- 0 - 0'0- 0- ••0000 / �'!� !i !i !i !i � IDEWALK / MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS =III III — III = III — III ' •. 0000 - .00000. \ / \/\ 11 1 \III I I —I I1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .\ \\ \:' "—I=1I =11 11 I1I I =� _ _ .. 0 03'� o 0 0 0 _ _ _ _ \ \ \ '' 1 =I I ,III =1 ° • �� / �I 1 = 1 I = 1 I =1 ' SOIL VOLUME UNAVAILABLE TO — \ I o o 0 0 o. o o o 0 LANDSCAPED FRONT YARD _ I i — _ — __ — ��; I \ I1 I � _ \\ BUILDING SOIL VOLUME ROOT PAATHRED (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) — -III ,\ I I I I I I I I I I I\ I I I \ — \ ROOT BARRIER PER \\ I 1 SIDEWALK MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS j ' ,) I DRAINAGE \ \ \ ROOT PATH COVERED SOIL VOLUME COMPACTED SUBGRADE \ y \ vi 12' RIGHT OF WAY--0-- 12' RIGHT OF WAY —CURB PROFILE LIMIT OF AVAILABLE SOIL (50' RADIUS) 1 _ NO SCALE EXAMPLE SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION — STREET TREE DWG. NO. PLAN WITH ROOT PATH APPENDIX 11 s 1 L OTIES. BOTANICAL NAME COM MON NAME SIZE CA Bk8 CONDIDON AS SHOMN SPAQNG ° .,• V , OPEN SOIL VOLUME 411. 11 AC M RUBRUM RED INPLE J' ' r •rr • • • • s COVERED SOIL VOLUME i / \ I SIDEWALK ROOT BARRIER EER MANUFACTURER'S IO \ STREET TREE TABLE VOLUME SPECIFICATIONS \ \ \ e\ TREE NUMBER SPECIES OPEN SOIL VOLUME COVERED SOIL VOLUME TOTAL SOIL VOLUME REQUIRED SOIL VOLUME CURB \ \ (C.F.) (C.F.) (C.F.) FOR 18' RIGHT OF WAY i - \ 4' 001 RED MAPLE 1,860 NA 1,860 800 lI �■ \ \ 002 RED MAPLE 2,637 NA 2.637 600 ,� RIGHT OF WAY (PROPERTY LINE) • 003 RED MAPLE 2,637 NA 2.637 800 // H ON E\ '= �_ \ a \ \ \ ` 18' RIGHT OF WAY 004 RED MAPLE 2,637 NA 2.637 800 005 RED MAPLE 2,037 507 2,544 800 TREET �, ; T 006 RED MAPLE 1,434 804 2 ,238 800 �i I i �rll _ S Ar `� � COI ACTED SUBGRADE �� COVERED SOIL VOLUME PER RED MAPLE (TYPO 007 RED MAPLE 888 1,628 2,516 800 CITY sPECIFICATIONs • < �� , \ \ • RED MAPLE 639 1,707 2,346 800 I- RIGHT OF WATIMDTH AS SHOWN E �` - tow r \ A �° 009 RED MAPLE 1,362 1,173 2,535 800 1 STREET TREE WITH COVERED SOIL DETAIL \ \ 0010 RED MAPLE 2,427 198 2,625 800 W► ` \ r \ \ . 0011 RED MAPLE 1,818 NA 1,818 800 NOT TOSCALE . ,, .. = � r � \ • �• A+ �� / • .• , REMOVAL, STORING, AND AMENDED SOILS FOR PLANTER STANDARD COVERED SOIL VOLUME SPECIFICATIONS: V �, AREAS: PART 1. COVERED SOIL MATERIALS \ 116. ,4� \ \ P \ \ • CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVAL ALL DEBRIS FROM PLANTER 4 `�. AREAS AND EXCAVATE TO A DEPTH OF 36 INCHES. SLOPE A. COVERED SOIL SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING MIXTURE OF GRAVEL SOIL AND ADMIXTURES: d / � \ \ \ SIDES OF EXCAVATIONS AT 1:1 SLOPE OR SHORE EDGES TO PREVENT UNDERMINING OF VEHICLE LOAD AREAS AND TO 1. CRUSHED ROCK. GRADATION OF 100% PASSING 1.25 INCH. MAX. 30% PASSING 0.75 INCH; �� = \ \ PROVIDE A SLOPED PROFILE TRANSITION BETWEEN SOIL TYPES II. LOAM/ORGANIC TOPSOIL; � Z► `� ^ \ \ AND STRUCTURAL FILL. DISPOSE OF DEBRIS AND SUBSOIL. III. SOIL BINDER SUCH AS , STABILIZER. AND • ', H ` �, ' \ \ \ ° = STOCKPILE EXCAVATED TOPSOIL IN APPROVED AREA OFF SITE. IV. WATER. 611.1 \ \ � i \ EXISTING AND IMPORTED TOPSOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE PART 2. PROPORTIONS OF COVERED SOIL MATERIALS / , ' • \ \ \ \ ` \\ DETERMINED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND APPROVED � ` . A /j� \ � y e � BY THE CITY ARBORIST. SOIL MIXING SHALL BE DONE IN A. THE PROPORTIONS OF COVERED SOIL MATERIALS SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS � t Imo` N � � \ \ r N DESIGNATED AREAS OR IN THE SUPPLIERS YARD. MIX \ A \ \ AMENDMENTS WITH TOPSOIL WHEN SOIL IS IN A FRIABLE ITI /�■I'\ �� ' \\ • CONDITION ONLY; DAMP AND NOT MUDDY WITH ADEQUATE AMOUNT FOR 1 CY AMOUNT FOR 4.8 CY 9 \ \ 4 MOISTURE TO BREAK INTO CLODS WHEN TURNED AND WILL MATERIAL OF COVERED SOIL OF COVERED SOIL �� \• O \ \ NOT LEAVE A MUD STAIN ON THE HAND WHEN SQUEEZED. ��A • • . CONTRACTOR 70 PROVIDE CERTIFICATE OF CONTENT AND BE A .. qO CRUSHED ROCK 23.2 CUBIC FEET 4 CUBIC YARDS .! / \, a \\21.7 • PERCENT OF SOIL MIXES WITH ALL AMENDED SOIL TO THE CITY \ •.• PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. \ t 8 -_ �•. \ ,•� \.\ TOPSOIL 5.9 CUBIC FEET DDED WILL BE DEPENDENT ON THE MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE RAW MATERIALS. ACTUAL AMOUNTS OF WATER 1 CUBIC YARD �� fr i BLENDED SOIL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION: � �' ♦ 44. SOIL BINDER 13.7 OZ 4 LBS �� \ \ •, r• SOIL SHALL BE FRIABLE WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED. �� \218 \ \\\••x PLACE SOIL IN LAYERS OF NOT MORE THAN 12' IN DEPTH. `' \\ ✓\ PROVIDE 3 PASSES WITH A 2' COMPACT PLATE VIBRATING WATER 1.6 GALLON 48 GALLONS � �tl � COMPACTOR. COMPACT TO 80415% MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AS � MEASURED BY THE PROCTOR TEST OR AS APPROVED FOR 4111 F / SPECIFIC BLENDED SOI MI XS. B. THE TARGET MOISTURE CONTENT IS 20% BY WEIGHT OF THE TOPSOIL WEIGHT. THE ABOVE WATER CONTENTS ASSUME THE TOP IS DRY. THE AMOUNT ®� � OF WATER THAT WILL N EED TO USED SHALL BE DETERMINED DURING MIXING. 44111140/P: � ` , \ PA RT 3. COVERED SOIL MUCING PROCEDURES \ A. MIX COVERED SOIL IN BATCHES OF AN APPROPRIATE SIZE FOR THE EQUIPMENT BEING USED. THE END RESULT IS TO BE A MATERIAL THAT IS , UNIFORMLY BLENDED TOGETHER. DO NOT BATCH IN QUANTITIES THAT WILL NOT ALLOW THE EQUIPMENT TO COMPLETELY MIX THE MATERIAL. \ DETERMINE BATCH SIZE AND QUANTES OF EACH MATERIAL NEEDED FOR THE BATCH. B. START WITH HALF OF THE CRUSHED ROCK MATERIAL. � Y \44 C. ADD ALL OF THE TOPSOIL MATERIAL. ITI \. D. ADD THE SOIL BINDER. IRRIGATION MAINLINE E. ADD HALF OF THE ESTIMATED WATER. \ \ F. ADD THE OTHER HALF OF THE CRUSHED ROCK MATERIAL. ` / G. MD( THE MATERIAL TOGETHER. BUILDING FOOTPRINT ♦♦ % �, �' 3 \ \ H. SLOWLY ADD WATER TO THE MIXTURE AND CON1INUE TO MIX. THE FINAL AMOUNT OF WATER WILL VARY WTTH MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE CRUSHED 4\ ' ROCK AND TOPSOIL ADD WATER IN INCREMENTAL AMOUNTS AND MIX THE MATERIAL BETWEEN THE ADDITIONS OF WATER. • V T- \ RED MAPLE ( TYP ) \ I. STOP ADDING WATER AND MIXING WHEN THERE IS A MINUTE AMOUNT OF FREE TOPSOIL REMAINING. THE TOPSOIL WILL COAT THE CRUSHED ROCK . \ AND NOT FALL OUT OF THE MATERIAL ALL OF THE CRUSHED ROCK SHALL BE UNIFORMLY COATED WITH TOPSOIL. THERE SHALL BE NO CLUMPS OF TOPSOIL OR UNCOERED CRUSHED ROCK IN THE MIXTURE. r\�' 1 \ J. T00 MUCH WATE E R ISS ADDED TO THE MIXTU . WATER WILL DRAIN OUT OF THE MATERIAL AND THE TOPSOIL WILL WASH OFF OF THE CRUSHED ROCK. C IIII �� - � `� F IF THIS OCCURS THE BATCH OF MATERIAL SHALL BE DISCARDED AND SHALL NOT BE INCORPORATED INTO THE COMPLETED WORK. \ O • . �N �; • - PART 4. PLACEMENT OF COVERED SOIL I I ' -. 'r: A . r I PROTECT SOILS AND MIXES FROM ABSORBING EXCESS WATER AND FROM EROSION AT ALL TIMES. DO NOT STORE MATERIALS UNPROTECTED FROM II' \ � � \00 RAINFALL EVENTS. DO NOT ALLOW EXCESS WATER TO ENTER SITE PRIOR TO COMPACTION. IF WATER IS INTRODUCED INTO THE MATERIAL AFTER „p ., �\ \ �► !" • GRADING. ALLOW MATERIAL TO DRAIN OR AERATE TO OPTIMUM COMPACTION MOISTURE CONTENT. •\ \ )5' . • B. ALL AREAS TO RECEIVE COVERED SOIL MIXTURE SHALL BE INSPECTED BY THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTAND /OR PROJECT ENGINEER BEFORE 1 �' ,� `may ;lA. •� STARTING PLACEMENT OF MIXTURE. ALL DEFECTS SUCH AS INCORRECT GRADING. COMPACTION AND INADEQUATE DRAINAGE. ETC.. SHALL BE \ CORRECTED PRIOR TO BEGINNING PLACEMENT OF COVERED SOIL. • \ \ \ C. CONFIRM THAT THE SUB -GRADE IS AT THE PROPER ELEVATION AND COMPACTED AS REQUIRED. SUB -GRADE ELEVATIONS SHALL SLOPE PARALLEL TO THE FINISHED GRADE. CLEAR THE EXCAVATION OF ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS. TRASH. RUBBLE AND FOREIGN MATERIAL FILL ANY OVER EXCAVATION ... . � \ \ \� •'! ' • WITH APPROVED FILL AND COMPACT TO THE REQUIRED SUB-GRADE COMPACTION. RE II, ,-- .,r !• \\ \ \' `` •� �I. D. INSTALL COVERED SOIL IN 6 -INCH LIFTS AND SPREAD UNIFORMLY OVER THE AREA. COMPACT EACH LIFT TO THE QUIRED PERCENT OF MAXIMUM DENSITY. DELAY PLACEMENT 24 HOURS IF MOISTURE CONTENT EXCEEDS MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE, PROTECT COVERED SOIL WITH PLASTIC OR PLYWOOD � '�A, DURING DELAY. TAKE PARTICULAR CARE NOT TO DAMAGE UTILITIES WHEN INSTALLING COVERED SOIL COVERED SOIL THAT WILL BE THE BEDDING SCALE 1" 20 FEET 41111 FOR UTILITY LINES SHALL BE COMPACTED TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIRED GRADE OF THE UTILITY UNE. DO NOT COMPACT THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY \ PROPERTY LINE ,�\ \ ABOVE A UTILITY LINE UNTIL A FILL DEPTH OF AT LEAST 12-INCHES ABOVE THE UTILITY LINE IS REACHED. / ��y E. BRING COVERED SOILS TO FINISHED GRADES AS SHOWN IN THE APPROVED DRAWINGS. IMMEDIATELY PROTECT THE COVERED SOIL MATERIAL FROM m 2 m \ \ \ \ \ / \\ 4• • CONTAMINATION BY WATER BY COVERING WITH PLASTIC OR PLYWOOD. • SCALE SHOWN LS FOR FULL . SIZE SHEET (24'X36'] ONLY DATE, 07-11-2011 REVISIONS: �N9MFOBT ND MOWS �(�ST EXAMPLE SOIL OFFICE ST LOCATED AT: _ , JOB NUMBER N7 97223 CHEWED BY JM�i LOOP ROAD IMPRO VE MENTS TIGARD. OREGON 1 000 VOLUME PLAN x:`��3155 ABC PREPARED FOR• HANCOCK OOP ROAD C JOHN H. DOE SHEET EMAIL: INFONAIK_COLLABORATWE COM 1011 SW LOOP ROAD OREGON y C OLLABORATIVE TIC OR 97223 T IGARD OREGON LICENSED IN OR, NA, 8 ID R«:� .x,�:. A.M�,.�mm...� . ,»~� • �. 11�rr�x� p_ APPENDIX 12 TAX LOT 1000 TAX MAP: 25 1 09AB ' OPEN SOIL VOLUME I OPEN SOIL COVERED SOIL TOTAL SOIL REQUIRED SOIL VOLME FOR 11' VE SOIL VOLUME TREE NUMBER SPECIES VOLUME (C.F.) VOLUME (C.F.) VOLUME (C.F.) RIGHT OF WAY {C f.} 0 / , . ' . ' CO RED SO L VOLU _ IT "' - -" - i — �— 10023 ARMSTRONG MAPLE 6,453 45 6,498 500 I ' I 1 ' 10024 ARMSTRONG MAPLE OVER 1,000 0 OVER 1,000 500 I 1 I EVERGRE N LANE •'• "` STREET TREE LEGEND 1 = SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONDITION SIZE SPACING -- - - ..... _ - ". - - _ - .,<, - - --- - - -- . +. -- PROPOSED SMEAR! S ERER - -- ,..._ OPEN SOIL - *• - - ""' - I ACER RUBRUM 'ARMSTRONG' ARMSTRONG MAPLE B&B 2" CAL. AS SHOWN ARMSTRONG P F D A P P L E ROOT BARRER PER / / a MANUFACTURER'S /f t SPECIFICATIONS - / • � � ° / STANDARD COVERED SOIL VOLUME SPECIFICATIONS: ISIO6WALX .' � a ° ( PART 1. COVERED SOIL MATERIALS ' e . + , / I _ A. COVERE CRU8HED OCK G SIST OF THE FOLLOWING MIXTURE OF GRAVEL, SOIL AND ADMIXTURES. `✓ i ` t I. RADATION OF 700% PASSING 1251NCH, MAX. 30 %PASSING 0.75 INCH; II. LOAMIORGANIC TOPSOIL: 4/j 4 — COVERED SOL 1 = _ X �t - - _ - A litil PUJR - _ d �\ .1�4 :t / 1, OPEN SSOIL III. SOIL BINDER SUCH AS, STABILIZER. : AND _ e t - i- __ - \ N. WATER. �� , 0 0 ' I--•• x I PART 2. PROPORTIONS OF COVERED SOIL MATERIALS / �f' � 1A i 9 1 B cv FOR ,,.,.,",,GTR. ♦� 1 � LOT 1 r LOT 2 Q A. THE PROPORTIONS OF COVERED SOIL MATERIALS SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: / �` I� 0 5,705 SF + I V 5,056 SF _ - MATERIAL AMOUNT FOR 1 CY OF COVERED SOIL AMOUNT FOR 4 CY OF COVERED SOIL • i • ,'.0 y " -/ P1RK • CRUSHED ROCK 23.2 CUBIC FEET 4 CUBIC YARDS Y i 1 - III III- II d 1III m r T 5 - I_ E - TOPSOIL 5.9 CUBIC FEET 1 CUBIC YARD - 1 N 1 ' ,/ ' - I 11 III I I - � I -III o % 'n"" - "��' .,,,T= - ,� 13.7 OZ 4 LBS • �' hI H. II_lu % i � j 2 I p - SOIL BINDER 4 i / , ovr. son 1 m WATER 1.6 GALLON 48 GALLONS , LANDSCAPED FRONT ° " r \ 1 \ 1 B. THE TARGET MOISTURE CONTENT IS 20% BY WEIGHT OF THE TOPSOIL WEIGHT. THE ABOVE WATER / i 1 1 t (11 \� ice COVERED SOIL VOlkA. NWT PAIN CONTENTS ASSUME THE TOP IS DRY. THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT WILL NEED TO BE ADDED WILL BE {ff PEN I I I DEPENDENT ON THE MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE RAW MATERIALS. ACTUAL AMOUNTS OF WATER ' . . 1 1 1 ?1 \I I cKrA l—naan OF WAY we exoww —I USED SHALL BE DETERMINED DURING MIXING. A , -- 1� "° '�' i PART 3. COVERED SOIL MIXING PROCEDURES VS31 AR k \ \ 1 10010• 10011 t 11 _ I STREET TREE WITH COVERED SOIL DETAIL • A. MIX COVERED SOIL IN BATCHES OF AN APPROPRIATE SIZE FOR THE EQUIPMENT BEING USED. THE END r, 1 1 PROPOSED WRONG I 1 1 a NOT TO SCALE RESULT IS TO BE A MATERIAL THAT IS UNIFORMLY BLENDED TOGETHER. DO NOT BATCH IN QUANTITIES 50' DREAM EIUFER \ I I \ 1 1 I z THAT WILL NOT ALLOW THE EQUIPMENT TO COMPLETELY MIX THE MATERIAL DETERMINE BATCH SIZE ' • 10015 nn 12 10!13' ; > I I ,, ROOT PROTECTION ZONE NOTES AND QUANTITIES OF EACH MATERIAL NEEDED FOR THE BATCH. 1 ir 1 r °N • B. START WITH HALF OF THE CRUSHED ROCK MATERIAL ENCROACHMENT INTO THE ROOT PROTECTION ZONE IS ALLOWED WITH PROJECT ARBORIST C. ADD ALL OF THE TOPSOIL MATERIAL. 10 14 n 1 0 SEr B a� APP AS DESCRIBED IN THE FOLLOWING NOTES: D. ADD THE SOIL BINDER. \ • ' L = 1 -- � / E. ADD HALF OF THE ESTIMATED WATER. _ _ _ ,_j v - 7. EXCAVATION IN THE TOP 24 OF THE SOIL IN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA SHOULD BEGIN F. ADD THE OTHER HALF OF THE CRUSHED ROCK MATERIAL. MATERIAL 1 OO B 1 I I — J 15= - _ - I I AT THE EXCAVATION LINE THAT IS CLOSEST TO THE TREE. G. MIX THE MATER TOGETHER. 10 • 10 SEI v- I j T 2. THE EXCAVATION SHOULD BE DONE BY HAND/SHOVEL OR WITH A BACKHOE AND A MAN < 1 H. SLOWLY ADD WATER TO THE MIXTURE AND CONTINUE TO MUC THE FINAL AMOUNT OF WATER WILL WITH A SHOVEL, PRUNING SHEARS, AND A PRUNING SAW. VARY WITH MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE CRUSHED ROCK AND TOPSOIL. ADD WATER IN INCREMENTAL \ � � AMOUNTS AND MIX THE MATERIAL BETWEEN THE ADD � _ - 3. IF DONE BY HAND, ALL ROOTS 1" OR LARGER SHOULD BY PRUNED AT THE EXCAVATION LINE. ITIONS OF WATER. \ \ 1 \ EXISTING TREE MUTE 1 1. STOP ADDING WATER AND MIXING WHEN THERE IS A MINUTE AMOUNT OF FREE TOPSOIL REMAINING. _ _ _ - J 4. IF DONE WITH A BACKHOE ( MOST LIKELY SCENARIO) THEN THE OPERATOR SHALL START THE TOPSOIL WILL COAT THE CRUSHED ROCK AND NOT FALL OUT OF THE MATERIAL. ALL OF THE THE CUT AT THE EXCAVATION LINE AND CAREFULLY "FEEL" FOR ROOTS/RESISTANCE. WHEN CRUSHED ROCK SHALL BE UNIFORMLY COATED WITH TOPSOIL THERE SHALL BE NO CLUMPS OF \ I • \ I ( THERE IS RESISTANCE, THE MAN WITH THE SHOVEL HAND DIGS AROUND THE ROOTS AND TOPSOIL OR UNCOVERED CRUSHED ROCK IN THE MIXTURE. J. f • ° PRUNES THE ROOTS LARGER THAN 1" DIAMETER. IF TOO MUCH WATER IS ADDED TO THE MIXTURE, WATER WILL DRAIN OUT OF THE MATERIAL AND THE pp TOPSOIL 4. WILL WASH OFF OF THE SO CRUSHED IL ROCK. IF THIS OCCURS THE BATCH OF MATERIAL SHALL BE ' ^'7 1 001 U / 15' REAR YARD SETBACK 1 1002 Z .. IRRIGATION: DISCARDED AND SHALL NOT BE INCORPORATED INTO THE COMPLETED WORK j I I \ ° I RRIGATION TO BE BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. PROVIDE PLANS TO THE ' PLACEMENT OF COVERED v � — - — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, _ _ CITY FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO BEGINNING INSTALLATION. I _ _ __— __ __ _ � - - — - - — - - I - " — - - — A. PROTECT SOILS AND MIXES FROM ABSORBING EXCESS WATER AND FROM EROSION AT ALL TIMES. DO i '(I� _ REMOVAL, STORING, AND AMENDED SOILS FOR PLANTER AREAS: NOT STORE MATERIALS UNPROTECTED FROM RAINFALL EVENTS. DO NOT ALLOW EXCESS WATER TO ' - ENTER SITE PRIOR TO COMPACTION. IF WATER IS INTRODUCED INTO THE MATERIAL AFTER GRADING, CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVAL ALL DEBRIS FROM PLANTER AREAS AND EXCAVATE TO A ALLOW MATERIAL TO DRAIN OR AERATE TO OPTIMUM COMPACTION MOISTURE CONTENT. I 10021 D EPTH OF 36 INCHES. SLOPE SIDES OF EXCAVATIONS AT 1:1 SLOPE OR SHORE EDGES TO B. ALL AREAS TO RECEIVE COVERED SOIL MIXTURE SHALL BE INSPECTED BY THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE I SIGNIFICAM W�BR BOIR�RY PREVENT UNDERMINING OF VEHICLE LOAD AREAS AND TO PROVIDE A SLOPED PROFILE ARCHITECTAND /OR PROJECT ENGINEER BEFORE STARTING PLACEMENT OF MIXTURE. ALL DEFECTS 1 . TRANSITION BETWEEN SOIL TYPES AND STRUCTURAL FILL. DISPOSE OF DEBRIS AND SUBSOIL. SUCH AS INCORRECT GRADING, COMPACTION AND INADEQUATE DRAINAGE, ETC., SHALL BE / 1 I ST O CKPILE EXCAVATED TOPSOIL IN APPROVED AREA OFF SITE. CORRECTED PRIOR TO BEGINNING PLACEMENT OF COVERED SOIL. C. CONFIRM THAT THE SUB -GRADE IS AT THE PROPER ELEVATION AND COMPACTED AS REQUIRED. j S1\ G gpU SE - 1 EXISTING AND IMPORTED TOPSOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE LANDSCAPE SUB -GRADE ELEVATIONS SHALL SLOPE PARALLEL TO THE FINISHED GRADE. CLEAR THE EXCAVATION \ HECK 1 PART a ARCHITECT AND APPROVED BY THE CITY ARBORIST. SOIL MIXING SHALL BE DONE IN OF ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS, TRASH, RUBBLE AND FOREIGN MATERIAL. FILL ANY OVER EXCAVATION t ��! � DESIGNATED AREAS OR IN THE SUPPLIERS YARD. MIX AMENDMENTS WITH TOPSOIL WHEN WITH APPROVED FILL AND COMPACT TO THE REQUIRED SUB -GRADE COMPACTION. SCALE O" = 10 FEET / SOIL IS IN AE FR CONDITION ONLY (D AN NOT MUDDY WITH ADEQUATE MOISTURE D. INSTALL COVERED SOIL IN 8 -INCH LIFTS AND SPREAD UNIFORMLY OVER THE AREA COMPACT EACH ■ ■�- J I i t r • "- ` ,-------- ! a- • TO BREAK INTO CLODS WHEN TURNED AND WILL NOT LEAVE A MUD STAIN ON THE HAND WHEN LIFT TO THE REQUIRED MAXIMUM DENSITY. DELAY PLACEMENT 24 HOURS IF M CONTENT I \ 1 ° SQUEEZED) . CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CERTIFICATE OF CONTENT AND PERCENT OF SOIL EXCEEDS MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE, PROTECT COVERED SOIL WITH PLASTIC OR PLYWOOD DURING DELAY. g e _ °" • • ° • MIXES WITH ALL AMENDED SOIL TO THE CITY PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. TAKE PARTICULAR CARE NOT TO DAMAGE UTILITIES WHEN INSTALLING COVERED SOIL COVERED SOIL • SCALE SHOWN IS FOR FULL / - THAT WILL BE THE BEDDING FOR UTILITY LINES SHALL BE COMPACTED TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIRED SIZE SHEET (24'X367 ONLY +t ' p 3 - B - -T �5 c • \ BLENDED SOIL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION: GRADE OF THE UTILITY LINE. DO NOT COMPACT THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY ABOVE A UTILITY LINE UNTIL �, ) 8, 173 SF n G C� \�+� , o e d . 1 A FILL DEPTH OF AT LEAST 12-INCHES ABOVE THE UTILITY LINE IS REACHED. • 1 , a `/ SOIL SHALL BE FRIABLE WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED. PLACE SOIL IN LAYERS OF NOT E. BRING COVERED SOILS TO FINISHED GRADES AS SHOWN IN THE APPROVED DRAWINGS. IMMEDIATELY ,� \- w P \ MORE THAN 12" IN DEPTH. PROVIDE 3 PASSES WITH A 2" COMPACT PLATE VIBRATING PROTECT THE COVERED SOIL MATERIAL FROM CONTAMINATION BY WATER BY COVERING WIT PLASTIC ' R, - COMPACTOR. COMPACT TO 80-85% MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AS MEASURED BY THE PROCTOR OR PLYWOOD. 1 I - ° O ° TEST OR AS APPROVED FOR SPECIFIC BLENDED SOIL MIXES. DATE: 07 -11 -2011 REVISIONS: D80 KRJ MINGNI.. 9A EXAMPLE 1000 STREETA E 1 NUMBER ' DRAM 9w BST VA A5 SHOW EVERGREEN HEIGHTS PARTITION 2001 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 CAGED BC KR SOIL VOLUME PLAN PH (503) 5505 -XXX PR EPARED Fa 401R4 I DOE FAX, (5D3) 555 -XXXX B OBOXIII 190 SW 147TH ST. JOI N71, INE &ARf CDI.LA &H A'r1YF.. ai wi "' COL LABORATIVE RGARO, OREGON 97223 FOR SINGLE LOT SHEET LICENSED IN OR. WA, A ID •Aarinxm�ar�•PIANN.•:o API' A10111,,,�x PH: 503 -909 -5555 TIGARD OREGON , APPENDIX 13 FAX 503- 909 -5556 TAXLOT 1700 TAIWAP 2 4E 25 _i SIDEWALK --a— 7 \ _.*1 / E J m 1. a w TYPICAL PLANTER STRIP _ • 7 W AT, ., 0 0 VARIES ; . ` . - + r_ -t om .4*. ( - lit TYPICAL LANDSCAPED FRONT ��tyl_ ,'t :,. YARD (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) k si h �, iv. 1 -Y � `�� gip I I L •� « •'•, I 4 ; 4 14 — la►J11 OPEN SOIL VOLUME ~ f .. �` 1 3' MIN. Ar I ROOT BARRIER PER . Imo-- VARIES OPEN SOIL \ ' � MANUFACTURER'S I VOLUME IIr SPECIFICATIONS r Q ROOT BARRIER PER MANUFACTURER'S LL 1 SPECIFICATIONS 1`�fill O CURB o A I ill fr I r4 C41 I P STREET it -11 CO VERED SOIL — Q a Q 1 SIDEWALK VOLUME ROOT PATH (MINIMUM WIDTH 3') V1,1∎11 MWV}yl irc■ , INIAFI NI OppVIti* ji4IAINM414iV1d = -' - = - -` - -_ _+' STREET \ — \ 1=111E11 1=11 — III — \ I 0 0 0 0' o' . VARIES '11= 111 = 111 = 111 = 111 = 111 = 111 = 111 °.°°°°°.°.°°°°°°°.. ° : o 3'. °°°o I / / //\ 1 1'1' '7 ""effrI'� re . \III — III =1 I I I I = 1 I l o °; ° ° °;° ° ° ° ° ° °o \ \\ ,�1r" 7 / 1 = 111 = 111 = 111 . 1 1 111 = 111= DRIVEWAY I -1I 1 - 11I — 1 -1I1— 0 0 0 0 0 g 0 0 0 /41 I III II 1 II I- 1I1II— — I 6 _ o o .- o� o 0 0 0 _ I11 _ o. 0�0 0 0 0 0 0 _ — - I � I -1 . — III — I I.— .�. . . _ ��- 60° III -III - � LANDSCAPED FRONT YARD I -III = I IW I \ I I 1 III 1 \ 1 1 \ 1 , I 1 1 \ \ 1 -1 \ \ (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) , i I 1 I 1 1 11 I I ( 1 ( / SIDEWALK (9 COVERED SOIL VOLUME ROOT PATH DRAINAGE z 7 2 - 1 PER CITY SPECIFICATIONS - COMPACTED SUBGRADE m \ O w I RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH VARIES Q \v` ` - — RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH VARIES PROFILE CURB NO SCALE PLAN EXAMPLE COVERED SOIL VOLUME PLAN DRAWING - ROOT PATH DWG. NO. OPTION FOR STREET TREE APPENDIX 14 —CURB ■ I 11 1 I I Q 1 7- \ '-\\ 1 / .1 . ,_, \ .•40 / ROOT BARRIER PER f •• ;+:`"' "` 55 y ' � • ` � - 0 ,� I • o O w MANUFACTURER'S f fi �! 1 _ , NM I ..-oe -a"4:::: .....,:,-- .1 5 .t.".. .r*.s. -e-- s. ire ... ..-.4,R,.., -.,.. < SIDEWALK SPECIFICATIONS _ -% ' ,• t }; � ° I y[ u , .'' ..u,_� ' � ! .,. . .its •mil TREE SOI CUTOUT VOLUME) (OPEN ��'�' • <' '� os 41 41 � " �� 3. r 1 A . L • .• r + .•c:. - � ✓�- t – .: . �� arc• � 11 + + + + IWO STREET ----- a � � • 7 41, -, •••• �� '� t i IA 4j Z MI OPEN SOIL VOLUME + + + + m ROOT BARRIER PER MANUFACTURER'S + + + SPECIFICATIONS I v CURB COVERED SOIL < 1 E I VOLUME ,A; RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH VARIES /j.–\ s'...\\ / o • - : • ir VAR 1 E S riiiiii w s `isssi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ■ % I ,• �•,,L., c; � „S.�c' „4,cr�� -- 7 00,0000o��oo0l f_ _ _ _ , 0 0 0 a 0 3 o 0 0° \ / ii — 111 111 -H 11 1 = III III = 1 1 _ •.00c / — I 1 = 1 11 =1 11 =1 I I— I I -1 I I i ,.0 00000 0000 .0.0000000 •OOOOr00000000• 1 . / ,.000000000000 C � 7=--” 111 - SIDEWALK —I II, II 111 - 111 - 111 - 111 - 111 1 1 , I II— STREET ,, I I III III — III — III I 1 COVERED SOIL COMPACTED SUBGRADE # VOLUME PER CITY SPECIFICATIONS - DRAINAGE 1 - RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH VARIES /`\--- - PROFILE NO SCALE PLAN EXAMPLE COVERED SOIL VOLUME PLAN DRAWING - UNDER SIDEWALK DWG. NO. OPTION FOR STREET TREE APPENDIX 14 Urban Forestry Plan — Supplemental Report Example Template General Information Date: Project Name: Project Arborist or Landscape Architect Name: Project Arborist or Landscape Architect Address: Project Arborist or Landscape Architect Telephone Number: Project Arborist or Landscape Architect Email Address: ISA Certified Arborist No.: Landscape Architect Stamp: Project Summary Specifications Tree Protection Fencing Specifications: Tree Preservation Specifications: Stand Preservation Specifications: Soil Characteristics and Specifications for Improvement: Tree Planting Specifications: Stand Planting Specifications: Appendix 9 Urban Forestry Plan — Supplemental Report Example Template Existing Tree Inventory Tree # Genus sp./ DBH Canopy Open or Heritage Cond. Pres. Preserve? Comments Common (ft Stand Grown Tree? Rating Rating • Existing Stand Inventory Stand # Genus sp./ Avg. DBH 1 Avg. Cond. Overall Stand Total Canopy Comments Common of Dominant Rating 1 Pres. Rating Canopy Preserved Genus sp./ Avg. DBH 2 Avg. Cond. (ft (ft Common of 2" Rating 2 Genus sp./ Avg. DBH 3 Avg. Cond. Common of 3rd Rating 3 Urban Forestry Plan — Supplemental Report Example Template Planted Tree Inventory • Tree # Genus sp./ Caliper (Decid.) or Mature Canopy Mature Canopy Available 1 Comments Common Height (Evergreen) Spread (ft) Area (ft Soil Volume (t Planted Stand Inventory Stand # Genus sp. /Common 1 Hgt. or Container size No. of Trees Avg. Spacing (ft) Total Mature Comments Genus sp. /Common 2 Hgt. or Container size No. of Trees Avg. Spacing (ft) Canopy Area (ft Genus sp. /Common 3 Hgt. or Container size No. of Trees Avg. Spacing (ft) Delineated at the Genus sp. /Common 4 Hgt. or Container size No. of Trees Avg. Spacing (ft) Outer Edge of the Stand Genus sp. /Common 5 Hgt. or Container size No. of Trees Avg. Spacing (ft) Urban Forestry Plan — Supplemental Report Example Template Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary *Lot or Lot or Tract 2x Canopy 2x Canopy 1.25x Mature I Mature 1.25x Mature Total Canopy ( Effective % o Tract # Area (ft Area (ft of Area (ft of Canopy Canopy Canopy Area (ft per Canopy (exclude Preserved Preserved Area (ft of Area (ft of Area (ft of lot or tract (Canopy Area streets) Trees Stands Native Non - Native Planted _ (w/ cond. and (w/ cond. and Planted Planted Stands Lot or Tract pres.?2) pres.>_2) Trees Trees Area) — -- _ —. 1 i ... Total *Note: effective tree canopy cover is required to be calculated on a lot /tract by lot /tract basis only in the R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R -7 districts. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for each lot or tract in the R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R -7 districts shall be at least 15 percent. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for the overall development site shall be at least: i. 40% for R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R- 7districts, except for schools (18.130.0500)); ii. 33% for R -12, R -25, R -40, C -N, C -C, C -G, C -P, MUE, MUE -1, MUE -2, MUC, MUR and I -P districts, except for schools (18.130.0500)); and iii. 25% for MU -CBD, MUC -1, I -L and I -H districts, and for schools (18.130.0500)) in all districts. Urban Forestry Plan — Supplemental Report Example Template Tree Canopy Fee Calculation (if applicable) If the percentage of effective tree canopy cover is less than the applicable standard percentage for the overall development: 1. Find the required ft of tree canopy: (overall development site area) x (standard required % (40 %, 33 %, or 25 %)). 2. Find the ft of tree canopy the development is short: (required ft of tree canopy from 1 above) - (proposed ft of tree canopy). 3. Find the $ value of tree canopy: (PNW -ISA wholesale median cost for a 3" deciduous tree in the Willamette Valley) _ 59. 4. Find the required tree canopy fee: (amount of ft of tree canopy from 2 above) x (the $ value of tree canopy from 3 above). If the overall development meets the applicable standard percentage, but the percentage of effective tree canopy cover is less than 15% for any individual lot or tract in the R -1, R -2, R -3.5, R -4.5 and R- 7 districts: 1. Find the required ft of tree canopy for the deficient lot or tract: (lot or tract area) x 15 %. 2. Find the ft of tree canopy the lot or tract is short: (required ft of tree canopy from 1 above) - (proposed ft of tree canopy). 3. Find the $ value of tree canopy: (PNW -ISA wholesale median cost for a 3" deciduous tree in the Willamette Valley) _ 59. 4. Find the required tree canopy fee: (amount of ft of tree canopy from 2 above) x (the $ value of tree canopy from 3 above). Signature of Approval I hereby attest that: 1. The Tree Preservation and Removal site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; 2. The Tree Canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual; and 3. The Supplemental Report meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Appendix 9 Example Covered Soil Volume Specifications Part 1. Covered Soil Materials A. Covered soil shall consist of the following mixture of gravel, soil and admixtures: 1. Crushed rock, gradation of 100% passing 1.25 inch, max. 30% passing 0.75 inch; 2. Loam /Organic Topsoil; 3. Soil binder such as "Stabilizer "; and 4. Water. Part 2. Proportions of Covered Soil Materials A. The proportions of covered soil materials shall be as follows: Material Amount for 1 CY Amount for 4.6 CY of Covered Soil of Covered Soil Crushed Rock 23.2 cubic feet 4 cubic yards Topsoil 5.9 cubic feet 1 cubic yard Soil Binder 13.7 ounces 4 pounds Water 1.6 gallon 46 gallons B. The target moisture content is 20% by weight of the topsoil weight. The above water contents assume the top is dry. The amount of water that will need to be added will be dependent on the moisture content of the raw materials. Actual amounts of water used shall be determined during mixing. Part 3. Covered Soil Mixing Procedures A. Mix covered soil in batches of an appropriate size for the equipment being used. The end result is to be a material that is uniformly blended together. Do not batch in quantities that will not allow the equipment to completely mix the material. Determine batch size and quantities of each material needed for the batch. B. Start with half of the crushed rock material. C. Add all of the topsoil material. D. Add the soil binder. E. Add half of the estimated water. F. Add the other half of the crushed rock material. G. Mix the material together. H. Slowly add water to the mixture and continue to mix. The final amount of water will vary with moisture content of the crushed rock and topsoil. Add water in incremental amounts and mix the material between the additions of water. I. Stop adding water and mixing when there is a minute amount of free topsoil remaining. The topsoil will coat the crushed rock and not fall out of the material. All of the crushed rock Appendix 14 shall be uniformly coated with topsoil. There shall be no clumps of topsoil or uncovered crushed rock in the mixture. J. If too much water is added to the mixture, water will drain out of the material and the topsoil will wash off of the crushed rock. If this occurs the batch of material shall be discarded and shall not be incorporated into the completed work. Part 4. Placement of Covered Soil A. Protect soils and mixes from absorbing excess water and from erosion at all times. Do not store materials unprotected from rainfall events. Do not allow excess water to enter site prior to compaction. If water is introduced into the material after grading, allow material to drain or aerate to optimum compaction moisture content. B. All areas to receive covered soil mixture shall be inspected by the project landscape architect and /or project engineer before starting placement of mixture. All defects such as incorrect grading, compaction and inadequate drainage, etc., shall be corrected prior to beginning placement of covered soil. C. Confirm that the sub -grade is at the proper elevation and compacted as required. Sub -grade elevations shall slope parallel to the finished grade. Clear the excavation of all construction debris, trash, rubble and foreign material. Fill any over excavation with approved fill and compact to the required sub -grade compaction. D. Install covered soil in 6 -inch lifts and spread uniformly over the area. Compact each lift to the required percent of maximum density. Delay placement 24 hours if moisture content exceeds maximum allowable, protect covered soil with plastic or plywood during delay. Take particular care not to damage utilities when installing covered soil. Covered soil that will be the bedding for utility lines shall be compacted to conform to the required grade of the utility line. Do not compact the immediate vicinity above a utility line until a fill depth of at least 12 inches above the utility line is reached. E. Bring covered soils to finished grades as shown in the approved drawings. Immediately protect the covered soil material from contamination by water by covering with plastic or plywood. Appendix 14 OPEN SOIL VOLUME I 1 r • TREE 'A' 34' PLAN URB OPEN SOIL VOLUME CURB • ARKING LOT SURFACING 11 11411 /•A•/" \I I -3 '> -.;-011A117 COMPACTED SUBGRADE 11�11�11�11:= ",:'�II�II 11�11*1 11. 11411.11�1��!I.� RAINAGE PROFILE TOTAL SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION FOR TREE 'A': OPEN SOIL VOLUME = (ISLAND AREA) X (SOIL DEPTH) = 336 S.F. x 3' = 1,008 C.F. COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 0 C.F. TOTAL SOIL VOLUME = OPEN SOIL VOLUME + COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 1,008 C.F. + 0 C.F. = 1,008 C.F. 1,008 C.F. IS GREATER THAN THE SOIL VOLUME REQUIRED FOR A PARKING LOT TREE (1,000 C.F.) SO THIS MEETS THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. NO SCALE EXAMPLE SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION - PARKING DWG. NO. LOT TREE WITH OPEN SOIL APPENDIX 15 OPEN SOIL VOLUME !1l , i 13 + + 3'-- 3' I f , + + �. TREE 'A' } + + A4 + ,,,,/- UNDERASPHALT 'I + + { C O VERED SOIL VOLUME I i • i \ 4-: I rii ++.__„, ...±, + r __ + 35' + + CURB PLAN 11 OPEN SOIL VOLUME 3' • 6' PARKING LOT SURFACING yr L 4 II 11 : ��JL � I 7 a .'o' \ \ \ j\ o °o' L gtAgg COVERED SOIL VOLUME 1. IIRW=.1W41 -Ill o . o �� . o ',1111 -,I , I�„ =111.= .11 1L =.E= d r " .� : n I I. ' _ l =11� 11.M11� COMPACTED SUBGRADE - - CURB DRAINAGE PROFILE TOTAL SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION FOR TREE 'A': OPEN SOIL VOLUME = (PLANTER AREA) X (SOIL DEPTH) = 196 S.F. x 3' = 588 C.F. COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 259 S.F. X 3' = 777 C.F. TOTAL SOIL VOLUME = OPEN SOIL VOLUME + COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 588 C.F. + 777 C.F. = 1,365 C.F. 1,365 C.F. IS GREATER THAN THE SOIL VOLUME REQUIRED FOR A PARKING LOT TREE (1,000 C.F.) SO THIS MEETS THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. NO SCALE EXAMPLE SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION - PARKING LOT DWG. NO. TREE WITH COVERED SOIL APPENDIX 15 TOTAL SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION FOR TREE 'A': OPEN SOIL VOLUME = 36 S.F. (TREE CUTOUT AREA)+ 36 S.F (CONNECTED TREE CUTOUT AREA) x 3' (SOIL DEPTH) = 216 C.F. COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 330 S.F. (COVERED SOIL AREA) X 3' (COVERED SOIL DEPTH' =990 C.F TOTAL SOIL VOLUME = OPEN SOIL VOLUME + COVERED SOIL VOLUME = 216 C.F. + 990 C.F. =1,206 C.F. 1,206 C.F. IS GREATER THAN THE SOIL VOLUME REQUIRED FOR A PARKING LOT TREE (1000 C.F) SO THIS MEETS THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. i 1 • ` ♦ • • o ♦ • ♦ • • • ■ ♦ TREE 'A' • COVERED SOIL % CONNECTED TREE • CUTOUT / VOLUME 1 I `• 1 41' .. .. t.. . iv 1 —CURB % / • 50' R. _6'X6' TREE CUTOUT • (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) • ♦ • i ♦ 1 • 1 Fi . ..,...... 1._ - -i 1 6'X6' TREE CUTOUT ao (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) / PARKING LOT CONNECTED TREE CUTOUT CURB % SURFACING % (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) A g A i ii ii' \ / / // // // / o o o •--== 0 0 0 0 i�? \ :.111 "11.11: 1111 = , \ \ \ \ \ j ∎ ,• 000000 '3;00 \ � \ j� \ \ / = 1 // o o o. 0 0 0 0. o o. // /MAW • I ICAPIII A �11'a k �� Il 11 l 400 - fIL�11 �1 p1 I � of - .1t 1 � A � , =1 g*1 = 1. =.11.. 11 ice'-,° *ail 11#11 I � � COVERED SOIL VOLUME (ROOT PATH) OMPACTED SUBGRADE DRAINAGE NO SCALE EXAMPLE SOIL VOLUME CALCULATION — PARKING DWG. NO. APPENDIX 1 5 LOT TREE WITH ROOT PATH PLAN 1 LCCaCNU II n-6... .../PWIMAI I I r..�� - \� 11fF , at 45 6 \ SPECIES OPEN SOIL VOLU ME COVERED SOIL VOLUME TOTAL SOIL VOLUME AVE. MATURE CANOPY %OF CANPY OVER PARNG LOT AREA OVER PARKING LOT I \ AA RE R 1 % 757 � 4. ' IWBOL ODES. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAWE SIZE CONDITION SPAGNG CANOPY SIZE 2 I 0 f 4 530 L 4W spread (7 500 al) / \ S 003 ZRlkR• i S f0? c L ) 0 f 3 102 at a slsread (1 3 at) f 02% �� / f. T — � � ss% t oa at. 7 ACER RUBRUW RED W4PLE 2 C LL. BAD AS SHOVM 40 SPREAD (1256 SF) - _ L 33ct 50% 054 af. 7 k — 5°x --- 1575 et 27907 274?ct eaepread(1,063al) 85% 1608ai v _ 'mc 14u5 8e x696 a � s li , j� / / / / f`" \ \ \ � \ \ O ) _. _.. 2 0 C 8,1 el \ � / ' WERLYIS RUf9RA RED OK 2CAL Bk8 As SHO � �IFAD (I / f /�� \ 'a! \ _11c 11 ox ' !� / / , . \ \ x914 mow 1101cf o.t ±1o15tsd ( taesat) I 10976 loaaat / I ,� 4 - \ \ \ e i7�Ot oat 4170f. 5 ad 1UOO 100% 1089f. I / � �eP�� \\ _ v\ w 2e ZELKOVA SERRATE ZELKOA 2 ' cx eae As sHOrm sD SPREAD (1057 • ) L t o I 3, . _ 0 c . f. t 5 1 e) we 10"i j \ / / .: w l 0020 Rd Oak 4608 ef. .. _..._�- ocf. ,4,506 at 45 splaad (1,5a.f) L . -. _ .. \ � \ \ F 0021 _ - Zelk 7 417f. 870t L?97t 50pd(1ae3l) 1% 1: RED OK I / . v Zow 28 c.f. GI 6a apleed (1008 a % • 1 \ ' ` # \\ \ I oO23 ow - -- 0.209 ct 870 o.f. 8,163 c.L t) 1003 �� / '`�' \ •s, \ 0024 vkola 42eae.t 870e.t 6,154cf. 5.e d(1a63et) 100% _ \ \ \ • ". \ \ 0025 Zalkose 4,4 c.t 870 c.f 554 c.t 6 1 0� a C) _ 100% 1083 t \ % / \ \ . / / //� \ N \ - 0 5,048 f. 0 et 5,04E el 50nd (1,903 sal) 48% _ % f. 3702 pld (1,b9a t 37% 581 a f / \ �� \ \ / ` I/!, \ \\ I 2,430 c f 0027 Red Oak I 302 C.f 0 c 0 c. .t et OSS f.1 i 077 c f o 1.077 e.t 63 a t) koe 1077 f Oaf. 1,OTI et 83 a.t / / I \ .� 4 }Of e .t _ Oat 4, 101 c.f. 00s.t) � � \ I . L Y.' . \ \ $ \ • I e T" 3 - 630 c f.. __ O c.f. 3,690 063 s.r. 1 :..:.:. ...... ./ .. - - - \ \ , (' — _ 4,302 c.f _ 0 c.f. 4.302 00 a.t) 4U% r 602 a.f. j / \ \ v L003a Zelkme I 7350 ei Oc.f. 7,350 c.f 37 apead (t 903 al) 48% 88203. \ / I :1 �i�♦ , \ \ �/ ! 0035 Red Mepe 1 418 c f O 41 1,410 c.f Ca spread (1,266 0 f) 10O% \ / 1 2 50 .f i \ \ 1 et 1489 of 40' spread (1 256 aa) 100% 1,256 s. \\ Red Nlo s 1 080 c f 0 0037 Red Maple I 8562 c.f 0 el 2,5302 of 4a s 0 et) 100% 1,250 s f. ' ' i� % ♦�i ♦�� , . ,• \ O a \ \ , 003 fed Maple I 2 529 c.f _ 0 c f. 2.520 c.0 4a eproal (1,258 a.t 73% 016 a f. iN� ♦i ° ♦ � ♦♦♦♦ i •♦ / O \ 0030 Red Maple 1533 at — 0 c.f. 1,633 of •10' 1266 a t ) 5896 775 a t / i ! ,:. , .♦r ♦i4° ♦4i4 ♦ /// 4' / \ N \\ / SCALE SHOWN I S FOR FULL 1 OD/O Red Maple _ S70tf. _ _ 1.710 cf ?.282 c.t 10'splsW (1258at, 81% _ 1021st. / \ . ♦�: ♦ ♦e,� ♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦ .' \ \ /\ SIZE SHEET (24'X36') ONLY L.- 004 f_ pad Maple 516eL 1,770 e.t 2,232 c.f. 40' (1,268a•f BO% 1,007 s.f. I %f ` / e♦�4• O°'O i• / \ \ d' \ SCALE 1" = 20 FEET O 42 ' I I Itlkoa 837 et _� Mtc.t. 1,278 af. 50 17.003 sa, 0 ?% _ _ 1804ar. �°♦ ♦ ♦�4 ♦� ♦ ♦� AVNU�BIE OPEN I ___ I / • .. \ • •♦: ••, ��sii� ♦. ♦.4:0♦ ♦4 ♦�, i SOIL \ \ \ $ 1 / a�R ♦♦ ♦ ♦ . ♦ ♦• (1. 1 \ \ \ Taal Qualifying Mature Tree Canopy Masi 57,703 c.f. I (/f / , I ♦ ♦ i 4iQi. ° ♦°♦...9 \ \ \ r • \ \ I I — IMIq _ 1 ' �/ . • • ♦°��♦ �O ♦ ♦� QUALIFYING MATURE CANOPY INCLUDES ALL AREAS DIRECTLY OVER THE PARKING LOT SURFACE AND AREAS THAT ARE SURROUNDED ON AT LEAST THREE SIDES BY EITHER CURB OR 5. $\ \ \ m `" - - � (Sum ofcaropiaea mar parking lot) 1 \ ": 7 1 \\ j ' %e . ' 9,;;;/ • \ \ HARD SURFACE PAVING. THIS INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO PARKING LOT ISLANDS AND PLANTING AREAS BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT AND SIDEWALK. \ s v \ / $ \k4 \ \ QUALIFYING MATURE CANOPY COVER OPEN SOIL VOLUME I ' 0 �� I WHEEL STOPS ` \ \\ INDIVIDUAL TREE MATURE CANOPY OUTLINE COVERED SOIL VOLUME s,,;10 \ BUILDING FOOTPRINT \ \ \ \ ' /1 ' ID • PARKING LOT AREA LD \ \ : 84,982 S.F. - ,> \$ \\ / TOTAL QUALIFYING MATURE TREE CANOPY AREA. 57.763 S.F. PARKING LOT TREE SOIL VOLUME REQUIREMENTS i \ O \ (CANOPY AREA DIRECTLY OVER PARKING LOT) e ZELKOVA (1YP.) \ ■ \ I ' \ \ - \I • % CANOPY COVER: 89% MIN. SOIL VOLUME REQUIREMENT ( C.F. PER TREE) '�� \ "I II ` :c \ \\ MINIMUM % CANOPY COVER: 30% 1C 1 \ \ \ I \ \ I I $ $\ \ 7 MET. 1 \ i REMOVAL, 1 (, \ L STORING, AND AMENDED SOILS FOR PLANTER AREAS: � I A \ CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVAL ALL DEBRIS FROM PLANTER AREAS AND EX CAVATE TO A DEPTH OF 38 1NCH R SLOPE SIDES OF EXCAVATIONS AT 1:1 SLOPE OR \ �• 7 I \ /— \ ,, . ' \ \ SHORE EDGES TO PREVENT UNDERMINING OF VEHICLE LOAD AREAS AND TO PROVIDE A SLOPED PR OFILE TRANSfTION BETWEEN SOIL TYPES AND STRUCTURAL — -f ` 1 \ \ \ \ �� ' -S'� \ FILL DISPOSE OF DEBRIS AND SUBSOIL. STOCKPILE EXCAVATED TOPSOIL IN APPROVED AREA OFF SITE. / '\ / / EXISTING AND IMPORTED TOPSOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND APPROVED BY THE CRY ARBORIST. SOIL MIXING � / \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ ♦ SHALL BE DONE IN DESIGNATED AREAS OR IN THE SUPPLIERS YARD. MIX AMENDMENTS WITH TOPSOIL WHEN SOIL IS W A FRIABLE CONDITION ONLY ( DAMP AND ! ' ' \ NOT MUDDY WITH ADEQUATE MOISTURE TO BREAK INTO CLODS WHEN TURNED AND WILL NOT LEAVE A MUD STAIN ON THE HAND WHEN SQUEEZED) . \ ` ` %' / _ \ ; " WATURE CANOPY , •� \ I • `� \ \ Z' \ CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CERTIFICATE OF CONTENT AND PERCENT OF SOIL MIXES WITH ALL AMENDED SOIL TO THE CITY PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. / �'� �' i , �� / �r COYER IJ \ 1111\# � fr '� \ :4/� I \ ■ / ' � . \ \ • �� /�'i \ �, , \ \ \ / BLENDED SOIL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION: T 1 � / \- CANOPY \ / RED MAPLE \ \ 1 •-".. SOIL SHALL BE FRIABLE WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED. PLACE SOIL IN LAYERS OF NOT MORE THAN t2" IN DEPTH. PROVIDE 3 PASSES WITH A 2' COMPAC \ / \ PLATE VIBRATING COMPACTOR. COMPACT TO 8085% MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AS MEASURED BY THE PROCTOR TEST OR AS APPROVED FOR SPECIFIC BLENDED / /le \ - - \ / \ •►� SOIL MIXES. , /44, ..-:::::,.. • MATURE \ \ CANOPY SPREAD / / ,4* �/ �� / 9,/, 1 OPEN SOIL VOLUME • �, ll ( /, �.% �%' /�. /� /� /�� /III' /...., • . • \ \ 1 I \ / A SHOWN AS \ �� 1 1 / /- ! � V �F / \ \ / \ G , / \ b e PARKING LOT SURFACING \ 0 , - I _, \ / j - - COVERED \/\ / \ \� _ .�,_r - : \ \ \ / \ \ 8 rE urlu Al I - _ STRUCTURAL SOIL / _ - O - r . - / ° \\ - . _ - \ \ r I 1 1 1 \ \ /\ II n n n =a COVERED SOIL VOLUME _ �/ � 1L=11=11=111= 1 \ \ 11 11,--11=11 I 7 \ / / v 40' WANRE -, I: 1 -A11 I 7 lt: .Rr.1 ' EL F -, =11 JI –il 1 II u COMPACTED SUBGRADE 0 5' ■ V % ∎ .a �!'' . / 4 — / 11 .II JL�II 1� _ L II R =1l—ll. Ili \ \ / \ CUR: DRAINAGE • j r 1 \ cnuoPY SPREAD \ 1 fill / I A \ � I //� TRASH / / — 1 \ / 7 I �• Re R. ow OF \ ENC LOSURE / -_, e / 1 . ;� ,-- ,� \ �j/ FOR TREE 00 4 \% I. PARKING TREE WITH COVERED SOIL DETAIL r�j e l ��r / % � , ,� �/ _ 1 % : �'� / \ \ NOT 10 SCALE / •ur.. a AREA (OUTSIDE OF PREIECT BOUNDARY) ... \ \ \ DOSING - _ -. __ - I. DATE: 07 -11 -2011 NIP REwslONS: EXAMPLE PARKING LOT 100 T ST E , '� " As ND `"° � T % JOB NUMBER • 15W D. OREGON 2277E F LOOP ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 1000 OFFICE, ORATED A T : IIE08D R TREE CANOPY PLAN PE (503) PREPARIED FOR woo( •%AWING• 1 ASSOROAD JOHN " DOE FILM: INPOOMIC_O3UAB(RATIVF_1YM ,560 SW LOOP ROAD 1011 SW LOOP ROAD kOREGON SHEET COLLABORATIVE Iwo, D 97223 OREGON , I. r.IL�Nieelw .,a„11141,e. ,euael Aaalwr a U IGARD _._ ..._ Ate., APPENDIX 16 i(}T1IPD IN SE. IA. A ID LANDSCAPE ISLAND (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) �f t T t + + + + + + + + + COVERED SOIL VOLUME if + + + ± + + + + + + + A UNDER ASPHALT + + + + + + + + -4- + f +I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + II 1 + + VARIES (6' MIN. • + + +{ ++ ++ —+ VA f AR `bh ES+'— •Eg. + + + + + + ,, �.4 + + -\------T I + + ,. + + + + + + 141 + 1 + + + 1 + + + , // + + + +41 L ++ ++ FA + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 1 + ++ / + +, + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + CURB+ + + + I + + + 1 + + + + PLAN OPEN SOIL VOLUME CURB r a VARIES PARKING LOT SURFACING L °off \ \ \ •o °oc COVERED SOIL VOLUME °o ° o • \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / 60° ° 3 PER CITY SPECIFICATIONS o. ''_- I � y L RAJ =JI COMPACTED SUBGRADE II DRAINAGE PROFILE EXAMPLE COVERED SOIL VOLUME NO SCALE PLAN DRAWING — UNDER DWG. NO. PARKING LOT OPTION FOR APPENDIX 17 COVERED SOIL VOLUME ROOT PATH (3' MINIMUM) CONNECTED TREE CUTOUT I II 1 IT 11 I / VARIES - - IC ..3D _ I I II \ ri ) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4 1 I I I 1 •.d VARIES — CURB _6'X6' MINIMUM TREE CUTOUT (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) PLAN 6'X6' MINIMUM TREE CUTOUT al (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) % PARKING LOT / CONNECTED TREE CUTOUT CUR SURFACING (OPEN SOIL VOLUME) = - r ii n= ii' 0 i .► \ / / j / _:fo � o o -- -- == i \ / \/ / \ \j + ,.•, :: , 11 11 : ::..:_ 1 - 11 =1 1- � // / 0 0 0 r, o � ._ . \/,& // 4 .1. 11 00 \ = ' 11=11=11=11=11- I I - / /�/ 0 0 0 ; . 0 0 0. • 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0.. J. ././y / \ /_':II:� II � ii 11= 11. =11= 11 =h =u= -v -11— 1,11 11 11 11 .lI "II =1I= 11-11.- 11 #11= 11 11= ll =:11- X11 =11= 1111 11.=11. =1h = 11 =; 11 - 11 = 11-11- 11 11 11 11 - = 11 11 1111 =1111 .11.= 11= 11.= 11 =11.= 11.=11= 11= 11= .11= 11 =11= ?II= 11= 11 =11. 11 11=11=11 11 :11 11 11 11=1 =11= _ =11.= 1!=,11; X111 -11= _ '=. 11 .= 11= 11.= 11= 11. =.11= 11= 11. -11 — COMPACTED SUBGRADE COVERED SOIL VOLUME (ROOT PATH) DRAINAGE PER CITY SPECIFICATIONS PROFILE EXAMPLE COVERED SOIL NO SCALE VOLUME DRAWING— ROOT DWG. NO. PATH OPTION FOR PARKING APPENDIX 17 1 IT Tnrr Example Covered Soil Volume Specifications Part 1. Covered Soil Materials A. Covered soil shall consist of the following mixture of gravel, soil and admixtures: 1. Crushed rock, gradation of 100% passing 1.25 inch, max. 30% passing 0.75 inch; 2. Loam /Organic Topsoil; 3. Soil binder such as "Stabilizer "; and 4. Water. Part 2. Proportions of Covered Soil Materials A. The proportions of covered soil materials shall be as follows: Material Amount for 1 CY Amount for 4.6 CY of Covered Soil of Covered Soil Crushed Rock 23.2 cubic feet 4 cubic yards Topsoil 5.9 cubic feet 1 cubic yard Soil Binder 13.7 ounces 4 pounds Water 1.6 gallon 46 gallons B. The target moisture content is 20% by weight of the topsoil weight. The above water contents assume the top is dry. The amount of water that will need to be added will be dependent on the moisture content of the raw materials. Actual amounts of water used shall be determined during mixing. Part 3. Covered Soil Mixing Procedures A. Mix covered soil in batches of an appropriate size for the equipment being used. The end result is to be a material that is uniformly blended together. Do not batch in quantities that will not allow the equipment to completely mix the material. Determine batch size and quantities of each material needed for the batch. B. Start with half of the crushed rock material. C. Add all of the topsoil material. D. Add the soil binder. E. Add half of the estimated water. F. Add the other half of the crushed rock material. G. Mix the material together. H. Slowly add water to the mixture and continue to mix. The final amount of water will vary with moisture content of the crushed rock and topsoil. Add water in incremental amounts and mix the material between the additions of water. I. Stop adding water and mixing when there is a minute amount of free topsoil remaining. The topsoil will coat the crushed rock and not fall out of the material. All of the crushed rock Appendix 17 shall be uniformly coated with topsoil. There shall be no clumps of topsoil or uncovered crushed rock in the mixture. J. If too much water is added to the mixture, water will drain out of the material and the topsoil will wash off of the crushed rock. If this occurs the batch of material shall be discarded and shall not be incorporated into the completed work. Part 4. Placement of Covered Soil A. Protect soils and mixes from absorbing excess water and from erosion at all times. Do not store materials unprotected from rainfall events. Do not allow excess water to enter site prior to compaction. If water is introduced into the material after grading, allow material to drain or aerate to optimum compaction moisture content. B. All areas to receive covered soil mixture shall be inspected by the project landscape architect and /or project engineer before starting placement of mixture. All defects such as incorrect grading, compaction and inadequate drainage, etc., shall be corrected prior to beginning placement of covered soil. C. Confirm that the sub -grade is at the proper elevation and compacted as required. Sub -grade elevations shall slope parallel to the finished grade. Clear the excavation of all construction debris, trash, rubble and foreign material. Fill any over excavation with approved fill and compact to the required sub -grade compaction. D. Install covered soil in 6 -inch lifts and spread uniformly over the area. Compact each lift to at least 85 percent of maximum density. Delay placement 24 hours if moisture content exceeds maximum allowable, protect covered soil with plastic or plywood during delay. Take particular care not to damage utilities when installing covered soil. Covered soil that will be the bedding for utility lines shall be compacted to conform to the required grade of the utility line. Do not compact the immediate vicinity above a utility line until a fill depth of at least 12- inches above the utility line is reached. E. Bring covered soils to finished grades as shown in the approved drawings. Immediately protect the covered soil material from contamination by water by covering with plastic or plywood. Appendix 17 i - / \ 14- ■ \ / 111.00' \ / / \ \ Y'. a ►�� ♦ /►♦ > s �� WHITE ASH (TYP.) -PARKING AREA BOUNDARY � 1,5 DIA. MATURE CANOPY (TYP.) 1,590 S.F. - � % ( 4 ( $ . iii 1 i I =I 1 . .� ►1�� , 1 ..#'4_ ,'4_ 4 _ i �i ►� i_i�;��:� 123.00' .I i ii ■ %; ► %; 0 RED MAPLE (TYP.) 40' DIA. MATURE CANOPY (TYP.) 1,256 S.F. SIDEWALK /. i■ ♦••♦•♦•� ♦♦� \ PLANTER -. . ♦ \ �•� �♦�♦�♦�♦ +•�� •�•�•�•� . 1 : - � 1� I 1 � � � 1 ' • I� �� AIP t ' � �� ' ' 'II' ♦ / ►em u � ♦ • il, - - ° Iropl . � � i0 ∎ . 0- - • - r * ∎∎ ∎ ∎•. - A AL 11Pter∎ -• ; 6 / / / � / \ / _ - _ TOTAL CANOPY AREA OF PARKING LOT TREES' = 11,388 S.F. TOTAL QUALIFYING MATURE CANOPY COVER = CANOPY COVER DIRECTLY OVER THE PARKING AREA IN SQUARE FEET, INCLUDING PLANTING ISLANDS AND AREAS SURROUNDED BY CURB OR HARD SURFACE PAVING ON AT LEAST THREE SIDES. ►�� TOTAL QUALIFYING MATURE CANOPY COVER = 8,057 S.F. PARKING LOT AREA = 13,590 S.F. PERCENT ACTUAL CANOPY COVER = (8,057 S.F.) / (13,590 S.F.)= 59% 59% IS GREATER THAN THE MINIMUM OF 30% TOTAL QUALIFYING MATURE CANOPY COVER THEREFORE CITY REQUIREMENTS ARE MET. `CANOPY AREA PER TREE IS DETERMINED FROM THE VALUE GIVEN IN THE CITY OF TIGARD PARKING LOT TREE LIST FOR A MATURE TREE OF THAT SPECIES. EXAMPLE PARKING LOT NO SCALE THAT MEETS 30% MINIMUM DWG. NO. CANOPY COVER APPENDIX 18 pre,' linr►irii r Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 1— Hazard Tree Evaluation and • E l Abatement Procedures I 1 l ;1 R I) Administrative Rule No. 8.06.030 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual creates a process for the reconciliation of hazard tree disputes between neighboring property owners. 2. Sections Please see Section 1 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 .3dininistrative Rule No. 8.06.030 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 2, Part 1— Street Tree Planting Standards T I G A R D Administrative Rule No. 8.08.030 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual creates a process for property owners to plant trees along streets. 2. Sections Please see Section 2, Part 1 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.08.030 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Ill Urban Forestry Manual Section 2, Part 2 — Street Tree Maintenance . Standards T I G A R D Administrative Rule No. 8.08.040 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual creates a process for property owners to maintain trees along streets. 2. Sections Please see Section 2, Part 2 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.08.040 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule I I I al Urban Forestry Manual Section 3 — Street Tree Removal Standards Administrative Rule No. 8.08.050 01 01 T I GA R D TMC # Rule # \'cr;iim # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual creates a process for property owners to remove street trees. 2. Sections Please see Section 3 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.08.050 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule ,� Urban Forestry Manual Section 4, Part 1— Median Tree Planting Standards T I G A R D Administrative Rule No. 8.08.060 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual creates a process for property owners to plant median trees. 2. Sections Please see Section 4, Part 1 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.08.060 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 4, Part 2 — Median Tree • Maintenance Standards T I G A R D Administrative Rule No. 8.08.070 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual creates a process for property owners to maintain median trees. 2. Sections Please see Section 4, Part 2 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.08.070 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule III Urban Forestry Manual Section 5— Median Tree Removal Standards T I GAR D Administrative Rule No. 8.08.080 01 01 ct TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual creates a process for property owners to remove median trees. 2. Sections Please see Section 5 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.08.080 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 6 — Sensitive Lands Tree Removal and Replacement Standards T I GARD Administrative Rule No. 8.10.040 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual details the approval criteria for sensitive lands tree removal though the City Manager Decision Making Procedures (Part 1), including Sensitive Lands Tree Replacement Standards (Part 2). 2. Sections Please see Section 6 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.10.040 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 7 — Development Tree Removal and Replacement Standards T I GARD Administrative Rule No. 8.12.040 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual details the approval criteria for development tree removal though the City Manager Decision Making Procedures (Part 1), including replacement standards for development trees (Part 2). 2. Sections Please see Section 7 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume N (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.12.040 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 8 — Urban Forestry Fund Tree • :1 : Removal and Replacement Standards R I) Administrative Rule No. 8.14.040 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual details the approval criteria for Urban Forestry Fund Tree Removal though the City Manager Decision Making Procedures (Part 1), including Urban Forestry Fund Tree Replacement Standards (Part 2). 2. Sections Please see Section 8 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.14.040 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 9 — Heritage Tree Designation • Removal Standards T 1 G A R D Administrative Rule No. 8.16.070 01 01 TMC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual details the approval criteria for heritage tree designation removal though the City Manager Decision Making Procedures. 2. Sections Please see Section 9 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 8.16.070 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule 'PI Urban Forestry Manual Section 10 - Urban Forestry Plan Standards • Administrative Rule No. 18.790.030 01 01 TIGARD TDC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual details urban forestry plan standards including tree preservation and removal site plan requirements, tree canopy site plan requirements, supplemental report requirements, tree canopy fee calculation requirements and significant tree grove preservation considerations. 2. Sections Please see Section 10 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 18.790.030 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 11— Urban Forestry Plan Implementation Standards T I G A R D Administrative Rule No. 18.790.060 01 01 TDC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual details urban forestry plan implementation standards including inspection requirements, tree establishment requirements, and urban forest inventory requirements. 2. Sections Please see Section 11 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 18.790.060 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule Urban Forestry Manual Section 12 — Street Tree Soil Volume IN . Standards T I G A R D Administrative Rule No. 18.745.040 01 01 TDC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual details street tree soil volume standards including soil volume requirements, soil volume calculation requirements, and soil volume plan requirements. 2. Sections Please see Section 12 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 18.745.040 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule III Urban Forestry Manual Section 13 — Parking Lot Tree Canopy Standards T I G A R D Administrative Rule No. 18.745.050 01 01 TDC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual details parking lot tree canopy standards including parking lot tree requirements, soil volume calculation requirements, and parking lot tree canopy plan requirements. 2. Sections Please see Section 13 of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 18.745.050 -01 -01 Effective Date: Proposed Administrative Rule II Urban Forestry Manual Appendices Administrative Rule No. 00.000.000 01 01 T I G A R D TDC # Rule # Version # Effective Date: 1. Description This section of the proposed Urban Forestry Manual includes: • Appendix 1: Tree Risk Assessment Form • Appendix 2: Street Tree List • Appendix 3: Parking Lot Tree List • Appendix 4: Columnar Tree List • Appendix 5: Native Tree List • Appendix 6: Nuisance Tree List • Appendix 7: Example Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan • Appendix 8: Example Tree Canopy Site Plan • Appendix 9: Example Supplemental Report Template • Appendix 10: Example Tree Canopy Site Plan for an Individual Lot • Appendix 11: Example Soil Volume Calculations for Street Trees • Appendix 12: Example Soil Volume Plan • Appendix 13: Example Soil Volume Plan for a Single Lot • Appendix 14: Example Covered Soil Volume Plan Drawings and Example Covered Soil Specifications for Street Trees • Appendix 15: Example Soil Volume Calculations for Parking Lot Trees • Appendix 16: Example Parking Lot Tree Canopy Plan • Appendix 17: Example Covered Soil Volume Plan Drawings and 1 Example Covered Soil Specifications for Parking Lot Trees • Appendix 18: Example Parking Lot that Meets the 30% Minimum Canopy Cover requirement f . 2. Sections Please see the appendix of the proposed City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual in the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume IV (attached). Approved by: Martha L. Wine, City Manager Date Page 1 Administrative Rule No. 18.745.050 -01 -01 Effective Date: City of Tigard T1 (, I Memorandum To: Tigard City Council From: Marissa Daniels, Associate Planner Re: Administrative Rules Date: January 22, 2013 The City Council will continue discussion of the Administrative Rules portion of the Urban Forestry Code Revisions. At the September 11, 2012, public hearing, staff presented a list of 47 "issues of interest" to capture Council feedback. At that time, Council gave direction to staff to categorize and simplify the list of issues to be discussed. The result of that process is repeated on page 3 of this memo (Discussion Guide). Issues related to the code were discussed on October 23, 2012 and November 13, 2012. Issues related to the administrative rules will be discussed now that the code portion of the proposal is adopted. This discussion is scheduled for January 22, 2013. Administrative Rules Process The administrative rulemaking procedure is described in Municipal Code section 2.04.070, and includes notice to both council and the public. Staff formally notified council of the proposed administrative rules on December 13, 2012. Councilors Woodard and Henderson both notified City Manager Marty Wine by the deadline that they desire to put the administrative rules for discussion as part of the next available council agenda. Public notice of the administrative rules discussion was sent on January 7, 2013. Council is scheduled to discuss the administrative rules on January 22, 2013 and February 5, 2013. Discussion Format Staff anticipates using an approach similar to the code items. Working from Council's 47 issues of interest, the issues related to the administrative rules have been separated into two categories: • Administrative Issues are items where Council has indicated a desire to look at potential changes to the Planning Commission's recommendation. Staff will provide a detailed response to each of the administrative issues in advance of council's discussion. 1 • Issues for Clarification are informational in nature. If there is an item in this category you'd like to raise for group discussion, please do so on January 22, 2013. Future issues will not be considered in the adoption of the code at this time. For example, solar access was identified by Council as a future work item. Issues Resolved indicates issues discussed previously with some resolution or clarification items that were not raised by council during the public hearing process. Expected Revisions Throughout the public hearing process, staff has heard several potential revisions to the Urban Forestry Manual to be made during the administrative rules process. Staff is currently working to identify sections where additional flexibility can be added, and to provide council with options on the level of flexibility desired. Below is a summary of sections where Council may desire flexibility. 2 Discussion Guide Urban Forestry Code Revision Issues of Interest - September 11, 2012 Type a U I ~ o ' m Category Issue U w 5. Is the canopy approach appropriate as a regulatory tool? 0 10. How will the requirements apply to large subdivisions vs. small infill (i.e. partitions) 0 .d a and redevelopment sites? - 0 7.') 11. Should developers be required to maintain trees for two years after planting to ensure 0 n Q establishment? 7. Are the canopy requirements a regulatory taking? 0 32. Are the tree planting, removal and thinning standards internally consistent? C1 1 33. What is the "built environment" (e.g. trees are allowed to be removed if their roots C2 Q damage the "built environment ")? 35. Are -there some inappropriate trees on the lists such as London Plane Tree? Al v 36. How was the nuisance tree list developed? C3 P4 39. Should there be spacing standards between trees and from buildings? A2 40. Why are there different standards for planting open grown vs. stand grown trees? C4 .tu ct 44. Why is it necessary to specify sheet size and scale for development plans? A3 45. Is it necessary for the city to have hard copies submittals of development plans? A3 46. Is requiring tree protection inspections by arborists /landscape architects twice monthly A4 -G during development excessive? 48. Complexity of requirements to draw plans. A3 c, 34. Do the tree lists provide enough options? Al . v w 35. Are there some inappropriate trees on the lists such as London Plane Tree? Al V N , 36. How was the nuisance tree list developed? C3 37. Is there a federal definition of a nuisance tree that can be used to develop the list? C5 38. Should Norway Maple be removed from the nuisance tree list? Al 43. Are there trees on the list that will cause damage to underground pipes and utilities? C6 22. Should a permit be required to remove trees that were planted or preserved with 0 development? C 21. Should permits continue to be required to remove trees on private property? b 20. Are the proposed permit requirements more restrictive than the existing permit 0 a v requirements? .5 w cr 23. Who will serve on the board or committee that makes decisions regarding removing 0 i l healthy, protected trees? 25. Why does the code allow the removal and replacement of trees that die within three 0 years of planting (e.g.8.12.040)? 28. Should hazard trees be prohibited in Tigard? 0 w 27. How do the hazard tree requirements relate to insurance requirements? 0 26. Will the hazard tree requirements be effective in requiring removal of hazard trees 0 when there are disputes? x 29. Are there conflicts between the hazard tree requirements and the recently adopted 0 nuisance code? 16/30. Should the Administrative Rules (Urban Forestry Manual) be eliminated and the 0 elements moved into the Code? c4 *Does the proposal increase the cost of development due to the tree canopy plan and soil 0 y - H,, volume plan requirements? g 14. Do the administrative rules that implement the development code meet state land use 0 N e.7 law? 15. Will the use of administrative rules lead to more appeals of development projects? 0 17. Do the administrative rules for the development code need to be so detailed? A5 31. Are the administrative rules a solution in search of a problem? C7 9/13. Will the cost of development increase due to the tree canopy plan and soil volume 0 o 5 plan requirements? `" o *Should parking lot canopy (and associated soil volume) be required, since it could lead to 0 increased development costs? IDA *How will funding of the Urban Forestry Program be affected by the proposal? 0 a a w 1. Was there a balance of viewpoint when developing the proposal? 0 v 2. Is there a disconnect between where we started (i.e. Comp Plan and Urban Forestry 0 fi o Master Plan) and where we ended? 0 o 0 3. Do Tigard residents support a 40% long term canopy goal? 0 p t 4. Is the 40% canopy goal for all private property or is it citywide? 0 Ga 19. Should there be a review period after adoption? 0 36. How was the nuisance tree list developed? 0 8. Will the canopy requirements prevent solar access? 0 0 24. Should people have the right to significant view corridors such as Mt. Hood views? 0 'd 41. Should there be limits on tree heights in order to preserve significant view corridors 0 cia 4 , such as Mt. Hood views? r 0 42. Should there be restrictions on planting evergreen trees on the south side of streets 0 (due to winter shade /ice issues)? * Denotes issues raised on September 11, 2012 3 Administrative Issues Al Issue of Interest: Are there some inappropriate trees on the lists such as London Plane Tree? Do the tree lists provide enough options? Should Norway Maple be removed from the nuisance tree list? Staff Response: The tree lists in Appendices 2 through 5 of the Urban Forestry Manual were developed by researching the tree lists from other cities in the Portland region. The most successful and appropriate trees were selected from the other cities' lists to create Tigard's lists. The lists were reviewed and recommended for approval by the Citizen Advisory Committee, Technical Advisory Committee and Peer Review Consultants. All of these reviewing bodies included members with expertise in urban forestry and urban tree species. There is a total of 123 trees on the tree lists that are appropriate for various applications from parking lots to natural areas. However, it is important to note that applicants are not limited to using only those trees on the city's lists. Any tree species not on the lists may be used if approved by the city during the application process. Norway Maple is included on the nuisance tree list in Appendix 6 of the Urban Forestry Manual because it is capable of spreading at such a rate that it causes harm to the natural environment. The process for developing the nuisance tree list is detailed in Issue C3 below. Staff Recommendation: Approve the tree lists in Appendices 2 through 6 of the Urban Forestry Manual. However, as mentioned in Potential Amendment 4, council will need to provide staff with direction on which species to add or delete if they decide to revise the lists. A2 Issue of Interest:WRIVIIIMMElards between trees and from buildings? : -_ Staff Response: The purpose of having spacing standards between trees and from buildings is to ensure healthy and sustainable tree growth to maturity. When trees are planted too closely together it results in excessive competition between trees, which can weaken their health and stability as they grow over time. When trees are planted too closely to buildings, their roots can cause damage to building foundations and branches and leaves can cause increased roof and gutter maintenance. The spacing standards limit these future conflicts. During previous council discussions, there were concerns raised about possible scenarios where site constraints would not allow the building setback standards to be met. To address this concern, staff recommends increasing flexibility in the building 4 setback requirement. Staff Recommendation: Increase building setback flexibility in Urban Forestry Manual Sections 10.2.L.1 -4 and 10.2.M.3 -5. Include language to the effect that "The setback from the face of habitable buildings may be reduced if approved by the city manager or designee." See Potential Amendment 5. A3 Issue of Interest: Why is it necessary to specify sheet size and scale for development plans? Is it necessary for the city to have hard copy submittals of development plans? Complexity of requirements to draw plans. Staff Response: The sheet size and bar scales are specified to ensure applicants have a clear understanding of the city's submittal requirements. Currently, these submittal requirements are not clearly stated, so applicants often submit plans on sheets or at scales that are not legible for review which delays the approval process. Documenting these requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual is intended to increase the efficiency of the approval process. However, flexibility may be warranted if alternate sheet sizes or scales are submitted and still legible for review by the city staff. Therefore, staff recommends increasing flexibility on sheet size and scale requirements. Hard copy submittals are currently required for development plans to create a record of permit approvals. The requirement in the Urban Forestry Manual for hard copy submittals of urban forestry plans continues the city's administrative practices. Finally, AKS Engineering and Forestry did not find that the requirements to draw plans were overly complex when they tested the requirements during the peer review phase. What they found was that they referred to the requirements only when there were specific questions when drawing the plans. If the requirements were not written down in the Urban Forestry Manual, it would have led to subjectivity when creating and reviewing the plans which increases the likelihood of appeals. Staff Recommendation: Retain requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual for drawing plans and submitting hard copies. Increase flexibility by allowing alternate sheet sizes (in Sections 10.1.A, 10.2.A, 12.3.B and 13.3.B) and bar scales (in Sections 10.1.D and 10.2.D). Include language to the effect of "Alternate sheet sizes /bar scales may be allowed if approved by the city manager or designee." See Potential Amendments 1 and 2. A4 Issue of Interest: Is requiring tree protection inspections by amorists /lan scape architects twice monthly during development excessive? Staff Response: The city currently requires twice monthly tree protection inspections as a condition of development approval. Documenting this requirement in the Urban Forestry Manual continues the city's current administrative practice and makes applicants aware of it in advance of application process. 5 The reason the city requires twice monthly inspections is to ensure tree protection plans are implemented and trees are adequately protected during development. This had been invaluable in avoiding damage to trees during development, fines and delays for applicants and damaged and /or hazardous trees for subsequent property owners. There may be situations where flexibility on the twice monthly inspection requirement is warranted. For example, a preserved tree may be far enough away from planned development activities that there is little chance it will be damaged. In this case, monthly inspections may suffice. Therefore, staff recommends increasing flexibility on the twice monthly inspection requirement. Staff Recommendation: Increase flexibility on the twice monthly inspection requirement in Urban Forestry Manual Section 11.1.B. Include language to the effect that "The frequency of site inspections may be decreased if approved by the city manager or designee." See Potential Amendment 7. A5 Issue of Interest: Do the administrative rules forevelopment code need to be so detailed? Staff Response: The purpose of the administrate rules in the Urban Forestry Manual is to more clearly articulate the city's code requirements for both development applicants and the general public. One of the main problems identified with the city's existing code is the vagueness of code requirements. This vagueness has lead to staff interpretations, conditions of approval or relying on unwritten past practice when issuing decisions This creates uncertainty and tends to increase the cost of development because of more delays and appeals. The administrative rules for the development code were developed in conjunction with homebuilders and the public on the Citizen Advisory Committee to make code implementation more efficient. The administrative rules were extensively tested as part of the peer review by AKS Engineering and Forestry, a local development consulting firm. What AKS found during the peer review was that the administrative rules were only referred to when there were specific questions to be answered. For example, during the peer review AKS wanted to better understand how to calculate tree canopy for street trees. They referred to the Urban Forestry Manual to confirm that street trees do receive full canopy credit even though they are planted in the right of way and not within the development site. If this detail was not included in the Urban Forestry Manual, it would be challenging to answer the question. In a real world scenario, this could have led to an appeal if someone disagreed with the decision. This example illustrates that the detail in the Urban Forestry Manual is not intended to make the requirements more complex, but rather to increase certainty during the development process. Staff Recommendation: Retain the existing level of detail in the Urban Forestry Manual. Issues for Clarification C1 Issue of Interest: Are the tree planting, removal and thinning standards internally consistent? Staff Response: Staff has reviewed the tree planting, removal and thinning standards and determined they are internally consistent. C2 Issue of Interest: What is the "built environment" (e.g. trees are allowed to be removed if their roots damage the "built environnt "2a:,. _ t Staff Response: The tree removal standards in Sections 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Urban Forestry Manual allow trees to be removed if their roots "are causing damage to paved surfaces, infrastructure, utilities, buildings or other parts of the built environment." The "built environment" is included as a catch all term to include all other things that have been constructed by people. C3 Issue of Interest: How was the nuisance tree list de s ped? Staff Response: Morgan Holen, certified arborist and forest biologist, served on the Citizen Advisory Committee. Just prior to the development of the City of Tigard's nuisance tree list, Ms. Holen was contracted by the City of Lake Oswego to develop their nuisance tree list for very similar purposes (to exempt certain species from tree permit requirements). In order to benefit from the up to date work of another expert in an adjacent city, staff utilized the City of Lake Oswego's list for the City of Tigard's purposes. Ms. Holen's process began with compiling nuisance tree lists from other local jurisdictions such as Clean Water Services and the City of Portland. She then researched and verified the list of tree species using additional sources such as the Native Plant Society of Oregon and the Plant Conservation Alliance. Finally, Ms. Holen further refined the list by contacting local ISA certified arborists and receiving additional feedback. She identified twelve local tree species as capable of spreading at such a rate that they cause harm to human health, the environment and /or the economy. These twelve species were peer reviewed and approved by Tigard's Citizen Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory Committee (both included experts on nuisance tree species), and are proposed for inclusion in the City of Tigard's nuisance tree list. It is important to note that the purpose of the nuisance tree list is to automatically allow the removal of nuisance trees when requested as part of the tree removal permit process. There is no requirement to remove nuisance trees if an owner wants to retain 8 them. C4 Issue of Interest: Why are there different standards for planting open grown vs. stand grown trees? Staff Response: Open grown trees and stand grown trees serve two different purposes. Open grown trees are typically ornamental trees that provide a focal point in a landscape. Open grown trees are usually planted in residential yards, parking lots or along streets. Stand grown trees are typically native trees found in natural areas, tree groves or along streams. The reason there are different planting standards is because open grown trees need more space to achieve their desired landscape effect whereas stand grown trees are planted at much closer spacing to account for expected competition and mortality in their natural setting. C5 Issue of Interest IF thara federal defillIt on of a niEnce trhat can be u - develop the list? _ Staff Response: There is not a federal definition of a nuisance tree. See Issue C3 to see how Tigard's nuisance tree list was developed. C6 Issue of Interest: Are there trees on the list that will cause lama e to underground pipes and utilities? Staff Response: The filter for including trees on the lists included non - aggressive rooting habits and low likelihood of causing damage to pipes and utilities. However, any tree has the potential to cause damage if planted too close to a pipe or utility. Therefore, the Urban Forestry Manual also includes setback requirements from pipes and utilities to minimize the possibility of damage. C7 Is.. of Interest s . a r rb: 1.1e Staff Response: As described in Issue A5, the purpose of the administrative rules is to more clearly articulate the city's code requirements for both development applicants and the general public. One of the main problems identified with the city's existing code is the vagueness of code requirements. This vagueness has lead to staff interpretations, conditions of approval or relying on unwritten past practice when issuing decisions. This creates uncertainty and tends to increase the cost of development because of more delays and appeals. The administrative rules were developed in conjunction with homebuilders and the public on the Citizen Advisory Committee to make code implementation more • City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Tigard City Council From: Marissa Daniels, Associate Planner Re: UFCR Master Fees and Charges Date: January 22, 2012 As part of the Urban Forestry Code Revisions project, council is being asked to consider amendments to the Citywide Master Fees and Charges Schedule. The primary reason for these changes is the shift from a mitigation approach to a tree canopy approach. The fees being proposed are less than the existing fees and on the lower end of fees across the region. Additional information about specific changes being proposed, how the fees were calculated, and comparing the fee -in -lieu option between the new and existing code is provided below. Specific Changes Staff is proposing new and amended fees, which are further described in Exhibit A, to implement the changes adopted through the Urban Forestry Code Revisions Project. These changes include: • Three existing land use review fees (Tree Removal, Landscaping Adjustments for Existing and New Street Trees, and Tree Removal Adjustments) are proposed to be eliminated because the corresponding land use reviews were eliminated. • The existing Tree Replacement Fee is proposed to be eliminated because the corresponding in lieu of tree mitigation fee was eliminated Background The proposed new and amended fees and charges were prepared by city staff in consultation with a Citizen Advisory Committee, a Technical Advisory Committee, and median cost estimates published by the Pacific Northwest Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture (PNWISA). The Planning Commission held several hearings on the proposal, and ensuring the Urban Forestry Code Revisions do not result in an excessive increase in costs for development emerged as one of two major themes. The Commission compared the proposed fee to the existing fee in the code, as well as fees across the region. This provided them further evidence that the proposed fee is fair and reasonable, because it is less than the existing fee and on the lower end of fees across the region. For additional information and comparison charts, please see Volume I, p. 35 or Volume V, p. 13. Fee -in -lieu Comparison One important distinction between the existing fees and the proposed fees is the fee -in -lieu of tree mitigation vs. the tree canopy replacement fee. In addition to the fee being less than the existing fee and on the lower end of fees across the region, the peer review results demonstrate that the proposed code has been structured so that the canopy requirements are achievable on the typical range of development projects in Tigard, without requiring payment of a fee -in -lieu. This is in contrast to the existing code where the mitigation requirements are not achievable for many projects, particularly those with many large existing trees. Therefore, the commission viewed the tree canopy fee as a fair and reasonable option for choosing not to plant or preserve trees, rather than something applicants will be required to pay for typical projects. For additional information, please see Volume I, p. 36 or Volume V, p. 130. SECTION 2: The description of the new and amended fees and charges in EXHIBIT A, are adopted as legislative intent. SECTION 3: This resolution shall be effective March 1, 2013. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of , MIS 2013 Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of , 10ff 2013 John L. Cook, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date RESOLUTION No. 12- Page 2 of 2 Exhibit A - Urban Forestry Fees Non Land Use Fees Hazard Tree Dispute Resolution Fee $165 per tree plus $55 for each additional tree* *The Hazard Tree Dispute Resolution Fee is based upon cost estimates provided by local International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified arborists, with an additional 10% to cover contingency and administrative costs incurred by City of Tigard staff. In Lieu of Planting Fees (Planting and 3 Years of Early Establishment) $537 per 1.5 inch caliper street tree* $537 per 1.5 inch caliper open grown tree* $383 per 0.5 inch caliper stand grown tree ** *The In Lieu of Planting Fees for 1.5 inch caliper street trees and other open grown trees is based on a formula that combines 50% of the published PNWISA wholesale median tree cost estimate to purchase and install a three inch diameter tree, with the average historical cost for City of Tigard staff to perform three years of maintenance on a 1.5 inch caliper tree. * *The In Lieu of Planting Fee for a tree of two feet in height or one gallon container size (estimated 0.5 inch caliper) for stand grown trees is based on a formula that combines 16.6% of the published PNWISA wholesale median tree cost estimate to purchase and install a three inch diameter tree, with the average historical cost for City of Tigard staff to perform three years of maintenance on a 0.5 inch caliper tree. Tree Permit Fees City Board or Committee Tree Permit* - $307 per tree up to and including 10 trees. If over 10 trees, the applicant submits a deposit of $307 for each tree over 10 trees up to a maximum of $5000. The applicant is charged actual staff time to process the permit and will be refunded the balance of the deposit if any remains after the review is complete. The applicant is charged actual staff time to process the permit and will be refunded the balance of the deposit if any remains after the review is complete City Manager Tree Permit ** - No charge Exhibit A - Urban Forestry Fees *The City Board or Committee Tree Permit Fee matches the existing fee structure for tree removal permits and is comparable to fees charged by an adjacent jurisdiction for a similar review for tree removal. ** The Urban Forestry Code Revisions Citizen Advisory Committee recommended no fee be charged for City Manager Tree Permits because it is a relatively simple review and the city does not currently charge for similar reviews. Land Use Fees Tree Canopy Fee $2.95 per square foot of tree canopy* *The Tree Canopy Fee was developed by converting the most recent wholesale median cost of a three inch diameter deciduous tree in the Willamette Valley, as determined by the PNWISA, divided by an average canopy size of 59 square feet for a three inch diameter deciduous tree as determined through the Krajicek methodology and local field samples. See the Tree Canopy Fee memo in Urban Forestry Code Revisions Volume V for a more detailed description of the methodology used to develop the Tree Canopy Fee. Urban Forestry Inventory Fees $137 per open grown tree* $181 per stand of trees* *The Urban Forestry Inventory Fees are based upon cost estimates provided by local ISA certified arborists increased by 10% for contingency and to cover administrative costs incurred by City of Tigard staff. Tree Establishment Bond (Planting and Early Establishment) $489 per 1.5 inch caliper open grown tree for subdivisions and minor land partitions* $441 per 1.5 inch caliper open grown tree for land use review types other than subdivisions and minor land partitions ** $367 per 0.5 inch caliper stand grown tree for subdivisions and minor land partitions * ** Exhibit A - Urban Forestry Fees $351 per 0.5 inch caliper stand grown tree for land use review types other than subdivisions and minor land partitions * * ** *The Tree Establishment Bond for the planting and maintenance of a 1.5 inch caliper tree for the required two years in subdivisions and minor land partitions is based on a formula that combines 50% of the published PNWISA wholesale median tree cost estimate to purchase and install a 3 inch diameter tree, with the average historical cost for City of Tigard staff to perform two years of maintenance on a 1.5 inch caliper tree. * *The Tree Establishment Bond for the planting and maintenance of a 1.5 inch caliper tree for the required one year in land use review types other than subdivisions and minor land partitions is based on a formula that combines 50% of the published PNWISA wholesale median tree cost estimate to purchase and install a 3 inch diameter tree, with the average historical cost for City of Tigard staff to perform one year of maintenance on a 1.5 inch caliper tree. ** *The Tree Establishment Bond for the planting and maintenance of a tree two feet in height or one gallon container size (estimated 0.5 inch caliper) for the required two years in subdivisions and minor land partitions is based on a formula that combines 16.6% of the published PNWISA cost estimate to purchase and install a 3 inch caliper tree, with the average historical cost for City of Tigard staff to perform two years of maintenance on a 0.5 inch caliper tree. * ** *The Tree Establishment Bond for the planting and maintenance of a tree two feet in height or one gallon container size (estimated 0.5 inch caliper) for the required one year in land use review types other than subdivisions and minor land partitions is based on a formula that combines 16.6% of the published PNWISA cost estimate to purchase and install a 3 inch caliper tree, with the average historical cost for City of Tigard staff to perform one year of maintenance on a 0.5 inch caliper tree. Urban Forestry Plan Review Fees* $627 for a Type I Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit** $392 for a Type III Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review Permit concurrent with another Type III hearing* ** $2,418 for a Type III Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review permit without a concurrent Type III hearing* * ** *A Long Range Planning surcharge of 14.76% has been added to all land use review fees pursuant to City Council resolution No. 04-99, passed and effective on December 28, 2004 Exhibit A - Urban Forestry Fees * *The fee to process a Type I Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit is based upon the fee to process a Minor Modification to an Approved Land Use Permit due to the administrative similarity of the two processes. ** *The fee to process a Type III Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review Permit concurrent with another Type III hearing is equivalent to a comparable fee for a concurrent Detailed Plan Review due to the administrative similarity of the two processes. * ** *The fee to process a Type III Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review permit without a concurrent Type III hearing is equivalent to a comparable fee for a non concurrent Detailed Plan Review due to the administrative similarity of the two processes Revenue Sou IMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING Accessory Residential Units 8307.00 7/1/2012 Anncaatiun 82,875.00 7/1/2012 (As of July 1, 2106 a moratorium on this fee was in effect, per Resolution 11 -08, through February 2012) Anal Directors Decision (Type II) to Hearings Officer 1300.00 7/1/2012 Expedited Review (Deposit) 1360.00 7/1/2012 Hearings Referee 5600.00 7/1/2012 Planning Commission /Hearings Officer to City Council 82,890.00 7/1/2012 Approval Extension 5307.00 7/1/2012 Coloration (of Wireless Communication Facilites). $52.00 7/1/2011 Conditional Use Initial 15,722.00 7/1/2012 Major Modification 85,722.00 7/1/2012 Minor Modification 1627.00 7/1/2012 Design Evaluation Team WET). Recommendation (deposit( $1,598.00 7/1/2012 Development Code Provision Review Single- Family Building Plan 877.00 7/1/2012 Commercial/Industrial/Institution 1307.00 7/1/2012 Commercial/Industrial/Institution— Tenant Improvements in Existing Development Project Valuation up to $4,999 $0.00 7/1/2010 Project Valuation 15,000 - 874,999 877.00 7/1/2012 Project Valuation 875,000 - $149,999 $192.0 7/1/2012 Project Valuation $150,000 and more 1307.00 7/1/2012 Jktwntown Review Downtown Review Compliance Letter $627.00 7/1/2012 Downtown Design Administrative Review Under $1,000,000.00 $1,464.00 + 0.004 x project valuation 7/1/2012 $1, 000,000.00 and over (max fee 825,(00.00) 15,645.00 +0.002 x project valuation 7/1/2012 Downtown Design Review - Design Review Board 12, 971.00 + applicable Type 11 fee 7/1/2012 Hsaung Poa(ponemmt 8349.00 7/1/2012 historic Overlay /Review District Historic Overby Designation 14,475.00 7/1/2012 Removal Historic Overlay Designation $4,475.00 7/1/2012 Exterior Alteration in Historic Overlay District 1670.00 7/1/2012 New Construction in Historic Overlay District 1670.00 7/1/2012 Demolition in Historic Overlay District 1670.00 7/1/2012 home Occupation Permit Type( $106.00 7/1/2012 Type 11 1627.00 7/1/2012 interpretation of the Community Dcvclopm en Lode Director's Interpretation 8627.00 7/1/2012 Appeal to City Council 82,890.00 7/1/2012 Page 1 artment Revenue So '- 4MUNITY DEVELOPMENT - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING Land Partition Residential and Non - Residential (3 Lon) 94,141.00 7/1/2012 Residential and Non-Residential (2 Lots) 93,444.00 7/1/2012 Expedited 94,832.00 7/1/2012 Final Plat $962.00 7/1/2012 Lot Line Adiustment 962700 7/1/2012 Minor Modification to an Anpmved Plan $627.00 7/1/2012 Non-Conforming Tine Confirmation $627.(8) 7/1/2012 Planned Development Conceptual Plan Review 98,103.00 7/1/2012 Detailed Plan Review (Concurrent Hearing) Applicable SDR Fee or Subdivision Fee + 9392.00 7/1/2012 Detailed Plan Review (Separate Hearing) Applicable SDR Fee or Subdivision Fee + $2,418.00 7/1/2012 Pre - Application Conference 9627.00 7/1/2012 Sensitive Lands Review With Excessive Slopes /Within Drainage Ways/ 9627.01 7/1/2012 Within 100 -Year Floodplain (Type 1) Vi'ith Excessive Slopes /Within Drainage Ways/ 92,748.00 7/1/2012 Within Wetlands (Type II) With Excessive Slopes/Within Drainage Ways/ 92,970.00 7/1/2012 Within Wetlands /Within the 100 -Year Floodplain (Type 111) Sign sonit Existing and Modification to an Existing Sign (No Size Differential) $171.00 7/1/2012 Temporary Sign (Per Sign) 954.00 7/1/2012 Site Development Review & Maior Modification Under $1,000,000.00 54,856.(8) 7/1/2012 $1,000,000.00/Over 16,307.00 7/1/2012 ( +$6.00 /per each 910,000.00 over S 1,000,0 0.00) Minor Modification $627.00 7/1/2012 $nbdiviaioa Preliminary Plat without Planned Development 95,606.00 /+ $93.00 per lot 7/1/2012 Preliminary Plat with Planned Development 97,758.00 7/1/2012 Expedited Preliminary Plat without Panned Development $6,427.00 /+ 593.00 per lot 7/1/2012 Expedited Preliminary Plat with Planned Development $7,758.00 7/1/2012 Final Plat $1,938.00 7/1/2012 Plat Name Change $350.00 7/1/2012 Ismnorary Use Director's Decision $307.00 7/1/2012 Special Exemption /Non -Profit 50.00 7/1/2003 Special Mixed Use - Central Business District Zone Rate 10 Temporary Use in a Calendar Year 9307.00 7/1/2012 2nd Through 5th Temporary Use With Substantially the Same Site Plan Within A Calendar Year 554.00 7/1/2012 Page 2 • • Revenue Source 1IMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING $39-7.99 qAtoota I;rhan Forestry Type I Modification to the 1:rhan Forestry Plan Component of an Anproved 1 and 11se Permit 5627.00 3/1/2013 Tyne 111 Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review Permit with concurrent :Lytle III review 13.22,11 3/1/2013 Type 111 Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review Permit without rnnenrrent Type 111 review 52318.00 3/1/2013 Variance /Adjustment Administrative Variance 0670.00 7/1/2012 Development Adjustment 5307.00 7/1/2012 Special Adjustments Adjustment to a Subdivision 5307.00 7/1/2012 Reduction of Minimum Residential Density 5307.00 7/1/2012 Access /Egress Standards Adjustment 5670.00 7/1/2012 laws° 70//301] Parking Adjustments Reduction in Minimum or Increase In Maximum Parking Ratio 0670,00 7/1/2012 Reduction in New or Existing Development /Transit Imprvmnt $670.00 7/1/2012 Reduction in Bicycle Parking 5670.00 7/1/2012 Alternative Parking Garage Layout 0670.00 7/1/2012 Reduction in Stacking Lane Length 0307.00 7/1/2012 Sign Code Adjustment 0670.00 7/1/2012 Street Improvement Adjustment 0670.00 7/1/2012 $39-7,00 7{}/3913 Wireless Communication Facility Adjustments Setback from Nearby Residence 0670.00 7/1/2012 Distance from Another Tower 0307.00 7/1/2012 7_oning Map /Text A-- end-- env Legislative - Comprehensive Plan 59,611.00 7/1/2012 Legislative - Community Development Code 03,924.00 7/1/2012 Quasi - Judicial 53,616.00 7/1/2012 ZoningAnalyeia (Detailed). 0627.00 7/1/2012 Zoning Inquiry Letter (Simple). 092.00 7/1/2012 * *Planning Flo incite& 14.76% Long Range Panning Surcharge per Ord 04 -99 12/28/2004 Page 3 Revenue So 1IMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING 1fMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - MISCELLANEOUS FEES & CHARGES pan Cnpie9 52.50 7/1/2007 Ca2mmu114 Deve1. omeet C!�.le CD Rom $10.00 Tigard Comprehensive Plan 575.00 7/1/2011 GIS Maps* 8 -1/2" x 11" Non Aerial 52.50 7/1/2011 Aerial 54.00 7/1/2011 11" x 17" Non Aerial 55.00 7/1/2011 Aerial 57.00 7/1/2011 17" x 22" Non Aerial 511.00 7/1/2011 Aerial 515.00 7/1/2011 34" x 44" Non Aerial $25.00 7/1/2011 Aerial 530.(1(1 7/1/2011 Custom Maps Staff Hourly Rate Information Prncessing & Archiving (IPA) Fee Temporary Sign 55.(0) 7/1/2010 Type I Review 518.00 7/1/2010 Type I I Review $175.00 7/1/2010 Type III Renew 5200.00 7/1/2010 Type IV Review 52(10(0) 7/1/2010 Neighborhood Meeting Signs (Land Usel 52.00 1997 Oversize Load Permit 5200.00 7/1/2005 Planimetric Maps Bhreline print - quarter section 85.00 Mylar - quarter section 5150.00 /+ reproduction cost Retrieval of Materials Confiscated in ROW Lawn and A -board signs 540.00 /sign 7/1/2010 Other signs and materials (based on size and value) City Manager's Discretion 7/1/2010 (per MC 7.61.035 Ord 10 -06) Tigard Transportation System Plan 575.00 7/1/2011 Wasbin,gtoo Samae Revinna1 C_nter 1999 Task Force Recommendations $10.00 Master Plan Map (Zoning /Plan) $2.50 Page 4 )MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT Blasting Permit* $325.00 7/1/2012 Fee in Lieu of Sewer Based on actual cost of sewer connection, 1998 (Commercial Only) if sewer was available Fee in Lieu of Shared Open Space Fee in lieu is determined by multiplying 7/1/2011 (MU -CBD zone only) the current Washington County Assessor- determined real market value of the land (not improvements) by 10 %. Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee $4,665.00 /dwelling unit 7/1/2012 (This fee is determined by Cleanwater Services. The City of Tigard receives 3.99% of fees collected.) $125.00 /caliber inch 9/1/2001 Water Ouality Facility Fee (Fee set by Clean Water Services) 6/6 /2000 (City receives 100% of fees collected) Residential Single Family $225.00 /unit Commercial & Multi -family $225.00 /2,640 sq. ft of additional impervious surface Water Ouantity Facility Fee (Fee set by Clean Water Services) 6/6/2000 (City receives 100% of fees collected) Residential Single Family $275.00 /unit Commercial & Multi - family $275.00 /2,640 sq. ft of additional impervious surface Metro Construction Excise Tax 12% of building permits for projects 7/1/2006 (City will retain 4% for administrative expenses) with a total valuation of 8100,001 or more; (Tax set by Metro, but collected by cities) not to exceed 812,000. School District Construction Excise Tax 10/1/2009 (City will retain 4% for administrative expenses) (Tax set by school districts, but collected by cities) Beaverton School District $1.07 /sq. ft. residential construction $0.54 /sq. ft. commercial construction Tigard- Tualatin School District $1.07 /sq. ft. residential construction $0.54 /sq. ft. commercial construction Page 1 4 MUNITY DEVELOPMENT - MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT Urban Forestry 1 lazard 'free Dispute Resolution Fee 5165.00 + 555.00 each additional tree 3/1/2013 In Lieu of Planting Fees (Planting & 3 Year Maintenance) Street Tree 5537.00 per 1.5" caliper tree 3/1/2013 Open Grown Tree S537.00 per 1.5" caliper tree 3/1/2013 per tree 2' in height or 1 gallon Stand Grown Tree 5383.00 container 3/1/2013 Tree Permit Fees City Board or Committee 5307.00 ** City Manager No Charge 3/1/2013 Tree Canopy Fee 52.95 per square foot of tree canopy 3/1/2013 Urban Forest Inventory Fees Open Grown Tree 5137.00 + 528.00 each additional tree 3/1/2013 Stand of Trees 5181.00 + 544.00 each additional stand 3/1/2013 Tree Establishment Bond (Planting & Early Establishment) 1.5" Caliper Minimum Street or Open ' Grown Tree in Subdivisions or Minor Land Partitions 5489.00 per tree 3/1/2013 1.5" Caliper Minimum Street or Open Grown Tree in Land Use Review Types other than Subdivisions or Minor I and Partitions 5441.00 er tree 3/1/2013 2' in I- Ieight or 1 Gallon Container Minimum Stand Grown Trcc in Subdivisions or Minor Land Partitions 5367.00 per tree 3/1/2013 2' in Height or 1 Gallon Container Minirn m Stand Grown Tree in I n Use Review Types other than Subdivisions or Minor Land Partitions 5351.00 per tree 3/1/2013 Vacation (Streets and Public Access). $2,319.00 /deposit + actual costs 7/1/2012 * Per Ord 03-59, fee is adjustedyearl/ based on the Construction Cost Index for the Gty of Seattk as published in the April issue of Engineering News Record and per Ord 04 -99 includes the 14.76% Long Range Planning Surcharge. * *5307.00 per tree up to and including 10 trees. If over 10 trees. the applicant submits a deposit of 5307.00 for each •ver10te su• .xim tof i11.mm.' se_••li _• is hap • . is.ffrim • • • ss he mi and will be refunded the balance of the deposit if any remains after the review is complete Page 2 I Urban Forestry Code Revisions Implementation January 22, 2013 11 TIGARD City ofTigard ''............' f" 7„...... . i Administrative Rules , 7 \_. :.„.. D City of Tigard Administrative Rules Imo , ix' City of Tigard Potential Amendments Stan O Y Increases flexibility on sheet size requirement. ® Y Increases flexibility on bar scale requirement. 3 N Removes requirement fqr driplines of trees to be shown on site plans to scale. 4 N Revises tree lists. Y Increases flexibility of setbacks between trees and buildings. r, N Increases flexibility of setbacks between trees and pavement and utilities. MEM Y Increases flexibility of the biweekly inspection requirements. City of Tigard Citywide Master Fees and Charges fir City of Tigard Tree Canopy Replacement Fee „„i" 1 i �. T .= a 4 n •�an� 1.11111 1111W' a. i . —i A my! ~ _� Preservation Planting Fee -in -lieu Discretionary Review Cit■ of Tigard Council Discussion • Administrative Rules • Citywide Master Fees and Charges Cathy Wheatley From: Marissa Daniels Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:57 PM To: Councilmail Councilmail Cc: Cathy Wheatley; Marty Wine; Liz Newton; Kenny Asher; Tom McGuire Subject: Jan. 22 - Fees and Charges Discussion Material Attachments: Fee Descriptions_dl.docx Importance: High Good afternoon, It was brought to my attention today that perhaps not everyone received the packet information pertaining to the updated Citywide Master Fees and Charges schedule. Please see the links below to the online packet information. Fees and Charges Memo Draft Fees and Charges Resolution In addition, after meeting with several of you we've prepared an additional chart to give a short description of each proposed change to the fee schedule (please see attached). I think this additional information will be helpful for you tonight. I will bring hard copies to the meeting. Thank you, Marissa Daniels Associate Planner Community Planning Division City of Tigard 503.718.2428 marissa(tigard- or.gov 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR DISCLAIMER: E -mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E -mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules "City General Records Retention Schedule." COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING Fee Name Fee Fee Description Amount Urban Forestry Tree -Removal emova' X00 This was the fee for tree removal permits. It is being struck because tree removal permits will no longer be administered through Title 18. Tree removal permits will be administered through Title 8 (Urban Forestry) in order to reduce costs and increase flexibility for applicants. The associated fees for tree removal permits can be found in the following table below under "Tree Permit Fees." Type I Modification to the $627.00 This new fee allows applicants to modify their Urban Forestry Plan approved urban forestry plan more efficiently and at Component of an Approved much lower cost. The current process to amend Land Use Permit approved urban forestry plans is through a Type II or III process which costs from $3,400 to $8,100. Type III Discretionary Urban $392.00 This new fee is optional. If applicants choose to not Forestry Plan Review Permit plant or preserve the required amount of tree canopy with concurrent Type III review with their development, they could receive approval through this process by using alternate green building or development techniques. Type III Discretionary Urban $2,418.00 This new fee is optional. If applicants choose to not Forestry Plan Review Permit plant or preserve the required amount of tree canopy without concurrent Type III with their development, they could receive approval review through this process by using alternate green building or development techniques. The reason for the higher cost in this case is because there is no concurrent hearing where the applicant could present their proposal, so a separate hearing would need to be held. Variance /Adjustment 307.00 This was the fee for using existing trees as street Exi3ting /Ncw Strcct Trcco trees. It is being struck because under the newly adopted code, applicants will be able to receive approval for this at no cost. Trcc Removal Adjustment $307.00 This was the fee for adjusting development standards such as setbacks or parking in order to preserve existing trees. It is being struck because under the newly adopted code, applicants will be able to receive approval for this at no cost COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT Fee Name Fee Fee Description Amount Tree Replacement Fcc $125.00 / This was the fee for tree mitigation. It is being struck caliper inch and replaced with the tree canopy fee below. The purpose of eliminating this fee is to reduce the cost of development for properties with many existing, mature trees. Urban Forestry Hazard Tree Dispute Resolution $165.00 This new fee is optional for property owners that Fee +$55.00 decide to involve the city in neighbor disputes over each potential hazard trees. The fee would allow the city to additional hire a third party arborist to settle the dispute. tree In Lieu of Planting Fees $537.00 This new fee is optional for applicants that choose (Planting & 3 Year Maintenance) per tree not to replant trees when required by a tree removal permit Street Tree In Lieu of Planting Fees $537.00 This new fee is optional for applicants that choose (Planting & 3 Year Maintenance) per tree not to replant trees when required by a tree removal permit Open Grown Tree In Lieu of Planting Fees $383.00 This new fee is optional for applicants that choose (Planting & 3 Year Maintenance) per tree not to replant trees when required by a tree removal permit Stand Grown Tree Tree Permit Fees - $307.00 This new fee is to receive a tree removal permit City Board or Committee through Title 8 when there is no clear reason for tree removal (e.g. aesthetics, view, solar, etc.). Note that the fee is the same as the previous "Tree Removal" fee in Title 18 of the previous version of the code. Tree Permit Fees - No charge There will be no charge to receive a tree removal City Manager permit when the reasons for removal are clear (e.g. dead /hazard, roots damaging sidewalk /infrastructure, etc.). This covers the vast majority of cases for tree removal and waiving of this fee is a significant reduction for applicants when compared with the previous version of the code. Tree Canopy Fee $2.95 This new fee is optional and replaces the tree per sq. ft. of mitigation fee. The tree canopy fee reduces costs for tree canopy development because it is less than the existing tree mitigation fee and at the lower end of fees across the Portland region. Urban Forest Inventory Fees - $137.00 This new fee is to cover costs associated with Open Grown Tree +$28.00 including protected trees in the city's urban forest each inventory. Including protected trees in the inventory additional was directed by council to make information more tree easily accessible and efficient to locate. Urban Forest Inventory Fees - $181.00 This new fee is to cover costs associated with Stand of Trees + $44.00 including protected stands in the city's urban forest each inventory. Including protected stands in the additional inventory was directed by council to make stand information more easily accessible and efficient to locate. Tree Establishment Bond $489.00 This new fee is refunded if development applicants (Planting & Early per tree meet their tree planting and establishment Establishment) - requirements. The previous administration of the 1.5" Caliper Minimum Street or code required applicants to provide a bond for tree Open Grown Tree in planting to ensure successful establishment. This fee Subdivisions or Minor Land formalizes the city's administrative practice and Partitions provides certainty as to the bond amount. Tree Establishment Bond $441.00 This new fee is refunded if development applicants (Planting & Early per tree meet their tree planting and establishment Establishment) - requirements. The previous administration of the 1.5" Caliper Minimum Street or code required applicants to provide a bond for tree Open Grown Tree in Land Use planting to ensure successful establishment. This fee Review Types other than formalizes the city's administrative practice and Subdivisions or Minor Land provides certainty as to the bond amount. Note it is Partitions the less than the bond amount above because the establishment period for non - residential development is less. Tree Establishment Bond $367.00 This new fee is refunded if development applicants (Planting & Early per tree meet their tree planting and establishment Establishment) - requirements. The previous administration of the 2' in Height or 1 Gallon code required applicants to provide a bond for tree Container Minimum Stand planting to ensure successful establishment. This fee Grown Tree in Subdivisions or formalizes the city's administrative practice and Minor Land Partitions provides certainty as to the bond amount. Note it is the less than the bond amount above because of the smaller size of tree. Tree Establishment Bond $351.00 This new fee is refunded if development applicants (Planting & Early per tree meet their tree planting and establishment Establishment) - requirements. The previous administration of the 2' in Height or 1 Gallon code required applicants to provide a bond for tree Container Minimum Stand planting to ensure successful establishment. This fee Grown Tree in Land Use formalizes the city's administrative practice and Review Types other than provides certainty as to the bond amount. Note it is Subdivisions or Minor Land the less than the bond amount above because the Partitions establishment period for non - residential development is less. * *$307.00 per tree up to, and including, 10 trees. If over 10 trees, the applicant submits a deposit of $307.00 for each tree over 10 trees, up to a maximum of $5000.00. The applicant is charged actual staff time to process the permit and will be refunded the balance of the deposit if any remains after the review is complete. AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: January 22, 2013 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN -UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before the City Council on: URBAN FORESTRY CODE REVISIONS - ADMINISTRATIVE RULE PROCESS Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: January 22, 2013 PLEASE PRINT Proponent — (Speaking In Favor) Opponent — (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. • Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No.