SLR2005-00016 I ZO DAYS = NIA • CITY OF TIOARC
DATE OF FILING: 9/1/2005 Community�DevoCopment
SfiapingA BetterCommunity
CITY OF TIGARD
�GUasFcington County, Oregon
NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER �
Case Numbers: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 2005-00016
MINOR MODIFICATION MMD 2005-00015
Case Name: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
Name of Owners: Cit of Ti ard
Name of Applicant: Cit of Ti ard
Address of Applicant: 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Ti ard OR 97223
Address of Property: Within the Fanno Creek Flood lain east of SW Hall Boulevard north and east of the
existin Ti ard Libra and south of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The ath will
connect to the existin Fanno Creek trail network.
Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washin ton Co. Tax Assessor's Ma No. 2S102DA Tax Lot 600� and 2S102DD Tax
Lots 100 and 200.
A FINAL ORDER INfORPORATING THE FACfS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR iENSITIVE LANDS REYIEW AND A MINOR
MODIfIfATION, THE �ITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFfICER HAS REYIEWED THE APPLIfANTS PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, �OMMENTS OF REYIEW(NG AGENCIES,
THE PLANNING DIYISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLIUITION DES�RIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE
HEARINGS OFFI[ER HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 22. 2005 TO REfEIYE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLIfATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN
BASED ON THE fACTS, FINDINGS AND fONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER.
Request: ➢ The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-wide paved,
multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail segment is approximately 1,090 lineal feet,
approximately 700 feet of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a pedestrian
bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over Fanno Creek. Minor
alteration of the floodway will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is also requesting
Minor Modification approval to a previously granted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-00001/City of Tigard
Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site. At the close of the record, the Hearings Officer
approved the applications subject to conditions of approval.
Zones: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District; and I-P: Industrial Park District. Applicable Review Criteria:
Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775 and 18.790.
Action: ➢ ❑ Approval as Requested 0 Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial
Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to:
� Owners of Record Within the Required Distance � Affected Government Agencies
� Interested Parties 0 The Applicants and Owners
The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning DivisionlCommunity Development
Department at the City of Tigard City Hall.
Final Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2005 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
Appeal:
The decision of the Review Authority is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with
standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section
18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with
the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the
decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard
City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2005.
Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171.
BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER
FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
Regarding an application by the City of Tigard for ) F I N A L O R D E R
sensitive lands review approval for a roughly 1,090 foot) SLR 2005-00016
section of 10-foot wide trail east of Hall Boulevard, north) MNID 22005-00015
of the Tigard Library, in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Fanno Creek Trail)
A. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The applicant, City of Tigard, requests sensitive lands review for construction
of a 10-foot wide paved public use trail, including a pedestrian bridge over Fanno Creek.
The applicant will construct the trail on tax lot 600, WCTM 2S102DA and tax lots 100
and 200, 2S102DD (the "site"). Roughly 700 feet of the proposed 1,090 foot trail
segment is located within the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek. The trail will be
located north and east of the recently constructed Tigard Public Library. The applicant
also requests minor modification of the Conditional Use Permit ("CUP") approved for
the library(CUP 2003-00001) to add the pedestrian trail to the library site. Additional
basic facts about the site and sunounding land and applicable approval standards are
provided in the Staff Report to the Hearings Officer dated August 15, 2005 (the " Staff
Report"), incorporated herein by reference.
2. Tigard Hearings Officer Joe Turner(the "hearings officer")held a duly noticed
public hearing on August 22, 2005 to receive and consider public testimony in this
matter. The record includes a witness list, materials in the casefile as of the close of the
record, including materials submitted after the hearing, and an audio record of the
hearing. At the beginning of the hearing, the hearings officer made the declaration
required by ORS 197.763. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parte contacts, bias or
conflicts of interest. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected
relevant testimony offered at the hearing.
a. City planner Duane Roberts summarized the Staff Report.
i. He requested the examiner modify condition of approval 4 to
allow the applicant to construct the pedestrian bridge and the section of trail south of
Fanno Creek prior to ODOT approval of a pedestrian crossing of Hall Boulevard,
provided the applicant installs a barrier at the north end of the bridge to preclude access
to north side of the creek and connection to the existing trail segment west of Hall
Boulevard.
ii. He requested the examiner modify condition of approval 5 to
clarify that the applicant is required to complete the required wildlife assessment prior to
construction of the trail section north of Fanno Creek.
. �
b. City Parks Manager Steve Martin, environmental consultant Stacy
Benjamin and city engineer Vannie Nguyen testified on behalf of the applicant. They
accepted the findings and conditions of approval in the Staff Report
c. At the end of the hearing,the hearings officer closed the public record
and announced his intention to approve the application subject to recommended
conditions as amended at the hearing.
3. City staff recommended that the hearings officer approve the application based
on findings and conclusions and subject to conditions of approval recommended in the
Staff Report as amended at the hearing. The applicant accepted those conditions as
amended. No one disputed the findings in the Staff Report. The hearings officer agrees
with those findings, conclusions and conditions, and adopts the affirmative findings in
the Staff Report as support for this Final Order.
4. Based on the findings and discussion provided or incorporated in this final
order,the hearings officer concludes that the applicant sustained the burden of proof that
the proposed sensitive lands reviews and minor modification do or will comply with the
applicable criteria of the Community Development Code, provided development that
occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state, and federal laws and with
conditions of approval warranted to ensure such compliance occurs in fact. Therefore
those applications should be approved subject to such conditions.
B. ORDER
In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating
the Staff Report and public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings
officer hereby approves SLR2005-00016 and MMD2005-00015 (Fanno Creek Trail),
subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. No site work will begin until appropriate fencing/demarcation has been installed
on site to clearly identify the wetland boundaries and construction perimeters.
2. The applicant will provide a copy of the tree�rotection plan, which will be
reviewed by the City's Arborist. Tree protection must be installed and inspected
by the City's Arbonst, Matt Stine, pnor to site work.
3. The applicant shall carry out the vegetated conidor plan as reviewed and
approved by CWS and obtain a letter from CWS documenting that the conditions
have been met.
SLR2005-00016 and MMD2005-00015 Hearings O�cer Final Order
(Fanno Creek Trail) Page 2
4. ODOT approval of the location and design of a pedestrian crossing of Hall
Boulevard serving trail users should be obtained and the crossing mstalled
concurrent with or before the trail connection is installed. At the applicant's
discretion and risk, the trail section located south of Fanno Creek may be installed
prior to the required ODOT ap�roval of a safe pedestrian crossing. The pedestrian
bridge also may be installed prior to the approval and installation of the Hall
Boulevard pedestrian crossing, provided two conditions are met: a barrier across
the northern end of the bridge shall be erected to prevent pedestrian access and a
sign�osted on the barrier indicating that access to the northern property is
prohibited.
5. A wildlife assessment will be conducted to address the impact of the project
within the area north of Fanno Creek prior to construction of the trail section
north of the pedestrian bridge. The trail desi�n north of the creek will respond to
and take into account the results of the wildlife assessment. The assessment and
design will be subject to a public hearing by the Hearing Officer.
DATED this lst day of September, 2005.
Joe Turner, Esq., AICP
City of Tigard Land Use Hearings Officer
.
SLR2005-00016 and MMD2005-0001 S Hearings O�cer Final Order
(Fanno Creek Trail) Page 3
F
, � �,
Agenda Item: 2.1
��
Hearing Date: Au ust 22 2005 Time: 7:00 PM
g� � § � STAFF REPORT TO THE �_
��
`�' HEARINGS OFFICER ��TYOFT��ARo
� � � �� Comnturiity�ez'efop�nerit
FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON �s�a��rl�A�aPtr�r�°njn,u�i��y
120 DAYS = N/A
SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY
FILE NAME: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
CASE NOS.: ensi ive an s eview -
Minor Modification (MMD) MMD2005-00015
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a
10-foo�-wide paved multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail
segment is approximately 1,090 lineal feet, approximately 700 feet (340 cubic
yards) of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a
pedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard bridge
over Fanno Creek. Minor alterafion of the floodway will be conducted to place
the�pedestrian bridge. The proJ ect will also temporarily impact zero square feet
of the 50' vegetated corridor due to construction staging and will permanently
impact 3,004 square feet of vegetated corridor as a result of the trail
construction.
APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd. 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
LOCATION: The proposed project is iocated within the Fanno Creek t1oodplain, east of Haii
Boulevard, north of the existing Tigard Library and south of the Southern Pacific
railroad tracks. The path is to extend from Hall Boulevard opposite an exiting trail
segment located on the west side of Hall to the north side of the proposed Wall
Street Extension. Tax lot numbers 2S102DA00600, 2S1102DD100 & 200.
ZONING: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed
to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050
square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses also are permitted
conditionally.
I-L: Light Industrial District. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for
general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production,
research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale
sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor,
and vibration.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775
and 18.790. .
SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find that a portion of proposed pedestrian trail and bridge
wilf not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards of
the Tigard Development Code. A remainder of the trail including the bridge is conditioned to be subject
to further study. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended
Conditions of ApprovaL
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 1 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
. , �'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND10R BUILDING PERMITS:
u mit to t e anning epartment ary agenstrec er, , ext. or review an
approvaL•
1. No site work will begin until appropriate fencing/demarcation has been installed on site to
clearly identify the wetland boundaries and construction perimeters
2. The applicant will provide a copy of the tree protection plan, which will be reviewed by the
City's Arborist. Tree protection must be installed and inspected by the City's Arborist, Matt
Stine, prior to site work.
3. The applicant shall carry out the vegetated corridor plan as reviewed and approved by CWS
and obtain a letter from CWS documenting that the conditions have been met.
4. ODOT approval of the location and design of a pedestrian crossing of Hall Boulevard serving
trail users should be obtained and the crossin installed concurrent with or before the trail
connection is installed. At the applicant's discre�ion and risk, the trail section located south of
Fanno Creek may be installed prior to the required ODOT approval of a safe pedestrian
crossing. The northern terminus of said portion of the trail is approximately 50 feet south or
downstream of the bridge and midway along the swale bordering the trail.
5. A wildlife assessment will be conducted to address the impact of the project within the area
north of Fanno Creek. The trail desi n north of the creek will respond to and take into account
the results of the wildlife assessmen�. The assessment and design will be subject to a public
hearing by the Hearing Officer.
THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION.
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Site Information and Proposal Description:
The site is located along Fanno Creek just north of the existing Tigard Library site. The trail segment
is approximately 1,090 fineal feet with approximately 700 feet located in the 100 year floodplain. The
site is developed with the library building and a small gazebo. Wetlands are located on the site;
however, the path has been designed to avoid wetland impacts. The trail will require development
within the CWS vegetated corridor and mitigation is proposed.
The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct approximately 700 lineal
feet of the 10-foot wide paved multi-use trail within the floodplain. The proposal includes a
pedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard bridge of Fanno Creek.
Minor alteration of the floodway also will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge.
Prior to the com letion of the library, a small residential home with related domestic improvements
(landscaping, etc�occupied a portion of the site. The house subsequently was destroyed by fire. A
gazebo has been constructed near the former home site.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 2 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA
A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this
staff report are as follows:
A. Decision Makin Procedures
. . on i iona se
B. Zonin istricts
esi en ial Zoning Districts)
18.530 Industrial Zoning Districts)
C. Specific Development Standards
18.775 (Sensitive Lands)
18.790 (Tree Removal)
D. Im act Stud �
The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters: 18.705 (Access, Egress
& Circulation), 18.715 Density Computations), 18.720 (Design Compatibility), 18.725 (Environmental
Performance Standards�,18.730 (Exce�pti�ns to Development Standards), 18.742 (Home Occupations),
18.750 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage)
18.765 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements), 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations), 18.786
(Signs), 18.785 (Temporary Uses,), 18.795 (Visual Clearance)„ and 18.798 (Wireless Communication
Facilities). These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Review to
make sure nothing is missmg from list.
18.705.030F addresses the design of walkways that cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots.
Finding: Section18.705 (Access, Egress & Circulation) does not apply because the library conditional
use application (CUP2003-00001) addresses walkway crossing of vehicle access driveways and
parking lots.
SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
I TH M UNI .
A. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES
This application includes a request for a Minor Modification to CUP2003-00001/SLR20001NAR2003-
00009, the City of Tigard Public Library. The Minor Modification approval criteria are listed below,
along with a discussion of how each applies to the project under discussion. The Minor Modification
approval criteria require that the Major Modification approval criteria first be addressed.
18.330.020.B. 2. The Director shall determine that a major modification(s) has resulted if one
or more of the changes listed below have been proposed.
a. A change in land use:
b. A 10% increase in dwelling unit density:
c. A change in the type and/or location of accessways and parking areas where off-site traffic
would be affected: '
d. An increase in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more than 10°/a where
previously specified:
e. A reduction in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more that 10% of the area
reserved for common open space and/or usable open space.
f. A reduction of specified setback requirements by more than 20%:
g. An elimination of project amenities by more than 10% where previously specified, such as,
Recreational facilities, Screening, or Landscaping provisions:
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 3 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
h. A 10% increase in the approve density:
FINDING: The trail proposal is a modification to the City of Tigard Public Library project (CUP2003-
0001). The final order issued by the Hearings Officer approving the original project dictates in
condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is making a continuing, diligent, good faith to
identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along Fanno Creek that will not be below the
elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal fulfills this condition by defining a
suitable alignment for the trail through the library property. The proposal is not a change in use. It
does it involve a 10% reduction in density. The accessways to the approved library site are not
changed from those approved as part of the library project. No increase in floor area is proposed.
No change in specified setbacks requirements Is proposed. The project adds rather than eliminates
recreational facilities. No change to screening or landscaping provisions is requested. No increase
in approved density is requested.
18.330.020.C. Minor modification of approved or existing conditional use.
1. Any modification which is not within the description of a major modification as provided in
Subsection B above shall be considered a minor modification.
2. Any applicant may request approval of a minor modification by means of a Type I
procedure, as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria in Subsection C3
below.
3. A minor modification shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied following the
Director's review based on the findings that:
a. The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable requirements of this
title; and �
b. The modification is not a major modification as defined in Subsection A above.
FINDING: The proposed modification is not within the description of a major modification and,
therefore is classified as a minor modification.
B. ZONING DISTRICT
Residential and Industrial Zonin Districts: Section 18.510.020 and 18.520.020
is e escrip ion o e esi en ia oning Districts and Industrial Zoning Districts.
This use is considered a public infra-structure improvement consistent with a street or sidewalk.
Therefore, the proposal does not conflict with allowed uses in either the R-12 or I-L zones.
This application includes a request for a Minor Modification to CUP2003-00001/SLR20001NAR2003-
00009, the City of Tigard Public Library. The Minor Modification approval criteria are listed, along
with a discussion of how major modification criteria are not applicable.
C. SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
SENSITIVE LANDS: CHAPTER 18.775
ensi ive an s are an s po entia yunsuitable for development because of their location within:
the 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas which are regulated by other
agencies including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands, or are
designated as si nificant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map, and
steep slopes of�5% or greater and unstable ground. A land use application is required for
ground disturbances in sensitive lands areas.
The proposal involves 340 cubic yards of excavation within the floodplain , a hard surface path in the
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 4 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
floodplain, and no temporary alteration of the floodway for the construction/placement of the bridge.
According to Section 18.775.020.G this proposal requires a Type III sensitive lands review by the
Hearings Officer.
Within the 100-year floodplain 18.775.070 (B)
The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request
within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been
satisfied:
Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and
maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments, including
fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified by a
registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in flood
levels during the base flood discharge.
The applicant has provided a letter and report from Pacific Water Resources, Inc. that certifies a zero-
foot rise in flood elevations. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in
areas designed as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except
that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or
public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Community Development Code
shall be allowed in areas designated residential sub�ect to applicable zoning standards;
The trail is an alteration associated with community recreation, which is allowed in the floodplain, as
are trails in City parks. The use is most closely related to a public support facility, therefore, the land
form alteration required for the construction of this use is allowed in accordance with this criterion.
Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will
not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood;
As mentioned above, the final project design was the subl'ect of a flood analysis that certified a zero-
foot rise in flood elevations. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
The land form alteration or develo�ment plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in
accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said
pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely;
The proPosal is to construction a pedestrian/bicycle path, which fulfills an approvat condition listed in
the HO s approval of a portion of the Tigard Library Pro�ect (CUP 2203-0001). However, as
discussed later in the staff report, there is evidence to indicate that pathway construction may be
untimely.
The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the
elevation of an average annual flood;
The path is located in the 100-year floodplain. Minor alteration of the floodway will be necessary to
construct footings for the bridge over Fanno Creek. The bridge itself will be located outside the
floodway. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
The necessary US Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of
State Lands, and CWS permits and approvals shall be obtained; and
The Corps and DSL have jurisdiction over work within wetlands and below the high water mark (the
top of bank). According to the natural resource assessment report completed by Fishman
Environmental Services, no portion of the path, bridge, or construction staging areas will take place in
the wetland or high water mark areas. Therefore permits were not required from DSL or the Corps.
A Service Provider letter was obtained from CWS. In addition, copies of the application materials
were sent to the Division of State Lands, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Fish
and Wildlife and Clean Water Services. No comments were provided.
Where land form alterations andlor development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-OOD15 PAGE 5 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
year floodplain, the City sha�i require the consideration of deuication of sufficient open land
area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan.. This
area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle
pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway
plan.
This standard does not apply because the property is already owned by the City and the request is to
, construct the pedestrian/bicycle path in accordance with the adopted plan.
Within wetlands 18.775.070 (E):
Special Provisions for Development Alon Fanno Creek 18.775.090:
In order to address the requirements of�tatewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and
the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 666-023-0030) pertaining to
wetlands , all wetlands classified as si nificant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams
orr�ic��Map" are protected. No land�orm alterations or developments are allowed within or
partially within a significant wetland, except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section
'18.775.'I 30.
In order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and
the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660-023-0030) pertaining to
ri arian corridors a standard setback distance or vegetated corridor area, measured
orizon y rom and parallel to the top of the bank, is established for the Tualatin River,
Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek.
No alternation of wetland is planned, however, the proposal does involve alteration of land within the
ve etated corridor and in the vicinity of wetlands. The vegetated corridor standards are addressed in
77�.090B below.
FINDING: Based on the plans provided, no alteration of wetlands�is proposed. However, since
construction activities are proposed in the vicinity of delineated wetlands, the
construction boundaries should be clearly defined in order to avoid unintentional and
unapproved disturbance of the wetlands.
CONDITION:No site work will begin until appropriate fencing/demarcation has been installed on site
to clearly identify wetland boundaries and construction perimeters.
775.090. B
2. The standard width for "good condition" vegetated corridors along Fanno Creek, Ball
Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek is 50 feet, unless wider in accordance with CWS
"Design and Construction Standards", or modified in accordance with Section
18.775.130. If all or part of a locally significant wetland (a wetland identified as
significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map") is located
within the 50 foot setback area, the vegetated corridor is measured from the upland
edge of the associated wetland.
3. The minimum width for "marginal or degraded condition" vegetated corridors along the
Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek is 50% of the
standard width, unless wider in accordance with CWS "Design and Construction
Standards", or modified in accordance with Section 18.775.130.
4. The determination of corridor condition shall be based on the Natural Resource
Assessment guidelines contained in the CWS "Design and Construction Standards".
5. The standard setback distance or vegetated corridor area applies to all development
proposed on property located within or partially within the vegetated corridors, except
as allowed below:
a. Roads, pedestrian or bike paths crossing the vegetated corridor from one side to
the other in order to provide access to the sensitive area or across the sensitive
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 6 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
area, as approved by the City per Section 18.775.070 and by CWS "Design and
Construction Standards";
b. A pedestrian or bike path, not exceeding 10 feet in width and meeting the CWS
"Design and Construction Standards";
a. Land form alterations or developments are located within or partially within the
minimum width area established for marginal or a degraded condition vegetated
corridor, as defined in Section 18.775.090.B.3.
According to the CWS Natural Resource Assessment, the condition of the vegetated corridor along
the creek is "degraded". The proposed vegetated width of 50 feet exceeds the minimum width
required. A pedestrian path not the exceed 10 feet is width is an allowed use in the vegetated
corridor set. Moreover, CWS has approved the trail design and issued a Service Provider Letter
approving the project with regard to CWS standards.
FINDING: The trail is an allowed use within the vegetated corridor. The vegetated corridor
proposed meets the City and CWS site-specific standards established for vegetated
corridors. �
CONDITION:The applicant shall carry out the vegetated corridor plan as reviewed and approved by
CWS.
Tree Removal 18.790 :
apter �7 . requires the submittal of a tree plan that identifies the location, size, and
species of all trees on the site, a program to save existing trees over 12-inch diameter at
breast height (dbh) or mitigate for their removal, identi�cation of trees to be removed, and a
protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to
protect trees during and after construction.
The applicant has submitted a tree plan that identifies the location, size; and sqecies of all trees
within or near the trail corridor. The earlier conditional use application for the development of the
library .(CUP 2003-0001) includes a tree inventory covering the.larger library,property. According to
the trail-specific inventory, three trees (one pine and two deciduous) of 2-inch diameter each are
proposed for removal. The loss of these trees will be compensated for by the planting of 24, 2-�allon
container size (approximately 0.5 inch diameter) trees along the trail. The required planting of
replacement trees applies to tree removal more than 12 inches in diameter. A protection plan for.
existing trees.has been developed.. This lan is the city's administrative policy pertaining to tree
protection during construction activities on ci�jr projects.
Section 18.790.040 states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section
may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with
Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be
subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property�owner shall record a
deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by this section
to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a
certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree
preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous
tree. The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director.
FINDING: Based on the analysis.above, the Tree Removal standards will be met, if the applicant
complies with the condition listed below:
CONDITION:Proyide a copy of the tree protection plan, which will be reviewed by the City.Arborist ,
Matt Stine. Tree protection must be installed and inspected by the City's Arborist prior to
site work.
D. Impact Studv:
18.390.040.B.e.states that the application shall include an impact study. The impact study
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 7 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
shall quantify the effect of t��e development on public facilitie� and services. The study shall
address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system,
the parks system, the water system, the sewer system,, and the noise impacts of the
development. For each pubic facility system and type of impact, the study,shall propose
improvements necessary to meet City standards and to minimize the impact of the
development on the pubic at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property
users.
Finding: The applicant has included an impact study that adequately addresses the project's
impact on the various the public facility systems, except for the transportation system.
The Engineering Department concludes that the project will increase the number of Hall
Boulevard pedestrian crossing. The lack of provision for crossing improvements will
contribute to unsafe conditions for trail users.
CONDITION:ODOT approval of the location and design of a pedestrian crossing of Hall Boulevard
serving trail users should be obtained and the crossin� installed concurrent with or
before the trail connection is installed. At the applicant s discretion and risk, the trail
section located south of Fanno Creek may be installed, prior to the required ODOT
approval of a safe pedestrian crossing. The northern terminus of said portion of the trail
is approximately 50 feet south or downstream of the bridge and midway along the swale
bordering the traiL
SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The City of Tigard Building Division, Long Range Planning, Planning/Engineering Technicians,
Engineering Department, and Public Works have reviewed the proposal and have no ob�ections to
The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has filed the following
comments.
Are there any discussions regarding "ped crossing" where the trail crosses Hall? I know from
experience that the library caused concerns for pedestrians accessing this facility. I know from
experience that other roadways are involved when the Fanno Creek Trail spans the roadway. What
other suggestions (ODOT approved) have been raised?
Response: According to the ODOT 2004 Transportation Volume Tables, Hall Boulevard .01 miles
south of Burnham Road daily handles 14,100 vehicles. The count .01 miles south O'Mara is 13,330.
City Engineering staff who designed the trail alignment conclude that the long term effect of the
completion of the new trail segment will be to increase the volume of Hall Boulevard pedestrian
crossings within the area under discussion, contrary to the conclusion contained in the applicant's
statement. Trail users approaching Hall will have two options should they wish to cross the road.
One option is to follow the sidewalk or, where there are gaps, the shoulder of the road to the existing
crosswalk and stop light located at Burnham and Hall, or in future, to the proposed crosswalk and
stop light located at Wall Street and Hall. The other option is to wait for gaps in the traffic and to
cross directly over between trail segments.
Hall Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of ODOT. Earlier this year, ODOT disapproved a City request
for a marked crossing adjacent to and north of the bridge on Hall. The City has available funding and
would install a pedestrian crossing at this location, if granted permission by ODOT. ODOT would
approve a location much further north, ad�acent to the driveway serving City Hall. This location is
considered by Engineering staff to be unsuitable for a crosswalk serving trail users, because it is too
far out-of-direction to be used by people on the trail and also because the high volume of vehicular
turning movements into and out of the City Hall driveway would create unsafe conditions for
pedestrians. Another factor is that Hall Boulevard is three lanes at this location as opposed to two
lanes where the trail segments meet. In the professional judgment of Engineering staff, it would be
safer for trail users to cross two lanes of trafFic mid-block, between trail segments without a cross
walk than to cross at a marked crosswalk at the ODOT-preferred location, situated approximately 250
feet north of the traiL There are many instances where trail users do not make use of crosswalks
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 8 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
that are out of direction. The users of the trail most likely cross at the most direct and convenient
crossing point, which also happens to be where the street is narrowest.
In conclusion, 2004 daily average traffic volumes within the vicinity of the proposed trail were in the
13-14,000 range and completion of the second of the trail's two ends is likely to increase the number
of Hall pedestrian crossings. The City has indicated a willingness to put in a crossing that.is not too
far away from the point where the trail segments connection to Hall. Negotiations with ODOT
regarding, the design and location of the crossing potentially could tie in to the proposed 2006
sidewalk infill along the Hall frontage of the City-owned tax lot north of Fanno Creek. fn any case,
staff concurs with the Police, ODOT, and Citizen comments on the need to address pedestrian safely
as part of the trail project. The crossing and trail improvements should be completed concurrently.
The proposed trail segment should not be installed until the issue of a street crossing serving trail
users is resolved. This conclusion will be included as a proposed condition of approval.
SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS
Metro, Oregon Department of Environmental QualitX, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Oregon Department of Transportation, Oregon Division of State Lands, Southern Pacific
Railroad, Clean Water Services, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, and US Army Corps. Of
Engineers have reviewed the project and offered no comments.
The Oregon Department of Transportation has reviewed the proposal and offered the
following comments.
Basil Christopher:
Shouldn't this study address how pedestrians and bicyclists will get across Hall Blvd. where the path
connects? O'Mara St. might serve as a valuable lesson here (poor planning).
Regarding the section marked Transportation system - The study reads; "...new trail segment is not
expected to result in an increase in the number of pedestrians crossing Hall Blvd...".
I disagree with this statement for the following reasons. One point of building a path,that connects to
the library is to encourage library users to walk or bike to the library instead of driving. I think it's
reasonable to assume that some people will do this (or why build a path to the library). I think it's atso
reasonable to assume some young persons who don't drive, will be attracted to walk and cross here
to get to the library. Given these assumptions, I think it's more likely the new path will result in an
increase in pedestnans crossing Hall Blvd. in this section.
Fredrick Sawyer:
The project looks fine. We may need to discuss the crossing of the highway during the design phase.
The crossing is not included in the plan and can be addressed later.
Sam Hunidi:
From the traffic point of view, the lack of a safe pedestrian crossing is a concern. The trail and
crossing should be handled together. ODOT may not grant future approval for a pedestrian crossing
between the trail segments.
SECTION VIII. PRIVATE ORGANIZATION AND CITIZEN COMMENTS
Brian Wegener, Watershed Watch Coordinator for the Tualatin Riverkeepers has reviewed the .
proposal has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments:
My biggest concern about the Fanno Creek Trail extension around the Library is having the trail cross
Hall 61vd without a crosswalk. Under "Transportation System" on page 12 of the Fishman report,
there is a statement that does not appear credible:
"Construction of the new trail segment is not expected to result in an increase in the number of
pedestrians crossing Hall Boulevard; however, it may encourage more pedestrians to cross at this
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 9 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
location rather than further svuth near the library entrance, pol���tially reducing the potential for
accidents between pedestrians and automobiles."
My response to this is:
1. How does a new trail extension across a road avoid increasing the number of pedestrians
crossing that road?
2. How does encouraging pedestrians to cross a road at a point with no crosswalk instead of
crossing at a controlled intersection with a crossing signal reduce the risk of pedestrian-auto
accidents?
I suspect that Fishman Environmental Services has no qualifications in traffic engineering or
pedestrian safety, and has no business making such claims to the city. While you have addressed
most of the environmental concerns we have raised, this significant safety concern has the potential
to either stop this project or cause a tragedy. We do appreciate your efforts to minimize im�acts to
habitat north of Fanno Creek. One alternative that we raised that was not addressed by the Fishman
report is.that the trail use the sidewalk on Omara Street, and cross Hall Boulevard at Omara Street
intersection. This might help with the safety issues and would eliminate the impacts to habitat north
of the creek and east of Hall Blvd.
With these impacts eliminated, great potential for wildlife viewing from.the second floor of the library,
using binoculars or spotting scopes is enhanced. We would like the city to consider this potential as
part of the trail plan, since connecting the people of Tigard with nature is one of the objectives of this
trail. Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
Response: Staff agrees with the need for a pedestrian crossing.
The Omara alignment is an on-street alignment. The goal of the City reenway trail plan is to
provide a continuous trail along Fanno Creek as it flows through the �ity. The quality of the
experience is very different befinreen walking along a street and a greenway trail. The one puts the
walker into close proximity to motorized transportation. The other exposes the walker to wildlife and
flowing streamwater. The same is true of wildlife viewing from the path as compared with wildlife
viewina using binoculars from inside the library. The quality of the experience is diminished and
opportunities for unintended contact with wildlife are reduced. Wildlife viewing is only one benefit of
the trail. Other benefits include health and fitness, reduced reliance on the automobile, reduced
stress, amon others. To the extent that a creekside trail is feasible and does not result in the
destruction o�significant wildlife habitat, off-street trail segments are preferred to on-street segments.
As indicated elsewhere in this report, a.path along Fanno Creek is consistent with the library master
plan and complies with all applicable review standards.
Sue Beilke, Director of the Biodiversity Project of Tigard has reviewed the proposal has
reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments:
Below are my comments for the Fanno Creek Trail Project, located north of the library. I appreciate
the opportunity to provide comments on this project. I wholeheartedly support the extension of the
trail since it will allow citizens to connect with nature and provide walking, biking, birdwatching and
other activities for folks that improves livability.
I do have several concerns and comments as follows:
First, I have gone to meetings in the past several years with the city where it appeared there would be
a marked crosswalk on Hall as well as possibly a median island where people could go if they needed
to stop due to heavy traffic. Hall Blvd. as we all know is getting busier by the day, and to cross this
street on foot or via bike can be dangerous. The current proposal is for not even a marked crosswalk
on Hall. I believe this lends itself to an extremely dangerous crossing for citizens and a significant
safety concern for all, both for trail users and motorists. The city recently installed a crosswalk on SW
North Dakota for the Fanno Creek trail crossing and it has reaily been making a difference. I notice
motorists are now stopping more frequently and are more courteous to people waiting to cross.
In regard to the above safety concerns, a recommendation would be to put route this section of the
trail along Hall to the south so that it comes out by Omara Street and then users could cross there
and a crosswalk could be installed at this intersection. That would eliminate the unsafe proposed
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 10 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
crossing as it is currently proposed. I think Brian Wegener also has proposed running the trail
through the church/senior center and then crossing Hall at Omara street.
My other major concern is for potential habitat and wildlife impacts due to the present proposed trail
alignment north of the library. Impacts to the vegetated corridor include 3,004 square feet of
permanent impact. This is a large area of permanent impact and.it means we lose this much area of
habitat and open space permanently. As we have stated at past meetings for the library open space
areas, we recommend that the entire area north of the creek be protected for wildlife, including
specifically addressing habitat needs for the western pond.turtle which have been observed here in
the creek and crossing Hall at this very spot where the trail is proposed to cross. The upland portion,
including where the trail ali nment is proposed, is one of the last areas of "uplands" that could be
improved for nesting habita� for turtles. Turtles need sparsely vegetated, sunny areas for nesting
that are quiet and away from human disturbance or they won't use the area. If a trail goes througFi
this area it will be used heavily, wildlife will not stay in this area because of noise and other impacts
that humans cause. One of the main reasons the library site was supported by citizens was that the
city was able to acquire a large open space tract. This was very exciting to many citizens since we
felt it was a olden opportunity for the city to protect and improve habitat for a variety of species such
as the pond�urtle. Since the city did use the pond turtle as a target species when getting the �rant for
this project from the Oregon State Parks, it seems appropriate that we also provide and then improve
habitat for the turtles by protectin� certain areas for them to ensure their long term survival. �thout
adequate nesting habitat turtles will not survive for the Iong term. By protectin� the entire area north
of the library for wildlife, we believe there will be a greater opportunity for wildlife viewing from south
of the creek on the trail and from the library itself using spotting scopes and binoculars.
Thanks again for the opportunity to.comment. We appreciate all of the hard work and effort staff has
put into this effort to provide recreational and wildlife viewing opportunities to the citizens of Tigard.
Response: The comment regarding the need for a marked crosswalk is responded to elsewhere in
this report. .
According to the Hearings Officer Final Report (CUP 2203-0001, Tigard Library), "there is no
substantial evidence in tFie record that the construction of a trail along Fanno Creek above the �
average annual flood elevation would adversely affect the turtle habitat if conducted consistent with
applicable city, ODOL and Clean Water Services ("CWS") standards."
Fishman Environmental Services provided the following comments regarding the Northwestern Pond
Turtle and the trail:
Th�e northwestern pond turtle (Emys Clemmys marmorata marmorafa) is not a listed federal or
state species: it is a federal Species o� Concern?SOC) and a state critical (SC) species. A SOC is a
species that is being considered for federal listing; a SC species is a species for which listing as
threatened or endangered is pending or may be appropriate if immediate conservation actions are not
taken.
"The northwestern pond turtle prefers quiet.water in small lakes, marshes, and sluggish streams and
rivers. It will also inhabit man-made or modified watercourses such as reservoirs, canals, farm ponds
and sewa�e treatment ponds. The pond turtle is a dietary generalist and opportunist with seasonal
shifts in diet related to prey availabifity (Holland 1991). It requires basking sites, such as logs, rocks,
mud banks or cattail mats, for thermoregulation (Csuti 1997).
The northwestern pond turtle has been observed in the vicinity of the project area. An adult and a
J'uvenile turtle were observ�d along Fanno Creek on the west side of Hall Boulevard south of the former
Tigard Library, and in 2000 a larg e adult pond turtle was observed crossing Hall Boulevard from north of �
the new library site east of Hali to the former library site (Sue Beilke pers. comm.). The project site
contains patches of suitable turtle habitat: sluggish water and basking structures, shallow water ponds
with potential forage, and upland cover for over-wintering. However, habitat is limited by accessibility due
to surrounding roadways and development, and physical features such as the incised, vertical banks of
Fanno Creek and the dense reed canary grass, blackberry, and scrub-shrub which can be difficult to
traverse. No pond turtles were observed durin� recent field visits of the project site, but the time of year
and construction on the new library could have influenced observations.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 11 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Since pond turtles were obse�ved as recently as 2000 in the vic����cy of the project site, the proJ'ect
design includes measures to minimize impacts to turtles. An aircraft cable-type fence will be installed
on both sides of the trail from Hall Boulevard to Fanno Creek to discourage trail users from leaving
the trail. A dense shrub barrier consisting of tall Oregon grape and Wood's rose will be installed east
of the fence to further discourage trail users from leaving the trail. Installation of the fence and dense
shrub barrier will minimize the potential for human disturbance to turtles and other wildlife using the
wetlands and Fanno Creek riparian area located east of the trail."
Modifications to the trail alignment north of Fanno Creek have been made to minimize the potential
for impacts to turtle habitat since several preliminary trail designs were initially presented in the
Fanno Creek Park Master Plan Summary (Murase Associates, May 2003). All of the trail designs in
the master plan extended further east into the Fanno Creek Park site than the currently proposed trail
alignment. In addition, the earlier trail designs also incorporated a series of smaller side trails and
boardwalks that would have provided access to the ponds and streams on the site but would have
resulted in greater natural resource impacts. The currently proposed trail alignment,has been shifted
closer to Hall Boulevard than initially proposed to avoid impacting wetlands and wildlife habitat.
The potential wildlife and habitat impacts of the trail are the minimum necessary to install the trail.
These impacts will be compensated for by the restoration of the required vegetated corndor to good
condition. Additionally, the master plan for the area calls for the future restoration of the parks' some
nine area to historic conditions. The trail will improve turtle safety by providing a partial barrier to the
crossing of Hall Boulevard, which, based on the crossing event described in the Fishman comments,
poses a threat to turtle safety.
Notwithstanding this, staff agrees that the northwest pond turtle's status as a federal SOC and state
SC highlights .the need for a formal wildlife assessment and will include this as a recommended
approval condition.
John Frewing, a private citizen, has reviewed the proposal has reviewed the proposal and has
offered the following comments:
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Fanno Creek Trail Project in the vicinity of
Tigard's public library. Please consider the comments below and modify the proposal accordingly:
1. I question whether the proposed project is consistent with the goals of the Fanno Creek Park
Master Plan. Such master plan includes the following purposes: a trail system that provides
accessibility for people of all ages and physical abilities; preserve, enhance and restore natural
resources; a safe and secure park. The uncontrolled crossing of Hall Blvd seems to limit
accessibility and safety. The incursion of the project into the turtle habitat area on the north
side of Fanno Creek, east of Hall Blvd seems to damage already scarce natural resources in
the area.
Response: The 2003 Fanno Creek Park Master Plan map includes a trail alignment that extends
further east into northern portion of the library property than does the alignment proposed in the
present application. The proposed alignment pulfs the alignment back toward Hall Boulevard in
order to minimize the trail's impact on the natural area. The same is true of the "preferred alignmenY'
for this segment of the Fanno depicted in the 2003 Metro Fanno Creek Greenway Trail Action Plan.
This alignment extends east-west throu.gh the length of the northern area and also intrudes into
wetland area. The alignment under consideration avoids all wetlands.
Also to be noted is that the "natural area" within the propose trail alignment is not in pristine condition.
According to the CWS natural resource assessment, the area in question is degraded. The area is a
former horse pasture.covered with nonnative pasture grasses. The park, master plan calls for its
future restoration to historic, pre-settlement conditions, but its present condition is an area where the
soil has been compacted by years of livestock grazing and where few native species survive.
The issue raised regarding access and safety is discussed below.
2. Although not stated explicitly, I presume the hearing is a Type II hearing under the Tigard
code, since it involves a sensitive lands review. My comment is that all provisions of the code
which apply to a Type.II hearing and decision should apply. My first impression is that I don't
see a traffic study and impact study.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 12 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Response:. The applicable procedure is a Type III hearing conducted by a Hearings Officer. The
permit application, beginning on page 12, includes a narrative addressing 'f8.390.0408.2.(e): Impact
Study. A traffic study is not required because the trail segment does not impact the vehicular
transportation system. It provides an additional access and route for bicycles and pedestrians.
Although pathways also are part of the transportation system, a traffic study is not usually
requirement for their construction. In the case of the present project, a pedestrian crossing study will
be required.
3. The application material prepared by Fishman does not appear to consider compliance with
TCDC 18.360.060, Minor Modifications. This section has a number of approval criteria which
must be met. The notice of hearing does not identify Section 360 as applicable to this project.
Response: The Notice of Public Hearing correctly omits 18.360 as including applicable review
critena. The reason is that the original application, the one proposed for modification, was a
Conditional Use Permit proposal (CUP 2003-0001). Therefore, the Conditional Use modification
criteria would apply. These are addressed beginning on page 5 of the application narrative and
elsewhere in this staff report.
4. Section 18.810.030, regarding street design, of the Tigard code states that no development
shall occur unless the streets adjacent to tf�e development meet the standards of this chapter.
I question whether Hall Blvd, adjacent to this development, meets the current street standards
for this busy street, including width, curbs, sidewalks with planter strip, crosswalks, etc. The
notice of hearing does not include Section 810 as one of the applicable review criteria. It
should be reissued because of this serious shortcoming.
Response: The present application is a minor modification to the COT Public Library project
(CUP20030001). The ori inal proposal addressed the provisions of Section 18.810. The finai order
issued by the Hearings �fficer dictates in condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is
making a continuin�, diligent, good faith to identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along
Fanno Creek that will not be below the elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal
fulfills this condition by defining a suitable alignment for the trail throu�h the library property.
According to Engineering staff, traffic studies are not normally required fc�� tra�ls, as r?lates to the trail
right-of-way.
5. I don't think the buffer requirements of Section 360 are met, considering the purpose of
providing buffer near this proJ ect. The beneficiaries of buffer are the small animals which live
near Fanno Creek and its wetlands; without a very tight fence, the domesticated animals which
accompany people will invade the area north of Fanno Creek and east of Hall Blvd. An aircraft
cable barrier and plantings are proposed; it is not stated whether this is a single aircraft cable,
or multiple cables strung horizontally. I suggest instead a 4-foot high chain (ink fence with 4"
clearance above ground, in con unction witFi plantings as buffer. The point is that this is not a
common buffer for human nee�s, but a buffer which must meet the needs of small animals,
with particular needs (nesting, forage, isolation from humans) known only to experts. Because
this pro�ect bnngs many more people near the natural features north of Fanno Creek and east
of Hall, the entire east side of Hall Blvd north of Fanno Creek, to the school bus parking lot,
should be protected with the above suggested buffer. The entire frontage along Fanno Creek
should be protected at its buffer boundary with fencing meeting CWS standards.
Response: The buffering requirements included in Section 360 (under 360.090.4) are generic and
apply to buffering and screening befinreen different types of land uses based on their zoning
designation. The specific buffer standards applicable to protecting natural areas, independent of the
zonin� or type of land use involved, are the CWS vegetated corridor standards. These are
administered by CWS and are incorporated into the CW5 Design Standards Manual, adopted by
reference into the Tigard Development Code. The applicant has provided a CWS Service Provider
Letter, dated January 2005, documenting compliance with these standards. The applicant has
provided a revised letter that reflects a reduced disturbance area and less impacf to existing
vegetation resulting from the trail's construction than previously proposed.
The proposed aircraft cable-t pe fence is designed to meeting FEMA requirements and includes 3
horizontal cables spaced 1 �oot apart. This fence design was modeled in the no-rise report
submitted by the applicant and is part of the "no-rise" certification provided by Pacific Water
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 13 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Resources. According to City Engineering staff, a very tight or c,,,ain link fence would impede flow
(by retaining water-carried debris) and not meet the flood hydraulic analysis no-rise standards for a
structure situated in the floodplain.
6. When performing work in wetlands, state requirements call for an alternatives analysis, which
is not done in this application. I believe a feasible alternative with least impact on waters of the
state is the one suggested by Brian Wegener in his recent comments to you -- improvements
along a Fanno Creek Trail se�ment which leaves the stream corridor near the Senior Center,
then proceeds east along O Mara Street (some improvements to church and residential
properties might be appropriate city expenditures) and crossing of Hall Blvd at a protected site
(stop light, crosswalk, lighting, etc.).
Response: The proposed trail alignment avoids all wetlands.
7. The notice of hearing does not identify TCDC 18.385 regarding Sensitive Land Permits as one
of the applicable approval criteria; it should.
Response: The purpose of chapter 385 is to identify the types of permits included in the
development code. The respective criteria that apply to the identified permit types are included in the
various 700 chapters. In the case of Sensitive Land Permits, the applicable approval criteria are
listed in Chapter 775, Sensitive Lands. The present proposal addresses the criteria laid out in 775.
8. The provision of viewing structures is inconsistent with maintanence of the zero-rise flood
plain.. The proposed structure (and existing, unpermitted structure) are perpendicular to the
direction of stream flow and present an obstacle to flow and debris flowing in the stream during
flood events. The viewing structures should be deleted. �
Response: . The viewing structure referenced is not part of.the present proposal. The scope of the
proposal is limited to the installation of a pedestrian trail and includes no other improvements.
9. In earlier comments, I have suggested a cantilevered footbridge on the west side of the
existing Hall Blvd motor bridge as an alternative for the proposed project which has less impact
on nat►�ral features of the area and state waters. Your staff analysis simply says that ODOT
didn't like the idea. There is no reason for such dislike for the project; Tigard should pursue
this option at.least to finding out the reason for ODOT dislike; perhaps there are modifications
which will satisfy ODOT concerns.
Response: The existing vehicular bridge includes a marked bike lane and narrow sidewalk on either
side of the road. A pedestrian bridge cantilevered or free-standing adjacent to the existing vehicular
bridge would provide basically the same function. It would be more of an enhancement to the
sidewalk on Hall as opposed to a continuation of the trail. The Engineering Department did look at
the feasibility of a cantilevered or free-standing pedestrian bridge ad�acent the vehicular bridge. It is
doubtFul thaf the existing bridge would provide adequate support for an attached structure or would be
allowed by ODOT. Moreover, although not scheduled or funded as yet, the existing ODOT-owned
bridge is substandard in terms of width and height and is highly likely to be replaced by a new
structure at some unspecified time in the future. Any attachments to the bridge would be removed.
According to preliminary field study, the length of a free-standing span would be in the range of 150
feet, with an estimate cost in the $300-400,000 range. This excludes the cost of acquiring private
property needed to install the span. As stated elsewFiere, the City would prefer that the trail continue
along Fanno Creek versus the on-street alignment. The preferred alignment of the trail is the route
depicted in the present proposal. Because of that, the City has not investigated this suggested on-
street alternative to the trail alignment beyond an on-site meeting with ODOT to view and discuss
pedestrian-friendly improvements to the Hall Boulevard bridge.
10. I disagree with the Fishman conclusion (re 18.330.020.B 2) that a greenway trail is not a
change.from the approved use of this tract for a public library The impact is that this chan�e
is a ma�or modification rather than a minor modification and different rules and approval criteria
apply. Similarly this project clearl changes access ways and parking areas where off-site
traffic �eg that traffic on Hall Blvd� would be affected. A dictionary meaning of words not
special y defined in the Tigard code is the standard in this regard.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 14 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
� V ..
Response: As noted earlier, thc final order approving the library Conditional Use application issued
by the Hearings Officer dictates in condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is making a
continuing, diligent, good faith to identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along Fanno
Creek that will not be below the elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal fulfills
this condition by defining a suitable alignment for the trail throu�h the library property. The applicant
clearly has demonstrated by a point by point response to the onditional Use review criteria that the
proposed project is a minor and not a ma�or modification.
11. The proposed project does not meet the requirement for campus-like industrial uses, ie it is not
pedestrian friendly, specifically the crossing of Hall Blvd is not pedestrian friendly. The project
includes this crossing, as its description indicates that it connects with the existing Fanno
Creek Trail on the west side of Hall Blvd.
Response: Because all of the City-owned industrial land located north of the creek is classified as
floodplain and wetlands, it is not suitable for light industrial development. It is, however, suitable for
a greenway trail. The crossing of Hall Boulevard is addressed elsewhere in this report.
12. The project description (Fishman) states that a (future) grading plan "will enable the trail to be
designed and constructed to avoid any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year
flood". This conclusory statement purpo�ts to meet 18.775.070 B 3, but actually improperly
defers an important decision to a later stage when public participation will not be available.
The engineering to show no increase in water surface elevation should be done before this
project is approved.
Response: The required certification has been provided by the appficant in the form of a hydraulic
analysis, perFormed by Pacific Water Resources. A copy of this study, titled No-Rise Certification:
Pedestrian Brrdge Crossing of Fanno Creek Below HaII Boulevard, is included in the Planning
Division project file and is available for public inspection. The study concludes that the "proposed
project meefs the criteria for a `no-rise' certification."
13. Since 18.790 is one of the approval criteria, a tree plan is required. All elements of the tree
plan should be provided prior to the hearing.
Response: This criterion is addressed within this staff report.. A tree inventory portraying the types
and diameter of trees within and proximate to the trail corridor is include in the project file. Only three
small, approximately 2-inch diameter trees, are proposed for removal. The vegetated corndor plan
approved by CWS includes the planting of 24 native, half inch diameter trees along the trail route.
14. The Fishman application for sensitive lands permit, at page 12, states that this project will
result in 'reducing the risk for accidents between pedestrians and road users.' I disagree. The
Fanno Creek Trail has hundreds of users each day and more pedestrian traffic crossing busy
Hall Blvd will result. A traffic study by a certifiied professional should be developed to
determine what the traffic impact will be. The code requirements for an impact study
(18.390.040 B.2.e) include the requirement that it "shall propose improvements necessary to
meet City standards . . ."; the present submittal does not do such and it should.
Response: This comment is responded to elsewhere in this report.
�
L Zi"`"`" Au ust 15 2 5
00
. uan o s
Asso 'ate anner
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 15 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
. " .
� �
Au ust 15 2005
. ic ar ew o
Planning M n er
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 16 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAII PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
. .
GEOGRAPNIC INFORMATION SVSiEM
YIQNITY I�Ai�
SLR�005-00016 '
� M M D2005-000 I 5
o FANNO CREEK
' TRAIL PROJECT
J
m
LP ,
i �
�
IY �ii1NH
I � ��
F� -t-
W `�µa�'
� 5
BU�i tff s' < ` �1� q
U � ' ¢P` �,�r'al P.D
: ' , =.-.
'"""" '' ��
IYI/ \1\ _ 6EEGBEN��- __-C�/kLd_�_fIRU �:
Tlpartl Area Map � �
�
' N
J ---------�
Q o 0
= O O0
o 0 100 200 300 400 Feet
0
0 0 ° - - _
0 0 7"=370 feet .
0 0
o °o o °o
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0
, , City of Tigard
I� Infortnation on this map is for generel localion only and
- should be verified wilh the Development Servicee Division.
.' ; 13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard,OR 97223
(503)639-4171
http:/lwsnv.ci.tigard.or.us
_ Community Development Plot date:Jul 21,2005;C:MagicWIAGIC03.APR
�a NOISInIa JNINNd�d a2�b�J11 �O Jlll�
- T Total area of poth = 12,780 SF LEGEND �
Permanent vegetofed comidor impoct orea = 3,004 SF --- -�P.,,,,o,,,�r wqemtve � V
i 'w.t�o,ar �wr;eor�no�r: �
Totol construction stoging areo = 11,114 SF r---, 0 O
�J SMwnr!ponda Veq�foted canidor mitlqotion 1
f Totol vegetafed corrido� orea impocted r—, � �
by construcfion = 5,435 SF _�w9•�orw co..�ao. ��i{,��I wai se...r..�i�e m;e;qona, O �
r s s r (femporory impoct) - �
^ �Tempwwy / N J
�etofM tar7Oar \ Q �
�, ShoWd�r rack SAOUlder rock (i� pocfa
� � , 7otol vegetated corridor mitiqation o�ea = 3,�4 SF � ( w�
'+�Q J'orDhWf `1�� �� - /�I ` ` � Y�
,l„ --s+�.-o.ozoo ti`� 7emporary vegefafed corridor impact areqs/ \ � 1'� � � ~
will be restored to a � _ } �f11�,1 �Q �
o+` - 'ao good condition / ,
,��^' � *� faflowinq complefron of constructian i. •- � �N y'i;, � W
'hick J�1 '-0�rock o... co�.�PO�r.e,�ey.od. � �. % � � �1',ji��j Q W
7"MiGk 7�-0�rock � � � / ..J I I.. / ��ll�� �'' � � �
j'I�
� '. � / I�}• �I�jli �I'll{�i , . �� . � V
TYPICAL PATHWAY SECTION 1 � / � �1I I {I I C, I; $I' {Il� � O
•n \ . . . . / ^ 'I.� f ' t }'I�'ij I .` O �
� �
scm�� � � \�. �ur�+s.rotw/ �/'.I ����i`',i I Il f��#'�1�' � � LaL
wo �m � . � Oxt
� ., _ \ � �� � _ �6�� �/'. : � �; �t,l �� , , J
`�� �.>. �;,!� � " Vf
� - �
�:' � �' c a �..,,_ il' ,1
. . .r� / . '.' �� � � � .�� -.�. , .'� ../ .,.3'�, ..� \ _,.� . '--� ��
� . I � � . . . . . .� . . y , � \ _ .
� i � �-. . \ - ___ -
� � J� ��,, e _ �--` .-
_
. i .' �MAe;n.e�w,� - -� � \� .
; �� � � s i C� cC(�ranP �� \.. I
,� �e���T'N"o„ `_��� �i ` ,``'�t_C'.�-�,��y
/ ' �~ j
� � / / \ �',{�• 1 i+��� . 1 ' -_
�� ( i/ " �!!.�` � — T 1 � �. `� „� r . �/
4' � � �"„",� � �� ���jj;. �� �� �� �
i i. �: � •.. / v.,,�,�.�r�mr.e - ` 6 ` 1 _ r � �`
�'; amw�mvocr _ - .�.1 7 1 _ `�
:♦ . . . . \ . ,7� ��/ ar� � 7.73.Y � .s�- .— - � �.� 7 ` . i�Ij 1, V J t..
1 . yp . � `
'.1. . . �I �'��: _y.gHOf.�cdoWer ��, ,;II �o. - — � � •� Si _ - � ��1 � ``.'�l �ir�' '`' _ � L �
� 4! rMt,poria�w a 6?G 5i' ::\ \ - -- . - - ,\ Q 1 � .
'� ' ' ` [� � c. — - 1 O `1 '!I����iTT,1,�, ' � �
, �� . vs:�:�ae�r yqat4iaq ���� \ �\ 100 1R fL000 — , �f {I'f •-�
qar;oo�;mpocr �.' .. - - -- - I I
� o eo�<f Oa9 � PWI�I£L£V�144' ^ � �� O���.'+�I{�f� �����' ,- �1 � �
�a � �:��� � ''�.- y - - = i , �Il��� �� r �
i : i�'�Constrvc+rcn+,;_,i��� . . . . �� •� • I .-�� ___. I ' � . .-II��� � � .0
.�,.�:�� `� ;�.a F--� `_ — _ �, _ ; ; ', , � � 1, �, � � � Z
� ,�,,,,� i t-7-rf�.,,,�, rIjII4 11 � j1lI� ("��
� Ir . � s`���inc.:�2� �� �/, ' � � � . . � j. I V F F'7•�'1 V y i'!; I Y � .I� `I��71 I �I-"'�� �
! I
r f
� 1 . . .�'\� Conatrt�cfim sf Mq . `� ;::�I i�I i I I1. � . 1i! �.' ' �
_ _,a �" aoo_.zs3z.� .. _- , i i i i � ; , i � �'f _. �����} '�r', � d
�_� � . F _ _ _ -
- - . - `_ ,. . r` _: ;., , �, ..�� _ -- f41- � -� '- -
- -r, - - _ , � � W
_� s� .
Construc�on s y Wq�tatM comdar arw�Ynpafb I _. . - I O ` �
�..a- �sez s� � ey�uN�rw,�_zse�sr HALL BLVD. _? �._ - - - � — = �
�� _ _ _ n«„Pa,.�,�,a�u � �: _ _i' �_
-!,�., � . — -.- - N v,
a;� �9a�a�a.;�, ��--- _,�-
; �'1 Vsqetotsd conMo�oroo m7f!atlon w�o-2J73 SF . - ._"-•. -°-- '-----� O
��� 4npocNd by conaWCtion
' �J.07I Sf(fNnporwy NnPOet) I��y , 4 � O
�� � Fl �
f � N
O — Q
� �
�
• • • � • • • • � • • • � � •
� \ , . . ,,,,,
. \
� . � � �
�
• � � �.�
` HEARINGS OFFICER
MONDAY- AUGUST 22, 2005 - 7:00 PM �
Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on
the Friday prior to the meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, Ext. 2438 (voice) or 503-6842772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the
Dea�. Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing
impairments and qualified bilingual interpreters.
Since these services must be scheduled with outside senrice providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible.
To request such services, please notify the City of Tigard of your need(s) by 5:00 p.m., no less than one (1}week prior to the
meeting date at the same phone numbers listed above so that we can make the appropriate arrangements.
Hearings are held in Town Hall at the City of Tigard at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Staff reports are available to the public 7 days prior to the hearing date
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC HEARING
2.1 FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW{SLR) 2005-00016
MINOR MODIFICATION (MMD) 2005-00015
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-wide
paved, multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail segment is approximately 1,090 lineal feet,
approximately 700 feet of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a pedestrian
bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over Fanno Creek. Minor
alteration of the floodway wilt be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is also requesting
Minor Modification approval to a previously granted Conditional Use Permit(CUP2003-00001/City of Tigard
Public Library)in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site.
LOCATION: The proposed project is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east of SW Hall
Boulevard, north of the existing Tigard Library, and south of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The path
will connect to the existing Fanno Creek trail network. WCTM 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax
Lots 100 and 200.
ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District; and I-P: Industrial Park District. APPLICABLE
REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775
and 18.790.
3. OTHER BUSINESS
4. ADJOURNMENT
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item: 2.1
Hearing Date: Au ust 22 2005 Time: 7:00 PM
STAFF REPORT TO THE
:��
HEARINGS OFFICER CITYOFTIGARD
(,ommunity,1�ec eG�prnerrt
F4R THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREG�N .SFapit�,�`��tr�r�°m�nuritty
120 DAYS = NIA
SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY
FILE NAME: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
CASE NOS.: ensitive an s eview
Minor Modification (MMD) MMD2005-00015
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a
10-foot-wide paved multi-use trail within a po►tion of the floodplain. The trail
segment is approximately 1,090 lineal feet, approximately 700 feet (340 cubic
yards) of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a
pedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard bridge
over Fanno Creek. Minor alteration of the floodway will be conducted to place
the�pedestrian bridge. The proJ ect will also temporarily impact zero square feet
of the 50' vegetated corndor due to construction staging and will permanently
impact 3,004 square feet of vegetated corridor as a result of the trail
construction.
APPLICANT: Cit of Tigard OWNER: Cit of Tigard
13�25 SW Hall Blvd. 13�25 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
LOCATION: The proposed project is iocated within the t=anno Creek floodpiain, east of Hail
Boulevard, north of the existing Tigard Library and south of the Southern Pacific
railroad tracks. The path is to extend from Hall Boulevard opposite an exiting trail
segment located on the west side of Hall to the north side of the proposed Wall
Street Extension. Tax lot numbers 2S102DA00600, 2S1102DD100 & 200.
ZONING: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed
to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050
square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses also are permitted
conditionally.
I-L: Light Industrial District. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for
general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production,
research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale
sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor,
and vibration.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775
and 18.790.
SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Hearings 4fficer find that a portion of proposed pedestrian trail and bridge
will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards of
the Tigard Development Code. A remainder of the trail including the bridge is conditioned to be subject
to further study. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended
Conditions of Approval:
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 1 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS:
u mit to t e anning epartment ary agenstrec er, , ext. or review an
approvai:
1. No site work will be�in until appropriate fencing/demarcation has been installed on site to
clearly identify the we land boundaries and construction perimeters
2. The applicant will provide a copy of the tree protection plan, which will be reviewed by the
City's Arborist. Tree protection must be installed and inspected by the City's Arborist, Matt
Stine, pnor to site work.
3. The applicant shall carry out the vegetated corridor plan,as reviewed and approved by CWS
and obtain a letter from CWS documenting that the conditions have been met.
4. ODOT approval of the location and design of a pedestrian crossing of Hall Boulevard serving
trail users should be obtained and the crossing installed concurrent with or before the trail
connection is installed. At the applicanYs discretion and risk, the trail section located south of
Fanno Creek may be installed prior to the required ODOT approval of a safe pedestrian
crossing. The northern terminus of said portion of the trail is approximately 50 feet south or
downstream of the bridge and midway along the swale bordering the trail.
5. A wildlife assessment will be conducted to address the impact of the project within the area
north of Fanno Creek. The trail design north of the creek will respond to and take into account
the results of the wildlife assessment. The assessment and design will be subject to a public
hearing by the Hearing Officer.
THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION.
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Site Information and Proposal Description:
The site is located along Fanno Creek just north of the existing Tigard Library site. The trail segment
is approximately 1,090 fineal feet with approximately 700 feet located in the 100 year floodplain. The
site is developed with the library building and a small gazebo. Wetlands are located on the site;
however, the path has been designed to avoid wetland impacts. The trail will require development
within the CWS vegetated corridor and mitigation is proposed.
The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct approximately 700 lineal
feet of the 10-foot wide paved multi-use trail within the floodplain. The proposal includes a
pedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard bridge of Fanno Creek.
Minor alteration of the floodway also will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge.
Prior to the com letion of the library, a small residential home with related domestic improvements
(landscaping, etc� occupied a portion of the site. The house subsequently was destroyed by fire. A
gazebo has been constructed near the former home site.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 2 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA
A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this
staff report are as follows:
A. Decision Makin Procedures
. � on itiona se
B. Zonin istricts
esi en ial Zoning Districts)
18.530 Industrial Zoning Districts)
C. Specific Development Standards
18.775 (Sensitive Lands}
18.790 (Tree Removal)
D. Im act Stud �
The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters: 18.705 (Access, Egress
& Circulation), 18.715 Density Computations), 18.720 (Desi n Compatibility , 18.725 (Environmental
Performance Standards�,18.730 (Exceptions to Development�tandards), 18.�42 (Home Occupations),
18.750 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage�
18.765 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Req uirements), 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations), 18.78
(Signs), 18.785 (Temporary Uses,), 18.795 (Visual Clearance)„ and 18.798 (Wireless Communication
Facilities). These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Review to
make sure nothing is missing from list.
18.705.030F addresses the design of walkways that cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots.
Finding: Section18.705 (Access, Egress & Circulation) does not apply because the library conditional
use application (CUP2003-00001) addresses walkway crossing of vehicle access driveways and
parking lots.
SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
LIAN E U I L M NT D TI N :
A. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES
This application includes a request for a Minor Modification to CUP2003-00001/SLR20001NAR2003-
00009, the City of Tigard Public Library. The Minor Modification approval criteria are listed below,
along with a discussion of how each applies to the project under discussion. The Minor Modification
approval criteria require that the Major Modification approval criteria first be addressed.
18.330.020.B. 2. The Director shall determine that a major modification(s) has resulted if one
or more of the changes listed below have been proposed.
a. A change in land use:
b. A 10% increase in dwelling unit density:
c. A change in the type and/or location of accessways and parking areas where off-site traffic
would be affected:
d. An increase in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more than 10% where
previously specified:
e. A reduction in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more that 10% of the area
reserved for common open space and/or usable open space.
f. A reduction of specified setback requirements by more than 20%:
g. An elimination of project amenities by more than 10% where previously specified, such as,
Recreational facilities, Screening, or Landscaping provisions:
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 3 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
h. A 10% increase in the approve density:
FINDING: The trail proposal is a modification to the City of Tigard Public Library project (CUP2003-
0001). The final order issued by the Hearings �fficer approving the original project dictates in
condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is making a continuing, diligent, good faith to
identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along Fanno Creek that will not be below the
elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal fulfills this condition by defining a
suitable alignment for the trail through the library property. The proposal is not a change in use. It
does it involve a 10% reduction in density. The accessways to the approved library site are not
changed from those approved as part of the library project. No increase in floor area is proposed.
No change in specified setbacks requirements Is proposed. The project adds rather than eliminates
recreational facilities. No change to screening or landscaping provisions is requested. No increase
in approved density is requested.
18.330.020.C. Minor modification of approved or existing conditional use.
1. Any modification which is not within the description of a major modification as provided in
Subsection B above shall be considered a minor modification.
2. Any applicant may request approval of a minor modification by means of a Type I
procedure, as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria in Subsection C3
below.
3. A minor modification shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied following the
Director's review based on the findings that:
a. The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable requirements of this
title; and '
b. The modification is not a major modification as defined in Subsection A above.
FINDING: The proposed modification is not within the description of a major modification and,
therefore is classified as a minor modification.
B. ZONING DISTRICT
Residential and Industrial Zonin Districts: Section 18.510.020 and 18.520.020
is s e escrip ion o e esi en ia oning Districts and Industrial Zoning Districts.
This use is considered a public infra-structure improvement consistent with a street or sidewalk.
Therefore, the proposal does not conflict with allowed uses in either the R-12 or I-L zones.
This application includes a request for a Minor Modification to CUP2003-00001/SLR20001NAR2003-
00009, the City of Tigard Public Library. The Minor Modification approval criteria are listed, along
with a discussion of how major modification criteria are not applicable.
C. SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
SENSITIVE LANDS: CHAPTER 18.775
ensi ive an s are an s potentia yunsuitable for development because of their location within:
the 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas which are regulated by other
agencies including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands, or are
designated as si nificant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map, and
steep slopes of�5% or greater and unstable ground. A land use application is required for
ground disturbances in sensitive lands areas.
The proposal involves 340 cubic yards of excavation within the floodplain , a hard surface path in the
SLR2005-00016/MM�2005-00015 PAGE 4 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
floodplain, and no temporary alteration of the floodway for the construction/placement of the bridge.
According to Section 18.775.020.G this proposal requires a Type III sensitive lands review by tre
Hearings Officer.
Within the 100-year floodplain 18.775.070 (B)
The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request
within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been
satisfied:
Land form alterations shall �reserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and
maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments, including
fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified by a
registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in flood
levels dur�ng the base flood discharge.
The applicant has provided a letter and report from Pacific Water Resources, Inc. that certifies a zero-
foot rise in flood elevations. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in
areas designed as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except
that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or
public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Community Development Code
shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards;
The trail is an alteration associated with community recreation, which is allowed in the floodplain, as
are trails in City parks. The use is most closely related to a public support facility, therefore, the land
form alteration required for the construction of this use is allowed in accordance with this criterion.
Where a land.form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will
not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood;
As mentioned above, the final project design was the subject of a.flood analysis that certified a zero-
foot rise in flood elevations. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrianlbicycle pathway in
accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said
pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely;
The proPosal is to construction a pedestrian/bicycle path, which fulfills an approval condition listed in
the HO s approval of a portion of the Tigard Library Pro�ect (CUP 2203-0001). However, as
discussed later in the staff report, there is evidence to indicate that pathway construction may be
untimely.
The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the
elevation of an average annual flood;
The path is located in the 100-year floodplain. Minor alteration of the floodway will be necessary to
construct footings for the bridge over Fanno Creek. The bridge itself will be located outside the
floodway. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
The necessary US Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of
State Lands, and CWS permits and approvals shall be obtained; and
The Corps and DSL have jurisdiction over work within wetlands and below the high water mark (the
top of bank). According to the natural resource assessment report completed by Fishman
Environmental Services, no portion of the path, bridge, or construction staging areas will take place in
the wetland or high water mark areas. Therefore permits were not required from DSL or the Corps.
A Service Provider letter was obtained from CWS. In addition, copies of the application materials
were sent to the Division of State Lands, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Fish
and Wildlife and Clean Water Services. No comments were provided.
Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 5 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
year floodplain, the City shall re uire the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land
area within and adjacent to the f�oodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This
area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle
pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway
plan.
This standard does not apply because the property is already owned by the City and the request is to
construct the pedestrian/bicycle path in accordance with the adopted plan.
Within wetlands 18.775.070 (E):
Special Provisions for Development Alon Fanno Creek 18.775.090:
In order to address the requirements of�tatewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and
the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 666-023-0030) pertaining to
wetlands , all wetlands classified as si nificant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams
orri ors Map" are protected. No land�orm alterations or developments are allowed within or
partially within a significant wetland, except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section
'18.775.130.
In order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and
the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660-023-0030) pertaining to
ri arian corridors a standard setback distance or vegetated corridor area, measured
orizon a y rom and parallel to the top of the bank, is established for the Tualatin River,
Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek.
No alternation of wetland is planned, however, the proposal does involve alteration of land within the
vegetated corridor and in the vicinity of wetlands. The vegetated corridor standards are addressed in
775.090B below.
FINDING: Based on the plans provided, no alteration of wetlands�is proposed. However, since
construction activities are proposed in the vicinity of delineated wetlands, the
construction boundaries should be clearly defined in order to avoid unintentional and
unapproved disturbance of the wetlands.
CONDITION:No site work will begin until appro�riate fencing/demarcation has been installed on site
to clearly identify wetland boundaries and construction perimeters.
775.090. B
2. The standard width for "good condition" vegetated corridors along Fanno Creek, Ball
Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek is 50 feet, unless wider in accordance with CWS
"Design and Construction Standards", or modified in accordance with Section
18.775.130. If all or part of a locally significant wetland (a wetland identified as
significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map"j is located
within the 50 foot setback area, the vegetated corridor is measured from the upland
edge of the associated wetland.
3. The minimum width for "marginal or degraded condition" vegetated corridors along the
Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek is 50% of the
standard width, unless wider in accordance with CWS "Design and Construction
Standards", or modified in accordance with Section 18.775.130.
4. The determination of corridor condition shall be based on the Natural Resource
Assessment guidelines contained in the CWS "Design and Construction Standards".
5. The standard setback distance or vegetated corridor area applies to all development
proposed on property located within or partially within the vegetated corridors, except
as allowed below:
a. Roads, pedestrian or bike paths crossing the vegetated corridor from one side to
the other in order to provide access to the sensitive area or across the sensitive
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 6 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
area, as approved by the City per Section 18.775.070 and by CWS "Design and
Construction Standards";
b. A pedestrian or bike path, not exceeding 10 feet in width and meeting the CWS
"Design and Construction Standards";
a. Land form alterations or developments are located within or partially within the
minimum width area established for marginal or a degraded condition vegetated
corridor, as defined in Section 18.775.090.B.3.
According to the CWS Natural Resource Assessment, the condition of the vegetated corridor along
the creek is "degraded". The proposed vegetated width of 50 feet exceeds the minimum width
required. A pedestrian path not the exceed 10 feet is width is an allowed use in the vegetated
corridor set. Moreover, CWS has approved the trail design and issued a Service Provider Letter
approving the project with regard to CWS standards.
FINDING: The trail is an allowed use within the vegetated corridor. The vegetated corridor
proposed meets the City and CWS site-specific standards established for vegetated
corridors. .
CONDITION:The applicant shall carry out the vegetated corridor plan as reviewed and approved by
CWS.
Tree Removal (18.7�
apter .7�6� requires the submittal of a tree plan that identifies the location, size, and
species of all trees on the site, a program to save existing trees over 12-inch diameter at
breast height (dbh) or mitigate for their removal, identification of trees to be removed, and a
protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to
protect trees during and after construction.
The applicant has submitted a tree plan that identifies the location, size, and species of all trees
within or near the trail corridor. The earlier conditional use application for the development of the
library (CUP 2003-0001) includes a tree inventory covering the larger library property. According to
the trail-specific inventory, three trees (one pine and two deciduous) of 2-inch diameter each are
proposed for removal. The loss of these trees will be compensated for by the planting of 24, 2-gallon
container size (approximately 0.5 inch diameter) trees along the trail. The required planting of
replacement trees applies to tree removal more than 12 inches in diameter. A protection plan for.
existing trees.has been developed.. This plan is the city's administrative policy pertaining to tree
protection during construction activities on city projects.
Section 18.790.040 states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section
may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with
Section 18.790.030, or as a cond�tion of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be
subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a
deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit a�fected by this section
to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a
certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree
preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous
tree. The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director.
FINDING: Based on the analysis.above, the Tree Removal standards will be met, if the applicant
complies with the condition listed below:
CONDITION:Provide a copy of the tree protection plan, which will be reviewed by the City Arborist ,
Matt Stine. Tree protection must be installed and inspected by the City's Arborist prior to
site work.
D. Impact Studv:
18.390.040.B.e.states that the application shall include an impact study. The impact study
SLR2005-00�16/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 7 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall
address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system,
the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the
development. For each pubic facility system and type of impact: the study shall propose
improvements necessary to meet City standards and to minimize the impact of the
development on the pubic at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property
users.
Finding: The applicant has included an impact study that adequately addresses the projecYs
impact on the various the public facility systems, except for the transportation system.
The Engineering Department concludes that the project will increase the number of Hall
Boulevard pedestnan crossing. The lack of provision for crossing improvements will
contribute to unsafe conditions for trail users.
CONDITION:ODOT approval of the location and design of a pedestrian crossing of Hall Boulevard
serving trail users should be obtained and the crossin� installed concurrent with or
before the trail connection is installed. At the applicant s discretion and risk, the trail
section located south of Fanno Creek may be installed,prior to the required ODOT
approval of a safe pedestrian crossing. The northern terminus of said portion of the trail
is approximately 50 feet south or downstream of the bridge and midway along the swale
bordering the trail.
SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The City of Tigard Building Division, Long Range Planning, Planning/Engineering Technicians,
Engineering Department, and Public Works have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to
The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has filed the following
comments.
Are there any discussions regarding "ped crossing" where the trail crosses Hall? I know from
experience that the library caused concerns for pedestrians accessing this facility. I know from
experience that other roadways are involved when the Fanno Creek Trail spans the roadway. What
other suggestions (ODOT approved) have been raised?
Response: According to the �D�T 2004 Transportation Volume Tables, Hall Boulevard .01 miles
south of Burnham Road daily handles 14,100 vehicles. The count .01 miles south O'Mara is 13,330.
City Engineering staff who designed the trail alignment conclude that the long term efFect of the
completion of the new trail segment will be to increase the volume of Hall Boulevard pedestrian
crossings within the area under discussion, contrary to the conclusion contained in the applicant's
statement. Trail users approaching Hall will have two options should they wish to cross the road.
One option is to follow the sidewalk or, where there are gaps, the shoulder of the road to the existing
crosswalk and stop light located at Burnham and Hall, or in future, to the proposed crosswalk and
stop light located at Wall Street and Hall. The other option is to wait for gaps in the traffic and to
cross directly over between trail segments.
Hall Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of ODOT. Earlier this year, ODOT disapproved a City request
for a marked crossing adjacent to and north of the bridge on Hall. The City has available funding and
would install a pedestrian crossing at this location, if granted permission by ODOT. ODOT would
approve a location much further north, adjacent to the driveway serving City Hall. This location is
considered by Engineering staff to be unsuitable for a crosswalk serving trail users, because it is too
far out-of-direction to be used by people on the trail and also because the high volume of vehicular
turning movements into and out of the City Hall driveway would create unsafe conditions for
pedestrians. Another factor is that Hall Boulevard is three lanes at this location as opposed to two
lanes where the trail segments meet. In the professional judgment of Engineering staff, it would be
safer for trail users to cross two lanes of traffic mid-block, between trail segments without a cross
walk than to cross at a marked crosswalk at the ODOT-preferred location, situated approximately 250
feet north of the trail. There are many instances where trail users do not make use of crosswalks
SLR2005-0�016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 8 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
that are out of direction. The users of the trail most likely cross at the most direct and convenient
crossing point, which also happens to be where the street is narrowest.
In conclusion, 2Q04 daily average traffic volumes within the vicinity of the proposed trail were in the
13-14,000 range and completion of the second of the trail's two ends is likely to increase the number
of Hall pedestrian crossings. The City has indicated a willingness to put in a crossing that. is not too
far away from the point where the trail segments connection to Hall. Negotiations with ODOT
regarding the design and location of the crossing potentially could tie in to the proposed 2006
sidewalk infill along the Hall frontage of the City-owned tax lot north of Fanno Creek. rn any case,
staff concurs with the Police, ODOT, and Citizen comments on the need to address pedestrian safely
as part of the trail project. The crossing and trail improvements should be completed concurrently.
The proposed trail segment should not be installed until the issue of a street crossing serving trail
users is resolved. This conclusion will be included as a proposed condition of approval.
SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS
Metro, Oregon Department of Environmental Qualitx, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Oregon Department of Transportation, Oregon Division of State Lands, Southern Pacific
Railroad, Clean Water Services, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, and US Army Corps. Of
Engineers have reviewed the project and offered no comments.
The Oregon Department of Transportation has reviewed the proposal and offered the
following comments.
Basil Christopher:
Shouldn't this study address how pedestrians and bicyclists will get across Hall Blvd. where the path
connects? O'Mara St. might serve as a valuable lesson here (poor planning).
Regarding the section marked Transportation system - The study reads; "...new trail segment is not
expected to result in an increase in the number of pedestrians crossing Hall Blvd...".
I disagree with this statement for the following reasons. One point of building a path that connects to
the library is to encourage library users to walk or bike to the library instead of driving. I think it's
reasonable to assume that some people will do this (or why build a path to the library). I think it's also
reasonable to assume some young persons who don't drive, will be attracted to walk and cross here
to get to the library. Given these assumptions, I think it's more likely the new path will result in an
increase in pedestrians crossing Hall Blvd. in this section.
Fredrick Sawyer:
The project looks fine. We may need to discuss the crossing of the highway during the design phase.
The crossing is not included in the plan and can be addressed later.
Sam Hunidi:
From the traffic point of view, the lack of a safe pedestrian crossing is a concern. The trail and
crossing should be handled together. ODOT may not grant future approval for a pedestrian crossing
between the trail segments.
SECTION VIII. PRIVATE ORGANIZATION AND CITIZEN COMMENTS
Brian We ener, Watershed Watch Coordinator for the Tualatin Riverkeepers has reviewed the
proposal�as reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments:
My bi gest concern about the Fanno Creek Trail extension around the Library is having the trail cross
Hall �Ivd without a crosswalk. Under "Transportation System" on page 12 of the Fishman report,
there is a statement that does not appear credible:
"Construction of the new trail segment is not expected to result in an increase in the number of
pedestrians crossing Hall Boulevard; however, it may encourage more pedestrians to cross at this
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 9 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
location rather than further south near the library entrance, potentially reducing the potential for
accidents between pedestrians and automobiles."
My response to this is:
1. How does a new trail extension across a road avoid increasing the number of pedestrians
crossing that road?
2. How does encouraging pedestrians to cross a road at a point with no crosswalk instead of
crossing at a controlled intersection with a crossing signal reduce the risk of pedestrian-auto
accidents?
I suspect that Fishman Environmental Services has no qualifications in traffic engineering or
pedestrian safety, and has no business making such claims to the city. While you have addressed
most of the environmental concerns we have raised, this significant safety concern has the potential
to either stop this project or cause a tragedy. We do appreciate your efforts to minimize impacts to
habitat north of Fanno Creek. One alternative that we raised that was not addressed by the Fishman
report is.that the trail use the sidewalk on Omara Street, and cross Hall Boulevard at Omara Street
intersection. This might help with the safety issues and would eliminate the impacts to habitat north
of the creek and east of Hall Blvd.
With these impacts eliminated, great potential for wildlife viewing from the second floor of the library,
using binoculars or spotting scopes is enhanced. We would like the city to consider this potential as
part of the trail plan, since connecting the people of Tigard with nature is one of the objectives of this
trail. Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
Response: Staff agrees with the need for a pedestrian crossing.
The Omara alignment is an on-street alignment. The goal of the City greenway trail plan is to
provide a continuous trail along Fanno Creek as it flows through the City. . The quality of the
expenence is very different between walking along.a street and a greenway trail. The one puts the
walker into close proximity to motorized transportation. The other exposes the walker to wildlife and
flowing streamwater. The same is true of wildlife viewing from the path as compared with wildlife
viewing using binoculars from inside the library. The quality of the experience is diminished and
opportunities for unintended contact with wildlife are reduced. Wildlife viewing is only one benefit of
the trail. Other benefits include health and fitness, reduced reliance on the automobile, reduced
stress, among others. To the extent that a creekside trail is feasible and does not result in the
destruction of significant wildlife habitat, off-street trail segments are preferred to on-street segments.
As indicated elsewhere in this report, a path along Fanno Creek is consistent with the library master
plan and complies with all applicable review standards.
Sue Beilke, Director of the Biodiversity Project of Tigard has reviewed the proposal has
reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments:
Below are my comments for the Fanno Creek Trail Project, located north of the library. I appreciate
the opportunity to provide comments on this project. I wholeheartedly support the extension of the
trail since it will allow citizens to connect with nature and provide wafking, biking, birdwatching and
other activities for folks that improves livability.
I do have several concerns and comments as follows:
First, I have gone to meetings in the past several years with the city where it appeared there would be
a marked crosswalk on Hall as well as possibly a median island where people could go if they needed
to stop due to heavy trafFic. Hall Blvd. as we all know is getting busier by the day, and to cross this
street on foot or via bike can be dangerous. The current proposal is for not even a marked crosswalk
on Hall. I believe this lends itself to an extremely dangerous crossing for citizens and a significant
safety concern for all, both for trail users and motorists. The citv recently installed a crosswalk on SW
North Dakota for the Fanno Creek trail crossing and it has reaily been making a difference. I notice
motorists are now stopping more frequently and are more courteous to people waiting to cross.
In regard to the above safety concerns, a recommendation would be to put route this section of the
trail along Hall to the south so that it comes out by.Omara Street and then users could cross there
and a crosswalk could be installed at this intersection. That would eliminate the unsafe proposed
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 10 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
crossing as it is currently proposed. I think Brian Wegener also has proposed running the trail
through the church/senior center and then crossing Hall at Omara street.
My other major concern is for potential habitat and wildlife impacts due to the present proposed trail
alignment north of the library. Impacts to the vegetated corridor include 3,004 square feet of
permanent impact. This is a large area of permanent impact and it means we lose this much area of
habitat and open space permanently. As we have stated at past meetings for the libra open space
areas, we recommend that the entire area north of the creek be protected for wild�fe, including
specifically addressing habitat needs for the western pond turtle which have been observed here in
the creek and crossing Hall at this very spot where the trail is proposed to cross. The upland portion,
including where the trail alignment is proposed, is one of the last areas of "uplands" that could be
improved for nesting habitat for turtles. Turtles need sparsely vegetated, sunny areas for nesting
that are quiet and away from human disturbance or they won't use the area. If a trail goes througFi
this area it will be used heavily, wildlife will not stay in this area because of noise and other impacts
that humans cause. One of the main reasons the library site was supported by citizens was that the
city was able to acquire a large open space tract. This was very exciting to many citizens since we
felt it was a olden opportunity.for the city to protect and improve habitat for a variety of species such
as the pond�urtle. Since the city did use the pond turtle as a target species when getting fhe �rant for
this pro�ect from the Oregon State Parks, it seems appropriate that we also provide and then improve
habitat for the turtles by protectin� certain areas for them to ensure their long term survival. �thout
adequate nesting habitat turtles will not survive for the long term. By protecting the entire area north
of the library for wildlife, we believe there will be a greater opportunity for wildlife viewing from south
of the creek on the trail and from the library itself using spotting scopes and binoculars.
Thanks again for the opportunity to,comment. We appreciate all of the hard work and effort staff has
put into this effort to provide recreational and wildlife viewing opportunities to the citizens of Tigard.
Response: The comment regarding the need for a marked crosswalk is responded to elsewhere in
this report. .
According to the Hearings Officer Final Report (CUP 2203-0001-, Tigard Library), "there is no
substantial evidence in the record that the construction of a trail along Fanno Creek above the
averaae annual flood elevation would adverselv affect the turtle habitat if conducted consistent with
applicable city, ODOL and Clean Water Services ("CWS") standards."
Fishman Environmental Services provided the following comments regarding the Northwestern Pond
Turtle and the trail:
The northwestern pond turtle (Emys /' Clemmys marmorata marmorafa) is not a listed federal or
state species; it is a federal Species ofi Concern�SOC) and a state critical (SC) species. A SOC is a
species that is being considered for federal listing; a SC species is a species for which listing as
threatened or endangered is pending or may be appropriate if immediate conservation actions are not
taken.
"The northwestern pond turtle prefers quiet.water in small lakes, marshes, and sluggish streams and
rivers. It will also inhabit man-made or modified watercourses such as reservoirs, canals, farm ponds
and sewa�e treatment ponds. The pond turtle is a dietary generalist and opportunist with seasonal
shifts in diet related to prey availability (Holland 1991). It requires basking sites, such as logs, rocks,
mud banks or cattail mats, for thermoregulation (Csuti 1997). �
The northwestern pond turtle has been observed in the vicinity of the project area. An adult and a
Juvenile turtle were observed along Fanno Creek on the west side of Hall Boulevard south of the former
Tigard Library, and in 2000 a larg e adult ond turtle was observed crossing Hall Boulevard from north of
the new library site east of HaIT to the �ormer library site (Sue Beilke pers. comm.). The project site
contains patches of suitable turtle habitat: sluggish water and basking structures, shallow water ponds
with potential forage, and upland cover for over-wintenng. However, habitat is limited by accessibility due
to surroundmg roadways and development, and physical features such as the incised, vertical banks of
Fanno Creek and the dense reed canary grass, blackberry, and scrub-shrub which can be difficult to
traverse. No �ond turtles were observed durin� recent field visits of the project site, but the time of year
and construction on the new library could have influenced observations.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 11 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Since pond turtles were observed as recently as 2000 in the vicinity of the project site, the proJ ect
design includes measures to minimize impacts to turtles. An aircraft cable-type fence will be installed
on both sides of the trail from Hall Boulevard to Fanno Creek to discourage trail users from leaving
the trail. A dense shrub barrier consisting of tall Oregon grape and Wood's rose will be installed east
of the fence to further discourage trail users from leaving the trail. Installation of the fence and dense
shrub barrier will minimize the potential for human disturbance to turtles and other wildlife using the
wetlands and Fanno Creek riparian area located east of the trail."
Modifications to the trail alignment north of Fanno Creek have been made to minimize the potential
for impacts to turtle habitat since several preliminary trail designs were initially presented in the
Fanno Creek Park Master Plan Summary (Murase Associates, May 2003). All of the trail designs in
the master plan extended further east into the Fanno Creek Park site than the currently proposed trail
alignment. In addition, the earlier trail designs also incorporated a series of smaller side trails and
boardwalks that would have provided access to the ponds and streams on the site but would have
resulted in greater natural resource impacts. The currently proposed trail alignment,has been shifted
closer to Hall Boulevard than initially proposed to avoid impacting wetlands and wildlife habitat.
The potential wildlife and habitat impacts of the trail are the minimum necessary to install the trail.
These impacts,will be compensated for by the restoration of the required vegetated corridor to good
condition. Additionally, the master plan for the area calls for the future restoration of the parks' some
nine area to historic conditions. The trail will improve turtle safety by providing a partial barrier to the
crossing of Hall Boulevard, which, based on the crossing event described in the Fishman comments,
poses a threat to turtle safety.
Notwithstanding this, staff agrees that the northwest pond turtle's status as a federal SOC and state
SC highlights .the need for a formal wildlife assessment and will include this as a recommended
approval condition.
John Frewing, a private citizen, has reviewed the proposal has reviewed the proposal and has
offered the following comments:
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Fanno Creek Trail Project in the vicinity of
Tigard's public library. Please consider the comments below and modify the proposal accordingly:
1. I question whether the proposed.project is consistent with the goals of the Fanno Creek Park
Master Plan. Such master plan includes the following purposes: a trail system that provides
accessibility for people of all ages and physical abilities; preserve, enhance and restore natural
resources; a safe and secure park.. The uncontrolled crossing of Hall Blvd seems to limit
accessibility and safety. The incursion of the project into the turtle habitat area on the north
side of Fanno Creek, east of Hall Blvd seems to damage already scarce natural resources in
the area.
Response: The 2003 Fanno Creek Park Master P/an map includes a trail alignment that extends
further east into northern portion of the library property than does the alignment proposed in the
present application. The proposed alignment pulls the alignment back toward Hall Boulevard in
order to minimize the trail's impact on the natural area. The same is true of the "preferred alignment"
for this segment of the Fanno depicted in the 2003 Metro Fanno Creek Greenway Trar!Action Plan.
This alignment extends east-west through the length of the northern area and also intrudes into
wetland area. The alignment under consideration avoids all wetlands.
Also to be noted is that the "natural area" within the propose trail alignment is not in pristine condition.
According to the CWS natural resource assessment, the area in question is degraded. The area is a
former horse pasture,covered with nonnative pasture grasses. The park, master plan calls for its
future restoration to historic, pre-settlement conditions, but its present condition is an area where the
soil has been compacted by years of livestock grazing and where few native species survive.
The issue raised regarding access and safety is discussed below.
2. Although not stated explicitly, I presume the hearing is a Type II hearing under the Tigard
code, since it involves a sensitive lands review. My comment is that all provisions of the code
which apply to a Type II hearing and decision should apply. My first impression is that I don't
see a traffic study and impact study.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 12 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Response:. The applicable procedure is a Type III hearing conducted by a Hearings OfFicer. The
permit application, beginning on page 12, includes a narrative addressing 'f8.390.0408.2.(e): Impact
Study. A traffic study is not required because the trail segment does not impact the vehicular
transportation system. It provides an additional access and route for bicycles and pedestrians.
Although pathways also are part of the transportation system, a traffic study is. not usually
requirement for their construction. In the case of the present pro�ect, a pedestrian crossing study will
be required.
3. The application material prepared by Fishman does not appear to consider compliance with
TCDC 18.360.060, Minor Modifications. This section has a number of approval criteria which
must be met. The notice of hearing does not identify Section 360 as applicable to this project.
Response: The Notice of Public Hearing correctly omits 18.360 as including applicable review
criteria. The reason is that the ori inal application, the one proposed for modification, was a
Conditional Use Permit proposal (CU� 2003-0001). Therefore, the Conditional Use modification
criteria would apply. These are addressed beginning on page 5 of the application narrative and
elsewhere in this staff report.
4. Section 18.810.030, regarding street design, of the Tigard code states that no development
shall accur unless the streets adjacent to the development meet the standards of this chapter.
I question whether Hall Blvd, adjacent to this development, meets the current street standards
for this busy street, including width, curbs, sidewalks with planter strip, crosswalks, etc. The
notice of hearing does not include Section 810 as one of the applicable review criteria. It
should be reissued because of this serious shortcoming.
Response: The present application is a minor modification to the COT Public Library project
(CUP20030001). The original proposal addressed the provisions of Section 18.810. The final order
issued by the Hearings Officer dictates in condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is
making a continuin�, diligent, good faith to identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along
Fanno Creek that will not be below the elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal
fulfills this condition by defining a suitable alignment for the trail through the library property.
Ac�Qr�ling to Engineering st�ff, traffic studies a.re nQt normally require� for trails, as rel�tP� t� the tra�!
rig ht-of-way.
5. I don't think the buffer requirements of Section 360 are met, considering the purpose of
providing buffer near this pro ect. The beneficiaries of buffer are the small animals which live
near Fanno Creek and its we�lands; without a very tight fence, the domesticated animals which
accompany people will invade the area north of Fanno Creek and east of Hall Blvd. An aircraft
cable barrier and plantings are proposed; it is not stated whether this is a single aircraft cable,
or multiple cables strung horizontally. I suggest instead a 4-foot high chain fink fence with 4"
clearance above ground, in conJ unction witFi plantings as buffer. The point is that this is not a
common buffer for human needs, but a buffer which must meet the needs of small animals,
with particular needs (nesting, forage, isolation from humans) known only to experts. Because
this pro�ect brings many more people near the natural features north of Fanno Creek and east
of Hall, the entire east side of Hall Blvd north of Fanno Creek, to the school bus parking lot,
should be protected with the above suggested buffer. The entire frontage along Fanno Creek
should be protected at its buffer boundary with fencing meeting CWS standards.
Response: The buffering requirements included in Section 360 (under 360.090.4) are generic and
apply to buffering and screening between different types of land uses based on tF�eir zoning
designation. The specific buffer standards applicable to protecting natural areas, independent of the
zonin� or type of land use involved, are the CWS vegetated corridor standards. These are
administered by CWS and are incorporated into the CWS Design Standards Manual, adopted by
reference into the Tigard Development Code. The applicant has provided a CWS Service Provider
Letter, dated January 2005, documenting compliance with these standards. The applicant has
provided a revised fetter that reflects a reduced disturbance area and less impact to existing
vegetation resulting from the trail's construction than previously proposed.
The proposed aircraft cable-type fence is designed to meeting FEMA requirements and includes 3
horizontal cables spaced 1 foot apart. This fence design was modeled in the no-rise report
submitted by the applicant and is part of the "no-rise" certification provided by Pacific Water
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 13 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Resources. According. to City Engineering staff, a very tight or chain link fence would impede flow
(by retaining water-carried debris) and not meet the flood hydraulic analysis no-rise standards for a
structure situated in the floodplain.
6. When performing work in wetlands, state requirements call for an alternatives analysis, which
is not done in this application. I believe a feasible alternative with least impact on waters of the
state is the one suggested by Brian Wegener in his recent comments to you -- improvements
along a Fanno Creek Trail se�ment which leaves the stream corridor near the Senior Center,
then proceeds east along O Mara Street (some improvements to church and residential
properties might be appropnate city expenditures) and crossing of Hall Blvd at a protected site
(stop light, crosswalk, lighting, etc.).
Response: The proposed trail alignment avoids all wetlands.
7. The notice of hearing does not identify TCDC 18.385 regarding Sensitive Land Permits as one
of the applicable approval criteria; it should.
Response: The purpose of chapter 385 is to identify the types of permits included in the
development code. The respective criteria that apply to the identified permit types are included in the
various 700 chapters. In the case of Sensitive Land Permits, the applicable approval criteria are
listed in Chapter 775, Sensitive Lands. The present proposal addresses the cnteria laid out in 775.
8. The provision of viewing structures is inconsistent with maintanence of the zero-rise flood
plain. The proposed structure (and existing, unpermitted structure) are perpendicular to the
direction of stream flow and present an obstacle to flow and debris flowing in the stream during
flood events. The viewing structures should be deleted. �
Response: The viewing structure referenced is not part of the present proposal. The scope of the
proposal is limited to the installation of a pedestrian trail and includes no other improvements.
9. In earlier comments, I have suggested a cantilevered footbridge on the west side of the
existing Hall Blvd motor bridge as an alternative for the proposed project which has less impact
on natural features of the area and state waters. Your staff analysis simqly says that ODOT
didn't like the idea. There is no reason for such dislike for the project; Tigard should pursue
this option at.least to finding out the reason for ODOT dislike; perhaps there are modifications
which will satisfy ODOT concerns.
Response: The existing vehicular bridge includes a marked bike lane and narrow sidewalk on either
side of the road. A pedestrian bridge cantilevered or free-standing adjacent to the existing vehicular
bridge would provide basically the same function. It would be more of an enhancement to the
sidewalk on Hall as opposed to a continuation of the trail. The Engineering Department did look at
the feasibility of a cantilevered or free-standing pedestrian bridge ad�acent the vehicular bridge. It is
doubtful thaf the existing bridge would provide adequate support for an attached structure or would be
allowed by ODOT. Moreover, although not scheduled or funded as yet, the existing �DOT-owned
bridge is substandard in terms of width and height and is high�y likely to be replaced by a new
structure at some unspecified time in the future. Any attachments to the bridge would be removed.
According to preliminary field study, the length of a free-standing span would be in the range of 150
feet, with an estimate cost in the $300-400,000 range. This excludes the cost of acquiring private
prope needed to install the span. As stated elsewhere, the City would prefer that the trail continue
along�anno Creek versus the on-street alignment. The preferred alignment of the trail is the route
depicted in the present proposal. Because of that, the City has not investigated this suggested on-
street alternative to the trail alignment beyond an on-site meeting with ODOT to view and discuss
pedestrian-friendly improvements to the Hall Boulevard bridge.
10. I disagree with the Fishman conclusion (re 18.330.020.B 2) that a greenway trail is not a
change.from the approved use of this trac� for a public library The impact is that this chan�e
is a ma�or modification rather than a minor modification and different rules and approval criteria
apply. Similarly this project clearl changes access ways and parking areas where off-site
traffic �eg that traffic on Hall Blvd� would be affected. A dictionary meaning of words not
special y defined in the Tigard code is the standard in this regard.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 14 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Response: As noted earlier, the final order approving the library Conditional Use application issued
by the Hearings Officer dictates in condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is making a
continuing, diligent, good faith to identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along Fanno
Creek that will not be below the elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal fulfills
this condition by defining a suitable alignment for the trail through the library property. The applicant
clearly has demonstrated by a point by point response to the Conditional Use review criteria that the
proposed project is a minor and not a ma�or modification.
11. The proposed project does not meet the requirement for campus-like industrial uses, ie it is not
pedestrian friendly, specifically the crossin� of Hall Blvd is not pedestrian friendly. The project
includes this crossing, as its description indicates that it connects with the existing Fanno
Creek Trail on the west side of Hall Blvd.
Response: Because all of the City-owned industrial land located north of the creek is classified as
floodplain and wetlands, it is not suitable for light industrial development.. It is, however, suitable for
a greenway trail. The crossing of Hall Boulevard is addressed elsewhere in this report.
12. The project description (Fishman) states that a (future) grading plan "will enable the trail to be
designed and constructed to avoid any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year
flood". This conclusory statement purports to meet 18.775.070 B 3, but actually improperly
defers an important decision to a later stage when public participation will not be available.
The engineenng to show no increase in water surface elevation should be done before this
project is approved.
Response: The required certification has been provided by the applicant in the form of a hydraulic
analysis performed by Pacific Water Resources. A copy of this study,, titled No-Rise Certification:
Pedestrian Bndge Crossing of Fanno Creek Below Hall Boulevard, is included in the Planning
Division proJ ect file and is available for public inspection. The study concludes that the "proposed
project meets the criteria for a `no-rise' certification."
13. Since 18.790 is one of the approval criteria, a tree plan is required. All elements of the tree
plan sk�ould be provided prior to the hearing.
Response: This criterion is addressed within this staff report.. A tree inventory portraying the types
and diameter of trees within and proximate to the trail corridor is include in the project file. Only three
small, approximately 2-inch diameter trees, are proposed for removal. The vegetated corridor plan
approved by CWS includes the planting of 24 native, half inch diameter trees along the trail route.
14. The Fishman application for sensitive lands permit, at page 12, states that this project will
result in 'reducing the nsk for accidents between pedestrians and road users.' I disagree. The
Fanno Creek Trail has hundreds of users each day and more pedestrian traffic crossing busy
Hall Blvd will result. A traffic study bjr a certified professional should be developed to
determine what the traffic impact will be. The code requirements for an impact study
(18.390.040 B.2.e) include the requirement that it "shall propose improvements necessary to
meet City standards . . ."; the present submittal does not do such and it should.
Response: This comment is responded to elsewhere in this report.
�
` Au ust 15 2005
. uan o s
Asso �at anner
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 15 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
��
Au ust 15 2005
. ic ar ew o
Planning M n er
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 16 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT, STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
.
NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENh.,��ER,VENDOR OR SELLER:
THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,
IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER.
CITY OF TIGARD
Community�Devefopmertt
CITY OF TIGARD Sh°�'�A�tterCommunity
HOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY
AUGUST 22. 2005 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER AT 13125 SW
HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION:
FILE NOS.: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2005-00016
MINOR MODIFICATION (MMD) 2005-00015
FILE TITLE: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
APPLICANT/ Ci� of Tigard
OWNER: 13 25 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a
10-foot-wide paved, multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail
segment is approximately 1,090 feet in length, approximately 700 feet of which are
located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a pedestrian bridge
crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over
Fanno Creek. Minor alteration of the floodway will be conducted to place the
pedestrian bridge. The applicant is also requesting Minor Modification approval to
a previously granted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-00001/City of Tigard
Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site.
LOCATION: The proposed project is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east of SW
Hall Boulevard, north and east of the existing Tigard Library, and south of the
Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The path will connect to the existing Fanno
Creek trail network. The path will connect to the existing Fanno Creek trail
network. WCTM 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200.
ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district.is designed
to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050
square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted
conditionally.
I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations
for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g.,
restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only
those light industnal uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor,
vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development
review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to
insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and
pedestria n-frie nd ly.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775
and 18.790.
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF
CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURES ADOPTED BY
THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL.
. �
ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICE:, r�RE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITh ...rPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL
ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED
BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR (503)
684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO
THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS.
ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN
WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC
HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT
PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND
WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER
MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON
THE APPLICATION.
IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION LESS THAN SEVEN (7)' DAYS PRIOR
TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF
THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY
REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A
REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING
(ORS 197.763(6).
INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE
TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR
DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND
THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE
REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. '
FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE
HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE
HEARINGS AUTHORITY AN OPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE
LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE.
ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR
INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25C) PER PAGE, OR
THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS
PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO
COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25�) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE
CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER DUANE ROBERTS AT (503)
639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223, OR BY E-MAIL TO
duane@ci.tigard.or.us.
v�a�a�r nwr
S1R2005-00016
MMD2005-00015
FANNO CREEK
� TRAII PROJECT
L
m
, .. .. ,
, F � -
V '� N��-�"'-.+7��.
i �
N
� � �
_ � �� g �.,.�
��o�
�;�a�_.._
A1ud�1�
rl�n�.����r
^ 08/15/2005 16: 52 5032241851 PAGE 02
, , • � �ACEIV�
� File Number
GleanWat�er Sezvices AUG 1510�5 4714
Our commitrtlent is clear. �
SwCA Portk,nd Clean Water Service�
AMENDED Service Provider Letter
Jurisdiction Tigard Date January 25, 200�L
Map �Tax Lot 2s1o2DAb0640,2s102DD00100 Owner City nf Tigard
Site Address E of SW Hall BI�d and N &S Contact S��Y��)amin,Fishman Errv.Serv.
Of Fanno Cneek. Address 434 NW 6 Ave Ste 304
Tigard, OR Po�la�d, OR 97209
P�oposed Ackivity Trail Phone 503-224-Q333X230
This fornt and the attached cflnditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in
accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standarcls(R80 04�9),
YES NO YES NO ^�
Natural ResQUrces � ❑ Atternatives Analysis ❑ �
Assessment(NRA) Required
Submitted Section 3.02.6)
District Site Vsit n Tier 1 Altematives Anal rs
Date: 120/05 � U � ❑ �
Cancur with NRAIor � � �'ier 2 Altematives Analysis � �
submitted information
Sensitive Area Present
On-Site � � Tier 3 Alternatives Analysis � �
Sensitive Area Present � � Vegetated Corridor ❑ �
Off-Site Averaging
Vegeta#ed Corridor � ❑ Vegetated Corrid�r � �^
Present On-Site Mitigation Required
Width of Vegetated $0�T On-Site Mitigation � ��
Corridor(feet} 3,004 SF
Condition of Vegetated Degraded Off-Site Mitigation � �
Corridar
Enhancement Requfred � � Planting Plan Attaci�ed � �� ` r
Encroachme�t into Enhancement/restoration Concurrent with site
Vegetated Corridor � ❑ cempietfon date developrrient
(Section 3.02.4)
Type and Square Footage pathway 3,004 SF� Geotechnical Report � ���
of�naroachment required
Allowed Use � � �
(Seotion 3.02,4) � path � Conditions Attached
This Seniice Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluabe and protect
wa#er quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your
property,
Page 1 of 4
08/15/2005 16:52 5032241851 PAGE 03
File Number
a��a
In order to comply with Clean Water Services (the District) water qualixy
protection requirements the project mus#comply with the following co�nditions:
1. No structures, development,construction activities,gardens, lawns, application of chemicals,
uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregcn Departmenf cf�nvironmentaf
Quality, pet waskes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be pem�itted within
the sensitive area which may negafively fmpact wafer quality, except those allawed by Section
3.02.3.
2. Na structures, development, construc�t;vn activities, gardens, lawns,appfication of chemicals,
unc4ntained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of�n�ironmental
�uality, pet wastPS, dumping ef materials of any kind, or other acfirities shall be perrriitted within
#he vegetated carridor which may negatively impact water quality, excepE those allowed by
Sectivn 3.02.4. Pathway allowed by this S�L.
3- Prior ta any site clearing, grading or construction the vegetated corridor and water quality
sensitive areas shall be surveyed,staked,and temporarily fenc.ed per approved plan, During
construction the vegetated corridor shall remafn fenced and undi$turbed except as allowed by
Sec�on 3.02.5 and per approved plans.
4. Prior to any activity within the sensidve area, the applicant shall gain authorization for the project
from the Oregon Division of State I�ands(DSL) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), The
applicant shall provide tha Disfrict with copies of all pSL and USACE project authorfaation
perm its.
5• An approved Oregon Department of Forestry Notificafion is required far one or more trees
harvested for sale, trade, or barter, on any non-federal lands within the State of Oregon.
6• Appropriate Best Management Practicc�(BMP's) for Erosion Control, in aceordance wit►t the
CWS Erosion Contral Technfcal Guldance Manuaf shall be used prior to, during, and following
earth disturbing activities.
7• Pnor to consiruction, a 5tormwater Connection Permit from the District or its designee is required
pursuant to Ordinance 27, Section 4.B,
8- The District or City/County may require an easement over the vegetated carridor conveying
storrn, surFace water management, and/or sanitary sewer rights to the District or City that woufd
prevent the owner of the vegetated corridor from activities and uses inconsistent with the purpose
of the corridor and any easements therein.
9- Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall camply with Secfion 3.13 of R8o 04-9,
10. Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited ta the greatest axtent practicaBle.
11. Removal of invasive non-native species by hand is required in all vegefated carridors rated
'9aod". Replanting is required in any cleared areas larger than 25 square feet.
12_ Should fina!developm�nt plans differ signiflcantly from those submitted for revfew by tttie District,
the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and ff necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider
Letter.
Page 2 of 4
08/15/2005 16:52 5032241851 PAGE 04
File Number
4774
SPecIAi coNDiT1oNS
��• The vegetatec}corridar width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minirnum of 50
feet wide, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive ar�ea.
14, For vegetated corrfdors SO feet wide or greater,the first 50 feet closest te the sensiave area shall
be equal to �r beE�er than a'goori"corridor condition as deflned in Section 3.02.7, Table 3.2.
15. Ciean Water Services shall be natified 72 haurs prior to the start and comp{etion of
enhancementlrestorat;�n activlties. EnhancemenUrest�r��n aciivities shall comply with the
guidefines provided in Landscape Requirements(R&0 Oa-9:Ap�ndix D).
16- Prior to fnstallation of ptant matenals, a11 invasive vegetation wifhin the vegetated corridor shall be
removed. During removal of Invasive vegetation care shall be taken tv minimize impacfs to
existing native Vees and shrub species.
�7• Enhancementlres�oration of the vegetated corrider shall be provided in accordance with the
attached planting plan and R&0 04-9,Appendix D. .
18• Prior to any site clearing, grading or constructian, the applicant shall provide#he District with the
required ve�getated oorridor enhancemenfJrestoration plan in compllance with R&O 04-9.
�9• Main#enance and monitoring requirements shafl comply with Sectlon 2.11.2 of R&O 04-9. If at any
time during the warranty periad th�landscaping faUs belvw the 8p°r6 survival level, the�wner
shall reinstall alf deficient plantfng at the next appropriafe planting opportunity and the two year
maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting,
20• Perfnrmance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Sec�ion 2.OS.2, Tabl�2-1
and Section 2.10,Table 2-2,
21• For any developments, which create multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownershi the
Disb�ict shall �equire that the vegetated coRidor and the sensitive area be contained in a sep�rate
tract 7he tract plat shaN include language protecting the vegetated corridor and sensitive areas.
22. The water quality swale and detention pond shall be planted with District approved native
species, and designed to blend into the natul�al surrpundings.
C�NDITIQNS TO BE INCLUDED ON CONST}�UCTION Pl.ANS
23. Final construction lans shall include landsca e lans. Plans shall include in the details a
description of the methods fer removal and control of exotic s
cqndition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preservecl, and �rsta ation�
methods for plant materials. Ptantings shail be tagged{nr dormant s�,ason identficallon. 7ags#o
rernain on pfant mateRal after planting for monftonng purposes.
Page 3 of 4
08/15/2665 16:52 5632241851 PAGE 05
� ' Fife Number
4�14
24. A Malntenance plan shall be�ncluded on final plans including methods, responsible'party
cvntact infarmation, and dates{minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September�0).
25. FEnal construcEian plans shall clearly depict the focatlun and dimensions of the sensttive
area and the vegetated corridor(indlcating good, margpnal,ar degraded condlticn}_
Sensitive area boundaries sha(i be marlcad in the field.
26. Protection of the vegetated carridors and assocfated sensitive areas shall be prvvided by the
installation of rmanent fencfna and signage between the development and the outer limits vf
the vegetated corriclors. Fencing details to be included on final construc#ion plans.
This Service Provider Let#er is not valid unless CW3-anaroved slte nlan is attached.
Plea9e call (603) 681-5106 with any questiens,
' / � �� J��
r .`�:.i��.�.. E.`; . /,�t;,c.t� .�.�
Damon W. Reische
Environmental Plan Review
A#tachments (1)
Page 4 af 4
� m
• m
�
• �
. v,
- - �
N
m
m
• LE6END v�
Tota! aareo of�o�A = 1T,780 SF -
-..t z-� ��..,r, ���rv`,.,.�'�i, � m
Permm+ent vegetofed carlabr �mpact �raa = .J OD4 SF
� rofa� con�tiucEion sdogrng oieo = 5.650 SF �'"�"��'� ������� �
N
F �wy.rwr m„ee,• �w s�tr..e..�a.�+�+ca.
Tofal vegelo�ed ewrfdw miliqollon mrao � J 00� 5i •
.�, �, � �. � — � `. �
�,.�.... .�..��-1 c,�.:�5 Ei2 F;l�. '��� � — � r . . N
r.wi , ppp�pyed � / � N
� R°°0° � �j C n 4Valer S`e`� � ` J / —� � �
� 1�of �'�svw�++�C+�� � iar�s..v ) OD
y�� �q. 61', �� adle e� � .' i. ..+r..s.�«. � _ cn
�.w.c�.+,Y+.I�r � � r-�
�•�Y eN�Y-O'n�a �. N wt ' � � _ / •, y . �� �n+aw ar+.w w �
v :�� � . � alfJyw�W
� . �
i
� �
iYPICAL PAililrAY SECTIQN l �
� , '. � � -
sr.ru_ �•-im , - '•' •\• ���+a.ia►r , •f— .
��. �pN� — — ' `��;; ... '+"�`s �.'� '.�
� - \ 1 ',� �T •r ,•�• i...a � .
� � .� ,,4' .
� ::. -- •- ,/' , , �"` �• • • • ' • '
� � •••• �� •�• ,lY'Cwnh.tAw y �• ' �l �1 ` - .
........�• .• .. . .. � / !• �Nwwf - ' " 4 1� l. .
..�:.�._� �', .... ... -•.. . .'�/ • •J• WmwN -
.:, ��}`. . ...• � .. ...__- � r���~ � �1 ?;
. ��m� ��. ���;:: =-.p �_ _ - �1; :`
; �' .., ass�� � 1� iao rw�aa�
:; :. � w.�w[u�rM �;� .
w ��«bw•.' �� � .
�'� ' � r,m � ♦ ..�� .w �4-.
l _ �'`� � � :��.tilr.'�– �-r � �
_-- .��,,, • � :'.a:S!': 11 1
. , `V— . ��:' i� :.�_
M� � �� EMY.rr `
{t�'.�. _'. .� �fj� 'J � �•7'C. �� • '
1. ..... ._. .`� ��� � � - ` 'y1 LL'• �_•' ' .
1
I l 1 ! �
. „�►�`�"� - D
� a � �
cs.�r..n.., �i�"�"� m
.«-uev°s� �
oi
__ --�------------------------ - ---------
Duane Roberts - FW: Ciry of Tigard pedestrian path on Hall Blvd ___ _ _ _ _ � Page 1`
.
� �
From: <Sam.H.HUNAIDI@odot.state.or.us>
To: <duane@ci.tigard.or.us>
Date: 8/12/2005 3:37:07 PM
Subject: FW: City of Tigard pedestrian path on Hall Blvd
See comments below. Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Sam H. Hunaidi
Assistant District Manager
Tel#: (503) 229-5002 Ext. 229
Fax#: (503) 297-6058
ODOT- District 2A
6000 SW Raab Rd.
Portland, OR 97221
mailto:Sam.H.Hunaidi@odot.state.or.us
<mailto:Sam.H.Hunaidi@odot.state.or.us>
Web Site: http://www.odot.state.or.us/<http://www.odot.state.or.us/>
-----Original Message-----
From: CHRISTOPHER Basil R
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 3:10 PM
To: HUNAIDI Sam H
Cc: SAWYER Fredrick A
Subject: RE: City of Tigard pedestrian path on Hall Bivd
Sam,
Shouldn't this study address how pedestrians and bicyciists will get across
Hall Blvd. where the path connects? Omaha St. might serve as a valuable
lesson here (poor planning).
Regarding the section marked Transportation system -The study reads; "...
new trail segment is not expected to result in an increase in the number of
pedestrians crossing Hall Blvd....".
I disagree with this siatement for the following reasons. One point of
building a path that connects to the library is to encourage library users
to walk or bike to the library instead of driving. I think iYs reasonable
to assume that some people will do this (or why build a path to the
library). I think it's also reasonable to assume some young persons who
don't drive, wi11 be attracted to walk and cross here to get to the library.
Given these assumptions, I think it's more likely the new path will result
in an increase in pedestrians crossing Hall Blvd. in this section.
Thanks,
Basil Christopher
Bicycle & Pedestrian Coordinator
ODOT Region 1
-----Original Message-----
From: SAWYER Fredrick A
Duane Roberts - FW: Ciry of Tigard pedestrian path on Hall Bivd Page 2
�
►
.
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 20054:39 PM
To: HUNAIDI Sam H; CHRISTOPHER Basil R
Subject: RE: City of Tigard pedestrian path on Hall Bivd
The project looks fine. We may need to discuss the crossing of the
highway during the design phase. The crossing is not inciuded in the plan
and can be addressed later. Fred
-----Original Message-----
From: HUNAIDI Sam H
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 11:44 AM
To: CHRISTOPHER Basil R; SAWYER Fredrick A
Subject: City of Tigard pedestrian path on Hall Blvd
Hi,
I will be faxing a copy of the City's request for the above
subject, please review it and let me know if you have any comments.
Thanks,
Sam H. Hunaidi
Assistant District Manager
Tel#: (503) 229-5002 Ext. 229
Fax#: (503) 297-6058
ODOT- District 2A
6000 SW Raab Rd.
Portland, OR 97221
maiito:Sam.H.Hunaidi@odot.state.or.us
<mailto:Sam.H.Hunaidi@odot.state.or.us>
Web Site: http://www.odot.state.or.us/
<http://www.odot.state.or.us/>
« File: HUNAIDI Sam H.vcf»
�
. �
REQUEST FOR COMML�S CITYOFTIG4RD
�ommunity•Development
ShapingA BetterCommunity
�
DATE: luhl 22,2005 �O �
T0: Rab Murchi Public Works Pro ect En ineer
FROM: Ci�of Tig�rd Plannin9 Di�ision
STAFF CONTACT: Duane Roberts Rssociate Planner[x24441
one: 1
SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLRI 2005-00016/MINOR MODIFICATIOM[MMDI 2005-00015
➢ FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECTQ
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-wide
paved, multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail segment is approximately 1,090 lineal
feet, approximately 700 feet of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a
Cedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existin Hall Boulevard vehicular bndge over Fanno
reek. Minor aiteration of the floodway will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is
also requesting Minor Modification approval to a previously granted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-
00001/City of Tigard Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site. LOCAI'ION: The
proposed project is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east of SW Hall Boulevard, north of the
existing Tigard Library, and south of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The path will connect to the
existing Fanno Creek trail network. WCTM 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and
200. ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to
accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of
civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning
district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale
commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like settin�. Only
those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the f-
P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, desi n and development standards in the I-P
zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be we�integrated, attractively landscaped, and
pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters
18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775 and 18.790.
Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's StatemenUPlans for your review. From information supplied by various
departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: AUGUST 5, 2005. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate letter to return your comments. If vou are unable to respond bv the above date, please phone the staff
contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any
questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
_ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
Please contact of our office.
Please refer to the enclosed letter.
_ Written comments provided below:
��S�a t �,.. i- s�_c.�r � ��rC ��r� �o�,-,,-.,-,�..-�--
� f"t c,c� -?� d� i �l��c��r-1i---�--
� Q� .��- ( �s�I�¢w,
�
Name 8 Number of Person(s)Commenting: .
�`' �a
� � REQUEST FOR COMMEH.,, CITYOfTIGARD
('ommurrity•UeceCopment
S�iapingA Better Community
DATE: luhl 22,2005
T0: Matt Stine,Urban forester/Public WorKs Annex
FROM: City of Ti9ard Planning�ivision
STAFF CONTACT: Duane Roderts Associate Planner[x24441
one: ax: 1
SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLRI 2005-00016/MINOR MODIFICATION[MM�I 2005-00015
➢ FANNO CREEK TRAII PROlECTQ
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-wide
paved, multi-use traif within a portion of the floodplain. The trail segment is approximately 1,090 lineal
feet, approximately 700 feet of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a
Cedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existin Hall Boulevard vehicular bndge over Fanno
reek. Minor alteration ofthe floodway will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is
also req uesting Minor Modification approval to a previously granted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-
00001/City of Tigard Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site. LOCATION: The
proposed projecf is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east of SW Hall Boulevard, north of the
existing Tigard Library, and south of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The path will connect to the
existing Fanno Creek trail network. WCTM 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and
200. ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to
accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of
civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning
district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale
commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only
those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-
P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P
zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be wefl-integrated, attractively landscaped, and
pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters
18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775 and 18.790.
Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's StatemenUPlans for your review. From information supplied by various
departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: AUGUST 5, 2005. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond bv the above date, please phone the staff
contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any
questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
� We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
_ Please contact of our office.
Please refer to the enclosed letter.
_ Written comments provided below:
Name 8� Number of Person(s)Commenting: � t � �
'_Duane Roberts -,Fanno Creek Trail __i Page 1
, � _
From: "John Frewing" <jfrewing@teleport.com>
To: "Duane Roberts" <DUANE@ci.tigard.or.us>
Date: 8/8/2005 2:29:09 PM
Subject: Fanno Creek Trail
Duane:
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Fanno Creek Trail Project in the vicinity of
Tigard's public library. Please consider the comments below and modify the proposal accordingly:
1 I question whether the proposed project is consistent with the goals of the Fanno Creek Park Master
Plan. Such master plan includes the following purposes: a trail system that provides accessibility for
people of all ages and physical abilities; preserve, enhance and restore natural resources; a safe and
secure park. The uncontrolled crossing of Hall Blvd seems to limit accessibility and safety. The incursion
of the project into the turtle habitat area on the north side of Fanno Creek, east of Hall Blvd seems to
damage already scarce natural resources in the area.
2: Although not stated explicitly, I presume the hearing is a Type II hearing under the Tigard code, since it
involves a sensitive lands review. My comment is that all provisions of the code which apply to a Type II
hearing and decision should apply. My first impression is that I don't see a traffic study and impact study.
3. The application material prepared by Fishman does not appear to consider compliance with TCDC
18.360.060, Minor Modifications. This section has a number of approval criteria which must be met. The
notice of hearing does not identify Section 360 as applicable to this project.
4. Section 18.810.030, regarding street design, of the Tigard code states that no development shall occur
unless the streets adjacent to the development meet the standards of this chapter. I question whether
Hall Blvd, adjacent to this development, meets the current street standards for this busy street, including
width, curbs, sidewalks with planter strip, crosswalks, etc. The notice of hearing does not include Section
810 as one of the applicable review criteria. It should be reissued because of this serious shortcoming.
5. I don't think the buffer requirements of Section 360 are met, considering the purpose of providing buffer
near this project. The beneficiaries of buffer are the small animals which live near Fanno Creek and its
wetlands; without a very tight fence, the domesticated animals which accompany people will invade the
area north of Fanno Creek and east of Hall Blvd. An aircraft cable barrier and plantings are proposed; it is
not stated whether this is a single aircraft cable, or multiple cables strung horizontally. I suggest instead a
4-foot high chain link fence with 4"clearance above ground, in conjunction with plantings as buffer. The
point is that this is not a common buffer for human needs, but a buffer which must meet the needs of
small animals, with particular needs(nesting, forage, isolation from humans) known only to experts.
Because this project brings many more people near the natural features north of Fanno Creek and east of
Hall, the entire east side of Hall Blvd north of Fanno Creek, to the school bus parking lot, should be
protected with the above suggested buffer. The entire frontage along Fanno Creek should be protected at
its buffer boundary with fencing meeting CWS standards.
6. When performing work in wetlands, state requirements call for an alternatives analysis, which is not
done in this application. I believe a feasible alternative with least impact on waters of the state is the one
suggested by Brian Wegener in his recent comments to you --improvements along a Fanno Creek Trail
segment which leaves the stream corridor near the Senior Center, then proceeds east along O'Mara
Street(some improvements to church and residential properties might be appropriate city expenditures)
and crossing of Hall Blvd at a protected site (stop light, crosswalk, lighting, etc.).
7. The notice of hearing does not identify TCDC 18.385 regarding Sensitive Land Permits as one of the
applicable approval criteria; it should.
8. The provision of viewing structures is inconsistent with maintanence of the zero-rise flood plain. The
proposed structure (and existing, unpermitted structure) are perpendicular to the direction of stream flow
.. _ --
� Duane Roberts - Fanno Creek Trail Page 2
and present an obstacie to flow and debris flowing in the stream during flood events. The viewing
structures should be deleted.
9. In earlier comments, I have suggested a cantilevered footbridge on the west side of the existing Hall
Blvd motor bridge as an alternative for the proposed project which has less impact on natural features of
the area and state waters. Your staff analysis simply says that ODOT didn't like the idea. There is no
reason for such dislike for the project; Tigard should pursue this option at least to finding out the reason
for ODOT dislike; perhaps there are modiflcations which will satisfy ODOT concerns.
10. I disagree with the Fishman conclusion (re 18.330.020.B 2)that a greenway trail is not a change from
the approved use of this tract for a public library. The impact is that this change is a major modification
rather than a minor modification and different rules and approval criteria apply. Siimilarly this project
clearly changes accessways and parking areas where off-site traffic(eg that traffic on Hall Blvd)would be
affected. A dictionary meaning of words not specially defined in the Tigard code is the standard in this
regard.
11. The proposed project does not meet the requirement for campus-like industrial uses, ie it is not
pedestrian friendly, specifically the crossing of Hall Blvd is not pedestrian friendly. The project includes
this crossing, as its description indicates that it connects with the existing Fanno Creek Trail on the west
side of Hall Blvd.
12. The project description (Fishman) states that a (future) grading plan"will enable the trail to be
designed and constructed to avoid any increase in the water surFace elevation of the 100-year flood". This
conclusory statement purports to meet 18.775.070 B 3, but actually improperly defers an important
decision to a later stage when public participation will not be available. The engineering to show no
increase in water surface elevation should be done before this project is approved.
13. Since 18.790 is qne of the approval criteria, a tree plan is required. All elements of the tree plan
should be provided prior to the hearing.
14. The Fishman application for sensitive lands permit, at page 12, states that this project will result in
'reducing the risk for accidents between pedestrians and road users.' I disagree. The Fanno Creek Trail
has hundreds of users each day and more pedestrian traffic crossing busy Hall Blvd will result. A traffic
study by a certified professional should be developed to determine what the traffic impact will be. The
code requirements for an impact study(18.390.040 6.2.e) include the requirement that it"shall propose
improvements necessary to meet City standards . . ."; the present submittal does not do such and it
should.
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
jfrewing@teleport.com
CC: "Sue Beilke" <sbeilke@europa.com>, "Brian Wegener"
�brian@tualatinriverkeepers.org>, "Sally Harding" <sallyfortigard@comcast.net>
-- _ ---
', Duane Roberts :Fanno Creek Trail Project � Page 1
From: "SUE" <sbeilke@europa.com>
To: "Duane Roberts" <DUANE@ci.tigard.or.us>
Date: 8/8/2005 10:08:55 AM
Subject: Fanno Creek Trail Project
Duane,
Below are my comments for the Fanno Creek Trail Project, located north of the library. I appreciate the
opportunity to provide comments on this project. I wholeheartedly support the extension of the trail since it
will allow citizens to connect with nature and provide walking, biking, birdwatching and other activities for
folks that improves livability.
I do have several concerns and comments as follows:
First, I have gone to meetings in the past several years with the city where it appeared there would be a
marked crosswalk on Hall as well as possibly a median island where people could go if they needed to
stop due to heavy traffc. Hall Blvd. as we all know is getting busier by the day, and to cross this street on
foot or via bike can be dangerous. The current proposal is for not even a marked crosswalk on Hall. I
believe this lends itself to an extremely dangerous crossing for citizens and a significant safety concern for
all, both for trail users and motorists. The city recently installed a crosswalk on SW North Dakota for the
Fanno Creek trail crossing and it has really been making a difference. I notice motorists are now stopping
more frequently and are more courteous to people waiting to cross.
In regard to the above safety concerns, a recommendation would be to put route this section of the trail
along Hall to the south so that it comes out by Omara Street and then users could cross there and a
crosswalk could be installed at this intersection. That would eliminate the unsafe proposed crossing as it
is currently proposed. I think Brian Wegener also has proposed running the trail through the church/senior
center and�hen crossing Hall at Omara street.
My other major concern is for potential habitat and wildlife impacts due to the present proposed trail
alignment north of the library. Impacts to the vegetated corridor include 3,004 square feet of permanent
impact. This is a large area of permanent impact and it means we lose this much area of habitat and
open space permanently. As we have stated at past meetings for the library open space areas, we
recommend that the entire area north of the creek be protected for wildlife, including specificalty
addressing habitat needs for the western pond turtle which have been observed here in the creek and
crossing Hall at this very spot where the trail is proposed to cross. The upland portion, including where
the trail alignment is proposed, is one of the last areas of"uplands"that could be improved for nesting
habitat for turtles. Turtles need sparsely vegetated, sunny areas for nesting that are quiet and away from
human disturbance or they won't use the area. If a trail goes through this area it will be used heavily,
wildlife will not stay in this area because of noise and other impacts that humans cause. One of the main
reasons the library site was supported by citizens was that the city was able to acquire a large open space
tract. This was very exciting to many citizens since we felt it was a golden opportunity for the city to
protect and improve habitat for a variety of species such as the pond turtle. Since the city did use the
pond turtle as a target species when getting the grant for this project from the Oregon State Parks, it
seems appropriate that we also provide and then improve habitat for the turtles by protecting certain areas
for them to ensure their long term survival. Without adequate nesting habitat turtles will not survive for the
long term. By protecting the entire area north of the library for wildlife, we believe there will be a greater
opportunity for wildlife viewing from south of the creek on the trail and from the library itself using spotting
scopes and binoculars.
Thanks again for the opportunity to comment. We appreciate all of the hard work and effort staff has put
into this effort to provide recreational and wildlife viewing opportunities to the citizens of Tigard.
Sincerely,
Sue Beilke, Director
--- — ____
[ Duane Roberts- Fanno Creek Trail Project Page 2
The Biodiversity Project of Tigard
CC: <jfrewing@teleport.com>, "Brian Wegener" <bwegener@orednet.org>, "Alice Ellis GauY'
<aliceeg@csgpro.com>, "Bob Storer" <bobstorer@comcast.net>
'� 1 ..ALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCU� • SOUTH DIVISION
� COMMUNITY SERVICES • OPERATIONS • FIRE PREVENTION
Tualatin Valley
Fire & Rescue
July 29, 2005
Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: Fanno Creek Trail Project
Dear Gary,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed site plan surrounding the above named
development project. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal and finds no conflicts with our
interests.
Please contact me at(503) 612-7010 with any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Eric T . McMullen
Eric T. McMullen
Deputy Fire Marshal
7401 SW Washo Court,Suite 101 •Tualatin,Oregon 97062.Tel.(503)612-7000•Fax(503)612-7003•www.tvfr.com
�--— _ . �__,.
� Duane Roberts- Fanno Creek Trail �i Pag�
�—�—-- ----- — ----- - - - --
.,
From: "Brian Wegener" <brian@tualatinriverkeepers.org>
To: ""Duane Roberts-Tigard' (E-mail)"' <duane@ci.tigard.or.us>
Date: 7/26/2005 1:29:47 PM
Subject: Fanno Creek Trail
Duane,
My biggest concern about the Fanno Creek Trail extension around the
Library is having the trail cross Hall Blvd without a crosswalk. Under
"Transportation System" on page 12 of the Fishman report, there is a
statement that does not appear credible:
"Construction of the new trail segment is not expected to resulting an
increase in the number of pedestrians crossing Hall Boulevard; however,
it may encourage more pedestrians to cross at this location rather than
further south near the library entrance, potentially reducing the
potential for accidents between pedestrians and automobiles."
My response to this is:
1. How does a new trail extension across a road avoid increasing
the number of pedestrians crossing that road?
2. How does encouraging pedestrians to cross a road at a point with
no crosswalk instead of crossing at a controlled intersection with a
crossing signal reduce the risk of pedestrian-auto accidents?
I suspect that Fishman Environmental Services has no qualifications in
traffic engineering or pedestrian safety, and has no business making
such claims to the city. While you have addressed most of the
environmental concerns we have raised, this significant safety concern
has the potential to either stop this project or cause a tragedy.
We do appreciate your efforts to minimize impacts to habitat north of
Fanno Creek. One alternative that we raised that was not addressed by
the Fishman report is that the trail use the sidewalk on Omara Street,
and cross Hall Boulevard at Omara Street intersection. This might help
with the safety issues and would eliminate the impacts to habitat north
of the creek and east of Hall Blvd.
With these impacts eliminated, great potential for wildlife viewing from
the second floor of the library, using binoculars or spotting scopes is
enhanced. We would like the city to consider this potential as part of
the trail plan, since connecting the people of Tigard with nature is one
of the objectives of this trail.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
Brian Wegener
Watershed Watch Coordinator
Tualatin Riverkeepers
16507 SW Roy Rogers Road
Sherwood, OR 97140
Phone: 503.590.5813
Fax: 503.590.6702
E-mail: <mailto:brian@tualatinriverkeepers.org>
brian@tualatinriverkeepers.org
Website: <http://www.tualatinriverkeepers.org>
www.tualatinriverkeepers.org
November 6, 2005 -Tualatin Riverkeepers Fall Fest
Cooper Mountain Winery
12 Featured Artists
Biodynamic Wines
Tasty Morsels
See you there.
j Duane Roberts- Fanno Creek Trail _ Page 2
_ _. `
CC: <vannie@ci.tigard.or.us>, "Sue Beilke" <sbeilke@europa.com>, "Dave Drescher"
<drescher@teleport.com>, "John Frewing" <jfrewing@teleport.com>, <aeg@csgpro.com>
� ' REQUEST FOR COMMENT� CITYOFTIGARD
Community•Decelopment
S&apingA rdetterCommunity
DATE: 1uh122,2005
T0: lim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Pre�endon Officer
RIOM: Ci�of Tioard Plannin9 Dihsion
STAFF CONTACT: Duane Roberts Associate Planner[x24441
one: ax: 1
SENSITIVE IANDS REVIEW[SLRI 2005-00016/MINOR MODIFICATION[MMDI 2005-00015
➢ FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROlECTQ
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-wide
paved, multi-use trail within a ortion of the floodplain. The trail seg ment is approximately 1,090 lineal
feet, approximately 700 feet o�which are located in the 100-year ffoodplain. The proposal includes a
Cedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existin Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over Fanno
reek. Minor arteration of the floodwa will be conducted to lace the pedestrian brid e. The applicant is
also requesting Minor Modification approval to a previouslypg ranted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-
00001/City of Tigard Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site. LOCA710N: The
proposed .projecf is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east of SW Hall Boulevard, north of the
existing Tigard Library, and south of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The path will connect to the
existing Fanno Creek trail network. WCTM 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and
200. ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to
accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of
civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning
district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale
commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fifness centers, in a campus-like settin9. Only
those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the f-
P zone. In addition to mandatory site devefopment review, design and development standards in the I-P
zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be wefl-integrated, attractively landscaped, and
pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters
18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775 and 18.790.
Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and ApplicanYs Statement/Plans for your review. From information supplied by various
departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: AUGUST 5. 2005. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate letter to retum your comments. I�ou are unable to resqond bv the above date, please phone the staff
contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any
questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
_ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
_ Please contact of our office.
Please refer to the enclosed letter.
� Written comments provided below:
Rte. .N,�t¢, ah �\�►on5 �{ Gt�, " • cto�\ " w►�c� .�t. klA�1
c�(�,t5 �a�l ? � k�rovJ �(om a.x �CQ, �k \�blav cc�v�eA Cor�,(�5
��I�C�avw� a�� � Jfh�s �uc.�� 'L khow Icc� �,�C �anc�. .�c�c�at
foGdwo� � qc� �...►a\�t v,kwn �lv� ��ro C(,�c �<a�1 5��5 � �coc�dv�► .
Wr�at � 5v�y�ta,5 (, 000T ap�(oJcd� �no�J� k�un �q���l ?
I Name 8� Number of Person(s)Commenting: � M wo�� xa��
�
WE 1 LAND LAND USE NOTIFICATION FOkM
(this form is to be completed onlv by planning department staff for mapped wetlands/waterways)
DEPARTMENT�F STATE LANDS WETLANDS PROGRAM
775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100; Salem,OR 97301-1279;(503) 378-3805
1. County: � Local Case File#: �Ll� �U U�O U O U ��
City: DSL File#:WN completed bv DSL Staft)
Responsible J sdiction: �City ❑County DSL Project#: icompleted bv DSL Staffl
2. APPLICANT: ���i�h sZ. /�a �j �.�.f' LANDOWNER: �/� v� T S' 4 �c�
name �� .
.C3/ �� ��,���/L� _ ,�5 � ,�--,�.
mailing address mailing address
mailing address mailing address
f/ S �r4�---�f-� �7 7 Z-Z.3
city,state zip city,state zip
�) - 7! �'--Z-�-4c� ���a - -�--��
phone phone
3. LOCATION
T 7-,�_ R� S�' %. 5•�_ Taac Lot(s) .6 G b
Address (streeticity) / b3;�j� ��t..� ��/ �lL ,
NWi quad map name �3.�a �.e_,- ,L.��„
Attach all the followi.ng(with site marked): .LWI/NWI Map(if no LWI map) .Parcel Map .Site Plan(if any)
If applicable attach: ❑Other
4. STTE INFORMATION
LVVI/NWI Wetland Classification Codes(s) �0 W � ' 7�d
Adjacent Waterway(if any) rt Zoning /� �Z
5. PROPOSED ACTIVITY -
J�site plan approval ❑subdivision
❑grading pernut ❑planned unit development
❑conditional use permit ❑building permit(new structures) � .
❑Other �3sz-h J� ���-'�- �.� ti e� 1' �Q..� .s,.� �
Pro�ect Description ,,�.� a .�
C� "�---r a �� q%
Completed by/Contact � � 4 r-i Date // S/o �—
Address � c .� � �.., Phone: (fU3 )y 033,3
��_
DSL RESPONSE
❑ A removal-fill permit is required from the Department of State Lands
❑A removal-fill permit will be required when the development project proceeds
❑A removal-filt permit may be required
❑A permit may be required by the Corps of Engineers(503-808-4373) �
❑Information needed includes:
❑A wetland determination/delineation report(Consultants list enclosed)
❑
❑ State Permit# ❑was issued ❑has been applied for
❑No removal-fill permit is required for the described project if/because:
Cornments:
❑ On-Site Visit By: Date:
Response completed by: Date:
* If the project is changed to involve fill or removal from the wetlands area,a state removal-fill permit will be required.
http://www.oregonstatelands.us/wetlanduse.htm August 2004
� r �� / �'✓��J�\� / / )\ � Y�L\\ \ ,''`/`�` � „ l D
:�� f ?� � , ,,��;��. �.,�`� ' �ti,`. �, .,, .�] f1.� � � -- TIGAR
, . �, ,% /�� �� � �� . BE�E�A oF
• ,�, �� / �:• /` �� ' v� \'� � wo S r �I�
`�t � � % � ^�'/ �`(� � �.����>' �, .� � '�
c/ �``� '� � � \� ,� �
��\ �`; ' ; , �� \ �y �'�. � ��� �' �' ,'J �, ��\�� - W ETLAN DS I NVE NTORY
,r � /% / \1 / /j � `'��� � \ �
>�l �'>'� �� ' ,c��� ��-\�C� �,�f�� ` �
'' �,/,'"'c�� / � ti''��. � y � \ � � \
'i,, �ti, \ � 1 �\` �� �P �� � � UNIT 7
, �,`. T �"" � \ �., �
�. ,i f�f` .0 \ / '����� '�`�� \ ,� '\ � h�'�' �
_ ?�\ /� j� • /'�,�, � � : ) \� `� \ �� � \\
�/f'� >'y �> \ �,/ ` � �. � � ` /\ � \ � \
" � ' .� � . � 1 f . / >\����9 ��� Identified Wetlands
.\ E'n,
�\S�.Y�. � ' �.� <j��.��\� \` . :... J//i/� l t( \V\
- / �T` ���� '�y� � ^ ,, � `�G��'�'�9d �`�, �,\ �� �
�r `'-� � � /'� Y \ \ \ �
% �,, ;, �\ ;` ..� � �: : `��,: ,, � ''� � � -31 A -1 Wetland ID
, ,� �' �, .� �� t � � � ,
`�' /`� %� � `\ \._ /' ��� T �\ \ '�/ �\ i .
/ %� / ,y��/ ',\ � ` �� � � �
/ '�. , .y / 2G,/ \ '• .
� �' �� � — A uatic Resource Unit
\�iy �� � �� � � ` �,`�� � \ — q
�y (� � �� .,,\\ \ E-3 2
� j � � � �� � ��.,=� Boundary
�, ',� ?
�� , ,� " E 8 � ' `�r y� ` `.� �\,'
'/�>. /� / :\" � r �f` ������ �,. ` �\ ����_ `\��
i y .�:� �4� � P 1��y� �_, �� --. �'� ��,� ���,� Stream Corridor �
� E--�8/ fti4. ,�`� �l g E-�11 �j�` � '� t I a n d s
- � ,� � . •.�` ��\� ;� � :.���� VARNS , W e
: . .
, , ./. �, � :...::: .._ � �,
� � �
pa�j ,�::: � E 16 �. \
�, .,� , �
i� � ^<<.�` a
� � ��� � :�;� E �4
:.. ..... . _ : :
, .
, �< ::: ':�,� �
, . . . .
, .. .. .__........ :::: ; :.;-:
� -. .� :::::::: __ . . ...
� , .
�� . � � � �-.��.; � ��:�:�:::::: : :::� - ::: :: _ . � � 33 4 blic Land Surve ,�
..
....
, � ,_ �,, � � � u
., ...
, , _.
( .
/��`/ rP `q� p�-\ � �� _ �.: r. r� �'\\\� � 43 Section IDs
\ / ` \�
�� � . . \ / �� i,'��CJ, � � .i � ♦ � \�, FIR ST
-1 � `• \ �d. V t ; . � `, �::�
�^ ,,�Q�. � ,,. _�, - -- -- � ; :: t �,, \� i
.'-� � ,�,��\1. � ' a ����'`,` - -- \���� ` p
�\ ��/ .\ , \ .�`\ \ ���'� U,IAAPq \r � � .: �~�. �"i.\�\
��,".�/ �� � � _ _` .
� 'n. �� , \ - . � _ �\
y p���� C ` . < _ \ � �
�� G � '� �� � �\�� `::::::::::::i::::::. ` `•� �� \ �9
� � \ � > �'� - -- - -- -..:.,_,r.. ` �� � \�
-�%�. � \ � � �� � =:18 \
/� , �� � � , ._ � \�
� .
� — ,
O \ \l \� \` �� \`'.,\`\�
�G\ -- \ � _.,� � � � , \ \
� � \
� J � \` ,
- \t ,` j� \'�.. i �\ .
�
� ly�<Zv[EVCT ;. ` � �_ TECH TER Source: Sc�entific Resources �Inc. and
i-- ' \ / $,1N ...... ...... .... �
'�. �. \ , Fishman Environmental Services. Aerial
.� �_. � � .::E-21 � 1
. 0. . .:=;.. � � :: . :::.. � photography from April, 1994 at a
t _ E �
T _
�::::::::. :::..
— :.: :.::::: ::::...
_ nominal scale of 1" = 40 .
, _........... .
_ _ , .. . ............. .... _. . :::::.:.::.. .
- .......... ............... :::::::�.:::::... ..
.............
1 12 _ �
_ ��,. ;:_�-. � - - -- Information on this rnap �s o a
F _ � � ` .......
�� : generalized nature. In all cases, actual
Y/ COIO�fv r,REEY..CT �- ` 9
�A��ZE11 F�SE . ...�� �- U- � � � : � s � fieid conditio�ns determine wetland -
�r ELFOS CT - l �
� Z� `O _'11-- �T�1 - - z u ' � oG�y
- m'.� rna i - Z I� Z ----r---�m, a � F,� boun�aries.
� - - FaNr�o _�q ,��r,,°,� ` _2 2�, 2
- - . o,� � ,. , Public Land Survey Information: Afi
- - � --D . �* � _�`ANN\_! � 1
- =�;��ST� vIEW L�i__ _ _� -z _ ` .�{�I ___ - ��.���� F�2 Public land survey sections depicted on
�_ - — � � -�9 �' - % �,�� this map survey are within either
v �-- G _ �;�,.._ L�-�ZO� `',•. p � v
�_ w VtEW TER n _ k EN� n GR o �? :�r.i.':.'.�..
__ VIEw/ 1EPR _ - — � _ __ j �I� �� �� Wy � T1SR1W or T2SR1W.
_ _' �-�••. Z WEAV R
E:2 .
�, � �
, 92Np-�- � � � � .
- -- -- — ,,, r�r - - /, � �v \
' - � -Si--- - . , -I JE. � It'IE S --- ��� L� � .
�n� - . �� -- -� --- -- �\ � �'-��- BqP�I l A Rp--- -- ------ - �
._._ _. __. , ` - - N O R T H
TWALITY �� - ./ — �I��=� � `.1 R�L`
��- __�_ �UNIOR _ _ �.. pUif,BHOUY W _ W _ A3RD ,-T — Scale 1 =V�V
- .���BP��!�}' $T � .�� - . `- °
, T � �� — Y FEET
-- -- � HIGH _ _ � _�
_ _ �
-- -- - -- SCHOOL -Q m � - ._ �
p 600 1200
--- _ - ��Y���i �� '_ _
- ' �.. ; \ z PLOT DATE: 02/10/95
� U � � C
Q
�
1
.. .
FANNO CRP�
�
� -
/
�
\
�
, �
' V W
� � � — � � � Y �
, ' _ I Q, W �
I w � � �
o U
� . � � � C FANNC
t
�-� 0000aa 00000a . Q o
. � � o00000 ooaooa o
� a0000
� � ° o00000
. o0000o t.,A��.
an�e ��y
� f
�
�
CT
_
* � �
l �
. �
�
\
., - �
� REQUEST FOR COMMENT� CITY Of TIGARD
Community�Ue�c�efopment
Shaping�BetterCommunity
�ATE: 1uh122,2005
T0: PER AITACHED
FROM: Cit�of Tigard Plannin9 Division
STAFF CONTACT: ouane Roberts Associate Planner[x24441
one: ax: 1
SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLRI 2005-00016/MINOR MODIFICATION[MMDI 2005-00015
➢ FANNO CREEK TRAII PROJECTQ
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-wide
paved, multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail seg ment is approximately 1:090 lineal
feet, approximately 700 feet of which are located in the 100-year ffoodplain. The proposal includes a
Cedestrian bridge crossmg Fanno Creek near the existin Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over Fanno
reek. Minor aiteration of the floodway will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is
also requesting Minor Modification approval to a previously granted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-
00001/City of Tigard Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site. LOCA710N: The
proposed pro�ecf is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east of SW Hall Boulevard, north of the
existing Tigard Library, and south of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The path will connect to the
existing Fanno Creek trail network. WCTM 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and
200. ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to
accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of
- civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning
district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale
commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only
those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the f-
P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P
zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be wefl-integrated, attractively landscaped, and
pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters
18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775 and 18.790.
Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's StatemenUPlans for your review. From information supplied by various
departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: AUGUST 5. 2005. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond bv the above date, please phone the staff
contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any
questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
_ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
_ Please contact of our office.
Please refer to the enclosed letter.
_ Written comments provided below:
IName 8 Number of Person(s)Commenting: I
. � • C � OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR �MMENTS
. NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICAT ONS
FILE NOS.: S�-tF �-'�-��' FILE NAME: ��no �rc_�k' T�� ��� �r� ���
CITIZEN IMVOLYEMENT TEAMS
14DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO INTERESTED PARTIES OF AREA: ❑Central ❑East ❑South ❑West
CITIf OfFlCES
�ONG RANGE PLANNING/Barbara Shields,Planning Mgr. COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPTJPIanning-Engineering Techs. �OLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer
✓BUILDING DIVISIONIGary Lampella,Buildirg Otficial �fNGINEERING DEPTJKim McMillan,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineer�PUBLIC WORKSRv1att Stlne,Utban Forester
CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder �RrBLIC WORKS/Brian Rager,Ergineering Manager
✓PLANNER—POST PROJECT SITE IF A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM-10 BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBIIC HEARING!
SPECIAL DISTRICTS
TUAL.HILLS PARK S REC.DIST.� TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE 8 RESCl1E s _ TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT+��LEANWATER SERVICES+�
Planning Manager Fre Marshall Administrative Office � Lee WalkerlSWM Program
15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fre District PO Box 745 155 N.Flrst Avenue
Beaverton,OR 97D06 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hiilsboro,OR 97124
LOCAL AND STATE I�RIS81CT10NS
CITY OF BEAVERTON � CITY OF TUALATIN � �✓ V OR.DEPT.OF FISH 8 WILDLIFE �� '�OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS
Planning Manager Planning Manager 3406 Cherry Avenue NE Melinda Wood�muN F�R.q���.a�
Steven Sparks,o�.s�a.M�. 18880 SW Marti�am Avenue Salem,OR 97303 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100
PO Box 4755 TualaGn,OR 97062 Salem,OR 97301-1279
Beaverton,OR 97076
_ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM.
METRO-LAND USE 8 PLANNING� _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.8 MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE
_ CITY OF DURHAM � 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 S lem,OR 97310-1380
City Manager Portland.OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 �i �
PO Box 23483 Bob Knight,DalaReeourceCxRer(2CA) f�US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG.
Durtiam,OR 97281-3483 Paulette Allen,c�a,�.�,«�c�,a�m, OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.B OVLP Kathryn Harris�r,P.o�y,�
Mel Huie,Groa�specesCoordi�or(CPNZOA) Larry French�c�.�,a,�w�o„y� Routing CENWP-OP-G
CITY OF KING CITY� y.l �Jen�ifer Budhabhatti,r��%�.,.,�w«�� 635 Capitoi SVeet NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946
City Manager _ C.D.Manager,GmWhMa�gemertServices Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946
15300 SW 116th Avenue
King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY�
OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY��,���a�� _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION�r�a.r�� Dept.of Land Use&Transp.
Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,r�.n.g 155 N.First Avenue
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO� Rou6ng TTRC—Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13
Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro.OR 97124
PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 Steve Conway�c�n��
Lake Oswego,OR 97034 � _Gregg Leion�can�
y✓_ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALI7Y(DEQ� ODOT,REGION 1 � Brent Curtis�can�
CIN OF PORTLAND �r�ouy r��w�c�e„as a�a ao�e„c�ei e���ro�m�,ce��m�� _Marah Danielson,�. Doria Mateja�zcn�Ms ia
_ alopmeM Review Coo�dinalor
Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator Carl To�land, Right-of-Way Section�v��� _Sr.Cartographer c����,.
1900 SW 4"'Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders Jim Nims,s�ryay�,�czG�ws,s
Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97269-4037
WA.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY L��ODOT,REGION 1-DISTRICT 2A� _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION STATE HISTORIC
Dave Austin�wcccai-s„°na..�,�.,a...,� Sam Hunaidi,a���x o�u;a Me�e� (Notify if ODOT R1R-Hwy.CroWnp is Only Au.�as W L�nd) PRESERVATION OFFICE
PO Box 6375 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 Dave Lanning,s�c��smiy sP.u��a �Nany n v.aw.ey n..Ho w.n,y�
Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221-2414 555-13"'Street,NE,Suite 3 1115 Commercial Street,NE
Salem,OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301-1012
UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL A6ENCIES
PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERNISANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R!R(eurungron Northem/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor)
Robert I.Melbo,President 8 General Manager
110 W.10th Avenue
Albany,OR 97321
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMCAST CABLE CORP. TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT.
Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer�a�.x,a«�.o„y> Randy Bice ��'.w�a•,..w�n (It P�ojaU is Wtthin%Mile of a Tra�cit Rou[e)
5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner
Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street
Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232
PORTLAND GENEl2AL ELECTRIC NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY VERIZON QWEST COMMUNICATIONS
Ken Gutierrez,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. David Bryant,Engineering Florence Mott,Eng.ROW Mgr.
9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue OR 030533/PO Box 1100 8021 SW Capitoi Hill Rd,Rm 110
Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97075-1100 Portland,OR 97219
TIGARD(fUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 COMCAST CABLE CORP. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC.
Marsha Butler,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist,Demographics Alex Silantiev�S..M.,+Q�,«o�n Diana Carpenter c��•Ea��a�w�
6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg. 12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue
Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Beaverton,OR 97008 Tigard,OR 97223-4203
alt INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANYlALL
CITT PROJECTS{Project Planner Is Responsible For Inditating Parties To Notify). h:lpattyUnasters\Request For Comments Notification Ust.dx (UPDATED: 3-Feb-05)
(Also uodate:i:�curolnlsetuo\IabelsWnnexation utilities and franchises.doc when uodatina this documentl
� ' ' "
� �� �n.,. c �,L�-r t e �
Brian Wegener �
Watershed Watch Coordinator
Tualatin Riverkeepers
16507 SW Roy Rogers Road
Sherwood, OR 97140
Sue Beilke
11755 SW 114�' Place �`
Tigard, OR 97223
John Frewing 4
7110 S W Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
NfFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITV�OFTIOARD
('ommuntty�UeceCopment
SFiapingA�detterCommunity
I, �PatriciaL.Lunsford being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a SeniorAdministrariveSpecial`utfor the
City of�I'rgar��GUasfrington County, Oregon and that I served the following:
{cnaa�ay�o�a�e eo■�s�e�,�
� NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR:� SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-0001 S — FANNO [REEK TRAIL PROJE(T
� AMENDED NOTICE (File No.Mame Reference)
HEARING BODY: HEARING DATE:
❑ City of Tigard Planning Director
� Tigard Hearings Officer (8122/05)
❑ Tigard Planning Commission
❑ Tigard City Council
A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Ellhlblt"A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to
each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhlblt"B", and by reference made a part
hereof, on September1,2005,and deposited in the United States Mail on September1,2005, postage prepaid.
r �'
�- .
(Perso at pare Notice)
.57,�I`IE OF�cjON �
County of�INas tngton )s,�
C'i�y of�I�ard ) ��
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the� day of � , 2005.
%� OFFICIAL SEAL --
��ae�', � SUFRCISS �`�
P"'TARY PUBLIG�RF^nN
' .,MMISSION N0.375152 � :�
P�1Y COMMI��!ON IXPIRES DEC.1,2007;'
My Com ' sion Expires: � a v (�0 �
� � EXHIBIT
I 20 DAYS = N/A CITY OF TI04RD
DATE OF FILING: 9/1/2005 Community�DeveCopment
SFiapingA BetterCommunity
CITY OF TIGARD
`Washington County, Oregon
NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER �
Case Numbers: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 2005-00016
MINOR MODIFICATION MMD 2005-00015
Case Name: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
Name of Owners: Cit of Ti ard
Name of Applicant: Cit of Ti ard
Address of Applicant: 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Ti ard OR 97223
Address of Property: Within the Fanno Creek Flood lain east of SW Hall Boulevard north and east of the
existin Ti ard Libra and south of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The ath will
connect to the existin Fanno Creek trail network.
Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washin ton Co. Tax Assessor's Ma No. 2S102DA Tax Lot 600• and 2S102DD Tax
Lots 100 and 200.
A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONflUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SENSITIVE IANDS REVIEW AND A MINOR
MODIFICATION, THE CIiY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFfICER NAS REYIEWED THE APPLIfANTS PLANS, NARRATIYE, MATERIALS, fOMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENfIES,
THE PLANNING DIVISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RE�OMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLI(ATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAII IN THE SfAFF REPORT. THE
HEARINGS OFfICER HELD A PUBLI( HEARING ON AUGUST 22, 2005 TO RECEIYE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLIfATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN
BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND (ONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER.
Request: ➢ The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-wide paved,
multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail segment is approximately 1,090 lineal feet,
approximately 700 feet of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a pedestrian
bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over Fanno Creek. Minor
alteration of the floodway will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is also requesting
Minor Modification approval to a previously granted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-00001/City of Tigard
Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site. At the close of the record, the Hearings Officer
approved the applications subject to conditions of approval.
Zones: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District; and I-P: Industrial Park District. A�plicable Review Criteria:
Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775 and 18.790.
Action: ➢ ❑ Approval as Requested � Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial
Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to:
� Owners of Record Within the Required Distance � Affected Government Agencies
0 Interested Parties � The Applicants and Owners
The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development
Department at the City of Tigard City Hall.
Final Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2005 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
Appeal:
The decision of the Review Authority is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with
standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section
18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with
the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the
decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard
City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2005.
Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171.
BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER
FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
Regarding an application by the City of Tigard for ) F I N A L O R D E R
sensitive lands review approval for a roughly 1,090 foot) SLR 2005-00016
section of 10-foot wide trail east of Hall Boulevard, north) MNID 22005-00015
of the Tigard Library, in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Fanno Creek Trail)
A. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The applicant, City of Tigard, requests sensitive lands review for construction
of a 10-foot wide paved public use trail, including a pedestrian bridge over Fanno Creek.
The applicant will construct the trail on taac lot 600, WCTM 2S 102DA and tax lots 100
and 200, 2S 102DD (the "site"). Roughly 700 feet of the proposed 1,090 foot trail
segment is located within the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek. The trail will be
located north and east of the recently constructed Tigard Public Library. The applicant
also requests minor modification of the Conditional Use Permit("CUP") apprvved for
the library (CUP 2003-00001)to add the pedestrian trail to the library site. Additional
basic facts about the site and surrounding land and applicable approval standards are
pr6vided in tbe Staff Report to the Hearings Officer dated August 15, 2005 (the " Staff
Report"), incorporated herein by reference.
2. Tigard Hearings Officer Joe Turner(the "hearings officer") held a duly noticed
public hearing on August 22, 2005 to receive and consider public testimony in this
matter. The record includes a witness list, materials in the casefile as of the close of the
record, including materials submitted after the hearing,and an audio record of the
hearing. At the beginning of the hearing, the hearings officer made the declaration
required by ORS 197.763. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parte contacts,bias or
conflicts of interest. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected
relevant testimony offered at the hearing.
a. City planner Duane Roberts summarized the Staff Report.
i. He requested the examiner modify condition of approval4 to
allow the applicant to construct the pedestrian bridge and the section of trail south of
Fanno Creek prior to ODOT approval of a pedestrian crossing of Hall Boulevard,
provided the applicant installs a barrier at the north end of the bridge to preclude access
to north side of the creek and connection to the existing trail segment west of Hall
Boulevard.
ii. He requested the examiner modify condition of approval 5 to
clarify that the applicant is required to complete the required wildlife assessment prior to
construction of the trail section north of Fanno Creek.
b. City Parks Manager Steve Martin, environmental consultant Stacy
Benjamin and city engineer Vannie Nguyen testified on behalf of the applicant. They
accepted the findings and conditions of approval in the Staff Report
c. At the end of the hearing,the hearings officer closed the public record
and announced his intention to approve the application subject to recommended
conditions as amended at the hearing.
3. City staff recommended that the hearings officer approve the application based
on findings and conclusions and subject to conditions of approval recommended in the
Staff Report as amended at the hearing. The applicant accepted those conditions as
amended. No one disputed the findings in the Staff Report. The hearings officer agrees
with those findings, conclusions and conditions, and adopts the affirmative findings in
the Staff Report as support for this Final Order.
4. Based on the findings and discussion provided or incorporated in this final
order, the hearings officer concludes that the applicant sustained the burden of proof that
the proposed sensitive lands reviews and minor modification do or will comply with the
applicable criteria of the Community Development Code, provided development that
occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state, and federal laws and with
conditions of approval warranted to ensure such compliance occurs in fact. Therefore
those applications should be approved subject to such conditions.
B. ORDER
In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating
the Staff Report and public testimony and e�chibits received in this matter,the hearings
officer hereby approves SLR2005-00016 and MMD2005-00015 (Fanno Creek Trail),
subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. No site work will begin until appropriate fencing/demarcation has been installed
on site to clearly identify the wetland boundaries and construction perimeters.
2. The applicant will provide a copy of the tree protection plan, which will be
reviewed by the City's Arborist. Tree protection must be installed and inspected
by the City's Arborist, Matt Stine, prior to site work.
3. The applicant s�all carry out the vegetated corridor plan as reviewed and
approved by CWS and obtam a letter from CWS documenting that the conditions
have been met.
SLR2005-00016 and MMD2005-00015 Hearings O�cer Final Order
(Fanno Creek Trail) Page 2
4. ODOT approval of the location and design of a pedestrian crossin� of Hall
Boulevard serving trail users should be obtained and the crossing mstalled
concurrent with or before the trail connection is installed. At the applicant's
discretion and risk, the trail section located south of Fanno Creek may be installed
prior to the required ODOT approval of a safe pedestrian crossing. The pedestrian
bridge also may be installed prior to the approval and installation of the Hall
Boulevard pedestrian crossing,provided two conditions are met: a barrier across
the northern end of the bridge shall be erected to prevent pedestrian access and a
sign�osted on the barrier mdicating that access to the northern property is
prohibited.
5. A wildlife assessment will be conducted to address the impact of the project
within the area north of Fanno Creek prior to construction of the trail section
north of the pedestrian bridge. The trail design north of the creek will respond to
and take into account the results of the wildlife assessment. The assessment and
design will be subject to a public hearing by the Hearing Officer.
DATED this lst day of September, 2005.
Joe Turner, Esq., AICP
City of Tigard Land Use Hearings Officer
SLR2005-00016 and MMD2005-0001 S Hearings Officer Final Order
(Fanno Creek Trail) Page 3
Agenda Item: 2.1
Hearing Date: Au ust 22 2005 Time: 7:00 PM
� STAFF REPORT TO THE
HEARINGS OFFICER ��TYOFT��QRo
(;ommuriity�Ur, ioprnertt
FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON S���y=7t$��e=ter�:mmunity
120 DAYS = NIA
SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY
FILE NAME: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
CASE NOS.: ensi ive an s eview
Minor Modification (MMD) MMD2005-00015
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a
10-foot-wide paved multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail
segment is approximately 1,090 lineal feet, approximately 700 feet (340 cubic
yards) of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a
pedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard bridge
over Fanno Creek. Minor alteration of the floodway will be conducted to place
the�pedestrian bridge. The proJ ect will also temporarily impact zero square feet
of the 50' vegetated corridor due to construction staging and will permanently
impact 3,004 square feet of vegetated corridor as a result of the trail
construction.
APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd. 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
LOCATION: The proposed project is located within the Fanno Creek floodplain, east of Hail
Boulevard, north of the existing Tigard Library and south of the Southern Pacific
railroad tracks. The path is to extend from Hall Boulevard opposite an exiting trail
segment located on the west side of Hall to the north side of the proposed Wall
Street Extension. Tax lot numbers 2S102DA00600, 2S1102DD100 & 200.
ZONING: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed
to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050
square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses also are permitted
conditionally.
I-L: Light Industrial District. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for
general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production,
research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale
sales activities with few, if any, nuisance charactenstics such as noise, glare, odor,
and vibration.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775
and 18.790. .
SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find that a portion of proposed pedestrian trail and bridge
will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards of
the Tigard Development Code. A remainder of the trail including the bridge is conditioned to be subject
to further study. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended
Conditions of ApprovaL•
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 1 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
CONDITIONS OF APPRQVAL
THE FOLLOWING CONDITlONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS:
u mit to t e anning epartment ary agenstrec er, , ext. or review an
approval:
1. No site work will begin until appropriate fencing/demarcation has been installed on site to
clearly identify the wetland boundaries and construction perimeters
2. The applicant will provide a copy of the tree protection plan, which will be reviewed by the
City's Arborist. Tree protection must be installed and inspected by the City's Arborist, Matt
Stine, prior to site work.
3. The applicant shall carry out the vegetated corridor plan,as reviewed and approved by CWS
and obtain a letter from CWS documenting that the conditions have been met.
4. ODOT approval of the location and design of a pedestrian crossing of Hall Boulevard serving
trail users should be obtained and the crossing installed concurrent with or before the trail
connection is installed. At the applicant's discretion and risk, the trail section located south of
Fanno Creek may be installed prior to the required ODOT approval of a safe pedestrian
crossing. The northern terminus of said portion of the trail is approximately 50 feet south or
downstream of the bridge and midway along the swale bordering the trail.
5. A wildlife assessment will be conducted to address the impact of the project within the area
north of Fanno Creek. The trail desi n north of the creek will respond to and take into account
the results of the wildlife assessmen�. The assessment and design will be subject to a public
hearing by the Hearing Officer.
THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VAL1D FOR '18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION.
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Site Information and Proposal Description:
The site is located along Fanno Creek just north of the existing Tigard Library site. The trail segment
is approximately 1,090 fineal feet with approximately 700 feet Iocated in the 100 year floodplain. The
site is developed with the library building and a small gazebo. Wetlands are located on the site;
however, the path has been designed to. avoid wetland impacts. The trail will require development
within the CWS vegetated corridor and mitigation is proposed.
The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct approximately 700 lineal
feet of the 10-foot wide paved multi-use trail within the floodplain. The proposal includes a
pedestrian bridge crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard bridge of Fanno Creek.
Minor alteration of the floodway also will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge.
Prior to the com letion of the library, a small residential home with related domestic improvements
(landscaping, etc�occupied a portion of the site. The house subsequently was destroyed by fire. A
gazebo has been constructed near the former home site.
SLR200�00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 2 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA
A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this
staff report are as follows:
A. Decision Makin Procedures
. . on i iona se
B. Zonin istricts
�.�' esi en ial Zoning Districts)
18.530 Industrial Zoning Districts)
C. Specific Development Standards
18.775 (Sensitive Lands)
18.790 (Tree Removal)
D. Im act Stud �
The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters: 18.705 (Access, Egress
& Circulation), 18.715 Density Computations), 18.720 (Design Compatibility , 18.725 (Environmental
Performance Standards�,18.730 (Exceptions to Development 5tandards), 18.�42 (Home Occupations),
18.750 Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage)
18.765 �(Off-Street Parking and Loading Re uirements), 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations), 18.780
(Signs), 18.785 (Temporary Uses,), 18.795 (�isual Clearance)„ and 18.798 (Wireless Communication
Facilities). These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Review to
make sure nothing is missing from list.
18.705.030F addresses the design of walkways that cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots.
Finding: Section18.705 (Access, Egress & Circulation) does not apply because the library conditional
use application (CUP2003-00001) addresses walkway crossing of vehicle access driveways and
parking lots.
SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
I E MMU L M D TI .
A. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES
This application includes a request for a Minor Modification to CUP2003-00001/SLR20001NAR2003-
00009, the City of Tigard Public Library. The Minor Modification approval criteria are listed below,
along with a discussion of how each applies to the project under discussion. The Minor Modification
approval criteria require that the Major Modification approval criteria first be addressed.
18.330.020.B. 2. The Director shall determine that a major modification(s) has resulted if one
or more of the changes listed below have been proposed.
a. A change in land use:
b. A 10% increase in dwelling unit density:
c. A change in the type andlor location of accessways and parking areas where off-site traffic
would be affected:
d. An increase in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more than 10% where
previously specified:
e. A reduction in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more that 10% of the area
reserved for common open space and/or usable open space.
f. A reduction of specified setback requirements by more than 20%:
g. An elimination of project amenities by more than 10% where previously specified, such as,
Recreational facilities, Screening, or Landscaping provisions:
� SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 3 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
h. A 10% increase in the approve density:
FINDING: The trail proposal is a modification to the City of Tigard Public Library project (CUP2003-
0001). The final order issued by the Hearings Officer approving the original project dictates in
condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is making a continuing, diligent, good faith to
identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along Fanno Creek that will not be below the
elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal fulfills this condition by defining a
suitable alignment for the trail through the library property. The proposal is not a change in use. It
does it involve a 10% reduction in density. The accessways to the approved library site are not
changed from those approved as part of the library project. No increase in floor area is proposed.
No change in specified setbacks requirements Is proposed. The project adds rather than eliminates
recreational facilities. No change to screening or landscaping provisions is requested. No increase
in approved density is requested.
18.330.020.C. Minor modification of approved or existing conditional use.
1. Any modification which is not within the description of a major modification as provided in
Subsection B above shall be considered a minor modification.
2. Any applicant may request approval of a minor modification by means of a Type I
procedure, as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria in Subsection C3
below.
3. A minor modification shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied following the
Director's review based on the findings that:
a. The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable requirements of this
title; and �
b. The modification is not a major modification as defined in Subsection A above.
FINDING: The proposed modification is not within the description of a major modification and,
therefore is classified as a minor modification.
B. ZONING DISTRICT
Residential and Industrial Zonin Districts: Section 18.510.020 and 18.520.020
is e escrip ion o e esi en ia oning Districts and Industrial Zoning Districts.
This use is considered a public infra-structure improvement consistent with a street or sidewalk.
Therefore, the proposal does not conflict with allowed uses in either the R-12 or I-L zones.
This application includes a request for a Minor Modification to CUP2003-00001/SLR20001NAR2003-
00009, the City of Tigard Public Library. The Minor Modification approval criteria are listed, along
with a discussion of how major modification criteria are not applicable.
C. SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
SENSITIVE LANDS: CHAPTER 18.775
ensi ive an s are an s po entia yunsuitable for development because of their location within:
the 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas which are regulated by other
agencies including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands, or are
designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map, and
steep slopes of 35% or greater and unstable ground. A land use application is required for
ground d�sturbances in sensitive lands areas.
The proposal involves 340 cubic yards of excavation within the floodplain , a hard surface path in the
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 4 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HE4RINGS OFFICER
floodplain, and no temporary alteration of the floodway for the construction/placement of the bridge.
According to Section 18.775.020.G this proposal requires a Type III sensitive lands review by the
Hearings Officer.
Within the 100-year floodplain 18.775.070 (B)
The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request
within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been
satisfied:
Land form alterations shall �reserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and
maintenance of the zero-foot r�se floodway shall not result in any encroachments, including
fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified by a
registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in flood
levels during the base flood discharge.
The applicant has provided a letter and report from Pacific Water Resources, Inc. that certifies a zero-
foot rise in flood elevations. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in
areas designed as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except
that alterations or developments associated with communi� recreat�on uses, utilities, or
public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the ommunity Development Code
shall be allowed in areas designated residential sub�ect to applicable zoning standards;
The trail is an alteration associated with community recreation, which is allowed in the floodplain, as
are trails in City parks. The use is most closely related to a public support facility, therefore, the land
form alteration required for the construction of this use is allowed in accordance with this criterion.
Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will
not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood;
As mentioned above, the final project design was the subject of a.flood analysis that certified a zero-
foot rise in flood elevations. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrianlbicycle pathway in
accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said
pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely;
The proPosal is to construction a pedestrian/bicycle path, which fulfills an approval condition listed in
the HO s approval of a portion of the Tigard Library Project (CUP 2203-0001). However, as
discussed later in the staff report, there is evidence to indicate that pathway construction may be
untimely.
The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the
elevation of an average annual flood;
The path is located in the 100-year floodplain. Minor alteration of the floodway will be necessary to
construct footings for the bridge over Fanno Creek. The bridge itself will be located outside the
floodway. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
The necessary US Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of
State Lands, and CWS permits and approvals shall be obtained; and
The Corps and DSL have jurisdiction over work within wetlands and below the high water mark (the �
top of bank). According to the natural resource assessment report completed by Fishman
Environmental Services, no portion of the path, bridge, or construction staging areas will take place in
the wetland or high water mark areas. Therefore permits were not required from DSL or the Corps.
A Service Provider letter was obtained from CWS. In addition, copies of the application materials
were sent to the Division of State Lands, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Fish
and Wildlife and Clean Water Services. No comments were provided.
Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-�0015 PAGE 5 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
year floodplain, the City shail re uire the consideration of deuication of sufficient open land
area within and adjacent to the f�oodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan.. This
area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrianlbicycle
pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway
plan.
This standard does not apply because the property is.already owned by the City and the request is to
construct the pedestrian/bicycle path in accordance with the adopted plan.
Within wetlands 18.775.070 (E):
Special Provisions for Development Along�Fanno Creek 18.775.090:
In order to address the requ�rements of-5tatewide Planning Goal 5�(Natural Resources) and
the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 666-023-0030) pertaining to
wetlands , all wetlands classified as si nificant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams
orr�c o Map" are protected. No land�orm alterations or developments are allowed within or
partially within a significant wetland, except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section
'I8.775.'130.
In order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and
the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660-023-0030) pertaining to
ri arian corridors a standard setback distance or vegetated corridor area, measured
orizon y rom and parallel to the top of the bank, is established for the Tualatin River,
Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek.
No alternation of wetland is planned, however, the proposal does involve alteration of land within the
vegetated corridor and in the vicinity of wetlands. The vegetated corridor standards are addressed in
775.090B below.
FINDING: Based on the plans provided, no alteration of wetlands�is proposed. However, since
construction activities are proposed in the vicinity of delineated wetlands, the
construction boundaries should be clearly defined in order to avoid unintentional and
unapproved disturbance of the wetlands.
CONDITION:No site work will begin until appropriate fencing/demarcation has been installed on site
to clearly identify wetland boundanes and construction perimeters.
775.090. B
2. The standard width for "good condition" vegetated corridors along Fanno Creek, Ball
Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek is 50 feet, unless wider in accordance with CWS
"Design and Construction Standards", or modified in accordance with Section
18.775.130. If all or part of a locally significant wetland (a wetland identified as
significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map") is located
within the 50 foot setback area, the vegetated corridor is measured from the upland
edge of the associated wetland.
3. The minimum width for "marginal or degraded condition" vegetated corridors along the
Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek is 50°/a of the
standard width, unless wider in accordance with CWS "Design and Construction
Standards", or modified in accordance with Section 18.775.130.
4. The determination of corridor condition shall be based on the Natural Resource
Assessment guidelines contained in the CWS "Design and Construction Standards".
5. The standard setback distance or vegetated corridor area applies to all development
proposed on property located within or partially within the vegetated corridors, except
as allowed below:
a. Roads, pedestrian or bike paths crossing the vegetated corridor from one side to
the other in order to provide access to the sensitive area or across the sensitive
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 6 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
area, as approved by the City per Section 18.775.070 and by CWS "Design and
Construction Standards";
b. A pedestrian or bike path, not exceeding 10 feet in width and meeting the CWS
"Design and Construction Standards";
a. Land form alterations or developments are located within or partially within the
minimum width area established for marginal or a degraded condition vegetated
corridor, as defined in Section 18.775.090.B.3.
According to the CWS Natural Resource Assessment, the condition of the vegetated corridor along
the creek is "degraded". The proposed vegetated width of 50 feet exceeds the minimum width
required. A pedestrian path not the exceed 10 feet is width is an allowed use in the vegetated
corridor set. Moreover, CWS has approved the trail design and issued a Service Provider Letter
approving the project with regard to CWS standards.
FINDING: The trail is an allowed use within the vegetated corridor. The vegetated corridor
proposed meets the City and CWS site-specific standards established for vegetated
corridors. �
CONDITION:The applicant shall carry out the vegetated corridor plan as reviewed and approved by
CWS.
Tree Removal 18.790 :
� a�� . requires the submittal of a tree plan that identifies the location, size, and
species of�all trees on the site, a program to save existing trees over 12-inch diameter at
breast height (dbh) or mitigate for their removal, identification of trees to be removed, and a
protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to
protect trees during and after construction.
The applicant has submitted a tree plan that identifies the location. size, and soecies of all trees
within or near the trail corridor. The earlier conditional use application for the development of the
library (CUP 2003-0001) includes a tree inventory covering the larger library property. According to
the trail-specific inventory, three trees (one pine and two deciduous) of 2-inch diameter each are
proposed for removal. The loss of these trees will be compensated for by the planting of 24, 2-gallon
container size (approximately 0.5 inch diameter) trees along the trail. The required .planting of
replacement trees applies to tree removal more than 12 inches in diameter. A protection plan for.
existing trees.has been developed.. This plan is the city's administrative policy pertaining to tree
protection during construction activities on city projects.
Section 18.790.040 states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section
may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with
Section 18.790.030, or as a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be
subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The prope�y owner shall record a
deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit a�fected by this section
to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a
certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree
preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous
tree. The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director.
FINDING: Based on the analysis.above, the Tree Removal standards will be met, if the applicant
complies with the condition listed below:
CONDITION:Provide a copy of the tree protection plan, which will be reviewed by the City Arborist ,
Matt Stine. Tree protection must be installed and inspected by the City's Arborist prior to
site work.
D. Impact Study:
18.390.040.B.e.states that the application shall include an impact study. The impact study
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 7 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
shall quantify the effect of tr�e development on public facilitie� and services. The study shall
address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system,
the parks system, the water system, the sewer system,, and the noise impacts of the
development. For each pubic facility system and type of impact: the study shall propose
improvements necessarX to meet City standards and to minimize the impact of the
development on the pubic at large, pubtic facilities systems, and affected private property
users.
Finding: The applicant has included an impact study that adequately addresses the project's
impact on the various the public facility systems, except for fhe transportation system.
The Engineering Department concludes that the project will increase the number of Hall
Boulevard pedestrian crossing. The lack of provision for crossing improvements will
contribute to unsafe conditions for trail users.
CONDITION:ODOT approval of the location and design of a pedestrian crossing of Hall Boulevard
serving trail users should be obtained and the crossin� installed concurrent with or
before the trail connection is installed. At the applicant s discretion and risk, the trail
section located south of Fanno Creek may be installed prior to the required ODOT
approval of a safe pedestrian crossing. The northern terminus of said portion of the trail
is approximately 50 feet south or downstream of the bridge and midway along the swale
bordering the traiL
SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The City of Tigard Building Division, Long Range Planning, Planning/Engineering Technicians,
Engineering Department, and Public Works have reviewed the proposal and have no ob�ections to
The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has filed the following
comments.
Are there any discussions regarding "ped crossing" where the trail crosses Hall? I know from
experience that the library caused concerns for pedestnans accessing this facility. I know from
experience that other roadways are involved when the Fanno Creek Trail spans the roadway. What
other suggestions (ODOT approved) have been raised?
ResPonse: According to the ODOT 2004 Transportation Volume Tables, Hall Boulevard .01 miles
south of Burnham Road daily handles 14,100 vehicles. The count .01 miles south O'Mara is 13,330.
City Engineering staff who designed the trail alignment conclude that the long term effect of the
completion of the new trail segment will be to increase the volume of Hall Boulevard pedestrian
crossings within the area under discussion, contrary to the conclusion contained in the applicant's
statement. Trail users approaching Hall will have finro options should they wish to cross the road.
One option is to follow the sidewalk or, where there are gaps, the shoulder of the road to the existing
crosswalk and stop light located at Burnham and Hall, or in future, to the proposed crosswalk and
stop light located at Wall Street and Hall. The other option is to wait for gaps in the traffic and to
cross directly over between trail segments.
Hall Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of ODOT. Earlier this year, ODOT disapproved a City request
for a marked crossing adjacent to and north of the bridge on Hall. The City has available funding and
would install a pedestrian crossing at this.location, if granted permission by ODOT. ODOT would
approve a location much further north, ad�acent to the driveway serving Cifjr Hall. This location is
considered by Engineering staff to be unsuitable for a crosswalk serving trail users, because it is too
far out-of-direction to be used by people on the trail and also because the high volume of vehicular
turning movements into and out of the City Hall driveway would create unsafe conditions for
pedestrians. Another factor is that Hall Boulevard is three lanes at this location as opposed to two
lanes where the trail segments meet. In the professional judgment of Engineering staff, it would be
safer for trail users to cross two lanes of trafFic mid-block, between trail segments without a cross
walk than to cross at a marked crosswalk at the �DOT-preferred location, situated approximately 250
feet north of the trail. There are many instances where trail users do not make use of crosswalks
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 8 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
that are out of direction. The users of the trail most likely cross at the most direct and convenient
crossing point, which also happens to be where the street is narrowest.
In conclusion, 2004 daily average traffic volumes within the vicinity of the proposed trail were in the
13-14,000 ran�e and completion of the second of the trail's finro ends is likely to increase the number
of Hall pedestnan crossings. The City has indicated a willingness to put in a crossing that is not too
far away from the point where the trail segments connection to Hall. Negotiations with ODOT
regarding the design and location of the crossing potentially could tie in to the proposed 2006
sidewalk infill along the Hall frontage of the City-owned tax lot north of Fanno Creek. fn any case,
staff concurs with the Police, ODOT, and Citizen comments on the need to address pedestrian safely
as part of the trail project. The crossing and trail improvements should be completed concurrently.
The proposed trail segment should not be installed until the issue of a street crossing serving trail
users is resolved. This conclusion will be included as a proposed condition of approval.
SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS
Metro, Oregon Department of Environmental Qualitx, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Oregon Department of Transportation, Oregon Division of State Lands, Southern Pacific
Railroad, Clean Water Services, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, and US Army Corps. Of
Engineers have reviewed the project and offered no comments.
The Oregon Department of Transportation has reviewed the proposal and offered the
following comments.
Basil Christopher:
Shouldn't this study address how pedestrians and bicyclists will get across Hall Blvd. where the path
connects? O'Mara St. might serve as a valuable lesson here (poor planning).
Regarding the section marked Transportation system - The study reads; "...new trail segment is not
expected to result in an increase in the number of pedestrians crossing Hall Blvd...".
I disagree with this statement for the following reasons. One point of building a path,that connects to
the library is to encourage library users to walk or bike to the library instead of driving. I think it's
reasonable to assume that some people will do this (or why build a path to the libra�). I think it's also
reasonable to assume some young persons who don't drive, will be attracted to wa k and cross here
to get to the library. Given these assumptions, I think it's more likely the new path will result in an
increase in pedestrians crossing Hall Blvd. in this section.
Fredrick Sawyer:
The project looks fine. We may need to discuss the crossing of the highway during the design phase.
The crossing is not included in the plan and can be addressed later.
Sam Hunidi:
From the traffic point of view, the lack of a safe pedestrian crossing is a concern. The trail and
crossing should be handled together. ODOT may not grant future approval for a pedestrian crossing
between the trail segments.
SECTION VIII. PRIVATE ORGANIZATION AND CITIZEN COMMENTS
Brian Wegener, Watershed Watch Coordinator for the Tualatin Riverkeepers has reviewed the
proposal Tias reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments:
My bi gest concern about the Fanno Creek Trail extension around the Library is having the trail cross
Hall �Ivd without a crosswalk. Under "Transportation System" on page 12 of the Fishman report,
there is a statement that does not appear credible:
"Construction of the new trail segment is not expected to result in an increase in the number of
pedestrians crossing Hall Boulevard; however, it may encourage more pedestrians to cross at this
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 9 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
location rather than further south near the library entrance, po����tially reducing the potential for
accidents between pedestrians and automobiles."
My response to this is:
1. How does a new trail extension across a road avoid increasing the number of pedestrians
crossing that road?
2. How does encouraging pedestrians to cross a road at a point with no crosswalk instead of
crossing at a controlled intersection with a crossing signal reduce the risk of pedestrian-auto
accidents?
I suspect that Fishman Environmental Services has no qualifications in traffic engineering or
pedestrian safety, and has no business making such claims to the city. While you have addressed
most of the environmental concerns we have raised, this significant safety concern has the potential
to either stop this project or cause a tragedy. We do appreciate your efforts to minimize impacts to
habitat north of Fanno Creek. One alternative that we raised that was not addressed by the Fishman
report is that the trail use the sidewalk on Omara Street, and cross Hall Boulevard at Omara Street
intersection. This might help with the safety issues and would eliminate the impacts to habitat north
of the creek and east of Hall Blvd.
With these impacts eliminated, great potential for wildlife viewing from the second floor of the library,
using binoculars or spotting scopes is enhanced. We would like the city to consider this potential as
part of the trail plan, since connecting the people of Tigard with nature is one of the objectives of this
trail. Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
Response: Staff agrees with the need for a pedestrian crossing.
The Omara alignment is an on-street alignment. The goal of the City greenway trail plan is to
provide a continuous trail along Fanno Creek as it flows through the City. The quality of the
experience is very different between walking along a street and a greenway trail. The one puts the
walker into close proximity to motorized transportation. The other exposes the walker to wildlife and
flowing streamwater. The same is true of wildlife viewing from the path as compared with wildlife
viewing using binoculars from inside the library. The quality of the experience is diminished and
opportunities for unintended contact with wildlife are reduced. Wildlife viewing is only one benefit of
the trail. Other benefits include health and fitness, reduced reliance on the automobile, reduced
stress, among others. To the extent that a creekside trail is feasible and does not result in the
destruction of significant wildlife habitat, off-street trail segments are preferred to on-street segments.
As indicated elsewhere in this report, a,path along Fanno Creek is consistent with the library master
plan and complies with all applicable review standards.
Sue Beilke, Director of the Biodiversity Project of Tigard has reviewed the proposal has
reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments:
Below are my comments for the Fanno Creek Trail Project, located north of the library. I appreciate
the opportunity to provide comments on this project. I wholeheartedly support the extension of the
trail since it will allow citizens to connect with nature and provide wafking, biking, birdwatching and
other activities for folks that improves livability.
I do have several concerns and comments as follows:
First, I have gone to meetings in the past several years with the city where it appeared there would be
a marked crosswalk on Hall as well as possibly a median island where people could go if they needed
to stop due to heavy traffic. Hall Blvd. as we all know is getting busier by the day, and to cross this
street on foot or via bike can be dangerous. The current proposal is for not even a marked crosswalk
on Hall. I believe this lends itself to an extremely dangerous crossing for citizens and a significant
safety concern for all, both for trail users and motorists. The citv recently installed a crosswalk on SW
North Dakota for the Fanno Creek trail crossing and it has really been making a difference. I notice
motorists are now stopping more frequently and are more courteous to people waiting to cross.
In regard to the above safety concerns, a recommendation would be to put route this section of the
trail along Hall to the south so that it comes out by Omara Street and then users could cross there
and a crosswalk could be installed at this intersection. That would eliminate the unsafe proposed
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 10 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
crossing as it is currently proposed. I think Brian Wegener also has proposed running the trail
through the church/senior center and then crossing Hall at Omara street.
My other major concern is for potential habitat and wildlife impacts due to the present proposed trail
alignment north of the library. Impacts to the vegetated corridor include 3,004 square feet of
permanent impact. This is a large area of permanent impact and.it means we lose this much area of
habitat and open space permanently. As we have stated at past meetings for the libra open space
areas, we recommend that the entire area north of the creek be protected for wild�fe, including
specifically addressing habitat needs for the western pond turtle which have been observed here in
the creek and crossing Hall at this very spot where the trail is proposed to cross. The upland portion,
including where the trail alignment is pro�posed, is one of the last areas of "uplands" that could be
improved for nesting habitat for turtles. Turtles need sparsely vegetated, sunny areas for nesting
that are quiet and away from human disturbance or they won't use the area. If a trail goes througfi
this area it will be used heavily, wildlife will not stay in this area because of noise and other impacts
that humans cause. One of the main reasons the library site was supported by citizens was that the
city was able to acquire a large open space tract. This was very exciting to many citizens since we
felt it was a olden opportunity for the city to protect and improve habitat for a variety of species such
as the pond�urtle. Since the city did use the pond turtle as a target species when getting fhe grant for
this project from the Oregon State Parks, it seems appropriate that we also provide and then improve
habitat for the turtles by protectin� certain areas for them to ensure their long term survival. �thout
adequate nesting habitat turtles will not survive for the long term. By protecting the entire area north
of the library for wildlife, we believe there will be a greater opportunity for wildlife viewing from south
of the creek on the trail and from the library itself using spotting scopes and binoculars.
Thanks a�ain for the opportunity to.comment. We appreciate all of the hard work and effort staff has
put into this effort to provide recreational and wildlife viewing opportunities to the citizens of Tigard.
Response: The comment regarding the need for a marked crosswalk is responded to elsewhere in
this report. .
According to the Hearings Officer Final Report (CUP 2203-0001, Tigard Library), "there is no
substantial evidence in the record that the construction of a trail along Fanno Creek above the
averaae annual flood elevation would adversely affect the turtle habitat if conducted consistent with
applicable city, ODOL and Clean Water Services ("CWS") standards."
Fishman Environmental Services provided the following comments regarding the Northwestern Pond
Turtle and the trail:
The northwestern pond turtle (Emysf Clemmys marmorata marmorafa) is not a listed federal or
state species; it is a federal Species ofi Concern.�SOC) and a state critical (SC) species. A SOC is a
species that is being considered for federal listing; a SC species is a species for which listing as
threatened or endangered is pending or may be appropriate if immediate conservation actions are not
taken.
"The northwestern pond turtle prefers quiet water in small lakes, marshes, and sluggish streams and
rivers. It will also inhabit man-made or modified watercourses such as reservoirs, canals, farm ponds
and sewa�e treatment ponds. The pond turtle is a dietary generalist and opportunist with seasonal
shifts in diet related to prey availabifity (Holland 1991). It requires basking sites, such as logs, rocks,
mud banks or cattail mats, for thermoregulation (Csuti 1997).
The northwestern pond turtle has been observed in the vicinity of the project area. An adult and a
Juvenile turtle were observed along Fanno Creek on the west side of Hall Boulevard south of the former
Tigard Library, and in 2000 a large adult pond turtle was observed crossing Hall Boulevard from north of
the new library site east of Hal` to the former library site (Sue Beilke pers. comm.). The project site
contains patches of suitable turtle habitat: sluggish water and basking structures, shallow water onds
with potential forage, and upland cover for over-wintering. However, habitat is limited by accessibilitpy due
to surrounding roadways and development, and physical features such as the incised, vertical banks of
Fanno Creek and the dense reed canary grass, blackberry, and scrub-shrub which can be difficult to
traverse. No pond turtles were observed durin� recent field visits of the project site, but the time of year
and construction on the new library could have influenced observations.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 11 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Since pond turtles were observed as recently as 2000 in the vic����cy of the project site, the pro1 ect
design includes measures to minimize impacts to turtles. An aircraft cable-type fence will be installed
on both sides of the trail from Hall Boulevard to Fanno Creek to discourage trail users from leaving
the trail. A dense shrub barrier consisting of tall Oregon grape and Wood's rose will be installed east
of the fence to further discourage trail users from leaving the trail. Installation of the fence and dense
shrub barrier will minimize the potential for human disturbance to turtles and other wildlife using the
wetlands and Fanno Creek riparian area located east of the trail."
Modifications to the trail alignment north of Fanno Creek have been made to minimize the potential
for impacts to turtle habitat since several preliminary trail designs were initially presented in the
Fanno Creek Park Master Plan Summary (Murase Associates, May 2003). All of the trail designs in
the master plan extended further east into the Fanno Creek Park site than the currently proposed trail
alignment. In addition, the earlier trail designs also incorporated a series of smaller side trails and
boardwalks that would have provided access to the ponds and streams on the site but would have
resulted in greater natural resource impacts. The currently proposed trail alignment has been shifted
closer to Hall Boulevard than initially proposed to avoid impacting wetlands and wildlife habitat.
The potential wildlife and habitat impacts of the trail are the minimum necessary to install the trail.
These impacts will be compensated for by the restoration of the required vegetated corridor to good
condition. Additionally, the master plan for the area calls for the future restoration of the parks' some
nine area to historic conditions. The trail will improve turtle safety by providing a partial barrier to the
crossing of Hall Boulevard, which, based on the crossing event described in the Fishman comments,
poses a threat to turtle safety.
Notwithstanding this, staff agrees that the northwest pond turtle's status as a federal SOC and state
SC highlights the need for a formal wildlife assessment and will include this as a recommended
approval condition.
John Frewing, a private citizen, has reviewed the proposal has reviewed the proposal and has
offered the following comments:
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Fanno Creek Trail Project in the vicinity of
Tigard's public library. Please consider the comments below and modify the proposal accordingly:
1. I question whether the proposed project is consistent with the goals of the Fanno Creek Park
Master Plan. Such master plan includes the following purposes: a trail system that provides
accessibility for people of all ages and physical abilities; preserve, enhance and restore natural
resources; a safe and secure park. The uncontrolled crossing of Hall Blvd seems to limit
accessibility and safety. The incursion of the project into the turtle habitat area on the north
side of Fanno Creek, east of Hall Blvd seems to damage already scarce natural resources in
the area.
Response: The 2003 Fanno Creek Park Master Plan map includes a trail alignment that extends
further east into northern portion of the library property than does the alignment proposed in the
present application. The proposed alignment pulfs the alignment back toward Hall Boulevard in
order to minimize the trail's impact on the natural area. The same is true of the "preferred alignmenY'
for this segment of the Fanno depicted in the 2003 Metro Fanno Creek Greenway Tra�l Action Plan.
This alignment extends east-west throu.gh the length of the northern area and also intrudes into
wetland area. The alignment under consideration avoids all wetlands.
Also to be noted is that the "natural area" within the propose trail alignment is not in pristine condition.
According to the CWS natural resource assessment, the area in question is degraded. The area is a
former horse pasture.covered with nonnative pasture grasses. The park, master plan calls for its
future restoration to historic, pre-settlement conditions, but its present condition is an area where the
soil has been compacted by years of livestock grazing and where few native species survive.
The issue raised regarding access and safety is discussed below.
2. Although not stated explicitly, I presume the hearing is a Type II hearing under the Tigard
code, since it involves a sensitive lands review. My comment is that all provisions of the code
which apply to a Type_II hearing and decision should apply. My first impression is that I don't
see a trafFic study and impact study.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 12 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT ' STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Response:, The applicable procedure is a Type III hearing conducted by a Hearings Officer. The
permit application, beginning on page 12, includes a narrative addressing 18.390.040 B.2.(e): Impact
Study. A traffic study is not required because the trail segment does not impact the vehicular
transportation system. It provides an additional access and route for bicycles and pedestrians.
Although pathways also are part of the transportation system, a traffic study is. not usually
requirement for their construction. In the case of the present pro�ect, a pedestrian crossing study will
be required.
3. The application material prepared by Fishman does not appear to consider compliance with
TCDC 18.360.060, Minor Modifications. This section has a number of approval criteria which
must be met. The notice of hearing does not identify Section 360 as applicable to this project.
Response: The Notice of Public Hearing correctly omits 18.360 as including applicable review
criteria. The reason is that the original application, the one proposed for modification, was a
Conditional Use Permit proposal (CUP 2003-0001). Therefore, the Conditional Use modification
criteria would apply. These are addressed beginning on page 5 of the application narrative and
elsewhere in this staff report.
4. Section 18.810.030, regarding street design, of the Tigard code states that no development
shall occur unless the streets ad�acent to the development meet the standards of this chapter.
I question whether Hall Blvd, adjacent to this development, meets the current street standards
for this busy street, including width, curbs, sidewalks with planter strip, crosswalks, etc. The
notice of hearing does not include Section 810 as one of the applicable review criteria. It
should be reissued because of this serious shortcoming.
Response: The present application is a minor modification to the COT Public Library project
(CUP20030001). The original proposal addressed the provisions of Section 18.810. The final order
issued by the Hearings Officer dictates in condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is
making a continuin�, diligent, good faith to identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along
Fanno Creek that will not be below the elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal
fulfills this condition by defining a suitable alignment for the trail through the library property.
According to Engineering staff, traffic studies are not normally ren�aired for trails, as re!ates to the tra�l
rig ht-of-way.
5. I don't think the buffer requirements of Section 360 are met, considering the purpose, of
providing buffer near this pro�ect. The beneficiaries of buffer are the small animals which live
near Fanno Creek and its wetlands; without a very tight fence, the domesticated animals which
accompany people will invade the area north of Fanno Creek and east of Hall Blvd. An aircraft
cable barrier and plantings are proposed; it is not stated whether this is a single aircraft cable,
or multiple cables strung horizontally. I suggest instead a 4-foot high chain fink fence with 4"
clearance above ground, in conJ unction witFi plantings as buffer. The point is that this is not a
common buffer for human needs, but a buffer which must meet the needs of small animals,
with particular needs (nesting, forage, isolation from humans) known only to experts. Because
this pro�ect bnngs many more people near the natural features north of Fanno Creek and east
of Hall, the entire east side of Hall Blvd north of Fanno Creek, to the school bus parking lot,
should be protected with the above suggested buffer. The entire frontage along Fanno Creek
should be protected at its buffer boundary with fencing meeting CWS standards.
Response: The buffering requirements included in Section 360 (under 360.090.4) are generic and
apply to buffering and, screening between different types of land uses based on their zoning
designation. The speafic buffer standards applicable to protecting natural areas, independent of the
zonin� or type of land use involved, are the CWS vegetated corridor standards. These are
administered by CWS and are incorporated into the CWS Design Standards Manual, adopted by
reference into the Tigard Development Code. The applicant has provided a CWS Service Provider
Letter, dated January 2005, documenting compliance with these standards. The applicant has
provided a revised fetter that reflects a reduced disturbance area and less impact to existing
vegetation resulting from the trail's construction than previously proposed.
The proposed aircraft cable-t pe fence is designed to meeting FEMA requirements and includes 3
horizontal cables spaced 1 �oot apart. This fence design was modeled in the no-rise report
submitted by the applicant and is part of the "no-rise" certification provided by Pacific Water
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 13 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Resources. According. to City Engineering staff, a very tight or c��ain link fence would impede flow
(by retaining water-carried debris) and not meet the flood hydraulic analysis no-rise standards for a
structure situated in the floodplain.
6. When perForming work in wetlands, state requirements call for an alternatives analysis, which
is not done in this application. I believe a feasible alternative with least impact on waters of the
state is the one suggested by Brian Wegener in his recent comments to you -- improvements
along a Fanno Creek Trail se�ment which leaves the stream corridor near the Senior Center,
then proceeds east along O Mara Street (some improvements to church and residential
properties might be appropriate city expenditures) and crossing of Hall Blvd at a protected site
(stop light, crosswalk, lighting, etc.).
Response: The proposed trail alignment avoids all wetlands.
7. The notice of hearing does not identify TCDC 18.385 regarding Sensitive Land Permits as one
of the applicable approval criteria; it should.
Response: The purpose of chapter 385 is to identify the types of permits included in the
development code. The respective criteria that apply to the identified permit types are included in the
various 700 chapters. In the case of Sensitive Land Permits, the applicable approval criteria are
listed in Chapter 775, Sensitive Lands. The present proposal addresses the criteria laid out in 775.
8. The provision of viewing structures is inconsistent with maintanence of the zero-rise flood
plain., The proposed structure (and existing, unpermitted structure) are perpendicular to the
direction of stream flow and present an obstacle to flow and debris flowing in the stream during
flood events. The viewing structures should be deleted. �
Response: The viewing structure referenced is not part of the present proposal. The scope of the
proposal is limited to the installation of a pedestrian trail and includes no other improvements.
9. In earlier comments, I have suggested a cantilevered footbridge on the west side of the
existing Hall Blvd motor bridge as an alternative for the proposed project.which has less impact
on natur�l features of the area and state waters. Your staff analysis simply says that ODOT
didn't like the idea. There is no reason for such dislike for the pro�ect; Tigard should pursue
this option at.least to finding out the reason for ODOT dislike; perhaps there are modifications
which will satisfy ODOT concerns.
Response: The existing vehicular bridge includes a marked bike lane and narrow sidewalk on either
side of the road. A pedestrian bridge cantilevered or free-standing adjacent to the existing vehicular
bridge would provide basically the same function. It would be more of an enhancement to the
sidewalk on Hall as op,posed to a continuation of the trail. The Engineering Department did look at
the feasibility of a cantilevered or free-standing pedestrian bridge ad�acent the vehicular bridge. It is
doubtful thaf the existing bridge would provide adequate support for an attached structure or would be
allowed by ODOT. Moreover, although not scheduled or funded as yet, the existing ODOT-owned
bridge is substandard in terms of width and height and is highly likely to be replaced by a new
structure at some unspecified time in the future. Any attachments to the bridge would be removed.
According to preliminary field study, the length of a free-standing span would 6e in the range of 150
feet, with an estimate cost in the $300-400,000 range. This excludes the cost of acquiring private
property needed to install the span. As stated elsewfiere, the City would prefer that the trail continue
along Fanno Creek versus the on-street alignment. The preferred alignment of the trail is the route
depicted in the present proposal. Because of that, the City has not investigated this suggested on-
street alternative to the trail alignment beyond an on-site meeting with ODOT to view and discuss
pedestrian-friendly improvements to the Hall Boulevard bridge.
10. I disagree with the Fishman conclusion (re 18.330.020.B 2) that a greenway trail is not a
change.from the approved use of this tract for a public library The impact is that this chan�e
is a ma�or modification rather than a minor modification and different rules and approval criteria
apply. Similarly this project clearl changes access ways and parking areas where off-site
traffic �eg that traffic on Hall Blvd� would be affected. A dictionary meaning of words not
special y def'ined in the Tigard code is the standard in this regard.
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 14 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
F
Response: As noted earlier, the final order approving the library Conditional Use application issued
by the Hearings Officer dictates in condition # 10 that "the applicant shall show that it is making a
continuing, diligent, good faith to identify an alignment for a pedestrian/bicycle path along Fanno
Creek that will not be below the elevation of an average annual flood." The present proposal fulfills
this condition by defining a suitable alignment for the trail throu�h the library property. The applicant
clearly has demonstrated by a point by point response to the onditional Use review criteria that the
proposed project is a minor and not a major modification.
11. The proposed project does not meet the requirement for campus-like industrial uses, ie it is not
pedestrian friendly, specifically the crossin� of Hall Blvd is not pedestrian friendly. The project
includes this crossing, as its description indicates that it connects with the existing Fanno
Creek Trail on the west side of Hall Blvd.
Response: Because all of the City-owned industrial land located north of the creek is classified as
floodplain and wetlands, it is not suitable for light industrial development.. It is, however, suitable for
a greenway trail. The crossing of Hall Boulevard is addressed elsewhere in this report.
12. The project description (Fishman) states that a (future) grading plan "will enable the trail to be
designed and constructed to avoid any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year
flood". This conclusory statement purports to meet 18.775.070 B 3, but actually improperly
defers an important decision to a later stage when public participation will not be available.
The engineering to show no increase in water surface elevation should be done before this
project is approved.
Response: The required certification has been provided by the applicant in the form of a hydraulic
analysis, performed by Pacific Water Resources. A copy of this study: titled No-Rise Certification:
Pedestnan Brid e Crossing of Fanno Creek Below Hall Boulevard, is included in the Planning
Division pro1'ect�ile and is available for public inspection. The study concludes that the "proposed
project meets the criteria for a `no-rise' certification."
13. Since 18.790 is one of the approval criteria, a tree plan is required. All elements of the tree
plan should be provided prior to the hearing.
Response: This criterion is addressed within this staff report. A tree inventory portraying the tvpes
and diameter of trees within and proximate to the trail corridor is include in the project file. Only three
small, approximately 2-inch diameter trees, are proposed for removal. The vegetated corridor plan
approved by CWS includes the planting of 24 native, half inch diameter trees along the trail route.
14. The Fishman application for sensitive lands permit, at page 12, states that this project will
result in 'reducing.the risk for accidents between pedestrians and road users.' I disagree. The
Fanno Creek Trail has hundreds of users each day and more pedestrian traffic crossing busy
Hall Blvd will result. A traffic study by� a certified professional should be developed to
determine what the traffic impact .will be. The code requirements for an impact study
(18.390.040 B.2.e) include the requirement that it "shall propose improvements necessary to
meet City standards . . ."; the present submittal does not do such and it should.
Response: This comment is responded to elsewhere in this report.
�
� Au ust 15 2005
. uan o s
Asso �at anner
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 15 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
Au ust 15 2005
. ic ar ew o
Planning M n er
SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 PAGE 16 OF 16
FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER
. .
GEOGRAPNIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
YIQNITY MAP
�
; SLR�005-000 I 6
'� MMD2005-00015 '
o FANNO CREEK
� m � TRAIL PROJECT
LP �
I
� _ ,,t
: ��
� I �N R�
� I � � �
w � � �� ,.�m y �> -
U � [iULi L(T' �` � \ \ I_
. Q m uo�._. .o
� '------- — �
I
f�� II —"�E`BEN��� O�NINYT RO
'i �
II TqarA Area Map � I
�
N
J �---_ __ o " - ------
� ° °o
0
= po O � 0 100 200 3DD 400 Faet
0 o O — — _
__ O�
� 0 1"=310 feet
— °o °o o�° °o
— o 0 0°
i
I' City of Tigard
IInformalion on Ihis map is for general loca�ion only and
ahould be verified with Me Development Services Division.
13125 SW Hall Blvd
a
Tigard,OR 97223
(503)639-M1 171
hltp:llww�r.ci.ligard.or.us
, Community Development Plot date:Jul 21,2005;C:lmagicWIAGIC03.APR
�� NOISInIa JNINNt/�d a21t�J11 �0 Jlll�
�
• E
t
Totol area o/poth = 12,780 SF LEGEND �
Permonent vegetated corridor /mpoct area = 3,004 SF -- -•-a r,,,,,o�.�r�qero�se � V
. . r �i Wef/ands i�::J,�corridw fmpxfa Q W
Total construction stoging areo = 11,114 SF I�--- 0 �+
�__i Sbeome&O�tla �sqsfotH corrlOor m/tiqotion 1 O
g Total vegetoted corrido� a�eo impacted — � ; O �
by construction = 5,435 SF ,j�v�o�w��,.�eo. ��I�j� w��se�..r..�„�a m;rgor;a, O �
r s� s r• (temporory impact) re„�v�r - � N J
� _ �»,y.mew<w.ieo. � � Q Q
hnDocfe �
?,� /�51oWa°"°�' p'°W'�"�o� �,� Totol vegetated corridor mitigation area = 3,�4 SF � f �
0
� �Slop��0.0700 1� �/ � /t�� � � �
� � Temporory vegetated corridor impoct areqs � i!�y � � _
�o,� ,,� wil! be restored fo a good condition � / ,, ; � ��I<<,1 � �
1
� � �,� following completion of construcfron i. �-- � �' �,;� � W
'Aick J�1 "-0�iock o�ar- CompOCfW wbqrOOl / � / �f' + ��jlj O W
7�lhick 1�0�ro<k � � � ,.�/ � �{���I� �'1�., -- . _ . O �
� � / / 'I ��1�'I �I��I , . O V
TYPICAL PATHWAY SECTION � � / i / � f }I�f i ifl#� I`� t O O
.� � }
i� J Z
� /� ! i " ��� �� i � � f##"(��;� � N Z
sc��e: i _ioo i., v«mmmr�.y.rorw �/ ( i��'i � ,(�}{�' � Q
� � 1 �\� . carMw�wna«r I+i ��I�'�# '' �:, � �1.
' ; .. ,� a.�_ ,6�� ,/ r ,,t' {���
� - - � I L(�' != '�;`.� , ;! vf
� � �` . �a� � +� ;�
:� � � � t � � � -- _
,' � � // � � �. � .,';' �\. � r'� _ �_ _ ==
� ` � ` - -
,;,, r _ r « _ -- .
, � �, --_.
�` . � � � •C`��r°�„�Wn � � � � ��� ; _ - -- �
� ' . � •� p L�Y � . .-�
�� f / � 16�e Mnr t� I
+ �'�-� �� �\ \, f, _Y
y � L � � � _ �, ' i' � --�
�" � "���. -•-r� �
t: ; ' * l r
' i. � / �m^z._ �` �'1 J i � �,-� <� �
. . . . . II�'... . (; .� •:',, � Pem,onmt roqetafltl . - - 1 ; Q +��� � 11�'
�f'. �lOOr lmpact � - Z 1' ' � .
� I I I I� :I • ''� `,/ ar� � I.751 SF ' - � nD' - - \ -1 / 1 �.{I� J ' _� �
� `� � � _,_ - - -� - _ : `� oy 11 'I ���h _ . �� _� �
. . , v.yera�.�car.wu:. , _ - � ��..1 �n � ��I 1 ,,,- .
:p.:� mnryoNOn wea r 6?R sf::1 - _. -. � � .�;1 p 11 . �.t� , �y, �.
, : , � � O f ,��: - _ _ _ � i o �� , �f�� ' � -� ��
' � � v�„w r��,�,� � \ �: \ roo rrr aoon L �:� ;�`' - - - oc � 1��I} (��'t �� I � �
. .
1 o pldor o�cr �� � . PUN�,f£1EV�14i' �� - -- - _ - �� O� i' ' � 1 r�`�I ...- -'.l I , �
� � � �; �� � � � `� Y _ - �.�.,I I �jj�l 4�1���`- " � �L T
� � � 1 C�try�i .._�tr�. � � . II 'TI- — . - - - - , I� � 1'
... wtimint .`` . ' m f--F='� ' -- -- 1 T- - r � i�� j I 1y ' . . '.II�ll� 1�4 1�' � Z
y i I
�11111 `I1111._'_ I �J {'�I -� —
_/ '� . � 1 �'1 �I � rI1'� �{ � I� .I
I'
+ �� �w`� { �•-? _ %�-- � ` . . � �� J 6 rfiTL � � � � � �.��� r �
� ��; ' Consfrucfion rfa4�9 � y�..,f ��1 �ii �
� ,�. . . . . . . . � � . w�o�J.532 Y .-_— I � . I I I �i � I � �I� �
. . . L.�.J_._ . � � . .J ��.--.. ___ . � 1-' _ .. __ . _ _
- — — f i -—' - �i f'�� r W } T�-�
� . 1 _ -,._,_ -- —- - t �� y .---�-�,—_�
i.
.� ..--.'C . _.- ..,
"'- --
. ;� _-- "_ . _
MfINC 1011 S O�n f0,Y11pOC�IO I . -"- - ^`
,� ,:, � W
g 4 �� � VaqefofM canOw .. ..., . . . �L ' ---_.- . .
s
area� 7.561 SF nr�o^:�ti�u�-zas�sr .- HALL BLVD. � -�� —.. , �
ti F _
,.. .. � .' .... :i_.. �._._ �_ .._ (fwmparary lmpoctJ � �_r..^_. . I� � - �
° ------" _� ��_ . _ N
• Sl:,� wq.robd car/eo' ••�, - /—�;------_ ...,.. I. - �r - N
-1 Veqstated canMOr wsa � mfNpoNOn a���7,J73 SF . --- - _.._. _,". .._ _,. ....__ ...
r—�_..
LnpectM Dy cm�trvcfron I� Q
_�.on sF(�.�,�Po.o.y w�c«r) �l � f�; � � «+
� o� � O
f � C
N
O — Q
� �
Brian Wegener EXH1BfT�
Watershed Watch Coordinator SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015
Tualatin Riverkeepers FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
16507 SW Roy Rogers Road
Sherwood, OR 97140
Sue Beilke
11755 SW 114th Place
Tigard, OR 97223
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
Sam H. Hunaidi, Assistant District Manager
ODOT — District 2A
6000 SW Raab Road �
Portland, OR 97221
CO�1 ,1 A AT T�TTT � CITY OF TIGARD P� �IC HEARING ITEM
✓11V�Vl�J 11 1 � The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer on
SPl�ll �RS onday Au�ust 22. 2005 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center -
Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral
1325 SW Custer Drive, Portland, OR 97219• PO and written testimony is invited.
Box 370• Beaverton, OR 97075 The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance
Phone: 503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 with the Tigard Municipal Code and the rules of procedure adopted
EmaiL by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set
legaladvertising@commnewspapers.com forth in Chapter 18390. Testimony may be submitted in writing prior
to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearing only.
Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to
A F F I DAV I T O F P U B L I CAT I C�N �e close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence
sufficient to afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to
State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board ofAppeal based on
that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community
I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly swom, Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is
depose and say that I am the Accounting directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion.
Manager of The Times {serving Tigard, i A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted
Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of I by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are
eneral circulation, ublished at Beaverton, in available for inspection at no cost. A copy of the staff report will be -
9 P ' made available for inspection at no cost at least seven(7)days prior
the aforesaid county and state, as defined by I � �e hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at a
ORS 193.010 and 193A20, that reasonable cost.
� Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division
City of Tigard—Public Hearing (staff confact: Duane Robertsl at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard,
Fanno Creek Trail Project(SLR) 2005-00016 Oregon 97223, by calling 503-639-4171, or by e-mail to
-'' (MMD) 2005-00015 duane(a�ci.tigard.or.us.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM:
; CNI TT10643 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 2005-00016/MINOR
MODIFICATION(NLMD)2005-00015
;'= a copy of which is hereto annexed, was >FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT<
� publ'ished in the entire issue of said UEST: The a licant is re uestin Sensitive Lands Revie
newspaper for approval to construct a 10-foot-wide paved, multi-use trail within a
� portion of the floodplain. The trail segment is approximately 1,090
feet in length,approxunately 700 feet of which are located in the 100-
`== successive and consecutive weeks in the year floodplain. The proposal includes a pedestrian bridge crossing
' Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevazd vehicular bridge over
=' following issues Fanno Creek. Minor alteration of the floodway will be conducted to
' place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is also requesting Minor
August 4, 2005 Modificahon approval to a previously granted Conditional Use
Permit (CUP2003-00001/City of Tigard Publ�c Library) in order to
^,�; ����/1 �p ^ add the pedestrian trail on the site. LOCATION: The proposed
L�' �� ` project is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain,east of SW Hall
1�° Chariotte Allsop (Accounting Ma ager) Boulevard,north and east of the existing Tigard Library,and south of
' the Souther Pacific Railroad tracks. The path will connect to the
existing Fanno Creek trail network. WCTM 2S102DA,Tax Lot 600;
Subscribed and sworn to before me this and 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200. ZONES: R-12: Medium-
Density Residential District; and I-P: Industrial Park District.
� Au ust 4, 2005 APPLICATION REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development
9 Code Chapters 18330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775 and 18.790.
- PLEASE SEE THE VICINITY MAP TO BE REDUCED AND
PUBLISHED WITH THIS LEGAL NOTICE. THANK YOU.
.' . N�TARY BLIC FOR OREGON __.
,-
-: My commission expires � � """
, �'��'��C7��� ��\` `�� �� `� �� ��►�...
' � � �S1A2005-00016
� �< � �MMD2005-OOUIS (
. Acct# 10093001 � + i,�'��, � °°°---"—� �
City of Tigard � { }� S\ � iiA�NNOP[REE� �
L� Attn:Accounts Payable ` \ ' N � , , � �
� �� ���: I
13125 SW Hall Blvd � �� � r
; MY COMMIS �- �``�-� � � � ��
'• Tigard, OR 97223 �----� � ���; ,'
;
�' �� _r��.��... 4 .V I�� �4 rry 4 �I
1
,
t.. �. �--,-� -�-� .
.._ �
SIZe X 1�'S J�.._.'`° f ��� f � � , , s
Amount Due $ l��'35 � � ' f— --�r
,-( ,, -i
• •remit to address above � � �{__ � ' - _-,{ ; A �
� --:�,�.. -!�r—��s` I � � ,,....
, _
. �— _ � _.�_' I
... _ '
:;: ; �_��—��-�- � .:a.
�:t , _�._
- �. _ � ,� _ .
, _ ��..
, � TT10643 Publish 8/4/OS
�
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF A LAND USE PROPOSAL
IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED
ON THE SITE.
In the Matter of the Proposed Land Use Applications for:
Land Use File Nos.: SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015
Land Use File Name: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
I, Duane Roberts, Associate Planner for the Citv of Tiqard, do affirm that I posted notice of the land use
proposal affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax
lot(s) currently registered) �-l� C-��/L( Z�� C� 2— �� �C� � and did
personally post notice of the Public Hearing on the proposed land use application(s) by means of
weatherproof posting in the general vicinity of the affected territory, a copy of said notice being
hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the �Z--day o LL L� 2005.
' � �l.-
.
Signature o Perso ho Performed Posting
h:lloginlpatty�mastersla�davit of posting for applicant to post public hearing.doc
, , _ ��,.,,�.�.-��:�.--
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING .
The following will be considered by the Ti ard Hearin s Officer on Monda Au ust 22 2005 at 7:00 PM at the
Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 a v ., igar , regon. o pu ic ora an wri en es imony is ..
invited.
The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Tigard Munici al Code and the rules of
procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure se�forth in Chapter 18.390.
Testimony may be submitted in writing prior to or at the public hearing or verbally.at the public hearing only. Failure
to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to.the close of the hearing accompanied by statements or
evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land
Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community.Development Code or
Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion.
A copy of the application .and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant. and th
applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost. A copy of the staff report will be made available fc.
inspection at no cost at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at a
reasonable cost.
Further information maY be obtained from the Planning Division staff contact: Duane Roberts at 13125 SW Hall
Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503-639-4171 , or by emai o uane ci. igar .or.us.
SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2005-00016/
MINOR MODIFICATION (MMD) Z005-00015
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-wide paved, multi-
use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail segment is approximately 1 ,090 lineal feet, approximately 700
feet of which are located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a pedestrian bridge crossing Fanno
Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over Fanno Creek. Minor alteration of the floodway will be -
conducted to place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is also requesting Minor Modification approval to a
previously granted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-00001/City of Tigard Public Library) in order to add the
pedestrian trail on the site. LOCATION: The proposed project is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east
of SW Hall Boulevard, north of the existing Tigard Library, and south of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The
path will connect to the existing Fanno Creek trail network. WCTM 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax
Lots 100 and 200. ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District; and I-P: Industrial Park District.
APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530,
18.775 and 18.790.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITYOFTIOARD
Community�Development
SFiapingA Better�omrnunity
I, �Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a SeniorA�'ministrative SpeciaCut for
the �'ity of7fgard,�`Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following:
{Check Appropnate Box(s)Below}
� NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: �� SLR2005-00016/MMD2005-00015 — FANNO CREEK TRAII PRO ECT
(File No./Name Reference)
HEARING BODY: HEARING DATE:
City of Tigard Planning Director
Tigard Hearings Officer (8/22/2005)
Tigard Planning Commission
Tigard City Council
A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked E1lhlblt"A",and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to
each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked EfIh161t"B",and by reference made a part
hereof, on AlIg11SI1.2005,and deposited in the United States Mail on AlIg11S�1,2005,postage prepaid.
, �
(Pers at ep e otice
,S'xA�E O�F'O�C�ON �
County o �GVasfiington )ss.
�'°.f �ard ) �
�
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the �' day of�� , 2005.
„�; OFFICIAL�L',_ .
�N' �
T �,�:j ;��,-�,���, ,
--,i'/ P �`T 4RY FUdJ:.. —� ' ^r�.t�
�-/ ' -r.%v11S5'QN N0.3751�2
' f,;�COi�':UII����!E;P1r�ES G.C.1,2007
My Com on FSrnires: ��`��' v 7
NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHv�OER,VENDOR OR SELLER: EXHIBlT..�..
THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,
IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER.
CITY OF TIGARD
�ommunity•vec�e(opment
C�� �� ������ SYurping/��detteiCommunity
HOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY
AUGUST 22, 2005 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER AT 13125 SW
HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION:
FILE NOS.: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2005-00016
MINOR MODIFICATION (MMD) 2005-00015
FILE TITLE: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
APPLICANT/ City of Tigard
OWNER: 13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a
10-foot-wide paved, multi-use trail within a portion of the floodplain. The trail
segment is approximately 1,090 feet in length, approximately 700 feet of which are
located in the 100-year floodplain. The proposal includes a pedestrian bridge
crossing Fanno Creek near the existing Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over
Fanno Creek. Minor alteration of the floodway will be conducted to place the
pedestrian bridge. The applicant is also requesting Minor Modification approval to
a previously granted Conditional Use Permit (CUP2003-00001/City of Tigard
Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on the site.
LOCATION: The proposed project is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east of SW
Hall Boulevard, north and east of the existing Tigard Library, and south of the
Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The path will connect to the existing Fanno
Creek trail network. The path will connect to the existing Fanno Creek trail
network. WCTM 2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200.
ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is desig ned
to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050
square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted
conditionally.
I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations
for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g.,
restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only
those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor,
vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development
review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to
insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and
pedestrian-friend ly.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775
and 18.790.
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF
CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURES ADOPTED BY
THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL.
ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES Ar.� AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMr r�IRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL
ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED
BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR (503)
684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO
THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS.
ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN
WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC
HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT �
PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND I
WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER
MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON
THE APPLICATION.
IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION LESS THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR
TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF
THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY
REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A
REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING
(ORS 197.763(6).
INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE
TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR
DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND
THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE
REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED.
FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE
HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE
HEARINGS AUTHORITY AN OPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE
LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE.
ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR
INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25G) PER PAGE, OR
THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS
PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO
COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25G) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE
CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER DUANE ROBERTS AT (503)
639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223, OR BY E-MAIL TO
duane@ci.tigard.or.us.
�n��nr�w
SLR2005-00016
MMD2005-00015
' ���� FANNO CREEK
` ��V � TRAII PROJECT
� ,,.���
\\�,���
,\��\�. ,
����
� �, ���..
�
W
_
° �� .��� �;� -
����\�\������`\ _t
� � ���� ���� �
�\���\��;� ` \ .
� � N
�—_�_� � _-____ �.r
9 �
CJry efTyrd
M�
��wem
wr�ti..
19102D02 SARTITION PLAT C1102DF002�ARD EXHIBIT.,.�
OWNf OF LOTS 1 &2 131 HALL BLVD
� ARD,0 97223
25102DD-90232 102DD-0010
ALEMU YOHANNES CI F ARD
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 131 HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 T ARD, 97223
2S102DD-01200 102DA-0060
AMARIR JEANNE M AUMAN 8 CI OF ARD
AMARIR AHMED 1312 HALL BLVD
13615 SW HALL BLVD T RD, 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90122 2S102DD-90611
ANDREWS TRAVIS J CLARK MICHAEL R
13712 SW HALL BLVD#2 13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 1
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102 DD-90652 2S 7 02D D-90542
BENNETT JAMES G CLARK RODNEY K 8 PATRICIA A
13676 SW HALL BLVD#5 13682 SW HALL BLVD#4
PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90552 2S102DD-90361
BERGMAN BECKY R COLE KATHRYN R TRUST
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 5 BY COLE KATHRYN R TR
TIGARD, OR 97224 13702 SW HALL BLVD#6
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01500 2S102DD-00902
BLICK CARL J DONA JEAN COLLING CHARLES
8740 SW O'MARA 8878 SW EDGEWOOD ST
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S 102 DD-90222 2S 102D D-00901
BRIDGMON DEBRA COLLING CHARLES W
13706 SW HALL BLVD#2 13835 SW HALL
TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90642 2 02DD-OD9
CARTER KIMBERLY S COL HARLES W
13676 SW HALL BLVD#4 138 S ALL
TIGARD,OR 97223 ARD,OR 223
2 S 102DA-a0900 2 S 102DD-90152
CHARBONNEAU LARRY& COSENZA JENNIFER L
WELSH ROBIN 13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 5
13337 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S 1 G2 D D-'90142 2S 102 DD-90252
CVETIC DEBORAH L FIELDS JENNIFER R
13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 4 13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 5
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90732 2S102DD-90422
DELSMAN LORI B HARPER JON&MEGHANN
13694 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 2
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102 D D-90522 2S 102 D D-90242
DISTEFANO BROOKS HOLDEN SPENCER R
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE#2 13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 4
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DA-00690 2S102DD-01603
EIKREM A HOLLAND RONALD P MARY L
PO BOX 82824 8850 SW EDGEWOOD
PORTLAND, OR 97282 TIGARD,OR 97223
2 S 102 D D-90411 2S 102 DD-01400
ENGEL MARIE C HOLSTEIN MARVIN R/LORETTA R TRS
13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 8710 SW OMARA
TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90161 2S101 CB-00400
ENGSTROM JARED S JEMPAK PARTNERS LLC
13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 6 7034 SW 83RD AVE
TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97223
02DD-9000 2S102DD-01601
FAN P NTE CONDOS JENSEN DAVID L AND LOIS C
OW F ALL UNITS 8840 SW EDGEWOOD
p TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90452 2S102DD-90561
FANNO POINTE LLC KNOWLTON SHELLEY
109 E 13TH ST 13682 SW HALL BLVD STE#6
VANCOUVER,WA 98660 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102 DD-90432 2 S 102 D D-01300
FAYLOR MAX&AMBER KRAEMER JULIA A&MARK W
13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 PO BOX 80665
TIGARD, OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97280
2S10100-01200 2S102DD-90342
FIELDS FRED W LAIN JOANNA M
1149 SW DAVENPORT 13702 SW HALL BLVD#4
PORTLAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90661 2S102DD-90111
LAMMERS LOIS E NEWMAN MICHAEL R&LAURIE J
13676 SW HALL BLVD#6 13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 1
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-01604 2S102DD-90332
LASNIEWSKI WILLIAM L AND OFFENSTEIN HEATHER
TERESA A 13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 3
8860 SW EDGEWOOD TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD, OR 97223
2S1 D2DD-90211 2S102DD-90461
LOUGHIN DOUGLAS M OLSON GEORGE P&
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 WELLS SHARON K
TIGARD,OR 97224 13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 6
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DA-00700 1S735C8-00800
MAGNO LLC OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
8800 SW COMMERICAL ST RIGHT OF WAY SECTION
TIGARD, OR 97223 355 CAPITOL STREET NE RM 420
SALEM,OR 97301
2 S 102 D D-90511 2S 102�D-90722
MASON RONALD C ORME BRAD R&ERICA L
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 13694 SW HALL BLVD#2
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102DA-00300 2S 7 02D D-05600
MATSUMOTO WILLIAM Y&NINA A O'ROKE GABRIELA
8770 SW BURNHAM RD 13705 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S 102 DD-01501 2S 102D D-90132
MCANDREW JOHN W&ANGELA D PALMER KRISTIN M&
8830 SW OMARA ST BROWN SHAWN L
TIGARD,OR 97223 13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 3
TIGARD,OR 97224
2 S 102 D D-90752 2S 102 DD-05700
MCDOLE JAMES MERRITT REUTHER DEBBIE
13694 SW HALL BLVD#5 11900 SW JAMES CT
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90311 2S102DA-00800
MILLS BERTIE JOYCE SCHALTZ RANDY A&MARGARET C
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 13335 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90622 2S102DD-90761
NEWELL CAROLYN S SIGLER PAMELA D
13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 2 13694 SW HALL BLVD STE 6
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD�90742 2S102DA-00701
SKOOG KARI TIGARD CHRISTIAN CHURCH
13694 SW HALL BLVD STE 4 13405 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S 102DD-90352 102DA-OD
SNELSON MICHAEL D&BRIANNE L TI RD TY OF
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 5 131 W HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97224 T ARD, 97223
2S102DD-00400 2 102DD-003
SOLARES HOMES L L C TI 0 TY OF
BY NORRIS BEGGS 8 SIMPSON 131 HALL BLVD
LOAN SVC DEPT ARD, 97223
121 SW MORRISON#200
PORTLAND,OR 97204
2S102DD-0110D 102DD-004
SOLIS EDGAR TRUSTEE TIG D TY OF
PO BOX 231193 131 HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97281 T ARD, 97223
2S102DD-90532 102DA-007
STARK LYNNE L TI RD Y OF
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 5.3 131 W HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 T ARD, 97223
2S102DD-01301 2S102DA-0070
STATE OF OREGON TI RD OF
DEPARTMENT OF TRASPORTATION 1312 HALL BLVD
RIGHT OF WAY SECTION RD, 97223
417 TRANSPORTATION BLDG
SALEM,OR 97310
2S102DD-90261 102DA-004
STENSON RICHARD TI RD OF
13706 5W HALL BLVD STE 5 131 W HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 ARD, 97223
2S 102 DD-90442 2 102DA-OD402
STEPHENSON GARY M TI D OF
13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 4.4 1312 HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 ARD, 97223
2S102DD-90711 2 102�A-004 0
TAKASHIMA GREGG K& TI D TY OF
HOLLISTER-TAKASHIMA LAURA 131 HALL BLVD
13694 SW HALL BLVD STE#1 ARD, 97223
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102 D D-90632 2S 102 DA-DO500
TIEU BRANDON H TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL
13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 DISTRICT 23J
TIGARD,OR 97224 6960 SW SANDBURG ST
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102D D-01600
TINNIN ROBERT O ELAINE M
8876 SW EDGEWOOD ST
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01602
TOKUDA KAZUHIDE AND
CAROL LYN
8870 SW EDGEWOOD ST
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90322
WALKER TERESA
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 2
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S101 CA-00200
YOUDE FAMILY TRUST ETAL
14201 NE 50TH AVE
VANCOUVER,WA 98686
Brian Wegener
Watershed Watch Coordinator
Tualatin Riverkeepers
16507 SW Roy Rogers Road
Sherwood, OR 97140
Sue Beilke
11755 SW 114th Place
Tigard, OR 97223
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
Josh Thomas Gretchen Buehner
10395 SW Bonanza 13249 SW 136� Place
Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224
Kristen Miller
8940 SW Edgewood Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Paul Owen
10335 SW Highland Drive
Tigard, OR 97224
Tim Esau
PO Box 230695
Tigard, OR 97281
CPO 4B �
16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242
Tigard, OR 97224
Ross Sundberg
16382 SW 104th Avenue
Tigard, OR 97224
Brian Wegener
9830 SW Kimberly Drive
Tigard, OR 97224
Joseph Dyar
10285 SW Highland Drive
Tigard, OR 97224-4668
Rex Caffall
13205 SW Village Glenn
Tigard, �R 97223
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
CITY OF TIGARD - SOUTH INTERESTED PARTIES (pg. I of I) (i:lcurpin\setup\labels\CIT South.doc) UPDATED: 12-May-05
. . ,.
Nathan and Ann Murdock Gretchen Buehner
PO Box 231265 13249 SW 136th Place
Tigard, OR 97281 Tigard, OR 97224
Sue Rorman Mildren Design Group
11250 SW 82�d Avenue Attn: Gene Mildren
Tigard, OR 97223 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120
Tigard, OR 97223
Naomi Gallucci
11285 SW 78�Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223
Michael Trigoboff
7072 SW Barbara Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
Brad Spring
7555 SW Spruce Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Alexander Craghead
12205 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223-6210
David Chapman
9840 SW Landau Place
Tigard, OR 97223
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
CPO 46
16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242
Tigard, OR 97224
CPO 4M
Pat Whiting
8122 SW Spruce
Tigard, OR 97223
CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES �i:lcurpinlsetup\IabeIslCIT East.doc) UPDATED: 2-Jun-05
�o � .
. � - .
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
� ���
�5�')
mneeeewa
m�tanwua meawretu omnenao ———————————
FOR: SLR2005-00016
masw�wa�
rno oau
RE: 2S I O�DA, 600/
�SIO�DD, 100/200
tS10YB/9BOBI �����������
me�wnaa
� Property owner information
� is valid for 3 months from
> mo:uoowo the date printed on this map.
J
m
BYOIIOtl tE1840111eB0Y
l511! 00707 g�
�
Sf1YY011E0)D1 `�. �'
ma owa
�*�
-- — m� mom �e;�;;�.;...
10lBIIp
m�:nmsn ox�oow
o:ooms �HOno�
rn�:o�man
menome� tsiamem:eo
N
m�nenca � ———----�o--
menameo Q me�ae:� o �oo zoo 30o aoo soo Feet
meseamat = me�on a�x
ai�seee�a�eo �o:oaoemo mmm�:ae
1"=381 feet
2fIBl109908 1411 151 1 00 ���8 ��1
81BOW 1 0 0 �0�
p�jry� o 0
II
lSIBMIIINP
manooeo� City of Tigard
nn�w�m �oruwo menoea�ei
Iniortnation on this map is for general localion only and
should be verified with the Development Services Division.
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard,OR 97223
87TH (503)639-4171
ARTHUR http://w.vw.ci.tigard.or.us
Community Development Plot date:Jul 22,2005;C:\magiclMAGIC03.APR
102DD-O58 102DD-0020
19 0 ARTITION PLAT CI F ARD
OWN� OF LOTS 1 &2 131 HALL BLVD
� ARD,O 97223
2S 102 D D-90232 102 D D-0010
ALEMU YOHANNES CI F ARD
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 131 HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97224 ARD, 97223
2S102DD-01200 102DA-0060
AMARIR JEANNE M AUMAN& CI OF T ARD
AMARIR AHMED 1312 HALL BLVD
13615 SW HALL BLVD T RD, 97223
TIGARD, OR 97223
2S102DD-90122 2S102DD-90611
ANDREWS TRAVIS J CLARK MICHAEL R
13712 SW HALL BLVD#2 13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 1
TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90652 2S102DD-90542
BENNETT JAMES G CLARK RODNEY K&PATRICIA A
13676 SW HALL BLVD#5 13682 SW HALL BLVD#4
PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102 D D-90552 2S 102 D D-90361
BERGMAN BECKY R COLE KATHRYN R TRUST
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 5 BY COLE KATHRYN R TR
TIGARD, OR 97224 13702 SW HALL BLVD#6
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01500 2S102DD-00902
BLICK CARL J DONA JEAN COLLING CHARLES
8740 SW O'MARA 8878 SW EDGEWOOD ST
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S 102 D D-90222 2S 102 DD-00901
BRIDGMON DEBRA COLLING CHARLES W
13706 SW HALL BLVD#2 13835 SW HALL
TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90642 2 02DD-009
CARTER KIMBERLY S COL HARLES W
13676 SW HALL BLVD#4 138 S ALL
TIGARD, OR 97223 ARD,OR 223
2S102DA-00900 2S102DD-90152
CHARBONNEAU LARRY& COSENZA JENNIFER L
WELSH ROBIN 13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 5
13337 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD, OR 97223
2S102D D-90142 2S102DD-90252
CVETIC DEBORAH L FIELDS JENNIFER R
13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 4 13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 5
TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90732 2S102DD-90422
DELSMAN LORI B HARPER JON&MEGHANN
13694 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 2
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102D D-90522 2S102 D D-90242
DISTEFANO BROOKS HOLDEN SPENCER R
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE#2 13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 4
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DA-00690 2S102DD-01603
EIKREM A HOLLAND RONALD P MARY L
PO BOX 82824 8850 SW EDGEWOOD
PORTLAND,OR 97282 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90411 2S102DD-01400
ENGEL MARIE C HOLSTEIN MARVIN R/LORETTA R TRS
13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 8710 SW OMARA
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90161 25101 CB-00400
ENGSTROM JARED S JEMPAK PARTNERS LLC
13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 6 7034 SW 83RD AVE
TIGARD, OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97223
02DD-9000 2S102DD-01601
FAN P NTE CONDOS JENSEN DAVID L AND LOIS C
OW F ALL UNITS 8840 SW EDGEWOOD
p TIGARD,OR 97223
2S 102 D D-90452 2S 102 DD-90561
FANNO POINTE LLC KNOWLTON SHELLEY
109 E 13TH ST 13682 SW HALL BLVD STE#6
VANCOUVER,WA 98660 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102 D D-90432 2S 102D D-01300
FAYLOR MAX&AMBER KRAEMER JULIA A&MARK W
13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 PO BOX 80665
TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97280
2S10100-01200 2S102DD-90342
FIELDS FRED W LAIN JOANNA M
1149 SW DAVENPORT 13702 SW HALL BLVD#4
PORTLAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90661 2S102DD-90111
LAMMERS LOIS E NEWMAN MICHAEL R&LAURIE J
13676 SW HALL BLVD#6 13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 1
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-01604 2S102DD-90332
LASNIEWSKI WILLIAM L AND OFFENSTEIN HEATHER
TERESA A 13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 3
8860 SW EDGEWOOD TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90211 2St 02DD-90461
LOUGHIN DOUGLAS M OLSON GEORGE P 8�
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 WELLS SHARON K
TIGARD, OR 97224 13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 6
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 7 02 DA-00100 1 S 135C B-00800
MAGNO LLC OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
8800 SW COMMERICAL ST RIGHT OF WAY SECTION
TIGARD,OR 97223 355 CAPITOL STREET NE RM 420
SALEM,OR 97301
2S102DD-90511 2S102DD-90722
MASON RONALD C ORME BRAD R 8 ERICA L
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 13694 SW HALL BLVD#2
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102 DA-00300 2S 102D D-05600
MATSUMOTO WILLIAM Y 8 NINA A O'ROKE GABRIELA
8770 SW BURNHAM RD 13705 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-a1501 2S102DD-90132
MCANDREW JOHN W&ANGELA D PALMER KRISTIN M&
8830 SW OMARA ST BROWN SHAWN L
TIGARD, OR 97223 13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 3
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90752 2S102DD-05700
MCDOLE JAMES MERRITT REUTHER DEBBIE
13694 SW HALL BLVD#5 11900 SW JAMES CT
TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGAR�,OR 97223
2S 102D D-90311 2 S 102 DA-00800
MILLS BERTIE JOYCE SCHALTZ RANDY A&MARGARET C
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 13335 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2 S 102D D-90622 2S102D D-90761
NEWELL CAROLYN S SIGLER PAMELA D
13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 2 13694 SW HALL BLVD STE 6
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90742 2S102DA-00701
SKOOG KARI TIGARD CHRISTIAN CHURCH
13694 SW HALL BLVD STE 4 13405 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
25102DD-90352 102DA-00
SNELSON MICHAEL D&BRIANNE L TI RD TY OF
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 5 131 W HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 T ARD, 97223
2S102DD-00400 2 102DD-003
SOLARES HOMES L L C TI D OF
BY NORRIS BEGGS&SIMPSON 131 HALL BLVD
LOAN SVC DEPT ARD, 97223
121 SW MORRISON#200
PORTLAND,OR 97204
2S102DD-01100 02DD-004
SOLIS EDGAR TRUSTEE TIG D TY OF
PO BOX 231193 131 HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97281 T ARD, 97223
2S 102DD-90532 102 DA-007
STARK LYNNE L TI RD Y OF
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 5.3 131 W HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97224 T ARD, 97223
2S102DD-01301 S102DA-0070
STATE OF OREGON TI RD OF
DEPARTMENT OF TRASPORTATION 1312 HALL BLVD
RIGHT OF WAY SECTION RD, 97223
417 TRANSPORTATION BLDG
SALEM, OR 97310
2S 102 DD-90261 102 DA-004
STENSON RICHARD TI RD Y OF
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 5 131 W HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 T ARD, 97223
2S102DD-90442 102DA-00402
STEPHENSON GARY M TI D OF
13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 4.4 1312 HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97224 ARD, 97223
2S102DD-90711 2 102DA-004 0
TAKASHIMA GREGG K 8 TI D TY OF
HOLLISTER-TAKASHIMA LAURA 131 HALL BLVD
13694 SW HALL BLVD STE#1 ARD, 97223
TIGARD, OR 97224
2S 102 D D-90632 2S 102DA-00500
TIEU BRANDON H TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL
13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 DISTRICT 23J
TIGARD,OR 97224 6960 SW SANDBURG ST
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01600
TINNIN ROBERT O ELAINE M
8876 SW EDGEWOOD ST
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01602
TOKUDA KAZUHIDE AND
CAROL LYN
8870 SW EDGEWOOD ST
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90322
WALKER TERESA
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 2
TIGARD, OR 97224
2S101CA-00200
YOUDE FAMILY TRUST ETAL
14201 NE 50TH AVE
VANCOUVER,WA 98686
Josh Thomas Gretchen Buehner
10395 SW Bonanza 13249 SW 136th Place
Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224
Kristen Miller
8940 SW Edgewood Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Paul Owen
10335 SW Highland Drive
Tigard, OR 97224
Tim Esau
PO Box 230695
Tigard, OR 97281
CPO 46
16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242
Tigard, OR 97224
Ross Sundberg
16382 SW 104th Avenue
Tigard, OR 97224
Brian Wegener
9830 SW Kimberly Drive
Tigard, OR 97224
Joseph Dyar
10285 SW Highland Drive
Tigard, OR 97224-4668
Rex Caffall
13205 SW Village Glenn
Tigard, OR 97223
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
CITY OF TIGARD - SOUTH INTERESTED PARTIES {pg. I of I) (i:\curpinlsetupllabels\CIT South.doc) UPDATED: 12-May-05
Nathan and Ann Murdock Gretchen Buehner
PO Box 231265 13249 SW 136� Place
Tigard, OR 97281 Tigard, OR 97224
Sue Rorman Mildren Design Group
11250 SW 82�d Avenue Attn: Gene Mildren
Tigard, OR 97223 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120
Tigard, OR 97223
Naomi Gallucci
11285 SW 78th Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223
Michael Trigoboff
7072 SW Barbara Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
Brad Spring
7555 SW Spruce Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Alexander Craghead
12205 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223-6210
David Chapman
9840 SW Landau Place
Tigard, OR 97223
John Frewing
7110 SW Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
CPO 4B
16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242
Tigard, OR 97224
CPO 4M
Pat Whiting
8122 SW Spruce
Tigard, OR 97223
CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES �i:lcurpinlsetupllabelslClT East.doc) UPDATED: 2-Jun-05
2si a2��-o0200
CITY OF TIGARD
13125 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-00100
CITY OF TIGARD
13125 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DA-00600
CITY OF TIGARD
13125 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97223
� ' PRE,APP.HELD BY:
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223-8189
503.639.4171/503.684.7297
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON LAND USE PERMIT APPLI�TION
U �
File# �SLj�����_!'(; Other Case#
-C'�0 0 �(
Date By� Receipt# City ❑ Urb ❑ Date Complete -Zf��
TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR
❑ AdjustmenWariance (i or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑Zone Change (III)
❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development (III) ❑Zone Change Annexation (IV)
❑ Conditional Use (III) �Sensitive Lands Review (I, II or III) ❑Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV)
❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) ❑ Site Development Review (II)
❑ Home Occupation {II) ❑ Subdivision (II or III)
ress i ava�a e
Z�-� G Z- ��� /vc� Z o o � Zs/ o z - �
�� r ! � �JlZ ��
C_� Uf / ! �' � r�]�
`�/Z,� �'�-v `—{� `� /(,�c/ l �C r Ul� � 7 Z�
.���3 -- 7� � - Z-� 3�� - G �Y -7�-�
� �, �� � � :� -- / " -Z
ac is i more an one
C� �� � 4 ��
� ` Z - � w ��t� 1� �
T�� -� 6 - i 7 - � � � - 7�.g
'When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be purchaser of record or a lessee in
possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The�ners must sign this application in the
s ace rovided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this a plication.
ease e speci ic
APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REG�UIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS
DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET.
THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT:
♦ If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the
terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval.
♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits
transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based
on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false.
♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria,
and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s).
SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED.
� � � � ���z�/�� "
Owner's Signature Date
Owner's Signature Date
Owner's Signature Date
Owner's Signature Date
Owner's Signature Date
� � �, T��
ApplicantlAge t/R resentative's Signature Date
ApplicanUAgent/Representative's Signature Date
� �.
CITY OF TIGARD
Commu�:ity�17e�c�eCop��ent
,S(tapirag��ettei C�ra�nu�tity
LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION
120 DAYS = N/A
FILE NOS.: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2005-00016
MINOR MODIFICATION (MMD) 2005-00015
FILE TITLE: FANNO CREEK TRAIL PROJECT
APPLICANT/ City of Tigard
OWNER: 13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Sensitive Lands Review approval to construct a 10-foot-
wide paved, multi-use traiT within a portion of the floodplain. The trail segment is
approximately 1,090 lineal feet, approximately 700 feet of which are located in the 100-
year floodplain. The proposal includes a pedestrian brid ge crossin� Fanno Creek near
the existing Hall Boulevard vehicular bridge over Fanno Creek. Minor alteration of the
floodway will be conducted to place the pedestrian bridge. The applicant is also
requesting Minor Modification approval to a previously granted Conditional Use Permit
(CUP2003-00001/City of Tigard Public Library) in order to add the pedestrian trail on
the site.
LOCATION: The proposed project is located within the Fanno Creek Floodplain, east of SW Hall
Boulevard, north of the existing Tigard Library, and south of the Southern Pacific
Railroad tracks. The path will connect to the existing Fanno Creek trail network. WCTM
2S102DA, Tax Lot 600; and 2S102DD, Tax Lots 100 and 200.
ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to
accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet.
A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally.
I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for
combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants,
personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those,light.industrial
uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P
zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development
standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-
integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.510, 18.530, 18.775 and
18.790.
DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I � TYPE II ❑ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV
DATE COMMENTS WERE SENT: JULY 22 2005 DATE COMMENTS ARE DUE: AUGUST 5 2005
HEARINGS OFFICER MON. RING: AUGUST 22, 2 : 7: PM
PLANNING C�MMISSION MON. DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM
CITY COUNCIL UES. DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM
STAFF DECISION EN ATIV DATE OF DECISION:
COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
� SITE PLAN HYDRAULIC REPORT GEOTECH REPORT
� NARRATIVE BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT WETLAND DELINEATION
NATURAL RESOURCE RPT. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RPT. GRADING, ETC. PLANS
STAFF CONTACT: Duane Roberts, Associate Planner (5031639-4171, extension 2444
�' �r Counry,oregon 2002-136823
�� 04:18:51 PM
i� o-ow c��.=� smu a ouvcK
525.00 58.00 511.00 -Totai=542.00
� t �g td ���R.t�� 11-IIS SPACE RESEK
00201946200201368230050058
��y 1,J�rry Hao�on,Dlndor of Aaa��emerrt and Taxatlon ,,
, and Ex-ORlclo County Cl�rk for Washinpton County, �
do h�nby urtlfythd th�wlthin Indrummt of writlnp t�� �:=?,
vv�s ncdwd�nd ncord�d In th�boqk o/ncords oi ^ . � ;��
uld courrty. i l_ ��,
,..,Ew,soti. �F�,:._•: f
After recording return to� J�rty R.H�n�on,Dlnctor u�um�nt and TaxaUon,�'���
C�Cy of Tigard EX.on,�io�o��,h,�i.�
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Trgard,OR 972Z3
una!a ci►2nge is rt!q�ied aU tax statements
shali be sent ta the�011owing address:
City of Tigard
13125 SW HaII Blvd
Tgard,OR 972Z3
File No.: NCS-4184-0RI (pb)
Date: October�2, �pOZ
�
0
o �— 'STATUTOt�'Y SPECIAL WAR�ANTY DEE�
�. �-
0
T '��
E�i Fred W. Fields,Grantor,conveys and specially warrants to Gty of T�gard,a�Oreac:n rr��sr.i�i�a!
m U � carpora�ic�n,the rollowing described real property free of liens and encumbrances created or suffered
� � � ! by the Grantor,except as spetifically set forth herein:
� �
` ; �
�� ' See Exhibit°A°attached hereto
�_ -
�
� This property.is free from liens and encumb�ances, EX�EPT: See �xhibit°B"attached hereto
.�
� V �
� �
THIS IN51"RUM�NT WILI. IVOT ALLOW USE OF THE PRpPERTY DESCRIBEp IN TI-iIS INSTRUMENT IN
VIOLATION OF APPi.ICAgl.E LA►VD USE LAWS ANp REGUl.�4T10N5. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING
THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSQN ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CN�CK WITH THE
APPROPRIAT� CM OR CQUN7Y PLANNING pEPARTMEN7 TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO
DETERMINE ANY LIMITS OfV LAWSl1ITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS D�FIIVED IN
oRS 3a.930.
The five consideration for this canveyance is $2,100,pOQ.00,
ACCEPTED:
City of Tigard, an Oregon
� ��/ `� , municipal corporation
I�� �/ �
Fred W. Fields
�` L/
William A. Monahan
City Manager
Page 1 vf 2
� . . _ �
Ap{,:R4SE951 �tutory Speclal WaRaniy beed Fle No.:P1C5-+i164-0R1(pb)
-oot�tlnued pate:l0/22/2002
SfATE QF OrQgon )
)ss.
County af �,;,� s h � n� �� 7 )
This instrument was acknowledged before me an this 3��day of �G�� b e r _ ,, 20 � z
by Fred W Fields. _
�� � ��'1 - ��
Notary Public for Oregon
�
OFFICIAL SEAL My rnmmission expires:
VERDA M GREGG
NOTARY PUBLIC—OREGON
� � COMMISSION NO.355208
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEB 27,2006
Page 2 of 2
2002-136823
� �,.�.,�'�..,,�,.-,,
STATE (�F OREGON ����■���IIIIIII�III
� SS: 2002 136823
County of Clackamas }
This instrument was acknowledged before me on �G�D� -� , 26, by William A.
Monahan as City Manager of the City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal corporation, on behalf of the
corporation.
. .�..�._ ��-�� �
� ' � ::';' ;�."`- Notary Pub ic for Oregon
�;:
�� ��:.f.::=�: , �•: :;_�
�. :�����y,. • �,;;r;���� My Commission Expires .>110103
.�, 'r;411A:•:i:';)i�!AfC'. 3'�'%�
N;t ..r•. _?,;?�Y 10,2�
- . .,:tF.'� r
OFFICl/1L SE11L
CATH�lE D IMFE�7IEY
NOTARY PUBUGpFC�iQN
MY COIIAMISSI(NV�IXF�IRES MAY 1q�
. ' � `1 �' _,1' •
EXHiBIT "A"
IIIIIII I��■��I
PARCEL I: 2002-136823
7he North one-half of Lot 1, �DGEWOOD ACRE TRACTS, in the City of Tigard, Cvunty vf Washi�gton
and State of Oregon.
PARCEL 11:
7'he South one-half of Lot 1, EDGEWOOD, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of
Oregan.
PARCEL IIl:
All thet CeRain tr�ct of land in the WilliBm GrahBm Donetion Land Claim No. 39 in Township 2 South,
Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of
Oregon, conveyed to Beacher B. Robinson by Daed recorded at page 193 of Volume 128, Washington
County, Oregon Deed Records, end being more particularly desc�ibed as follows, to-wit:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of the aforesaid Robinson Tract in the ce�ter of the County Road at
the Northwest corner of Lot 1, EDGEWOOD, a duly recorded subdivision of Washington County, Oragon,
which beginning point is said to bear 5.60 chains West and 21.02 chains North of the Northwest comer
of Section �2, TOwnghip 2 South, t�ange 1 West, of the W��lemene Meridian; thence from said point of
beginning North 0°22' East in the center of the said county road 969.4 feet to the Northwest corner of
the said Robinson Tract; thence South 47°43' East 26.9 feet to an iron pipe; thence contin�ing Sauch
47°43' East 431.1 fset to an iron pipe; thence South 99.0 feet to an alder tree marked "C.S."; thence
continuing South 96,0 feet to a point in the center of �anno Geek, fram which point a� iron pipe bears
North 19.9 feet; thence down stream following the center of Fanno Greefc the fallowing courses and
distance: South 37°01` East 11fl.0 feet; South 26°58' INest i 26.0 ie�t; Souin fi°44' West 86.8 feet;
South 3Q°08' East �0.5 feet; South 73°51' East 44.8 feet; North 53°56' East 71.7 feer South 74°06'
Eest 33.1 feet; South 4°44' West 72.6 feet; Sauth 24°24' East 64.3 feet; South 51 °2' East 137.0 feet
dnd South 11°35' West 42.7 feet to a point on the Nonh line of said EpGEWO�D SUBDtVlSIDN; thence
Nonh 89°00' West along the North line of aforesaid subdivision 35.1 feet to a point in the center of
Fanno Creek, from which point an i�on pipe bears South 69°00' East 7 7.1 feet; thence running
downstreem in the center of Fanno Creek North 39°18' West 32.8 feet North 58°29' West 104.5 feet,
South 86°48' West 41.6 feet and South 12°Q2' West 76,4 feet to a point on the North lina of aforesaid
subdivision, f�om which point an iran pipe bears North 89°00' West 28.0 feet; the�ce leaving Fanno
C�eek snd running along the North line of said subdivision 528.0 feet to the place of beginning.
SAVE AND EXCEPT THEREFROM that portion conveyed to the State of Oregon, by and through the State
Highway Commission recorded August 20, i 965 in Book 656, page 306, Records of Washington County.
• - „����..�I
�
, • Exhibit "B" ���II�II��
2002-136823
1. Statutory Powers �nd Assessments of Clean Water Services.
2. Rights of the public and of governmental bodies in and to that portion of the premises herei+l
described (ying below t�e high water mark of Fanno Creek.
3. Any adverse claim based upon the assertion thst some poRion vf said land has baen removed f�om
or brought within the boundaries thereof by an avulsi�e movement of the Fanno Creek br has been
formed by ihe process of accretion or relict�on or has been created by artificiai means or hss accreted
to such portipn so created.
4. The rights af the public in snd to that portion of the premises herein described lying within the
timits of roads, streets or highways.
5. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof;
Recorded : pecember i 6, 7 971 in Bopk 847, page 55
Favor of : Tigard Water Districi, a municipal Corporation of Washington County, Oregon
For : UnderQround pipeline and/or mains
(. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisipns thereof;
Recorded : July 20, 1972 in E3ook 878, page 295
Favor of : Unified Sewerage Ageney of Washington County, a municipal corporation ancE county
service district of the State of Oregon
For : Sewer �
7. An eesement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof;
Recorded : July 20, i 972 in 600k 878, pags 298
Fevor of : Unified Sewerege Agency of Washington Caunty, a municipal corporation and county
service district oi the State of Oregbn
For : Sewer
J
�� ,
� � . ,�:r,g .
1 •
� '
' Portlond Office
E'���� �I'�!� 434 NW S�Mh A�enue,Su�te 304
J Portlond,Oregon 97209
n D I v+S I O N O F Tel 503.224.0333 Fox 503.224.1851
. ^` 1 l^� www'swco.com .
?/3S � � E�+vIeONMENT/1lvilLUNTS
f
t
Date: July 19, 2005
To: Duane Roberts, Associate Planner, Long-Range Planning, City of Tigard
Dan Plaza, Parks & Facilities Division Manager, City of Tigard
From: Stacy Benjamin, Senior Project Manager, Wetland/Environmental Assessments
Subject: CITY OF TIGARD SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT APPLICATION (Revised)
FANNO CREEK TRAIL—TIGARD LIBRARY SEGMENT
Introduction
The City of Tigard is proposing to construct a new segment of the Fanno Creek Trail on the
Fanno Creek Park site, located north of Fanno Creek, and on the Tigard Library site. The
proposed trail alignment begins on the east side of Hall Boulevard, across from an existing trail
segment behind City Hall, and extends southerly to its terminus at the north side of the proposed
Phase 1 of Wall Street. A drawing showing the proposed trail alignment is attached. The
proposed trail will be constructed to regional trail standards and will meet the Americans with
Disabilities Act guidelines. The path will be a 10 foot wide paved asphalt path with a 1 foot
gravel shoulder on each side, for a total trail width of 12 feet from edge to edge including the
gravel shoulder. The trail will serve the full range of recreational users, including bike riders,
skaters, pedestrians, and wheelchair users. The proposed trail segment is approximately 1,090
lineal feet and includes a 50-foot long pedestrian bridge crossing of Fanno Creek near the
existing Hall Boulevard bridge over Fanno Creek. The bridge and a portion of the trail will be
constructed within the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek; therefore, a City of Tigard Sensitive
Lands Permit is required to be obtained for the project.
A 50 foot vegetated corridor is required by Clean Water Services adjacent to Fanno Creek and
wetlands on the trail site. A Service Provider Letter for the trail project was issued by Clean
Water Services on January 24, 2005 (CWS File No. 4714). The proposed trail alignment and
associated vegetated corridor impacts have been modified slightly since the Service Provider
Letter was issued for the purpose of reducing vegetated corridor impacts; therefore, a modified
Service Provider Letter will be obtained for the project.
__ �
A neighborhood meeting for the project was held on June 6, 2005 at the Tigard Library. The
project is planned for construction in the fall/winter of 2006.
Existing Site Conditions
Site vegetation along the proposed trail alignment consists predominantly of non-native grasses
including bentgrass, meadow foxtail, tall fescue and common velvetgrass. The stream banks of
Fanno Creek are approximately 8 feet high, steeply sloped, and covered with dense Himalayan
blackberry in much of thc project site. The riparian corridor along Fanno Creek contains a
narrow band of native shrubs and scattered trees consisting of red-osier dogwood, rose, Pacific
ninebark, willow, Oregon ash, and red alder.
Fishman Environmental Services (Fishman) prepared a wetland delineation and natural resource
assessment report for the proposed trail project to meet Clean Water Services' requirements for
site development. Fishman delineated wetlands and evaluated the condition of the vegetated
corridor on the Fanno Creek Park site located north of Fanno Creek. Wetlands present on the
Fanno Creek Park site consist of emergent wetlands, seasonally ponded wetlands, and a
permanent open water pond. A 50 foot vegetated corridor is required adjacent to the top of bank
of Fanno Creek and from all wetland boundaries. The vegetated corridor was determined to be in
degraded condition according to Clean Water Services standards due to lack of vegetation cover
by native species and sparse tree and shrub cover.
A wetland delineation and natural resource assessment were conducted by another consultant on
the portion of the trail alignment located on the library site (CWS File No. 2743). The boundaries
of Pinebrook Creek-associated wetlands and 2 ponds were delineated. A 50 foot vegetated
corridor is required adjacent to all wetland and pond boundaries. The vegetated corridor was
determined to be in degraded condition according to Clean Water Services standards due to lack
of vegetation cover by native species and sparse tree and shrub cover. The results of this
previous study were incorporated into the wetland delineation and natural resource assessment
report prepared by Fishman and submitted to Clean Water Services for the trail project. A copy
of this report was submitted to the City under separate cover.
Alternatives Analysis
Alternative trail alignments were evaluated by the City of Tigard during the design process to
minimize impacts of the project to natural resources. Environmental groups have raised concerns
that providing trail access to the Fanno Creek Park site located north of Fanno Creek may result
in human disturbance to turtle habitat. As a result, the City considered shifting the trail alignment
to the west side of Hall Boulevard and incorporating a cantilevered pedestrian bridge over Fanno
Creek that would be attached to the existing Hall Boulevard bridge over Fanno Creek. Since Hall
Boulevard is an Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) facility, this bridge design would
require approval by ODOT. The City met with ODOT to discuss this alternative; however, it was
rejected by ODOT.
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 2
�r
Fanno Creek and its associated wetlands are much wider on the west side of Hall Boulevard than
on the east side of Hall Boulevard where the alignment is currently proposed. A bridge crossing
of Fanno Creek west of Hall Boulevard would need to have a longer span than a bridge on the
east side of Hall Boulevard and would have the potential for greater expense as well as
environmental impacts if a clear-span bridge were not utilized. The alternative trail alignment on
the west side of Hall Boulevard would also require obtaining right-of-way from private property
owners, whereas the City already owns the land east of Hall Boulevard. A trail alignment on the
west side of Hall Boulevard was rejected due to the rejection of a cantilevered bridge design by
ODOT, difficulty of obtaining the necessary right-of-way from private land owners, and greater
expense and potential for greater environmental impacts due to constructing a bridge across a
wider section of Fanno Creek.
Modifications to the trail alignment on the Fanno Creek Park site have been made to minimize
the potential for impacts to wetlands, vegetated corridors, and wildlife habitat since preliminary
trail designs were initially presented in the Fanno Creek Park Master Plan Summary (Murase
Associates, May 2003). All of the trail designs in the master plan extended further east into the
Fanno Creek Park site than the currently proposed trail alignment. In addition, the earlier trail
designs also incorporated a series of smaller side trails and boardwalks that would have provided
access to the ponds and streams on the site but would have resulted in greater natural resource
impacts. The currently proposed trail alignment has been shifted closer to Hall Boulevard than
initially proposed to avoid impacting wetlands on the Fanno Creek Park site and to minimize
vegetated conidor impacts. The potential for the trail to result in human disturbance to wildlife
habitat will be minimized by planting a dense shrub barrier along the east edge of the trail on the
Fanno Creek Park site in order to discourage trail users from leaving the trail and venturing
further east into the site. Additional habitat area protection is provided by the installation of a 4'
high aircraft cable fence extending along the edge of both sides of the Fanno Creek Park, or
northern, portion of the trail. The fence cables are strung horizontally in order to avoid any
increase in flood levels.
Natural Resource Permitting
Vegetated Corridor
A Service Provider Letter for the trail project was issued by Clean Water Services on January 24,
2005 (CWS File No. 4714). A copy of the Service Provider Letter was submitted to the City
under separate cover. The project design submitted to Clean Water Services in January 2005
included proposed impacts to 3,260 square feet of vegetated corridor due to construction of the
bridge, trail, and a small viewing platform. The trail will impact vegetated corridor areas
determined to be in degraded condition that consist of non-native grass communities. No trees
will be removed as part of the trail project.
The proposed trail alignment has been modified slightly since the Service Provider Letter was
issued for the purpose of further reducing vegetated corridor impacts; therefore, a moditied
Service Provider Letter will be obtained for the project. Currently proposed project impacts to
the vegetated corridor include 3,004 square feet of permanent impact due to construction of the
trail. Permanent vegetated corridor impacts will be mitigated on site at a 1:1 ratio by enhancing
3,004 square feet of the vegetated corridor on site. The mitigation area will include a 2,375
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 3
�
square feet area located west of the trail and north of Fanno Creek and a 629 square feet area
located east of the trail and north of Fanno Creek. The purpose of the mitigation area located east
of the trail is to create a dense shrub barrier to discourage trail users from leaving the trail and
venturing further east into the site, which would potentially result in human disturbance to
wildlife using the wetlands and Fanno Creek riparian area located east of the trail. Proposed
impact and mitigation areas are shown on the attached trail alignment drawing. Planting
specifications for the 3,004 square feet mitigation area are included at the end of this application.
The project also proposes 5,435 square feet of temporary impact to the vegetated corridor due to
construction staging areas adjacent to the proposed bridge crossing over Fanno Creek. Proposed
temporary impact areas are shown on the attached trail alignment drawing. Staging areas have
been located 25 feet from the top of bank of Fanno Creek to minimize the potential for
construction-related water quality impacts to Fanno Creek. Best management practices for water
quality protection of Fanno Creek include: installation of orange construction fencing to prevent
staging from occurring within 25 feet of Fanno Creek; installation of sediment fencing at the top
of bank of Fanno Creek; bare soil areas will be reseeded immediately upon completion of
construction; erosion control measures will be maintained for the duration of construction and
until vegetation cover is established. Temporarily impacted vegetated corridor areas will be
rehabilitated after completion of construction to their existing condition or better by seeding and
planting with native trees and shrubs. The existing condition of the temporary disturbance area
on the north side of Fanno Creek is degraded, and this area consists of a non-native grass
community with no tree or shrub cover. The temporary disturbance area on the south side of
Fanno Creek was planted with native trees and shrubs in 2004 as part of the required vegetated
corridor enhancement for the Tigard Library project. Any tree or shrub plantings that are
damaged as a result of construction and staging activities will be replaced with native species
included on the planting plan.
Wetlands
No wetland or stream impacts are proposed for the trail project;therefore, a wetland permit is not
required for the project from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Oregon Department of
State Lands. Delineated wetland boundaries are shown on the attached trail alignment drawing.
Although no wetland impacts are associated with the trail project, impacts to the wetlands in the
south portion of the library site, in close proximity to the southern extent of the proposed trail
project, have been permitted for the City of Tigard's Wall Street Phase 1 project (DSL #31719-
RF, Corps #200200137). Pinebrook Creek and associated wetlands and ponds are proposed to be
reconfigured as wetland mitigation for the Wall Street project. Reconfigured wetland boundaries
are shown in Figure 6 of the wetland delineation and natural resource assessment report prepared
for the trail project. A copy of this report was submitted to the City under separate cover.
Cit�gard Sensitive Lands
The 50-foot long bridge and a portion of the trail will be constructed within the 100-year
floodplain of Fanno Creek; therefore, a City of Tigard Sensitive Lands Permit is required to be
obtained for the project. The grading plan will ensure that the project does not result in any
increase in the flood elevation. Excavation is proposed in the floodplain to compensate for
placement of asphalt fill in the floodplain to construct the trail. Proposed excavation totals 340
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 4
- - -- _�i
cubic yards. Excavated material will be disposed of off-site in an upland location to be
determined during project construction and will be subject to approval by the City of Tigard.
This application is being submitted to the City of Tigard pursuant to the City of Tigard's
Municipal Code, Title 18.330, "Conditional Use" and Title 18.775, "Sensitive Lands" and
specifically addresses the code provisions found in 18.330.20 "Approval Process", 18.775.070
"Sensitive Lands Permits", 18.775.090 "Special Prov�sions for Development within Locally
Significant Wetlands and along the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and South Fork of
Ash Creek", and 18.390.040B.2(e) "Impact Study". Each of the City's code sections pertaining
to the proposed project is addressed independently below. Excerpts from the City of Tigard
Municipal Code are italicized. �
Narrative Demonstrating Compliance with 18.330: Conditional Use
This application includes a request for a Minor Modification to CUP2003-
00001/SLR20001NAR2003-00009, the City of Tigard Public Library. The Minor Modification
approval criteria are listed below, along with a discussion of how each applies to the project
under discussion. The Minor Modification approval criteria require that the Major Modification
approval criteria first be addressed.
18.330.020.B 2. The Director shall determine that a major modification(s) has resulted if one or
more of the changes listed below have been proposed.
a. A change in land use:
The proposal is to construct approximately 1,090 lineal feet of 10-foot wide greenway
trail. The project includes the installation of a 50-foot long pedestrian/bicycle bridge
over Fanno Creek near the existing vehicular bridge. No change in the approved primary
use of the land as a public library is proposed
b. A 1 D% increase in dwelling unit density:
This criterion is not applicable to the present proposal. No residential use is proposed.
c. A change in the type andlor location of accessways and parking areas where off-site traffic
would be affected:
No change in the type and/or location of accessways and parking areas where off-site
traffic would be affected is proposed.
d. An increase in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more than 10% where
previously specified:
No increase in the floor area of the library is proposed.
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 5
�
e. A reduction in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more that 10% of the area
reserved for common open space andlor usable open space.
Altogether, the library site includes some 5 plus acres of open space. Greenway trails are
included in the definition of open space. The trail is a support facility to the open space.
The open space on the library property is also known as the Fanno Creek Park extension.
f.� A reduction of specified setback requirements by more than 20%:
The present proposal does not include any alteration of the existing setbacks that apply to
the library site.
g. An elimination of project amenities by more than 10% where previously specifred, such as,
Recreational facilities, Screening, or Landscaping provisions:
The project is intended to serve open space users exclusively. The proposed
improvements represent an enhancement to the usable open space of the new Tigard
Library.
h. A 10% increase in the approve densiry:
The proposed request does not involve residential development. As such, this criterion
does not apply the present proposal.
18.330.020.C. Minor modification of approved or existing conditional use.
1. Any modiftcation which is not within the description of a major modifrcation a.r provided in
Subsection B above shall be considered a minor modification.
As outlined above, the proposed modification does not fit within the definition of a major
modification by meeting one or more of the changes listed under 18.330.020.B 2.
2. Any applicant may request approval of a minor modification by means of a Type I procedure,
as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria in Subsection C3 below.
The City is requesting Sensitive Lands Permit approval for the trail segment along with
the Conditional Use Permit approval. Therefore, the Type III procedure for the Sensitive
Lands Permit would apply to the combined application.
3. A minor modification shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied following the
Director's review based on the frndings that:
a. The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable requirements of this
title; and
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 6
� We Think rhe db'orld of War �'�
� � 503.671.9709
� ������� fax: 503.671.0711
info(�pacificwr.com
WATER RESOURCES, INC. www.pacificwr.com
�����, 4905 SW Griffith Drive,Suite 200,Beaverton,Oregon 97005
"'���
�..�
July 15, 2005 D �[ � � � � �
Ms. Vannie Nguyen n �L�� I F 2��5 /
CIP Engineering Manager
City of Tigard �ITY OF TIGARD
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard,OR
Subject: Advance No-Rise Certification for the installation of a Pedestrian Bridge over
Fanno Creek downstream of Hall Boulevard
Ms.Nguyen
Pacific Water Resources,Inc.prepaned a hydraulic computer model in support of the installation of a pedestrian
bridge over Fanno C�eek,approximately 150'downsU�eam of Hall Boulevard in the City of Tigard. The
computer model results indicate that tt►e 100-year regulatory floodplain profile will increase approximately 0.01
fcct(1/8")within the area between die proposed pedestrian to just upsrtream ofthe Hall Boulevand Bridge.
Based on the computer model,the hydraulic impact ofthe pedestrian bridge does not reach areas upstream ofthe
Hall Boulevard Bridge.
It is our professional opinion that the local rise in the water surface profile will not impose any meaningfW
hydraulic impacts to the Fanno C�+eek system or neighboring properties. Therefore the proposed project will
meet the criteria for a zero-rise certification. The local rise in water surface elevation is confined to the park area
which,as we unde�stand is City owned property. The proposed project,as we can determine,dces not
hydraulically impact adjacent private lands. We encourage you to verify that the area in question is in fact
owned entirely by the City.
Our analysis is based on the plans(June 16�',2005)and details(July 13�',2005)ofthe proposed pedestrian
bridge and path which were pmvided by tfie City of Tigard via email to PWR. The effective hydraulic computer
model previously prepared by PWR for the FEMA FIS restudy of Fanno Creek was modified by the analysis to
include the proposed project
In addition,our modeling also excludes the proposeci chain link fencing along the path on the north side of
Fanno Creek. As discussed in our me�ting Monday July 11�',2005,a chain link fence in this area would trap
debris from flow in the creek and effe�tively reduce conveyance. If a fence is desired in this area,alternative
materials tfiat allow the passage of debris should be used. For purposes of modeling,we assumed that that the
fencing material would be horizontal cables similarto that shown on the details forthe bridge railing.
A comprehensive draft drainage report documenting our assumptions,methodolo�y used,and results will be
completed and delivered to you befo�the end of July.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concems that you may have.
Sincerely,
Pacific Water:�tesources,Inc.
/' .
-:��t✓
�: `�'red MacGregor, P.E.
Senior Water Resource Engineer
' • . ,
Fanno Creek Trail — Tigard Library Segment
Plantin S ecifications for the Ve etated Corridor Miti ation Area (3,004 s uare feet)
Scientific Name Common Name Size Spacing/ Quantity
Seedin Rate & Location
Trees
Acer macro hyllum big-leaf ma le 2 allon 10 feet on center 8 (west of trail)
Pseudotsu a menziesii Dou las fir 2 allon 10 feet on center 8 (west of trail)
uercus garryana Ore on white oak 2 allon 10 feet on center 8 (west of trail)
Shrubs
Holodiscus discolor oceanspray 1 gallon 5 feet on center 40 (west of trail)
Mahonia aquifolium tall Ore�on grape 1 gallon 4-5 feet on center 40 (west of trail)
2 feet on center 45 (east of trail)
Rosa woodsii Wood's rose 1 allon 2 feet on center 45 (east of trail)
S m horicar os albus snowberr 1 allon 4-5 feet on center 40 (west of trail)
Seed Mix
Bromus carinatus native California seed 10 lbs pls/acre As needed for bare
brome soil areas following
Elymus laucus blue wild e seed l O lbs pls/acre completion of trail
Festuca rubra var. rubra native red fescue seed S lbs pls/acre construction,
Lupinus polyphyllus large-leafed lupine seed 81bs pls/acre �ncluding staging
areas
Plantin�Notes(per CWS Desi�n &Construction Standards, Appendix D Landscape Requirements, March 2004):
1) Himalayan blackberry is present in the vegetated corridor along Fanno Creek. Due to its proximity to
Fanno Creek, mechanical control by hand consistent with Clean Water Services' Integrated
Vegetation and Animal Management Guide (March 2003) is recommended to control its spread prior
to installing plantings.
2) Plantings should preferably be installed between February 1 and May 1 or between October 1 and
November 15. Plants may be installed at other times of the year; however, additional measures may
be necessary to ensure plant survival. Irrigation or other water practices (i.e. polymer, plus watering)
shall be used during the two-year maintenance period. Watering shall be provided at a rate of at least
one inch per week between June 15 and October 15.
3) Plantings shall be mulched a minimum of three inches in depth and 18 inches in diameter to retain
moisture and discourage weed growth around newly installed plant material.
4) Tree plantings shall be protected from wildlife damage (beaver, nutria) by installing tree-protector
tubes or wire mesh cylinders around newly installed plantings.
Maintenance Plan:
1) Clean Water Services requires a two-year maintenance period for vegetated corridor mitigation. The
mitigation site is to be inspected annually, a minimum of three times during the growing season and
one time prior to onset of the growing season. Invasive species control is to be conducted as needed
based upon the site inspections.
2) Clean Water Services' success criterion for vegetated corridor landscaping is 80%survival of tree and
shrub plantings during the 2 years following planting. The vegetated corridor landscaping should be
monitored annually in the spring or fall to assess survival of tree and shrub plantings. If any mortality
is noted on the site, the factor likely to have caused mortality of plantings is to be determined and
corrected if possible. If survival falls below 80% at any time during the two-year maintenance period,
the plantings shall be replaced, and other corrective measures, such as additional mulching or
irrigation, may need to be implemented. If replanting is necessary, the maintenance period will be
extended for two years from the date of replanting.
As detailed iri the application proposal, the proposed development meets all
applicable requirements the Conditional Use title.
b. The modification is not a major modification as defrned in Subsection A above.
As demonstrated, the proposed modification is not a major modification.
18.510 Residential Zoning District
Table 18.510.1, Use Table: Residential Zones
The table lists Community Recreation as a Conditional Use in all the Residential Zoning
Districts. The applicable conditions are described in 18.330.OSO.B.S, Community Recreation
and Parks. Two conditions are listed. One (S.a) refers to building setbacks from the property
line. The other (S.b) says there are no off-street parking requirements, except for dog parks.
Neither condition pertains to the project under discussion.
18.530 Industrial Zoning District
Table 18.530.1, Use Table: Industrial Zones
This table lists Community Recreation as a Conditional Use in all the Industrial zones.
According to footnote 10, this use is limited to outdoor Recreation on (1.) land classified as
floodplain on Ciry flood maps, when the recreational use does not otherwise preclude future cut
and fill as needed in order to develop adjoining industrially zoned upland.
According to FEMA flood maps the industrial portion of the trail right-of-way is located
entirely within the floodplain and does not adjoin any industrially zoned upland.
Narrative Demonstrating Compliance with 18.775: Sensitive Lands
18.775.070 B (1). Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage
function and maintenance of the zero foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments,
including fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified
by a registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in
flood levels during the base flood discharge;
The proposed trail and pedestrian bridge crossing over Fanno Creek will cross through
the floodway and 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek. The City has hired an engineering
consultant to perform a floodway and floodplain study to enable the bridge to be designed
and constructed to maintain the zero-foot rise floodway. Although the bridge will cross
through the floodway and floodplain, the bridge design and associated grading plan will
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 7
ensure that the project will not result any increase in flood levels during the base flood
discharge.
18.775.070 B 2. Land form alterations or developments within the 100 year floodplain shall be
allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land
use map, except that alterations or developments associated with communiry recreation uses,
utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Community Development
Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards;
The proposed development is a trail for the purpose of community recreational use. The
trail is a permitted use on the site, which is zoned light industrial (I-L) and medium
density residential (R-12).
18.775.070 B 3. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the
floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100 year flood;
The northern approximately 700 lineal feet of the proposed trail are located within the
100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek. The City has hired an engineering consultant to
perform a floodplain study to enable the trail to be designed and constructed to avoid any
increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. The grading plan will
ensure that the project does not result in any increase in the flood elevation. Excavation is
proposed in the floodplain to compensate for placement of asphalt fill in the floodplain to
construct the trail. Proposed excavation totals 340 cubic yards. Excavated material will be
disposed of off-site in an upland location to be determined during project construction
and will be subject to approval by the City of Tigard.
18.775.070 B 4. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle
pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the
construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely;
The proposed development is a segment of the Fanno Creek Trail designed in accordance
with the City's pedestrian/bicycle plan.
18.775.070 B S. The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be
below the elevation of an average annual flood;
� The top of stream bank of Fanno Creek was delineated on the site during site
development planning for the City's library and Wall Street projects. The top of stream
bank is defined by the Oregon Department of State Lands as the elevation of the average
2-year flood. The proposed trail and bridge deck will be located above the top of bank of
Fanno Creek, and will therefore be located above the elevation of the average annual
flood.
I8.775.070 B 6. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board,
Division of State Lands, and CWS permits and approvals shall be obtained;
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 8
The bridge will completely span Fanno Creek, and no portion of the bridge will be
constructed below the top of bank of Fanno Creek. Therefore, the bridge will not result in
any impacts to Fanno Creek. The trail alignment is located outside delineated wetland
areas on the Fanno Creek Park site and the library site. No wetland or stream impacts are
proposed; therefore, a wetland permit is not required for the project from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers or the Oregon Department of State Lands. A Service Provider Letter
has been obtained for the project from Clean Water Services. A revised Service Provider
Letter is currently being applied for due to slight modifications to the trail alignment
since the Service Provider Letter was issued, for the purpose of further reducing
vegetated corridor impacts.
18.775.070 B 7. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and
adjacent to the 100 year Jloodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of
sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the _floodplain in accordance with the
comprehensive plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction
of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted
pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan.
The project is to be constructed entirely on City-owned property and will provide access
to the greenway corridor along Fanno Creek on both the Fanno Creek Park site and the
library site.
Narrative Demonstrating Compliance with 18.775.090: Special Provisions for Development
within Locally Significant Wetlands and along the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball
Creek, and South Fork of Ash Creek
A. In order to address the requirement.s of ,Statewide Planning Goal S (Natural
Resources) and the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR
666-023-0030) pertaining to wetlands, all wetlands classified as significant on the
City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" are protected. No land form
alterations or developments are allowed within or partially within a significant
wetland, except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section 18.775.130.
The project does not propose any development within a significant wetland.
B. In order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources)
and the safe harbor provisions of the Goal S administrative rule (OAR 660-023-0030)
pertaining to riparian corridors, a standard setback distance or vegetated corridor area,
measured horizontally from and parallel to the top of the bank, is established for the
Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek.
1. The standard width for "good condition" vegetated corridors along the
Tualatin River is 75 feet, unless wider in accordance with CWS "Design and
Construction Standards", or modified in accordance with Section 18.775.130. If
all or part of a locally significant wetland (a wetland identified as significant on
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 9
the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map") is located within the
75 foot setback area, the vegetated corridor is measured from the upland edge of
the associated wetland.
Not applicable. The site is not adjacent to the Tualatin River.
2. The standard width for "good condition" vegetated corridors along Fanno
Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek is 50 feet, unless wider in
accordance with CWS "Design and Construction Standards", or modifred in
accordance with Section 18.775.130. If all or part of a locally significant wetland
(a wetland identified as signifrcant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams
Corridors Map') is located within the SO foot setback area, the vegetated
corridor is measured from the upland edge of the associated wetland.
Not applicable. The vegetated corridor on the site is not in good condition.
3. The minimum width for "marginal or degraded condition" vegetated corridors
along the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash
Creek is 50% of the standard width, unless wider in accordance with CWS
"Design and Construction Standards", or modified in accordance with Section
18.775.130.
The vegetated corridor on the site has been determined to be in degraded
condition per Clean Water Services standards. Minor vegetated corridor
impacts are proposed due to construction of the trail. The minimum
vegetated corridor width on the site is greater than 50% of the required
width.
4. The determination of corridor condition shall be based on the Natural
Resource Assessment guidelines contained in the CWS "Design and Construction
Standards".
The determination of the vegetated corridor condition is in accordance
with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards, Resolution
and Order#04-9, March 2004.
5. The standard setback distance or vegetated corridor area applies to all
development proposed on properry located within or partially within the
vegetated corridors, except as allowed below:
a. Roads, pedestrian or bike paths crossing the vegetated corridor
from one side to the other in order to provide access to the
sensitive area or across the sensitive area, as approved by the
Ciry per Section 18.775.070 and by CWS "Design and
Construction Standards";
Fanno Geek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 10
The trail is an allowed use and will cross the Fanno Creek
vegetated corridor to provide access between the Fanno
Creek Park site and the Tigard Library.
b. Utiliry/service provider infrastructure construction (i.e. storm,
sanitary sewer, water, phone, gas, cable, etc.), if approved by
the Ciry and CWS;
c. A pedestrian or bike path, not exceeding 10 feet in width and
meeting the CWS "Design and Construction Standards";
d. Grading for the purpose of enhancing the vegetated corridor, as
approved by the Ciry and CWS;
e. Measures to remove or abate hazards, nuisances, or fire and life
safety violations, as approved by the regulating jurisdiction;
_f. Enhancement of the vegetated corridor for water qualiry or
quantity benefits, fish, or wildlife habitat, as approved by the
Ciry and CWS;
g. Measures to repair, maintain, alter, remove, add to, or replace
existing structures, roadways, driveways, utilities, accessory
uses, or other developments provided they are consistent with
City and CWS regulations, and do not encroach further into the
vegetated corridor or sensitive area than allawed by the CWS
"Design and Construction Standards.
6. Land form alterations or developments located within or partially within the
Goal S safeharbor setback or vegetated corridor areas established for the
Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek that
meet the jurisdictional requirements and permit criteria of the CWS, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Division of State Lands, and/or other federal, state, or
regional agencies, are not subject to the provisions of Section 18.775.090.B,
except where the:
a. Land form alterations or developments are located within or
partially within a good condition vegetated corridar, as defined
in Sections I8.775.090.B.1 and 18.775.090.B.2;
Not applicable. The vegetated corridor is in degraded
condition.
b. Land form alterations or developments are located within or
partially within the minimum width area established for
marginal or a degraded condition vegetated corridor, as
defined in Section 18.775.090.B.3.
Not applicable. The vegetated corridor on the site is greater
than the minimum required width.
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 11
These exceptions reflect instances of the greater protection of riparian
corridors provided by the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5
administrative rule.
Narrative Addressing Chapter 18.390.040 B.2.(e): Impact Study
The impacts of the proposed project on public facilities and services are addressed below.
Transportation system
SW Hall Boulevard, designated as a major collector, abuts the northwest edge of the
proposed trail alignment. No sidewalk is present along Hall Boulevard in the section of
road adjacent to the proposed trail; however, a gravel shoulder is present. Hall Boulevard
is served by Tri-Met bus route number 76 (Beaverton Transit Center).
The proposed trail project will not have a direct impact on the transportation system but
may have a small indirect impact on road users by reducing the risk for accidents
between pedestrians and road users. The proposed trail project will provide a connection
to an existing section of Fanno Creek Trail located behind City Hall on the west side of
Hall Boulevard. The City has requested that the Oregon Department of Transportation
approve a crosswalk with a flashing light for construction on Hall Boulevard at the
currently proposed trail location. ODOT has not approved this request since they would
prefer a crosswalk be constructed further north of the proposed trail. Pedestrians currently
cross Hall Boulevard at unsigned locations to access the Tigard Library. Construction of
the new trail segment is not expected to result in an increase in the number of pedestrians
crossing Hall Boulevard; however, it may encourage more pedestrians to cross at this
location rather than further south near the library entrance, potentially reducing the
potential for accidents between pedestrians and automobiles. 1n addition, the new trail
segment will provide access to the library that does not require pedestrians to use the
gravel shoulder of Hall Boulevard, potentially further reducing the risk of accidents.
Bikeways
The proposed trail will connect with an existing trail segment located behind City Hall on
the west side of Hall Boulevard and will provide access to the Tigard Library and the
greenway along Fanno Creek. The trail will result in improved recreational opportunities
for neighborhood residents.
Drainage system
The construction of the trail will result in a small increase in impervious area on the site.
Stormwater runoff from the trail will flow into the vegetated corridor adjacent to Fanno
Creek. The vegetated corridor located between the trail and Fanno Creek will provide some
water quality treatment for runoff from the trail. No water quality treatment or detention is
proposed for trail runoff since the increase in impervious surface is small, and no inputs of
pollutants are anticipated since trail users will consist of pedestrians and bicycles. The trail
is not expected to have a negative impact on the drainage characteristics or water quality of
Fanno Creek.
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page 12
Parks system
The trail will provide access to the Fanno Creek Park located north of Fanno Creek, as
well as the �reenway along Fanno Creek on the library site. The trail will result in
improved recreational opportunities for neighborhood residents.
Water system
No water lines are located within the project alignment; therefore, the project will not have
any impact upon the water system. The project will not result in an increase in the number
of consumers of the water system.
Sewer system
No sewer lines are located within the project alignment; therefore, the project will not have
any impact upon the sewer system. The project will not result in an increase in the number
of consumers of the sewer system.
Noise impacts of the development
Existing ambient noise levels in the project area are moderate due to the proximity of Hall
Boulevard to the project site. Construction of the trail will result in a short-term increase in
noise levels due to the presence of construction equipment. It is unlikely that the
construction noise will be audible inside the library; therefore, no noise impacts to library
users are anticipated. The project will not result in any long-term negative noise impacts.
Regular use of the trail will have the usual low noise levels associated with similar sized
recreational facilities.
Narrative Demonstrating Compliance with Chapter 18.790: Tree Removal
Site vegetation in the proposed trail alignment consists predominantly of non-native
grasses including bentgrass, meadow foxtail, tall fescue and common velvetgrass. The
stream banks of Fanno Creek are covered with dense Himalayan blackberry in much of
the project site. The riparian corridor along Fanno Creek contains a narrow band of native
shrubs and scattered trees consisting of red-osier dogwood, rose, Pacific ninebark,
willow, Oregon ash, and red alder. No trees will be removed for the trail project;
therefore, no tree mitigation is required to meet City of Tigard requirements.
Proposed mitigation for Clean Water Services vegetated corridor impacts includes
enhancement of 3,004 square feet of vegetated corridor located north of Fanno Creek by
planting 24 native trees and 210 native shrubs.
Fanno Creek Trail-Tigard Library Segment-Sensitive Lands Permit Application,revised July 2005
Page ]3
.
� � R��� File Number
�� \� a
. ��e�-����ater \ Services FEB i 1 2005
Our commitment is clear.
SWCI�Portionc Clean Water Services
Service Provider Letter
Jurisdiction Tigard Date January 25, 2004
Map &Tax Lot 2s102DA00600, 2s102DD0o100 Owner City of Tigard
Site Address E of SW Hall Blvd and N & S Contact Stacy Benjamin,Fishman Env.5erv.
Of Fanno Creek. Address 434 NW 6 Ave Ste 304
Tigard, OR Portland, OR 97209
Proposed Activity Trail Phone 503-224-0333X230
This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in
accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (R&O 04-9).
� YES----0 ----- �---YES_ ' NO --
�------------------- —�---,
Natural Resources � � ; Alternatives Analysis ! �
( Asssssment(NRA1 i � i � � Required � ' � �
, �
:: Submitted � � ! (Section 3.02.6) ;
_.........------..__._._�..--------- r----------� - - -- -
+ District Site Visit � ! � ! Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis � � ,
Date: 1/20/05 !
�-----------_._��---------..._.....�..-----------._...___-- � --- -__---------.._.._ ._—.---------�
rConcur with NRA/or � I � ! Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis I � � � �
� submitted information ! � j
----------........-----------...-----........�...------__�..---------i----- ------------- ------t--I
Sensitive Area Present � � ; Tier 3 Alternatives Analysis ! � � �
On-Site .
__ ---------�- -- � � '
--,-----
�Sensitive Area Present '( I Vegetated Corridor � ❑ � '(
i Off-Site [ � � � Averaging I
�- ---...__.. __..._. ----__._.. .. - +------._..._....------------------'..___._..._.__ —.______—I
-4---- �--------:
' Vegetated Corridor � � ❑ ( Vegetated Corridor � � �
` Present On-Site ; Mitigation Required �
r-------...___------.........----i...._—..._.—.:______----; _... _----.—.I `.._ -��-
! Width of Ve etated �
E 9 � 50 FT � On-Site Mitigation � � �
Corridor(feet) ; ; ____ a,000sF :.
---._._._..__
--___._....--- ----- -- --T— �.— _.. _._
-�------------
Condition of Vegetated ' Degraded � Off-Site Mitigation ! � I �
, Corridor � E �
------------� -- -.._.._...__._..__ �
-----------___._ __..___.._.____._._._�----------_�_.__.----- + ------ '__ � �
Enhancement Required � I � j Planting Plan Attached Draft ;
❑ . ,
� i _ i _.._..—.._._.........._..........._.__...._._._._...........i..._ included i
_ . _ _.__..._...___.
___._...._...................__._.... ...._._�
�� Encroachment into � �Path ' ; EnhancemenUrestoration � �
Vegetated Corridor and viewing ; ❑ � completion date � TBD `
; �Section 3.02.4) I platform � , '
,_r____-------.....-------.__....._. _ ' ---_.__..------_...___- - ----,-----a
; Type and Square Footage� ! —rGeotechnical Report � �
3 260 SF ; ❑ � � I
I of Encroachment � ' i reqwred i
� _ .. .._......---._.�_._.._.__ ..—._.._--.._._.......___--�_--_-------..__.—_..__...-----..._...i...........__....---;-----;
�-----._..---------—-�- � , , i
� Allowed Use � ❑ , � � I � �
� ath � Conditions Attached �
i (Section 3.02.4) ; p � ! I I
� ------.._. �.._ ,
�'�is ��rvice Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect
water �uality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your
,,,.„rorty.
Page 1 of 4
_��
' File Number
In order to comply with Clean Water Services (the District) water quality
protection requirements the project must comply with the following conditions:
1. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals,
uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within
the sensitive area which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section
3.02.3.
2. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals,
uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within
the vegetated corridor which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by
Section 3.02.4. Path and viewing platform allowed by this SPL. The viewing platform shall
be placed within the buffer so as to minimize native plants and tree removal.
3. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction the vegetated corridor and water quality
sensitive areas shall be surveyed, staked, and temporarily fenced per approved plan. During
construction the vegetated corridor shall remain fenced and undisturbed except as allowed by
Section 3.02.5 and per approved plans.
4. Prior to any activity within the sensitive area, the applicant shall gain authorization for the project
from the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL)and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The
applicant shall provide the District with copies of all DSL and USACE project authorization
permits.
5. An approved Oregon Department of Forestry Notification is required for one or more trees
harvested for sale, trade, or barter, on any non-federal lands within the State of Oregon.
6. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's)for Erosion Control, in accordance with the
CWS Erosion Contral Technical Guidance Manual shall be used prior to, during, and following
earth disturbing activities.
7. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from the District or its designee is required
pursuant to Ordinance 27, Section 4.B.
8. The District or City/County may require an easement over the vegetated corridor conveying
storm, surface water management, and/or sanitary sewer rights to the District or City that would
prevent the owner of the vegetated corridor from activities and uses inconsistent with the purpose
of the corridor and any easements therein.
9. Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with Section 3.13 of R&0 04-9.
10. Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the greatest extent practicable.
11. Removal of invasive non-native species by hand is required in all vegetated co�ridors rated
"good". Replanting is required in any cleared areas larger than 25 square feet.
12. Should final development plans differ significantly from those submitted for review by the District,
the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and if necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider
Letter.
Page 2 of 4
i
• � File Number
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
13. The vegetated corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum of 50
feet wide, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive area.
14. For vegetated corridors 50 feet wide or greater,the first 50 feet closest to the sensitive area shall
be equal to or better than a "good" corridor condition as defined in Section 3.02.7,Table 3.2.
15. Clean Water Services shall be notified 72 hours prior to the start and completion of
enhancemenUrestoration activities. EnhancemenUrestoration activities shall comply with the
guidelines provided in Landscape Requirements (R&0 04-9: Appendix D}.
16. Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the vegetated corridor shall be
removed. During removal of invasive vegetation care shall be taken to minimize impacts to
existing native trees and shrub species.
17. Enhancement/restoration of the vegetated corridor shall be provided in accordance with the
attached planting plan and R&O 04-9, Appendix D.
18. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction, the applicant shall provide the District with the
required vegetated corridor enhancemenUrestoration plan in compliance with R&O 04-9.
19. Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with Section 2.11.2 of R8�0 04-9. If at any
time during the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80% survival level,the Owner
shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity and the two year
maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting.
20. Performance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1
and Section 2.10,Table 2-2.
21. For any developments,which create multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership, the
District shall require that the vegetated corridor and the sensitive area be contained in a separate
tract. The tract plat shall include language protecting the vegetated corridor and sensitive areas.
22. The water quality swale and detention pond shall be planted with District approved native
species, and designed to blend into the natural surroundings.
CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS
23. Final construction plans shall include landscape plans. Plans shall include in the details a
description of the methods for removal and control of exotic species, location, distribution,
condition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preserved, and installation
methods for plant materials. Plantings shall be tagged for dormant season identification. Tags to
remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes.
24. A Maintenance Plan shall be included on final plans including methods, responsible party
contact information, and dates (minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September 30}.
25. Final construction plans shall clearly depict the location and dimensions of the sensitive
area and the vegetated corridor(indicating good, marginal, or degraded condition).
Sensitive area boundaries shall be marked in the field.
Page 3 of 4
i
� , File Number
26. Protection of the vegetated corridors and associated sensitive areas shall be provided by the
installation of qermanent fencing and signage between the development and the outer limits of
the vegetated corridors. Fencing details to be included on final construction plans.
This Service Provider Letter is not valid unless CWS-approved site plan is attached.
Please call (503) 681-5157 with any questions.
/:�,�-- - l ; _--._----�_.
Astrid Dragoy
Environmental Plan Review
Attachments (2)
Page 4 of 4
i — .
�� r �SS H.I��B��' 1'`61YI�U �l GGIIi i. �sa.�. —-a
� 4 00� aare feet):
s�e S acin Seedin Rate Quanti
�.ltin S ecifications for the Vegetated Corridor Enhancement Area ,
Common Name
Scientific Name 15
Trees bi -leaf ma le 2 allon 10 feet on center 15
Acer macro h Ilum Dou las fir 2 allon 10 feet on center 10
Pseudotsu a menziesii pre on white oak 2 allon 10 feet on center
uercus ar ana
Shrubs ��
oceans ra 1 allon 4-5 feet on center 70
Holodiscus discolor red flowering 1 gallon 4-5 feet on center
Ribes sanguineum ��ant 70
S m horicar os albus snowbe
1 allon 4-5 feet on center
Seed Miz seed lO lbs pls/acre As needed for bare
Bromus carinatus native California soil areas>25 sq.
brome lO lbs ls/acre ft.following
blue wild e seed ��asive species
EI mus laucus seed S lbs ls/acre removal
Festuca rubra var.rubra native red fescue g lbs ls/acre
Lu inus oly h IIus large-leafed lu ine seed
Creek.Due to its proximity to Fanno
Plantin Notes er C
WS Desi &Construction Standards A endix D oandsca e Re uirements March 200 :
1) Himalayan blackberry is present in the vege t a te d c o r r i d o r a l o n g F a n n
tr o l b hand consistent with Clean Water Services' o i to astali ng planting�d A n i m a l
Creek, mechanical con y
A�lcmagement Guide(Mazch 2003) is recommended to control its sprea pn �een October 1 and November
1 and May 1 or be
2) Plantings should preferably be installed between Fe earuarYoWever, additional measures may be necessary to
15. Plants may be installed at other times of the y ol er, lus watering}shall be used during the
ensure plant survival.Irrigation or other water practices(i.e.p ym P
ance eriod.Watering shall be provided at a rate of at least one inch per week between June
ri,�,o-year mau�ten P
� 15 and October 15.
3� plantings shall be
mulched a minimum of three inches in depth and 18 inches in diameter to retair►moisture
and discourage weed growth around newly mstalled plant matenal. rotector tubes or
4) Tree p
lantings shall be protected from wildlife damage (beaver, nutria) by installing t�e-p
wire mesh cylinders around newly installed plantings.
Maintenance Plan: e� maintenance period for vegetated corridor mitigation. The
1) Clean Water Services requires a two-Y
ow,�ng Season and one time
mitigation site is to be inspected annually, a m��?em o�ol s to be cond�ed a�s needed based upon the site
iprior to onset o f t he grow i n g s e a s o n.I n v a s i v e s p
, inspections.
ccess criterion for vegetated corridor landscaping is 80%survival of tree and shrub
�� 2) Clean Water Services' su l�oWin �anting. The vegetated corridor landscaping should be monitored
plantings during the 2 years fo g P lantings• If anY mor�lity is noted on the
�� lantin s is to be determined and corrected if possible. Lf
annually in the spring or fall to assess survival of tree and shru P lantin s shall be replaced,
�s site, the factor likely to have caused mortality of P ear maintenance period,�en ed t be implemented. If
survival falls below 80% at any time during the two-y or u.r.�gation, may
date of replanting.
and other corrective measures, such as additional mulching �e
replanting is necessary,the maintenance period will be extended page 1 of 1
Project 8352-199 C�Ban �ate��2NlCeS
. �,�
an/SWCA - . , _ . j
Fisnm g
y �ate;F _
�
�'4
� � . � , � � �
� � � � � � • � ' � •, =� � �
• • I �
l: .1.:�
1•
� . \
F `
E \.
7 �
a �
► .�
� � /
3 ••
a � , �
�� ' � I I' ' II' � -� �
�� N � �� `
''�� �- � ♦ / `� � - -��� �
�������+Lt��;`\ ' �_ � ' \
y ' �� � / � ►����� �/'I / � �
_ �_ ��. �r�►l� ., ;
���,�fo �tp .i -.-. , ,
i I! � �'�,/"� , .-- ,.- � .
r
� - �� <<
��� . �,�. -- -.
, f , . .
.�� „
d� 111\\\\` (
j�� \'. t
i��%' % '.
II.��? /i, ,`` �:;:: � I
=. /= ,,
,� ; ,
//, -���: , ;� -.::
���1 I:;;';",.' !::
I._�/. / : - .:
,, ,�. ����`:.:� , ,�
� �, ,. _ - ,.
��%��� � � � O
� '�\!` ` ��.
ti���'. . I " � 1 '
��j \� �.��'I':"r _�....■_ �P
� � ,:vro.�:�.
.�
�� •�� �� ��. ��►.
I �a► _ �s.v ��. -uc...
II \��V��� �•\\� /�\�� ��
����� •f�y�`' /////1/ /�• - �
-.���- � I• �
� �11 �
'J���. �� /•� `� �
I lf;�,f�� f�'�.� � �'\ �
':fv'i;� �
�' � /
�:����
�
S��
,� �
••
� „�
� 1_- /, ��
' �..
� `� , /
-r_ ����'�
' � ��■W�r �,�. ,) � • , \ s
� ��-.I±'*�I:u; �, ..
.,;;-; . _ :�-,_ �.����:.,�, l I
� �.�M.��l�,�_' - � { ,I � �
\��t.�i��:' �
� • l�■■�� -� �/ •,.'� r
•���� `�ff4�1���lpry 7 � �� f� `Z �
' �
.��.. •.. I i � ���•,
::: ,�,�:.�r � :-:._.._ / �...
::•• • ��'�,y„ • , r� ��,►`�,,,
� . � �
����������������ra�����������������t�����ri��� `'•�, � i - � \ �ir-��,�/"� '
i��v� ` r
■ � �� i�� •• ,i , w,
/\ ���-- !' �
— ', = �1I, �.�Y�`•,•/::�j•�`_> i)�
` ..t.. �
•� , �/•\ :+i�NY.��:a'.',;t..�
M��1� • , .� � /i/���y..;::�,;•�
� �.�,,,,, � ,. � �::, � 111
- \ .�,. „ . , ,;:;
�,,;1�
ifi"� � �• � . ��,r
/t flr. `� /i� � ,
/ �1�.;♦ \ � .�� ,v i `
� �� * /r�%�'��^` ��\_ ':����:�j/�j �i�'
yl�p1i' `T ����� �` - ' %'''/ �
������������1�����y�y_:���/', ��,�
� �1� .�� � �/� r�,' �'�
Il�� x� � � � y..� /� _ �I .
�.�`i����jr ���% // '.� � `i.
� �/ �� 1�//� / \\
- .,�- _ - �����°�' - _--_�_
-- -
�. _
�,�...�_ ��- - ��� .����
_ ___-
• �% -.
�"��! . - — � ���is``` , _�� '�—���� \ '
--- - - '
��r �
- - - � � ������:���r.��1 ; ���.'� ——-�=--���` ��
��������ll;��_��__---
�� _ _ — —� `...._', �r_��1—=�'�=—
: .�' °°� �� i%!�� —�:�: �
�'�� � —�• � =____
s � -
� •'i�/ r� <',�I �
� ����I�i� �
� ���� � �� ���
,�. s �0 I/ N � -� •
,
. ,
.�•�� - � O � � � � ,-- ..-
���� : . . , ,
�� _ �I . -,
� �, �s ,, f I
�.. � ,.s-
���; �+ -� _ �
��� ... .�. _..�,. ., •
'` --�'��--•��/ r .` , • - . - . . . -. - . - -.
; ��,� q �� ��M/� 1 � . : • _ �
��,�1�. � ,� � �
� �� � M �, �,
i�' o � � �1 0 �. � ,
� �� � � � � ,
1 �
�, __ _ ____ .
�
� � LEGEND
�
TREE � LAi�
Q Z � Weflands � '- � Permonent vegetoted
� �� corridor impocts
Total areo of path = 12,780 SF � Streoms Qt ponds � Vegetoted corridor mitigation
�r Permanenf vegetated corrrdor impact area = 3,004 SF U Vegetofed corridor �� WaN Street wetlond mitigation
�• 5• 5• r• Tota/ construction staginq area = �,650 SF � � 'I
� �
�,� �Shoulder rock Shoulder rock f��� / � � I
� o� Tota/ vegetated corridor mitigation area = 3,004 SF J �
�i�0 3" aspholt �c�' %'" / � J / � \
+r� --- 5lope=0.0200 � `l� / ` II
��� � ��� ,,.,,� ���j � � WaN Street p�o�'ecf � I
��p4 �u�r�.�� ,u ��.° � o � / ��
i � + wetfand mitigotion areo / I
\ r /
�
� 4" thick 3/4 '-0' rock orrr `Compocted subg�ode / % , / I
7� lAiek 2�-0� rock � — _ Stream creation m
• • / � existing wetlond �i
/ , . �� � � ;
TYPICAL PATHWAY SECTION ` • ' 1 � � �
M75 � /
� � � � e ,/ ''
.i,�,,'. — ' �! I
SCALE: 7" = 100 j � . . , PermanmT`rrgetoted . � .
�Fi11�3����}3��� . . .�� ��`. � . . . . corridor impoct ' r
rao w o �oc �+ area = 162 SF � . .�I
����)-f:. \� \ . . ..� �I�' '. : , . . .B. . ' . .- . ' '� �°� — � / ' ;�
�����. , i.. � . � i '� . . . . �1 � B ;!�
��#� , i . . . . i � � - �� �� � , , �. B �
i �1�� ; � �' / . . . •. . . . •� � � =�._ ) n ,
�il������, . , ,f �. 'I . . + . � . � . . . / / fr! ! kil� '1i.r ! �_ p�e pr e� Bn�m
� �n 1� t p� 76 a � r� ♦4
�,,ii3}����� . . , � / . . . '� / r;,�e" �f8 M d;fied wh v 9`�"��
�� . . . �t. ,� � c air romp �,� '
' '�' ' ' ' e,e
%: :�: : :�:�: :
'� :�:�: : :� �� � � , � 16� Constructiun � '1 '
, . . . �i: : :•:-:•�.
�.e�...::::::::::: eosement e.m,s• , �' �
. , , . . , . . • ��. ,r�.'y'y. . . . � /+ ' • � l ' . 1 •
. . . . . . . . , . .�� � �'__ b4 � '�
. . • , . • . . , � • , •t: � 6 • • ' Prpp. e ol! Stre
. . . . . . . . . � , . .�: •
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .':: • • / miti tio c�
. . . . . . . . . , . . . . t�:�:�:�:�:':' 'c�:�:�:���c�:�:� J�j'. � Permonm! vegetoted - ��
. , . ! �� � corridor im act
��� . . . . � � . . . , 1 :: f� orea = 1,54 SF < 4 .'� ,��
\ .�:::�:�:�:���:�:���:�:�:�:�: e
1 . . . � � �\:::�:�:::::::�:�:�:�:�:�:�:�:I . �
�'� . . . `'�:'t' :':' ' w.w.. • •\
� ,
�. . . �rin:�pr:c::�: t�:� I .o. +
::►n oxea =:'G2� SF.'.':::� 100 YR FL000
s
' ' `A
� . ��r` PLA/N EZEV 144' ,
� �
�� Prr}rior�eni:' eEvt�= � w i .`
t � �
��>, :�toiYidoh�ilYipOcf:�:�:�:�:'���':��. I �• �q'`• - •
� brea Y 1;088 e � � ""� ��w�� . �.
�' • .' i»6�. �z- � � I
�� \ T.�'F'.Yr.'r. . " �eo- ►"�� ° . . . .
� � . � - . .
. . . � .
i •Censtr�uctiv�i: ::i , . su• �ocE "� � � b p • I •
x:r, �bn�� _ Q
.COSGRIM�� . � . �. , � . . � • � • . � 7• � __ . . . . �
• � _ � �- d b
� i ��o�o. . . .
�� . . � r� •w n� �.•� ��,�ar e•.e•.e' c . . -
: : : 4: oin link • , • 'Z � , • •
t�� �+.: J ce –' 24$' � ./ . ' � F c�e � - . , . .
' �„�„ �.
��. . , . . ,��.'\��: . ,>v � , 1 � + �o• � •
�, . , r . . „a„�. • �d b 4 — —
1 . . . . . . _ . . i _' i / 5, :�
_. . , , . . . . ....... ....
x ,e<. � -
. , ,., y... . .
- 31E
� _ � _ _ •Y
Construction stoging � d — — — —
- areo = 1.300 SF 8 p � — —
� . . t . , , ,.,
• � §+ Vegitoted corridor mitigation
, • . - . . : :, -._., , . . . .. .-,
� Construction staging areo = 2,375 SF
area = 4350 SF
Narrative
Total a of pafh = 12, 780 SF LEGEND
� Z � Permonent vegetafed corridor impact area = 3,004 SF Weflands P�onent �9eror�
_ - -,-,J corridor impacts
Total construction sfoging Qreo = 11,114 SF ----,
_ Streoms dr ponds �egetoted corridor mitigation
� Total veqefated corridor area impacted T
by consfruction = 5,4.3J'r SF _ Vegetated corridor � �. Woll 5treet wetlond mitigation
��.
r' S' s' �' (temporary impact) r�Pa.�y , — �
� � �egetoted corridor �
impacts
�� `sna,�a� r�k sna,�a� rock� o+c��` To tal vege ta ted corrrdor mi tiqa tion area = 3,�4 SF � 1
�io+ 3" osphal! �cr / � ���'�_ � `
,�, --- sr�e=o.ozoo '�� Temporary vegetated corridor impact arecys . � . J ��; ',
�
�o+��t - ',,o+c will be restored to a good condition � . � � / ;_ J_ __ : _ __ j ,�, �,
following comp/etion of construction i� � � . �
�;� °f / � , r � ,; �
�Compocted sub rode E� j'�, � �,x
4" thick 3/4 "-0��ock ov�r g � , � ' i �� ' � ''� '
7' thick 2`-0"rock -- — . . � �-�� � . r - - - -��=' '� c�y
. r i . . . � _ _ - ,.�. . � c<
�. _ � �'��i � � � " `>�
� ' . • _ � �� � i �' � i i i {�� �\�1
. � . . . . . . • . � I l � I 1 � r ♦' ,
TYPICAL PATHWAY SECTION � . . . . . . .
� [ �-, ;.;y , , / � ;
. , � . ., ,
■„ � . . . . . . . / I'', , , , . , .�'� � \
. . . . . . . / � . . . . � . �`�
\ . . . . . . . � `. i . i i � r , . :
p 'i i i � � i i �� �. ��
- . . . . . _ _ / � ,i i� Y i i i i .r � •'�\ �,
SCALE: 1� = 100 � . . . . . . . �'c4 � � � � � ��; � �\l� '
'� Permonen� etated � � � � • • • ���: ;�
'� . � . � , ;��.�
\ . . .I �� . . . . corridor impoct • • �/ . . � �.•-' �'. � : J
� � +I �
ron w o rao . . . � . . weo : 162 SF � . ' . ' . ' N '��
�' , • ' � /""-� , � ,.• � � '�,��
� � � . � . � .� �l. . . � - � - � - � . . . . . . � . . � �i' � :r
� . . . . . .' .-,.� . . . � . � . � . � . � . . . �--- . �l� "�i/ II ` ;�':7 !��
f�. �\' . . �°� . . . . . ��. ,F L> .,i �� i � !
/':':': � • . . . � � ' - . . . � o � � �
./:::;::::. . . . 1 � . . . . :"� � � �`� � �p �.
. . I� . . . . . / / ` . . . :. . .._ i' . ���.' 1i- � -�_��� i : �
. . � . . . . . . - - / / �a..:._ i. +f � �t ��`:.'-_ - -�l �� ��i .
/. :.� / . . . . . . // 7� i • • � `� \ �,, _ : _` � i
i
A . . . � . � . . . . / � � i,• / `e� ` � `? ,_ `- �%
� • � �j Modired wh :4 �, � ^-
�� . . . �' :� : . . . . � � / o �oir ramp � �°a,� � �'.
:..'...: P•� I \ � . �` �. �f
i: . . . . .�.;.;i;i;: � 16' Construction -� \ / ``�
/ . . ��!i . . . eosement �� v . ° `. , ' , ��. .
�
. . , , . . , ai.•.�:•:•. . . . . . / . .�i--�: � '.,.� � .. ... � �
'' /.•.•.• '..
. . . . . � �- : � ,
. . . . . . , - #,�::::.....:.:.:::::.:..�� � , i ;, , � � .
. . . - - - � - ;�� �, . � . .:� � 1, 1 ;, . -�_r ` ., �-��.
. . . . . . . - - t. �/ � - / \ E t 'f I. ' -_ -ctsF� ��_� �.
. . . . . . . . . . - -1:;:;::':';i;c.::::::::::::::::::' . . . ;, '' • "3_-- -- �,, �
• : : • • : . . . ; : t� .:� . � Permanent Hegetoted � � �1' • I' ii '``--`� . '
} �:� /
� . . . � . . ' .'�.�•� _ corridor impoct , 'i��� iT '\ " �
.� . . . . . . ��c�i�:�c�:�:�:�:�:�:�:�c�c�i�i� . . orea = 1.754 SF _ ai i' . . .� � �-���
.� • �'� { f��� I.� r v
..� . . �_� . . ������������������������������� e �'. -� . ,-1 � . �' r . . . � � �
..� �:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::I Y � , . - - • • – � �-,-._
�i . . . � `�����=��������������������� . ..,.. — ; .% , �-, � . _ . . . � � ;
i ..; .. . _ . , � ,
� . —Yegetat�'CQ?�rdQl�' — �� - ' r '. . . -
;' ��' : :hti/tiga tion:oR'ed� ��29�'S.f.?: .� � � � .� �,� . . . �
:\ �� �- . ���'�i . . I
� , ,�
,�
�� � .
:�\� . � � . �
, :__t , t�Peirancnent�i�gefiatedii�i;i;�� � 100 YR fLOOD � ':r-� . ' !
. , a . - i
' i
�� :� :��ar+aor�Mipocr:::::::.: , � PUIl� EL£V=�� � �:.t } . i 'i'?��i��• • ✓�
,- �:b:reo•��f;088: _s�' • • F - . . .�� r. .�n
i :�\` �. �.: � . . . . .
i� _ �
, • .�
„ �i. .•� . �� � _ ,.�/�
/ / i
��� :�A A ' :��`y�.�,�'. � 6 = . .� . . .
��. � . � ` :�'. . . . . . _ ; � - �� . . . �♦ ���,�'. . . . �I
��; ������� . . . . . . . SO' BRI . � I — .� . . � �� �� . . �`-' I
:�i� ' Constructipvi�:��� i
. . . . . c:�, _. , T r `.�I �I '� �'� ': . . �-!�r��'�'�� . . . . �, f �
eosement� . . . . . . , . . . _
. . . . � . . . !i � �i . . . _ I . .
. . �� . c� �l. �: �1�1111 �il'�,11� a '�'� t� { . . . . . �'���� i� �'
I I, 'I I�v '� . . �I
. . . . . r� — ti�• _i�d_ . �'� �� I . . . . . ��'
. . . . . � � � /�'` t I � � � I�1 ' . . . . . . ��y�ry� .
i . :: ::: .. �z �, � ��_; , , . �;��i i��,
` � �r���:���'i� :�f'��ence - 2� �' � � • �' —1 . �. �� ,� - G. ( i..� • • .' . . . .t► �. . . .
:•:•:••••• �
�� . . - . _ ;� � � . . . ,�y (
~`� ��. �� �� Construction sta rn � i� � . . . . . . . �. . .
i�. . . . . .'!�`�' . �� . � 4� 9 �; � i � � i , � i I I I � . .
'�. . . . . . �' . . �/ orea 3,552 SF � . i � h' � {
- �`� - � - - � 1� -- ------_- � ,�� , T, �� - - ��,
� L-= ' --�;— --�� I: o � ���I, , i
. • - —
—
. _ -�
. --__
,.,�.- � • _ -
- . _ `
� , _ . --., .._
, . -
.
. .
� .
_ . _ _ �_ . ... ., . . . ,
.,
-- ; ���
Construcbon s og�ng Vegetoted corridor orea impacted __� _ _ _ �
area = 7,562 SF by construction = 2,364 SF � . � - - � - -
,
c ° -" �� -�.
---;-_' _ (tamporary impoct) — _ � i — —
—� �_� - �
C _ �
• �:� Vegetated corridor ��---� ,�- . ,.. > _ : .. . , ._ ..
-`f Vegetoted corridor oreo mitigotion oreo = 2,375 SF
��' � impacted by conshvction �� �
= 3,071 SF (temporary impoct) � I � �i
; " '. � i
fi��t I
�-
o �� v�N�
N
-� /V/_,L.3 3
Q
oo{��oSH�l3
�
. r-�-.. �-,t �
, �
Notice of Nei hborhood Meetin
g g
May 20, 2005
RE: Fanno Creek Trial Segment
Dear Interested Party:
The City af Tigard is the owrer�f the �roperty located at 13360 SW Hali Boufevard, Tax
lots 2S1 2DD 600 and 2S1 2DD 100 & 200, also known as the Tigard Library site. The
City is considering the installation of a segment of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail at this
Iocation.
Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, we would like to discuss
the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are
invited to attend a meeting on:
Monday, June 6, 2005
Tigard Library, Community Room, Northeast Corner of 2"d Floor
13360 SW Hall Boulevard
6:30 PM — 8:00 PM
Please note that this will be an informational meeting on preliminarv plans. These plans
may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City.
We look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at
639-4171 should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
�"Duane oberts
Associ te Plan r
,
FANNO PATHWAY
Proposed
„N�o p a th woy �
CR<<T
�`
/
J
m / ��
a 0'MARA ST ��3,�� \
0 ��B�'�R y �--T-n-�� �
J J r �\
2 � \
r I
w.��s�RCC' � �,�
. 1
�
)OD ST
�
1/ICINITY MAP
N TS
�
. �
� �►FFIDAVIT OF MA1LIIvv/POSTING NEIGHBORHOO�U MEETING NOTICE
IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT !S REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF T '�ARD A COPY OF THE �,��
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT T E SAME TIME PROPERTY :. ��; �d
OWNERS ARE MAICED NOTiCE, T0 THE ADDRESS BELOW: � ` �,�
City of Tigartl Planning Division ��' � x�
.r�� � I 3125 SW Hall Boulevard ''
� �.-�. ��
' Tigard, OR 97223-8189
IN ADDITION, TNE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT & COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION.
MAILING:
I, 4h v ✓�21^ , being duly sworn, depose and say that on the��day of -�
20� I cause d to have mai le d to eac h o f the persons on the att ched list, a nots'ce of ineeting to discuss a roposed
development at(or near) !3 j�ji� .3 w �4 �/ ,�!v� a copy
o f w hic h no tice so mai le d is a ttac he d hereto and made a part of hereof.
I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addr�ssed to said persons and were deposited on the
date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at � %�-�.-C/ �Q, /2 Z� ,�c,..� �f c� �,��'f-
with postage prepaid thereon.
�.
, Signature ( the esence of a Notary Public)
POSTING:
I, �c h �. �d �✓�y' , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed
�"`- w t j"af �r ecting the land located at (state the pro imate I cation(s) IF no
a ress(s) and/or t lot(s)currently r gistered)_ I`�' ?�,�,�`S'c,,✓ �(a�� , /v�_
and did on the� day of /1i1 4, , 20 o.r personally post notice indicating that the site may be
proposed for a ,J�r,Ji7�'�� ve... La application, and the time,date and place of a neighborhood meeting to
discuss the proposal.
The sign was posted�rt r► �4•^ ��L�, Z'�'4 h n J � ��/c�S �C.��lr�S �4����i�
(state location you posted notice on property)
l�� �,f�.e.,c--'
Signatu 1e the presen e of a Notary Public)
(THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETElNOTARIZE)
STATE OF Q��'�v� )
County of t,.►p�st+�„���r ) ss.
Subscribed and swornlaffirmed before me on the Z- �� day of Ju�� , 20os .
OFFICIAL SEAL
- KAISTIE J PEERMAN
NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
COMMISSION N0.370962
P h4Y COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 28,2007 �y��
NOTARY PUBL C OF OREGON
_ My Commission Expires: �� 2b', l.�o �7
Applicant, please complete the information below: /
NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: ���►n o Ci'�-�l� l y-4.�
TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:
Address or General Location of Subject Property: c.�,i a v
Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): p �
h:Uoginlpattylmasters�affidavit of mailing-posting neighborhood meeting.doc
Notice of Nei hborhood Meetin
g g
May 20, 2005
RE: Fanno Creek Trial Segment
Dear Interested Party:
The r�ty of Tigard is the �wner cf thE pr�perty lo�ated at 13380 SW Hall Boulevard, Tax
lots 2S1 2DD 600 and 2S1 2DD 100 & 200, also known as the Tigard Library site. The
City is considering the installation of a segment of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail at this
location.
Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, we would like to discuss
the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are
invited to attend a meeting on:
Monday, June 6, 2005
Tigard Library, Community Room, Northeast Corner of 2"d Floor
13360 SW Hall Boulevard
6:30 PM — 8:00 PM
Please note that this will be an informational meeting on preliminarv plans. These plans
may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City.
We look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at
639-4171 should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
� �R�
�Duane oberts
Associ te Plan r
/
FANNO PATHWAY
Proposed
�'NNO p o th way �
C^<<T
�`
/
J
m / / `
t� /`�
a 0'MARA ST '��� \
O ��eF''AR y
O J
J \
Q \
2
r
w.��s,.«. ��i
1
�o� sr �
l/lC/N/TY MAP
N TS
�
� , -,
2S102D D-90742 2S102DA-00701
SKOOG KARI TIGARD CHRISTIAN CHURCH
13694 SW HALL BLVD STE 4 13405 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
25102DD-90352 2S102DA-00
SNELSON MICHAEL D 8 BRIANNE L TIGARD OF
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 5 13125 W HALL
TIGARD,OR 97224 TI D,OR 97223
2S102DD-00400 2S102DD-003
SOLARES HOMES L L C TIGARD OF
BY NORRIS BEGGS 8 SIMPSON 13125 HALL
LOAN SVC DEPT TI D,OR 97223
121 SW MORRISON#200
PORTLAND,OR 972D4
2S102DD-01100 2S102DD-0 01
SOLIS EDGAR TRUSTEE TIGAR CITY OF
PO BOX 231193 131 SW HALL
TIGARD,OR 97281 TI ARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90532 2S102DA-0 3
STARK LYNNE L TIGA ITY OF
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 5.3 131 SW HALL
TIGARD,OR 97224 ARD,OR 97223
r�
2S102D0.01301 2S102DA-00�
STATE OF OREGON TIGAR4�ITY OF
DEPARTMENT OF TRASPORTATION 131,�tSW HALL
RIGHT OF WAY SECTION T�oARD,OR 97223
417 TRANSPORTATION BLDG �
SALEM,OR 97310
zs,o2o�-sozs, 2S102DA-0
STENSON RICHARD TIGAR ITY OF
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 5 131 SW HALL
TIGARD,OR 97224 T ARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90442 2S1020A-00402
STEPHENSON GARY M TIGA�D CITY OF
13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 4.4 �13.1�5 SW HALL
TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
./ 25102DD-90711 2S102DA��0
TAKASHIMA GREGG K 8 TIGARp�'CITY OF
HOLLISTER-TAKASHIMA LAURA 13125�SW HALL
13694 SW HALL BLVD 5TE#1 f<fGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD, OR 97224
� 2S102DD-90632 2S102DA-00500
TIEU BRANDON H TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL
13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 DISTRICT 23J
TIGARD,OR 97224 6960 SW SANDBURG ST
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102D D-90661 2S102DD-90111
LAMMERS LOIS E NEWMAN MICHAEL R 8 LAURIE J
13676 SW HALL BLVD#6 13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 1
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S10200-01604 2S102DD-90332
LASNIEWSKI WILLIAM L AND OFFENSTEIN HEATHER
TERESA A 13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 3
8860 SW EDGEWOOD TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90211 2S102DD-90461
LOUGHIN DOUGLAS M OLSON GEORGE P&
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 WELLS SHARON K
TIGARD,OR 97224 13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 6
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DA-00100 1S135C6-00800
MAGNO LLC OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
8800 SW COMMERICAL ST RIGHT OF WAY SECTION
TIGARD,OR 97223 355 CAPITOL STREET NE RM 420
SALEM,OR 97301
2S102DD-90511 2S102DD-90722
MASON RONALD C ORME BRAD R&ERICA L
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 13694 SW HALL BLVD#2
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DA-00300 2S102DD-05600
MATSUMOTO WILLIAM Y 8 NINA A O'ROKE GABRIELA
8770 SW BURNHAM RD 13705 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01507 2S102DD-90132
MCANDREW JOHN W&ANGELA D PALMER KRISTIN M 8
8830 SW OMARA ST BROWN SHAWN L
TIGARD,OR 97223 13712 SW HALL BLVO STE 3
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90752 2S102D0.05700
MCDOLE JAMES MERRITT REUTHER DEBBIE
13694 SW HALL BLVD#5 11900 5W JAMES CT
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
; 2S102DD-90311 2S102DA-00800
' MILLS BERTIE JOYCE SCHALTZ RANDY A 8 MARGARET C
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 1 13335 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
✓ 2S102D0-9D622 �-� 2S102DD-90761
NEWELL CAROLYN S SIGLER PAMELA D
13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 2 13694 SW HALI.BLVD STE 6
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90142 2S102DD•90252
CVETIC DEBORAH L FIELDS JENNIFER R
13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 4 13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 5
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90732 2S102DD-90422
DELSMAN LORI B HARPER JON&MEGHANN
13694 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 2
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90522 2S102DD-90242
DISTEFANO BROOKS HOLDEN SPENCER R
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE#2 13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 4
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S702DA-00690 2S102DD-01603
EIKREM A HOLLAND RONALD P MARY L
PO BOX 82824 8850 SW EDGEWOOD
PORTLAND,OR 97282 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90471 2S102DD-01400
ENGEL MARIE C HOLSTEIN MARVIN R/LORETTA R TRS
13688 SW HALI BLVD STE 1 8710 SW OMARA
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90161 2S101C&00400
ENGSTROM JARED S JEMPAK PARTNERS LLC
13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 6 7034 SW 83RD AVE
TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97223
2S102DD-9D000 2S102DD-01601
FANN "�POINTE CONDOS JENSEN DAVID L AND LOIS C
O ERS OF ALL UNITS 8840 SW EDGEWOOD
0 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90452 2S1020D-90561
FANNO POINTE LLC KNOWLTON SHELLEY
109 E 13TH ST 13682 SW HALL BLVD STE#6
VANCOUVER,WA 98660 TIGARD,OR 97224
, 2S102DD-90432 2S102D0-01300
FAYLOR MAX 8 AMBER `� KRAEMER JULIA A&MARK W
13688 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 PO BOX 80665
TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97280
2S101D0-01200 2S102DD-90342
! FIELDS FRED W �% LAIN JOANNA M
1149 SW DAVENPORT 13702 SW HALL BLVD#4
PORTLAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S 102DD-01600
TINNIN ROBERT O ELAINE M
8876 SW EDGEWOOD STREET
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01602
TOKUDA KAZUHIDE AND
CAROL LYN
8870 SW EDGEWOOD ST
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90322
WALKER TERESA
13702 SW HALL BLVD STE 2
TIGARD, OR 97224
2S 101 CA-00200
YOUDE FAMILY TRUST ETAL
14201 NE 50TH AVE
VANCOUVER,WA 98686
. J
• . �/_
. 2S102DD- 800 2S102DA-00
1995-1 PARTITION PLAT CITY OF IGARD
OW RS OF LOTS 1 &2 131 W HALL BLVD
T ARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90232 2S102DD-00
V- ALEMU YOHANNES CITY OF IGARD
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 3 1312 W HALL BLVD
TIGARD,OR 97224 TI RD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01200 2S102DD-90611
AMARIR JEANNE M AUMAN& CLARK MICHAEL R
AMARIR AHMED 13676 SW HALL BLVD STE 1
13615 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90122 2S102DD-90542
ANDREWS TRAVIS J CLARK RODNEY K 8 PATRICIA A
13712 SW HALL BLVD#2 13682 SW HALL BLVD#4
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S102DD-90652 2S102DD-90361
BENNETT JAMES G COLE KATHRYN R TRUST
13676 SW HALL BLVD#5 BY COLE KATHRYN R TR
PORTLAND, OR 97223 13702 SW HALL BLVD#6
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S702DD-90552 2S102DD-00902
BERGMAN BECKY R COLLING CHARLES
13682 SW HALL BLVD STE 5 8878 SW EDGEWOOD ST
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-01500 2S102DD-00901
BLICK CARL J DONA JEAN COLLING CHARLES W
8740 SW O'MARA 13835 SW HALL
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S102DD-90222 2S702DD-009
BRIDGMON DEBRA J COLLI CHARLES W
13706 SW HALL BLVD STE 2 138 SW HALL
TIGARD,OR 97224 T ARD,OR 97223
2S102DA-00900 2S102DD-90152
CHARBONNEAU LARRY& COSENZA JENNIFER L
WELSH ROBIN 13712 SW HALL BLVD STE 5
13337 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD,OR 97223
2sio2�o-002 a 2s�a2�o-sosa2
CITY OF GARD CRISMAN BRUCE A&ELIZABETH M
131 W HALL BLVD 13676 SW HALL BLVD 5TE 6.4
T ARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224
Sue Beilke
11755 SW 114�' Place
Tigard, OR 97223
✓ Tualatin Riverkeepers
16507 SW Roy Rogers.Road
Sherwood, OR 97140
✓ Fans of Fanno Creek
Attn: Dave Drescher
7717 SW S 15t Place
Portland, OR 97219
� John Frewing
7110 Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
� � � �
�
�
�
�
�
i
�
� L
C
� � � � � � �
� � � �
� �
■ �� �� �► I
...u...: :; : •. �- � ...�r , �i o••� - ., �
� ■ � � �� �� ♦ r �
�� ������ �I �� �•��� � �� � �� ,�� ��� ����
� ����� ����� � �'� I��111�� ��i , i/ .
■ n��' ��►`���, � �� �������1 r�
■ ����� � �� � `
/� ���'� �.��� � �� ��/����\' � � ' '
■ �� / ��� �,III��I��i� �� � �������I � r �
� � ■ ■ �� �� _■ �/� ` '
■ �1� ■ ■ � ������ �� � �����►� � �w /
1. � �- . ■ � �. ♦v
� iii� ��r i � � � / � ��� ��
� � 111 �� � iii�� � � . / . . ♦ ♦
� ���;� ��� � � ��%i%%j�i, � ;� � � . `�
��� /� �. � � �` i..,.,.,. , �/,i���� j /i�,. ,//,% �
��j�: �►�: � '� �r % �•: %%����, % %% .��
■ ���� • �•, %%%%i %� %/ ♦ ,
� •� ■ „ �� �� / /% �/// ♦ ♦
,:1 ,'�� �� �- . ;.-.-, ,, ,, , - / , ' , ♦
■ ��� ��� � ��1 � , �% ��� � � _
■■ II�r+ _ . I . . / �
/.I!,� . .I►� � �i �%� �1 ■
�� �_ I.r , � / , ■■■.
.��.�.i :.111, �- -■ -- -.. � ..,,.� //�
%
�� : �• ���..■ ■���... 1� ....,., %/ , / ♦
����: _ _ �I����� := = ■ ��1 %� %%. ;/ ��� //
� � � ,�� ������+ , %/ �/% � r' �'
��%. �� � I/p �� �■. �" � � ��./ 1'j
� _ � •'- == =� � �//// %%! / � ♦ �
�� � __ _ � %/ � , ♦
�►�i�11 _ ��. _ . . // � ♦
► � = :�� `'►` / I , �
� .� / �
■ � � ��� ..Ilr% j �
.
■ ���� � r � � `
. . -.� ,/1�� _lul / �
,� i� 17i���i:����� �
. :� ��� ►���: �Ili�ii►:
: � : ;� ; - ,; : - '
. �� - �m=_�, ,., .,�. _ _ ,..' �
_����_r--=_
� -_�T
: � ■
� ����� ��� e
�� �
. � ■ ���� ■
� . ��r. .... ..
--- ■: :������ �.. ' a
� �� ��
� �
� = � � � � ■
� �/� - ��� ■ ■ '���
,,, _ ..... . .. .
,, . . . ,. .
..��i//.�.�� ��� , ■ � . �
_� � � .
,
MEMORANDUM
__� ,�.
TO: Planning File < �
FROM: Duane Roberts
RE: Fanno Creek Trail Segment, 6/6/05 Neighborhood Meeting Notes
DATE: June 7, 2005
The neighborhood meeting on the above-mentioned project held as required by the the
City of Tigard development review process. The following are notes on the comments
of those those attending the meeting, which was held on June 6, 2005, in the Tigard
Library Community Room. A meeting sign-up sheet is attached. City staff Duane
Roberts and project natural resource consultant Stacy Benjamin represented the City as
applicant at the meeting. Duane Roberts read aloud the "Statement of Purpose" letter
as required and provide a brief overview of the project, pointing to an air photo depicting
the conceptual trail route and to an oversize design drawing.
The project map used at the meeting showed the trail continuing on-street, beyond the
limits of the present project, across the Wall Street Extension and along the new
driveway leading to the Fanno Pointe Condominiums. Several meeting attendees
raised questions about this particular out-of-scope piece of the trail. They were
concerned about the condo association's liability for trail users walking or riding along
their private driveway. One attendee suggested the city consider redesigning the
connection between the downstream terminous of the presently proposed trail segment
and the Fanno Point section of the trail. This person suggested that the trail alignment
be changed to avoid the driveway.
Stacy Benjamin responded that the area between the road and the Fanno Point section
of the creekside trail was a wetland/natural area mitigation site for the Wall Street
Extension and that the amount of wetland and natural area mitigation associated with
the Wall Street and other site improvements made it very difficult to find an alternative
location for the mitigation. Also, the CWS permitting for Wall Street has been
approved. The amendment of this approval would be difficult to accomplish.
Many persons commented that trail users walk through the condo project now.
Increasing the trail's accessiblity by installing the new trail segment will exacerbate this
problem. Apparently, there is some dispute regarding the ownership of the trail route
behind the condos. It appears that the condo association would be responsible for
covering the cost of a fence between the trail and private property.
4
How will you encourage trail users and their dogs to stay on the path and not disturb
wildlife areas? Staff responded that signs along the trail will advise trail users to not
leave the paved trail and to not disturb the greenway habitat along the trail route. To be
noted is that this is the only question raised at the meeting that concerns the project at
hand. All the other questions focused on trail sections located downstream of the
project for which land use approval is being requested.
When will work start on the Fanno Creek Park Extension Project? Staff promised to ✓
check into this.
Considerable concern was expressed regarding the lack of a plan to install pedestrian
crossing improvements between the old and new trail segments connecting to Hall.
Staff explained that ODOT is the road owner and has denied the City permission to
install pedestrain crossing improvements at this location. The reason is that this would
create a mid-block crossing. The City intends to continue working with ODOT to obtain
this approval after the new trail segment is constructed.
Staff promished to follow up on the liabilty question and to respond by letter to all those �,-
providing an address on the meeting sign-up sheet. Residents requested that the City
include in any letter to them updated information on the timing of the Wall Street project.
John Frewing attended the meeting and suggested that the trail section north of Fanno
Creek be replaced with boardwalk. He commented that he had walked the site and the
the slope from the road was not so steep that it would not accommodate an accessible
boardwalk. He also pointed out that the location of the existing viewing area depicted
on the project map is inaccurate.
- l�l � `�.�
l � � J
, .
. �'
' iz 4 ��-� � �c ��� r L�� � ti-c� �, �� 4 � l
�
���%� 7//� .��' �o ;�f�s�7�o
��s L�i`n/�r e�l �� 7� -rl�tt`e!/ �6 �.� 635��6u l/4�rn e� �rn n ef
l �
O��e,a, /.�6�9 /�IAl1 �/����, S��/��a-399� �a�e�..�Q ���d ,l(�,�'
- U
��.eG .L� � /��� �� l��,T,C a3-� ?8os �o������C�ic�i�.c�
c��
���� � � /3G/Z sw ��lhGt� �'D�957-YovS' or �nfln�hu����.�rn-
�/� . �
G� n-7 �j�C���NSUi`(/ � 3b �� srn/ H� �� ��•A S`Ji 9�7` � �-�1� �� S�ydC+L e Co"rC�S�^l�'
/'�w� C - �qs aN ���i►�r2 �3 6� z Sl.�l�x�c�� 5�� 3 63 �-���i RM a�FG@ Fa��yU.��.��
��,aurv� �- ��n�tib Q�a. �.3c�L5 s� ���
r--,
,
� �� ��w� w
�
�
,
� CITY OF TIGARD
June 20, 2005 OREGON
Fanno Creek Trail Segment Neighborhood Meeting Attendee:
This responds to the question you and other Fanno Pointe owners raised at the May
Neighborhood Meeting concerning the design of the future connection between the library
segment of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail and the existing Fanno Pointe segment.
As you may remember from the meeting,the downstream limit of this yeaz's project is
approximately half way along the existing library pazking lot. The second phase of the trail
project, which is not funded or scheduled as yet,would extend the trail downstream to
connect with the Fanno Pointe section.
The City had been seeking a Sensitive Lands Permit that would cover the entire gap
between the Hall Boulevard and Fanno Pointe trail sections. The permit would have
covered both the library trail section the City is proposing to construct this year as well as
the library trail section the City is proposing to construct at some later, as yet,
undeternuned date.
At the Neighborhood Meeting, several residents pointed out that the proposed trail
alignment calls for the trail to travel on the proposed new private drive serving the Fanno
Pointe condominiums. As further pointed out by meeting participants, directing trail uses
onto the private drive would create an undo liability problem for the condo association.
Since the meeting, I have discussed this concern with the Project Engineer, City Engineer,
and City Risk Officer. All agree that the proposed alignment would result in an
undesirable exposure for the owner's association for any loss or damage occurring on the
private drive. This problem was overlooked when the trail alignment was determined. We
appreciate your bringing it to the City's attention.
City staff involved in the trail project concur with the owners that a resolution to this
liability problem is needed. This could include an easement or a re-routing of the trail
connection. In the meantime, the City will revise the Sensitive Lands application to
exclude the driveway connection from the trail design. This will remove a potential
problem and will allow time for City and Fanno Pointe owners to work together to find a
way to interconnect the trail segments that would avoid the imposition of any liability on
the condo owners.
13125 SW Hail Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772
�
At the Neighborhood Meeting, I also promised to check on the start date for the Fanno
Creek Park Extension project. As mentioned, this project is based on a master plan .
developed by Murase Associates and includes the restoration of the undeveloped nine acres
of library property to historic conditions. Unfortunately,the Parks Manager informs me
that the date for carrying out this project has not been set as yet.
Please call or email (503-718-2444; duane(a�ci.tigard.or.us) should you have any questions
now or in the future.
Sincerely,
Duane Roberts
r
,
Gayle Kauffman Jennifer Cosenza
7110 SW Lola Lane 13612 SW Hali Blvd. #5
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Lois Lammere Gary Stephenson
13676 SW Hall Blvd. #6 13688 SW Hall Bivd. #4
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, Or 97223
Rea Engel Ron C. Mason
13688 SW Hall Blvd. #1 13682 SW Hall Blvd. #1
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, Or 97223
Gorge Olson 8� Sharon Wells Jeanne 8�Ahmed Amarir
13688 SW Hall Blvd. #6 13615 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, Or 97223
Ri Parker STACIE YOST
136 SW 130th Place 7582 SW A FORD STREET
Tigard, R 97223 TIGARD, R 97224
Rick Parker B IL CHRISTOPHER
13639 SW 130th ce ,��460 SW NORTH DAKOTA
Tigard, OR 97223 � TIGARD, OR 97223
�
Rick Parker �"� STACIE YOST
13639 SW 130th Place �'' 7582 SW ASHFORD STREET
��
Tigard, OR 97223 :` TIGARD, OR 97224
�
Rick Parker BASIL CHRISTOPHER
13639 SW 130th Place � 9460 SW NORTH DAKOTA
Tigard, OR 97223 l,�� TIGARD, OR 97223
��
.�'
Rick Parker ,��' TACIE YOST
13639 SW 130th Pl�ce 75 SW ASHFORD STREET
Tigard, OR 9722� TIGA , OR 97224
�,r
f'
Rick Par r BASIL CHRI OPHER
13639 W 130�h Place 9460 SW NOR DAKOTA
Tig d, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 972 3
. •
CITY OF TIGARD
PRE-APPLICATION CONfERENCE NOTES �o m°�1ty���°�p�t
S�eapingA BetterCommunity
(Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Yalid for Six (b) Months)
� �nn�o� � Z° oS'
�,��: O � �
NON-RESIDENTIAI
APPLICANT: Lr � AGENT:
Phone: (Sc3) ?!8• �yY� Phone: � )
PROPERTY LOCATION:
ADDRESS/GENERAL LO(ATION: � 31z� �� N� /3It�.
TA% MAP(S)/LOT #(S): .2 S 1 O Z D!� (,oa
NECESSARY APPLiCATIONS: s�77�'E EVI�v
7`1� ll1"No)
PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: __ itJ�°w �=f�iv� GKE�-,C T/lA�� .sEb�+t�uT �=�tsr J�f/K�
Ax�A�a�T/f o� Pr`��'0 c.•�+�[� ST72E�T E��Td`�+.tsio�
COMPREHENSNE PLAN
MAP DESIGNATION: �1 G'Nr �WQkJS?'lp/�C.
� r st i/.�uT�ifL
ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: �"1- �' �z
l�.S/O �
Z6NIM6 DISTRICT�IMENSIOMAL REQUIREMENTS [R�fer to Ced�S�c�op 18S3o 3 )
INIMUM LOT SIZE: sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: ft. Max. building height: ft.
Se �dcx Front ft. Side ft. Rear ft. Corner ft. from street.
MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: %.
'�, NEI6NBORNOOD MEETIN6 [R�fer t�the Neighhordoed M�etlng Nandontl
THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED
PARTIES, AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two
(2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use
Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meetinq is to be held prior to
submittinq vour application or the application will not be accepted.
"' NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans
Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8
NON-Res�dential Application�Planning Division Section
�
, '� NARRATIYE [Refer to Code Cha.._.r 18.3901
The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable
approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to
consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review
the code for applicable criteria.
� IMPACT STUDY [Refer to Code S�ctlans 18.390.040 and 18.390.0501
As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE
IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the
development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the
transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system,
the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type
of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize
the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private
property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real
property interests, the applicant shatl either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or
provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not
roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development.
❑ ACCESS IR�fer u Chapt�rs 18.705�ad 18.765]
Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width:
Minimum pavement width:
All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved.
Drive-in use queuing areas:
❑ WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS [R�fer u Ced�S�ctio�18J85.0301
WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GR4UND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE
GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and
industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide
convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial
complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and
neighboring developments.
❑ SPECIAL SEIBACKS [R�hr u Code Chapt�r 1iJ311
➢ STREETS: feet from the centerline of
➢ LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary.
➢ FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK.
❑ SPECIAL BUILDIM6 NEI6HT PBOVISIONS [Rdf�r to Code Sectlon 18.730.010.B.1
BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a
height of 75 feet provided that:
➢ A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist;
➢ All actual building setbacks will be at least half ('/z) of the building's height; and
➢ The structure will not abut a residential zoned district.
❑ BUFfERIN6 AMD SCREEIiIM6 [R�fer t�Cod�Chapter 18.1451
In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE
OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the
City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are
described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous
and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance befin►een vertical and horizontal
plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if
not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may onlv be occupied by vegetation, fences,
utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be
found in the Development Code.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8
NON-Residenfial Application/Planning Division Section
. The ESTIMATED REQUIFc�� BUFFER WIDTHS applicable to vou� proposal area are:
feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary.
feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary.
IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG:
❑ LAMDSCAPIN6 [Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.7051
STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR
PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must
be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of-
way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured
four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the
branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations
affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division.
A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED
in and around all parkin� areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking
areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view.
These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised
planters.
❑ RECYCLIN6 [Refer te Ced�C�apt�r 18.7551
Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE
SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such
as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within
Pride Disposal's Service area. Lenny Hing is the contact person and can be reached at (503)
625-6177.
� �ARIOM6 [Ref�r to Cad�S�cdon 18.765.0401
� REQUIRED parking for this type of use: .� •a�� SY (t3�cy��C; q3�u9asf� ?
Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s):
SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking:
Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): -
NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED
AS COMPACT SPACES.
PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows:
� Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches.
➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches.
Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that
separates the paricing space from an adjoining space.
Note: A maximum of three(3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can
be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as
landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements.
HANDICAPPED PARKING:
� All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED
DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking
spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space
symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted.
➢ BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and
in convenient locations.
❑ LOADIN6 AREA REQUIREMENTS [Refer t�Code Secdon 18.765.0801
Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be
provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City
Engmeer.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8
NON-Residential Applicalion/Planninc,Division Section
-� BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Cod� ctlon 18J651
BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile tra�c and in
convenient locations.
� SENSITIYE LANDS [Refer te Code Chapter 18.7151
The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR
DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLO�DPLAIN, NATURAL
DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON
UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-
application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibilitv to precisely
identifv sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibilitv of the applicant. Areas
meetinq the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearlv indicated on plans submitted with the
development application.
Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands
areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS.
❑ STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Code S�ction 18J15.080.C1
When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be
subrnitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code
Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall
include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C.
� CLEANWA�R SERYICES[CWSI 6UFFER STANDARDS [R�fer to R g 196-44/USA Rcgulatlo�s-Chapt�r 3l
LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a
vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive
area.
Desi n Criteria:
The EGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table
identifies the required widths:
TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS
SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAURESOLUTION 8� ORDER 96-44
SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT 4 WIDTH OF VEGETATED
TO SENSITIVE AREA CORRIDOR PER SIDE
• Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25%
� 10 to <50 acres 15 feet
� >50 to <100 acres 25 feet
• Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet
• Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet
• Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow
• Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres
• Natural lakes and onds
• Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25%
� 10 to <50 acres 30 feet
� >50 to <100 acres 50 feet
. Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure
. Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting
• Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in
• Natural lakes and ponds <25%slope), add 35 feet past the top
of ravineb
Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring
boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15
feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement.
SVegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certfied to be in a marginal or degraded condition.
6The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to
15 feet, if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setbadc from the top of ravine.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8
NON-Residential ApplicaUonlPlanning Dnision Section
• � Restrictions in the Ve ecl ta_� orridor:
' NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals,
dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract
from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the
CWS Design and Construction Standards.
Location of Veqetated Corridor:
IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended
for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a
separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit.
�---� CWS Service Provider Letter:
PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service
Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to compty with the R&0 96-44 sensitive
area req uirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS
Service Provider Letter is not required.
?� S16NS [R�forte C�d�Cdapter 18.7801
, SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of
Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or
height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a
development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for
Director's review.
,� TREE REMAYAL PLAM REQOIREMENTS [Ref�r to Ced�Secdon 18J90.039.CJ
A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a
certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a
development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development,
or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible.
THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following:
➢ Identifi ' loc ti including trees designated
as signi icant by the City;
➢ Identification of a r m to sav �' ' �„or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in
caliper. Mitigation must ollow t e replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according
to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code
provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots:
� Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation
program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees;
� Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existin� trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-
thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.;
� Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50%
of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.;
� Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no
mitigation;
➢ Identification of all trees which are proaosed to be remo�d; and
➢ A r t cti n ro r defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to
protect trees uring and after construction.
TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT
APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be
replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D.
(� MITI6ATION [R�fer te Cede S�ctioa 18.790.060.E1
REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines:
➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics.
➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably
available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural
resource value.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8
NON-Residential Apphr.atioNPlanning Divisbn Section
'• � ➢ If a replacement trE �f the size cut is not reasonably av� ale on the locai market or wouid
' not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance
with the following formula:
� The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated
caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably
available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the
subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted
on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner,
private property.
➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to
allow growth to maturity.
IN-LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the
consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree
replacement.
❑ CLEAR YISION AREA [Refer te Cade Chapter 18.7951
The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETINEEN THREE (3) AND
EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size
of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting streeYs functional classification and any
existing obstructions within the clear vision area.
❑ ADBITI01lAL LOT DIMEIISIOMAL REQUIREMENTS [R�fer t�Code S�cdon 18.810.0601
MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process.
Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum
15-foot-wide access easement.
The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2'/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the
parcel is less than 1'/z times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district.
CODE CHAPTERS
�8.330�ca�aroo�i u�� 'I S.F)2O(Tgard Tnargle Design Standards) — �S.7C5(OffStreet ParWnglLoading Requirements)
_ 'I H.�O(Diredors Interpretation) �8.630(washington Square Regional Center) 18.775(Sensi6ve Lands Review)
_ 18.350(�►anned�evebPment) 18.705�A�9�c��,�e�,� 18.780 csg��
_ 18.360(site�eve�opment Rev�ew) �H.T�O(Accessory Residential UniLs) _ $,7$5(Temporary Use Pertnits)
_ 18.370(va�ances�,od��stme�ts) 18.715(�ensiry Computatior�s) _�18.790(rree Remo+ra�)
_ �S.3SO(Zoning Map/fext Amendmenfs) 18.720(Desgn Compatibiuty Standards) — 18.795(vsua�C�earance Areas)
_ 1 H.385(Misoe��aneous Permits) 18.725(Environmental Perfortnance Standards) _ 1 H.798(wire�ess Communication Faali6es)
� 18.390�o�«,n�w�P�oo�a��n�a sn,dy> 18.730(�ceptions To�e�ebprnent standards) _ 18.810(street s uti��ty�mprovemem standards)
_ 'I 8.4�O(Lot Line Ad�ustrnents) �8.74�(Historic Overlay)
_ 18.420(land Partitions) 18,742(Home occupaoon Pem�ts)
_ 18.430(subdivisions) 18.745(�andscapirg 8 screenng 5tarxiards)
.L 18.51 O(Residentia�Zoning Districts) �8.750(Manufactu2dMlobil Home Regulations}
_ 18.520(Commercial Zoning Distric�s) 18.755(Maed Solid waste/Recyding Storage)
J� �8.530(Industrial Zoning Distrids) �8.�6O(Nonconiorming Situations)
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Appl'�cation Conference Notes Page 6 of S
NON-Residential Application,Planning Divisan Section
.
, ''ADDITIOMAL CONCERNS OR COMMEM, .
G t,u S �/ZvY/v�� L�'7T�
D5� � f'�.��rt
�'►��_
��•n�c t�ec o�: �s �t ��a�Tia�.4� UsEi�v .r� � R-!� ao�,
/E • D r ' .
G - S �
.
F�c . •
,
T4 �. .
rf��..: L� P� � ll_
PROCEDURE
Administrative Staff Review.
� Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer.
Public hearing before the Planning Commission.
v Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a
recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be
held by the City Council.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS
Atl APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the
Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall o�ces. PLEASE NOTE: A lications
submitted b mail or dro ed off at the counter without Plannin ivision acce tance ma e
returne . he anninq counter closes at 5:0
Ma s submitted with an a lication shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8'/z" x 11". One 8'/z" x 11"
ma o a ro ose ro ect s a e su mitte or attac ment to t e sta re ort or
a ministrative ecision. pp ications wit un o ded maps s a not e accepte
The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the
application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter
submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted
materials are required.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8
NON-Residential ApplicationlPlanrnng Division 5ection
' The administrative decisic r public hearing will typically occur � oximately 45 to 60 days after an
•' application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or
protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review.
Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public
hearing A 10-day public appeal pe�iod foIIQvy s all Iand use decisions. An appeal on this matter
would be heard by the Tigard�H�)C�[� CeJwwl • �«I LU-�14 . A basic flow chart
which illustrates the review pr ess is vailable f o t e Planning Division upon request.
Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the
applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing.
This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE
INTENDEO TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code
requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff
and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affectir�g development of the
site.
BUILDIM6 PERMITS
PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR
REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by
the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance w�th all conditions of
development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the
Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is
recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are
building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed.
Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be
demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that
structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the Citv's policv is to applv those system
develo ment credits to the first buildin ermit issued in the develo ment (UNLESS OTHERWISE
DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER A THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS
OBTAINED).
e con erence an notes cannot cover a e requirements an aspects re ate to
site planning that should ap pl to the develoRment of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide
information required by the C�e shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements.
It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or
ask an questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submittin an application.
AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN
APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A
PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as
unnecessary by the Planning Division).
PREPARED BY:
GTY Of TI6A P NNI G DIVISION - STAFf PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING
PHONE: 503-639-4111 FAX: 503-684-1291
EMAIL �mfls fi�c u��a�ci.tigard.or.us
TITLE 18(CITI' OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)IMTERMETADDRESS: WWW.cibgard.9f.11S
H:lpattylmasterslPre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 1�Dec-04
(Engineering section:preapp.eng}
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8
NON-Residential Application.�Pianning Division Section
�;F o: 5�1�2.�0�- �bOl b
w� �� ��F;.
;�,;�;� t ��`? �� _ Department of State Lands
;,-,: ,:,I
'�� AV'�.,���„���,:;� � 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100
�� Salem,OR 97301-1279
�1'e�59 Theodure R.Kulongoski,Govemor
(503)378-3805
FAX(503)37�-4844
www.oregonstatelands.us.
August 2, 2006
State Land Board
Daniel Plaza Theodore R. Kulongoski
Parks & Facilities Division Manager Governor
City of Tigard Bill Bradbury
13125 SW Hall Blvd. Secretary of State
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Randall Edwards
State Treasurer
Re: Wetland Delineation Report for a Segment of the Fanno Creek Trail
(TriMet Mitigation Site I), Washington County; T2S R1 W Sec. 2DA,
Portion of Tax Lot 600; WD #05-0049; App. #36170
Dear Mr. Plaza:
The Department of State Lands has reviewed the wetland delineation repo�t prepared
by SWCA Environmental Consultants for the site referenced above. Based on the
information presented in the report, my site visit on June 29, 2006, and additional
information submitted upon request from Adolfson Associates, Inc, we concur with the
wetland and waterway boundaries as mapped in revised Figure 5 of the report. Within
the study area, two wetlands were identified, totaling 1.37 acres. In addition, other
waters including portions of a pond, a tributary to Fanno Creek, and Fanno Creek were
identified within or immediately adjacent to the study area.
These wetlands and waters are subject to the permit requirements of the state
Removal-Fill Law. A state permit is required for fill or excavation of 50 cubic yards or
more in a wetland area or below the ordinary high water line of a waterway (the 2 year
recurrence interval flood elevation, if OHWL cannot be determined). However, Fanno
Creek is an essential salmonid stream; and therefore, fill or removal of any amount of
material below ONW in the creek, or within hydrologically connected wetlands, may
require a state permit.
This concurrence is for purposes of the state Removal-Fill Law only. Federal or local
permit requirements may apply as well. This concurrence is based on information
provided to the agency. The jurisdictional determination is valid for five years from the
date of this letter, unless new information necessitates a revision. Circumstances under
which the Department may change a determination and procedures for renewal of an
expired determination are found in OAR 141-090-0045 (available on our web site or
upon request). The applicant, landowner, or agent may submit a request for
reconsideration of this determination in writing within 60 calendar days of the date of
this letter.
J:\Wetlands\Det-WN Letters�2005\OS-0049.doc �p
_ I
; � ` ' - �
Thank you for having the site evaluated. Piease phone me at extension 232 if you have
any questions.
Sincerely,
�
�� Approved by
Peter Ryan, PWS Jan t C. Morlan, PWS
Wetland Specialist Wetl ds Program Manager
cc: Joe Walsh, TriMet
Stacy Benjamin, SWCA Environmental Consultants
Greg Mazer, Adolfson Associates, Inc.
City of Tigard Planning Department (Maps enclosed for updating LWI)
Kathryn Harris, Corps of Engineers
Damon Reische, Clean Water Services
Carrie Landrum, DSL
J:1Wetlands\Det-WN Letters12005\o5-0049.doc
1
W b 0�- 9C�`�
. � �
� 1� � �.1 � � � � .. � 1 � I. " � O___ ___ er. \\�'� .'4.\ �.� ' '?+4i ct�eKl.dt Lr� '
=-��.` ; � �<`�a ,; � 5 '�-�7I�" . _�•� tT ! ".��5
I '—_ � - � �' \�' � ' ��- � ��s,� , '�,� '��, =-�
'z i �:;� , i > --�_ �
�- -�. r __ %�; 1 i '�o � �� j�� �' 3.��.�-' .�v ��:. � - -_ �
� -" II � � o i .o '. 1 � ==t�'�o��. :6�` ' � � ��. �
,�t -_, � s� �
��,,,r ��i, - � , t � �' c� .f�.i�..'�� ��� , /o " T-��
.� �1 �['.01.9 .9 F, 9I�K- IF. �, ��.\
' / ` '�:, Q �,:'� \i —� ..�i�„'�'i��.�I u /��( — em (� - y . . .
�
� ��
� +� ' � �c1$�_ .. �� _._,= i .-,r��1' � �- � a� --r-=
.__.- � -�._
� � �� 11 ��A � C �� �� �� �,�� 9b �"� - o, T, s- -
�s w ,
� 3 �� �/ �
/� ,'_��...�; �., '' � .. (� ` "�:. .Mecz�er:�-��"?'� , `� � ��- `�(��, ` � - ���-,.
3< - �� �� E��, , P� _���4 �"� 1�! ��1h��� ��_ d� ��
�/ � �� _I_�: _y. •,.: • - 3 ro.a `� r--=-�� i
� � I �� }~ � L �I ��^�
: H o q! �, ��`-� -�._J. �� �_ D. ( I(� Rrn,E r ( �
� � ����'= � �� � �
��i i��;: - - �. .l�� E ,, � -.
G4� -`1 -_ . �.��� r .`� l ��r; _ J '�•:<.
� . � II� �Q.'• -- ..�� - ��� �'^..J � � �� t.
o� p o /� ��_ ��1 I• � �� •��� �
'i� i• •Nnrrr .a r - � '�:� I �'
•-� • __-_-- - °': ;j�l�i�'�
� � l,
n
.o
. . .ao •�
.
' .
"��" ��; '�:" - ' > , ' �� ��:•���' ��''.
I �. . l '• ' ',. � ` �EOFrAr 1� •
1 \�.. �� '�4,ttQ;-+�.i�"{ .�\ �II� �. 54 •• �: •,�-- \`�• ' r
.. i f�� \ • • ��
V� � �� � ��- � � „�. . � ��'�f ��Zoo
��.. .. '/, ::i` ;'I• c` � �F � � ��:
�.t.�.�s� � I -- - o � -- �-- • `•
�� I --- - � -- - - •'ji •j y •� �•� ����-��_
�,, `�- _ _ • ••��. '. / �, \� - I -
� � " 3 e •��' ' � � -�• �g -
i
:�
� •� �
- •� o �� �. � �� ,.
�/ �' `' "' . �<' • , r ' _ I
'�. � ' - - ��..�� ��� :. .� . . ��� 1T
•II - - Sch• .�.' •.���� I� �y •�
J�' F
.
.�
•i .
i .S
i � SITE
i�-•_�' �` j �� �
1 -�. . •-°-t�� �.o � '+�.� �' LOCAT[ON
- uf / Tigar �L'•�• �y�,-�'���/� e� � .,�'� _
i � �..... � ' ••h. �� �°J ° ,�'��.
�-_ ��,�••r'• � - � �� ��i
_ �.�� •�� � pq
. .�.`� �,� � / ''( , .L• ��
. 'Q .�., ' ;�'o �� /� 09 �`� - _
_ •�.:�• h --_ . ..�'. :g r, O �.' /) � o
ap t•� • �:.'.�•' O / o �>. �.
I 250-�� � �� �
i �6 •5' � C' C+
� i `ro
a� I ����--' _ � . ,r .t . '
i '3po. �� - --� :��:
I�' / � �/ � �Y ' '` �_�� � �' `==�1' omt �:
�� l _ �� --7� �.
�II _ /� �--. �. � :r ,r 9
� v+ ,t� 1 �\ ir; _-_ �v r Jr . �-.'i�;.. i /' .
� � d � //�/ � ♦� .W•.e �'' � r �/� �:. � %. �
���� �/�j��� ..��; �• .�� � -
��////' �j ' � e�
//�� G�O�/.// � 400� _ � .� �• N � '\E�
\��; ,�i✓�. :t �� �/ TT El7; � � �Q� \.
/: '�rs'". �� • 200'• 91'
� e (� !
�'. �%/ '� }�` . � '�f n , m ,'� - •�•�� 1 �-20qi• �'•�l� �_
:,r i ir ' \
Le end • Fanno Creek Trail
N ����
Fanno Creek Park Segment
1 inch=2.OQ(1 feet
�°�°'S�°N°F Wetland Delineation
° ���� & Natural Resource Assessment
...o...�„�.�.,..„
Portland Office SITE LOCATION MAP
43d NW Sixth Avenue,Suite 304
Source: USGS 1961, photorevised 1984. Porcland,Orego� 97209
Tei 503.224.0333 Fax503.2za.issi Figure 1 Dec. 2004 Project 8352-199
Beaverton,Oregon topographic quadrangle www.swca.com
i' .. �
I v'} o
n n ,
_ . � � � rN-
,3;, ;.-�,-� . ° ° �
c c 0
�� t_ L • n� m �
��. , r^ �,
� }�a� �,, v_ � �
_ . �; N a
.,, v 1
; . ,..
�
� N 1� ' �
i — ,:t�: �, �,
_ . . o p �
— . — . _ =�
_ - f; u� �
� a F
� - �`EAM �a� x � ��
:� `'! . . � � �
I WA 9 ,�
1 . t 1.• Q�
A1 �\ (
, _ � �
� •P4 . � �i�.
. �,� 64
A1
�C LPNC� "
WE �
•P1 3
I P2� �
� 4 0
+P
A1 �P �O ��� ��PNO ` %
� �P3 � .
� �� ' � �
g -',` � B 3
PP 2;. � � .. ,,:.�., P
t ,,,, , S
� A8 � __;:, .. �
� � �� J�wiso�• ���/ °
� .PS �� �p��`°n�
� N� � ����, _ �
�o �l uP� �;
� � �� �
.`I •P7 - �'
y �
1 ; � �1 12 � ` ''• _ � i
� / ... .. � �� -..'. 4 �
� ( - '
{�' ';!,:' 1 Q�
�
, i �2; `1
' i �' Np LINE � �:' •
( � _... 813 �, . % � AND DGE 0 BR
13
; I PS �, �P 15 �
,
CS
� _.. . _
,. ; . _. ....__
,s 14 ;,�,:- �
n � C7
( � �P10 Q
�` .P,, E��PN ,��
� � � C6 � \
, _ � g �
5 � \
� 15 �c�f'� 4 � _ ��
I
, WE1 �L �� B19 P13 3 I
� t � _� � � . _ 20 }�
I � �
, � �
I , 4 _ ,
/� l ` ` , M��SO'�j�� ¢Q �}}w �� u"� \
, ► , GRE�K �s�t ��9 2 y�,,.��"``�-�. :� � � 2 , � �
� ,
PP ` �rv / V �Or�1 e l� � - _
�� � � \ �' •(`� '7T�
I ,.�,,..: ' �` � �\\
� / »` � \ '`�6 ' �
.�
w�.. .. •
,
,: : � .
..
, . �
_ �.... , \
a .$.q ` . \
� .�..� • I ' ori.
� m �a , � �. � � �
t ..
� I� � � � g �. ,:,
Le end � Fanno Ci•eek Trail
�� �����5�'"""°'S� °��� N F1�ll�lc,`�I:1. Fanno Creek Park Segment
.p1- P15 S�le P1��S E��en���
� �+I� ��� Q Wetland Delineation
♦DIViSION OF �
��CA & Natural Resource Assessment
.t_��� `YTLXJ4 l��a ��A{1�IYVY � �w�ww�wwcoe�u�wn
'` ' � W��S ��"r'd�' Pon�and ot�ce WETLAND BOUNDARY MAP
Source: DeHaas&Associates, September 2003. 434 NW Sixch Avenue,suice 304
Wetland boundaries&sample plots professionally Portiand,Oregon 97209
I inch=5�feet Tel 503.224.0333 Fax 503.224.1851 Figure 5 Dec. 2004 Project 8352-199
land surveyed. Map accuracy+/- 1 foot. www.swca.com
�`.� '°yg S o�
����„� p�!
,
� Duane Roberts- Re: Tigard Library Trail Page 1 '
From: "Stacy Benjamin" <sbenjamin@swca.com>
To: "Duane Roberts" <DUANE@ci.tigard.or.us>
Date: 9/23/2005 12:54:08 PM
Subject: Re: Tigard Library Trail
Duane,
Yes, you are correct. For siting of trails Clean Water Services requires
that you avoid impacting the vegetated corridor where it is possible to do
so. If it is not possible to avoid the vegetated corridor, then it may be
possible to locate the trail inside the vegetated corridor; however,
proposing to impact the vegetated corridor simply for aesthetic reasons
would very likely not be permitted.
Stacy
Stacy N. Benjamin
Senior Project Manager, Wetland/Environmental Assessments
SWCA Environmental Consultants
434 NW 6th Avenue, Suite 304
Portland, Oregon 97209
phone (503) 224-0333, ext. 230
fax (503) 224-1851
email: sbenjamin@swca.com
SWCA Portland office-- previously Fishman Environmental Services
-----Original Message -----
From: "Duane Roberts" <DUANE@ci.tigard.or.us>
To: <sbenjamin@fishmanenvironmental.com>
Cc: "Daniel Plaza" <Daniel@ci.tigard.or.us>; "Vannie Nguyen"
<VANNIE@ci.tigard.or.us>
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 12:35 PM
Subject: Tigard Library Trail
> Stacy,
>
>A question has come up regarding the alignment of the parking lot
> section of the library trail, which I hope you can help me answer. This
> alignment presently runs between the 50 foot CWS buffer and the parking
> lot curb. The question is did we have any real choice about the
> location of this section? My understanding is that CWS regulations
> require trails to be located outside the buffer unless there is some
>justification, such as no alternative ROW being available, or the need
>to provide access to a bridge crossing, or the like. The rationale
> can't simply be that you would like it to run within the buffer for
>aesthetic or any other reasons not related to the physical constraints
>of the site. Is this interpretaton correct with regard to the trail
> section in question? We were required to avoid the buffer and land was
> available to allow us to do so. Thanks, Stacy
>
> Duane Roberts
> City of Tigard
� , . . �L� �OC�5- DOD /f
ENVIRONMENTAI CONSULTANTS
�
Fanno Creek Trail
Fanno Creek Park and Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation and Natural Resource Assessment
T2S, R1W, SECTION 2, SE '/4, TAX LOT 600
WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
Prepared for: �
Daniel Plaza, Parks Manager
City of Tigard, Public Works
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
and
Duane Roberts, Associate Planner
City of Tigard, Long Range Planning
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Prepared by:
Stacy Benjamin
Fishman Environmental Services ��„ ��t =���,;�
A Division of SWCA Environmental Consultants ��
�,
434 NW 6th Avenue, Suite 304 �
Portland, Oregon 97209-3652
;z�..
'�'j4�.:Ar� � ..
��.
�r 2005 j, ti .�, .�:� ; ' �"= �,
� January .�...��3; A `',� ��, ��u�
�' `' � � , .�� �, �:� �-:
R" y.z� . �.: .�r�':'� �i �'" ... � � ���-
.. ,��,. \ ' r _ ' . . sr , . . . . _ '' . .
!� �'�:. • �. � �'�.
,� Y � 434 NW Sixth Avenue,Suite 30�3 Portland OR 97209-36�?� 503-22a-0�.�3 faY�+13-224-1851 A
�P�',` � www.S'V�"CA.com
.� � s ,. �
r� +�i, v
1;:7 l�� 1`''� . ��:. -.. ,
� �r�y0f ^�'.�,? ` � �'\�' .� �i � , ,'�� �. ` �� .
x� � �,;.,, �� ti � `,��,., � '9}�"'�..
t �`+�lu�} ��•'a� � .e ,4 .i -�� y �r' . � •r� � �`�'A•� �,;�ir . . n ' .. ..
� , .. j'r. . ,. " ��14Y'�, _�.� ���'' �f' ,� .' ���.��. .. , _n '��
_ '�i•,,r
, ,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
WETLAND DELINEATION SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROLTND INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1 Study Area Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Local Wetlands Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 National Wetlands Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 SoilSurvey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.5 Site Elevation and Topography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.6 Floodplain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.7 Precipitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3 SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1 Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2 Uplands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3 Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.4 Vegetated Corridor Lnpacts & Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5 LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6 LIST OF PREPARERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix A: Local Wetlands Inventory Map& Summary Sheets
Appendix B: Wetland Determination Data Sheets
Appendix C: Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment Data Sheets& Enhancement Plan
Appendix D: Site Photographs
Appendix E: Vegetation Table of the Fanno Creek Park Site
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. SITE LOCATION MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
FIGURE 2. STUDY AREA BOUNDARY MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
FIGURE 3. NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
FIGURE 4. SOIL SURVEY MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
FIGURE 5. WETLAND BOUNDARY MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
FIGURE 6. VEGETATED CORRIDOR MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page i
r
WETLAND DELINEATION SUMMARY
SITE NAME: Fanno Creek Trail, Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
SITE LOCATION: The Fanno Creek Park site is located east of SW Hall Boulevard, south of the
Southern Pacific railroad tracks and north of Fanno Creek. The new Tigard
Library is located east of SW Hall Boulevazd and south of Fanno Creek in
Tigard, Oregon.
T2S, R1W, Section 2, SE 1/4, TaY lot 2S102DA 600
APPLICANT: Daniel Plaza, Parks Manager, City of Tigard Public Works Department
AGENT: Stacy Benjamin, Fishman Environmental Services
DATE OF SITE VISITS: August 12, September 22,October 28,&December 3, 2003
PROJECT STAFF: Stacy Benjamin, Senior Project Manager
Mark Vlahakis, Soil Scientist
C. Mirth Walker, PWS, Wetlands Program Manager
PROJECT: 8352-199
SUMMARY
Fishman Environmental Services,a division of S WCA Environmental Consultants(Fishman/S WCA),
conducted a natural resource assessment to meet Clean Water Services'requirements for the proposed
construction of a new segment of the Fanno Creek Trail on the Fanno Creek Park site and the new Tigard
Library site.Fishman conducted a wetland delineation and a vegetated comdor condition assessment on
the portion of the Fanno Creek Park site located north of Fanno Creek and south of an unnamed tributary
to Fanno Creek.Fishman delineated 1.55 acres of emergent wetland and permanent pond on the Fanno
Creek Park site. The vegetated corridors on the Fanno Creek Park site consisted of three vegetated
corridor communities that were determined to be in degraded condition and will require enhancement as
part of site development.
A wetland delineation and natural resource assessment were previousiy conducted on the new Tigard
Library site located south of Fanno Creek by Kurahashi&Associates in 2002(DSL WD#2002-0324).
Fishman has incorporated the results of Kurahashi's investigations into our evaluation of proposed
vegetated corridor impacts.This report has been prepared to meet Clean Water Services natural resource
assessment requirements and the Oregon Department of State Lands May 21,2004 wetland delineation
report requirements.
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 1
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
At the request of the City of Tigard,Fishman prepared a natural resource assessment to determine the
locations of wetlands and vegetated corridors on the Fanno Creek Park site located north of Fanno Creek
(Figure 1).Fishman also assisted with determuung the proposed Fanno Creek Trail alignment on the Fanno
Creek Park site and the new Tigard Library site to minimize impacts to vegetated comdors and prepared
a mitigation plan to compensate for unavoidable vegetated corridor impacts due to trail construction.The
proposed trail alignment will begin on the east side of S W Hall Boulevard across from an existing section
of the Fanno Creek Trail.A tributary to Fanno Creek flows east through the north portion of the Fanno
Creek Park site and then flows southerly near the east property boundary.Fanno Creek flows east through
the central portion of the site and then flows southerly along the east edge of the library site.Fanno Creek
Park will be managed as a natural environment for passive uses and will include open space,trails,a
viewing platform, interpretive center,and small parking lot The new segrnent of the Fanno Creek Trail will
connect with an existing trail segment located west of Hall Boulevard and an existing trail segment located
south of the new Tigard Libraty site and the proposed Wall Street on the Fanno Pointe Condominiums site.
1.1 Study Area Boundary
The tax lot map ofthe site is shown in Figure 2.The study area boundary for the wetland delineation and
vegetated corridor condition assessment is also shown in Figure 2.The study area was located east of S W
Hall Boulevard,north of Fanno Creek,and south and west of an unnamed tributary to Fanno Creek.Since
Fanno Creek and the tributary were not shown on the tax lot map, we have added the approximate
locations of these waters by hand.
1Z Local Wetlands Inventory
Wetlands were mapped on the Fanno Creek Pazk site in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory
(LWI),which was conducted by Fishman Environmental Services in 1995.The site is contained within
Fanno Creek Unit 7,and four wetland areas were mapped on the site.Wetlands associated with Fanno
Creek are mapped in the east portion of the site(Unit E-20)and extend off-site to the east.Three small
wetlands (Units E-14, E-15 and E-16) are mapped north of Fanno Creek. Wetlands in Unit 7 were
determined to be locally significant based upon rating high for wildlife habitat,fish habitat,water quality and
hydrologic control functions. The LWI map and summary sheet are included in Appendix A.
Based upon our field investigation,Unit E-14 appears to be a seasonally saturated or shallowly ponded
area located in the west portion of the South Wetland delineated on the site.Unit E-15 is located in the
vicinity of the Fanno Creek tributary in the north portion of the site.Unit E-16 is the permanent pond
contained within the delineated South Wetland.
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 2
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
1.3 National Wetlands Inventory
Fanno Creek is mapped as riverine,upper perennial,open water with an intermittently exposed/permanent
water regime(R30WZ)on the Beaverton,Oregon National Wetlands Inventory(NVVI)map(Figure 3).
No other wetlands are mapped on the Fanno Creek Park site.
1.4 Soil Survey
Soils were mapped on the Fanno Creek Park site by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in the Soil
Survey of Washington County, Oregon(USDA SCS 1982;Figure 4).The northern portion of the site �
is mapped as the somewhat poorly drained Aloha silt loam(Unit 1)that formed in alluvium or lacustrine
silt on broad valley terraces.The central portion of the site is mapped as the poorly drained Verboort silty
clay loam(Unit 42)that formed in stratified,moderately fine textured and fine textured alluvium on bottom
lands.The slope of all three units is 0 to 3 percent.The southern portion of the site is mapped as the
moderately well-drained McBee silty clay loam (Unit 30)that formed in alluvium on floodplains.
Verboort soils are listed as hydric on the Hydric Soils in Washington CountyArea, Oregon list(L1SDA
SC S 1989).Aloha soils may have hydric Huberly inclusions,and McBee soils may have hydric Cove and
Wapato inclusions.
1.5 Site Elevation and Topography
Topography of the Fanno Creek Park site is relatively flat and ranges from approximately136 to 139 feet
above sea level(DeHaas&Associates topographic survey,Figure 5).Steep approximately 8 foot banks
slope down to Fanno Creek.
1.6 Floodplain
The 100-year floodplain is mapped on Figure 6.The portion of Fanno Creek Park located north of Fanno
Creek is entirely within the Clean Water Services revised 100-year floodplain(Clean Water Services
2003).The portion of the Fanno Creek Park located south of Fanno Creek is partially within the floodplain.
The southern section ofthe trail alignment located immediately east ofthe library is located outside the
floodplain.
1.7 Precipitation
According to the Oregon Climate Service(http://www.ocs.oregonstate.edu/index.html),rainfall at the
Portland KGW-TV rain gage station was 0.05 inch during the two weeks prior to the August 12,2003 site
visit during which the wetland delineation field work was conducted.There was only a trace amount of
rainfall for the month of July.On August 12,2003,rainfall since October 1,2002 was 39.55 inches, 1.10
inches below normal for the water year to date(97%of normal).Rainfall for the two weeks prior to the
December 3,2003 site visit during which wetland hydrology was rechecked was 2.99 inches.Rainfall for
the water year to date(October 1,2003 through December 2,2003)was 8.25 inches(81%of normal).
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 3
Fanno Geek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
2 METHODOLOGY
The methods used for determining the presence of wetlands and delineating wetland boundaries follow the
routine plant community methodology of the Army Corps ofEngineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987)used by both the Corps and the Oregon Department of State Lands.
Wetland delineation field work was conducted on August 12,2003.Soils,vegetation,and indicators of
hydrology were recorded at 15 sample plot locations to document site conditions.The wetland boundary
was marked with orange"WETLAND BOLJNDARY"flagging tied to vegetation(tall grass or blackberry).
Sample plot locations were marked with pink flagging tied to lath stakes. Wetland boundaries were
professionally land surveyed by DeHaas&Associates.Wetland boundaries and sample plot locations are
shown on Figure 5. Wetland determination data sheets are included in Appendix B.
The site was revisited on September 3,October 28,&December 3,2003 to confirm the presence of
wetland hydrology.The condition of the vegetated corridor adjacent to the wetland boundaries was
evalua.ted on December 3,2003.The vegetated corridor sample plot locations and the vegetated corridor
setbacks are shown on Figure 6. The vegetated corridor condition assessment data sheets are included
in Appendix C. Site photographs are included in Appendix D.Vegetation noted on the site is listed in
Appendix E.
Reference material used in this study included Reed's National List of Plant Species that Occur in
Wetlands: Northwest(Region 9) and the 1993 Supplement to this list,where the indicator status of
wetland plants are listed. These indicators include:
OBL Obligate wetland(almost always occur in wetlands)
FACW Facultative Wetland (usually occur in wetlands)
FAC Facultative (equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands}
FACU Facultative Upland (usually occur in non-wetlands)
UPL, NOL Upland,Not Listed (almost always occur in non-wetlands)
NI Iv`o Indicator(insuificieiii infoi-�nation available ar piatit is widely toieia►��j
Plant taaconomy follows Hitchcock and Cronquist(1973)and synonymy follows Reed(1988);synonymy
is shown in[single square brackets].Ta�conomy of some species has been updated(Kartesz 1994)and the
new nomenclature is shown in [[double square brackets]].
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 4
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
Soils were described with standardized color chips(Munsell Soil Color Charts,Kollmorgen Corporation,
1998 revised washable edition)of hue,value,and chroma and by texture(sand,silt,clay,loam,muck,and
peat).
Other materials used in this study are included in the Reference section.
3 SITE CONDITIONS
The Fanno Creek Park site is bordered on the south by Fanno Creek,on the west by SW Hall Boulevard
and on the north by the Tigard-Tualatin School District property which is used for school bus parking.The
area east of the site is undeveloped.The Fanno Creek Park site is approximately 3.7 acres and consists
predominantly of a grass field dominated by colonial bentgrass,meadow foxtail,tall fescue and common
velvetgrass.Vegetation was unmowed at the time of the site visits.A tributary to Fanno Creek flows
easterly through the north portion of the site,then flows southerly along the east property boundary.A small
animal dam was present on this tributary in the north portion of the site during the August site visit.
Upstream of the dam,the tributary was ponded to an unknown depth and ranged from 20 to 40 feet wide,
resulting in the stream overflowing its short banks and ponding in a small area of the field immadiately south
of the stream channel.Downstream of the dam,the stream channel ranged from 2 to 3 feet wide and was
flowing a few inches deep with a wetted width of up to 1 foot wide.Vegetation along the streambanks
consisted of reed canarygrass with lesser amounts of bittersweet nightshade,American speedwell and
orange balsam in the north portion of the site,and a fringe of scrub-shrub and forested vegetation consisting
of willow,Himalayan blackberry,red-osier dogwood,rose,black hawthorn,Pacific ninebark,Oregon ash
and red alder along the east site boundary.
The stream banks of Fanno Creek are approximately 8 feet high,steeply sloped,and covered with dense
Himalayan blackberry in much of the project site.A narrow riparian corridor along Fanno Creek contains
Oregon ash, red alder, ornamental hawthorn, Himalayan blackberry, rose, Pacific ninebazk and willow.
A permanent pond is present near the central portion of the site and is associated with what is likely a
remnant oxbow of Fanno Creek.Based upon a review of historic aerial photos,an oxbow was cut offfrom
Fanno Creek in the early 1970's during construction of a 60-inch diameter sewer interceptor line through
the proj ect area.The western half of the oxbow appears to have been filled,but the eastern half of the
oxbow and the pond remain.Two large concrete footings,which are likely the remains of an old weir or
dam structure,are present on the north and south edges of the pond near the downstream end.The pond
appears to be several feet deep,and an outlet(the remnant oxbow channel)is present in the southeast
portion of the pond that flows southerly to Fanno Creek.Dense scrub-shrub vegetation including Himalayan
blackberry,willow,red-osier dogwood and black hawthorn near the east site boundary made it difficult
to access this area;however,it appears that the tributary to Fanno Creek that flows through the north
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 5
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
portion of the site j oins the remnant oxbow channel prior to the confluence with Fanno Creek.A fringe of
emergent wetland vegetation,including birdsfoot-trefoil,bentgrass,soft rush,creeping buttercup,and
peppermint is present along the west edge of the pond.The side slopes of the pond are 2 to 3 feet high,
and several Oregon white oak are present at the top of slope along the north edge of the pond.
3.1 Wetlands
Two wetlands were delineated on the Fanno Creek Park site.The South Wetland consists of an emergent
wetland and a permanent pond.The pond is associated with a remnant oxbow of Fanno Creek.The North
Wetland is an emergent/seasonally ponded wetland. Since the wetland delineation field work was
conducted during the dry time ofyear,primary indicators ofhydrology were not present in the majority of
the wetlands on the site.
South Wetland
The South Wetland was generally dominated by colonial bentgrass(Agrostis tenuis[[capillaris]],FAC)
and meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis, FACW) with areas of reed canarygrass (Phalaris
arundinacea,FACW),quack grass(Agropyron[[Elytrigia]]repens,FAC-)and tall fescue(Festuca
arundinacea, FAC-). The South Wetland was documented at sample plots 11 - 15. A small vernal
pooUdepression area,measuring approximately 10 feet by 70 feet,was present in the southwest portion
of the South Wetland.This area appeared to be seasonally ponded based upon the presence of bare,
cracked soils with dried algal mats.Vegetation in the vernal pool area was dominated by water foxtail
(Alopecurus geniculatus,OBL)(dead),ovoid spikerush(Eleocharis ovata,OBL)(dead),low cudweed
(Gnaphalium uliginosum [Filaginella uliginosaJ,FAC+),reed canarygrass(Phalaris arundinacea,
FACW) and Mediterranean barley (Hordeum geniculatum [hystrix], FACU+). Small amounts of
mayweed chamomile(Anthemis cotula,FACU)and spotted cats-eaz(Hypochaeris radicata,FACU)
were also present.Soils in the South Wetland met the hydric soils criterion by having a chroma of 2 with
redox concentrations.Soils were historically disturbed due to construction of a 60 inch sanitary sewer
interceptor through this area in the early 1970s and consisted of cemented silts and silt loams.
Soils were dry during the suminertime site visit,and hydrology indicators(algal mats)were only observed
in one area of the wetland,the vernal pool area.The South Wetland was determined to be wetland based
upon meeting the hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils criteria.Since the delineation was conducted
during the dry time of year,hydrology could not be used to deternune the presence or absence of wetlands
or wetland boundaries. Wetland hydrology appears to be driven mainly by precipitation ponding on
compacted and cemented soils,with occasional overbank flooding from the Fanno Creek tributary at the
eastern(downslope)edge of the wetland.The wetland boundary was determined primarily based upon
changes in vegetation and soils,and topography was also used to assist with detern-unation ofthe wetland
boundary along the north and west edges of the permanently ponded area.The vernal pool area of the
wetland and several depressional areas were observed to be ponded to a depth of 3 to 4 inches during a
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 6
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Comdor Assessment
)anuary 2005
brief site visit conducted on December 3,2003 to verify the presence of wetland hydrology and confum
the accuracy of wetland boundaries.The wetland boundaries delineated during the August 12`''site visit
coincided well with hydrology observed on the site in December,and no changes were made to the
delineated wetland boundaries.
North Wetland
The North Wetland was generally dominated by colonial bentgrass and meadow foxtail with areas of tall
fescue and common velvetgrass(Holcus lanatus,FAC).The North Wetland was documented at sample
plots 1,2,4 and 5.A small ponded area(Plot 1)was present in the east portion of the North Wetland
during the August site visit.The ponded azea was up to 6 inches deep and appeared to be the result of a
small animal dam on the Fanno Creek tributary in the north portion of the site.Soils in the North Wetland
meet the hydric soils criterion by having a chroma of 2 with redox concentrations.Soils were dry at three
out of the four sample plots located in this wetland during the summeriime site visit,and did not display
hydrology indicators.
The ponded area contained 100 percent herbaceous vegetation cover which was dominated by meadow
foxtail and birdsfoot-t�foil with small amounts of quackgrass,soft rush,slender nash,Watson's willow-herb
and one-sided sedge.
The North Wetland was determined to be wetland based upon meeting the hydrophytic vegetation and
hydric soils criteria and containing a small ponded area.Since the delineation was conducted during the dry
time of year,hydrology could not be used to determine the presence or absence of wetlands or wetland
boundaries.The wetland boundary was determined based upon changes in vegetation and soils.The site
was revisited several times to deternune the duration of ponding in the wetland and confirm the accuracy
of wetland boundaries.The ponded area had partially receeded by a September 22nd site visit and was
no longer ponded by the October 28th site visit.This area was ponded again during a December 3rd site
visit.The wetland boundaries delineated during the August 12`h site visit coincided well with hydrology
observed on the site throughout the Fall and early Winter,and no changes were made to the delineated
wetland boundaries.
Previously.Delineated Wetlands
A wetland delineation report was prepared for the new Tigard Library site by Kurahashi&Associates
in June 2002 and was resubmitted to the Division of State Lands in September 2002 (DSL WD#
2002-0324;DSL concurrence letter dated October 8,2002).Kurahashi delineated the wetland boundaries
of wetlands associated with Pinebrook Creek and a large pond located to the south of the Fishman study
area.Impacts to the Kurahashi-delineated wetlands have been pernutted far the City of Tigard's upcoming
Wall Street Extension project, scheduled to begin construction in 2005 (DSL #31719-RF, Corps
#200200137).Pinebrook Creek and associated wetlands and ponds are proposed to be reconfigured as
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 7
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
wetland mitigation for the Wall Street project.Reconfigured wetland boundaries are shown in the wetland
mitigation plan prepared for the Wall Street project.
3.2 Uplands
Upland vegetation was generally dominated by colonial bentgrass and tall fescue with areas where orchard
grass(Dacrylis glomerata,FACL�,common velvetgrass or meadow foxtail were subdominant.A dense
hedgerow of Himalayan blackberry was present along the top of slope on the north side of Fanno Creek
in the south portion of the site and along the west edge of the Fanno Creek tributary/remnant oxbow
channel in the southeast portion of the site.Uplands were documented at sample plots 3 and 6-10.Upland
soils did not meet the hydric soils criterion due to having a chroma of 2 with no redox concentrations.Soils
were historically disturbed in the south portion of the site due to construction of a 60 inch sanitary sewer
interceptor through this area in the early 1970s and consisted ofcompacted base rock(large gravel fill)at
Plots 8 and 9.Soils were dry and did not display hydrology indicators.Areas were determined to be non-
wetland based upon lack of a predominance ofhydrophytic vegetation and/or presence of non-hydric soils.
A few areas meeting the hydrophytic vegeta.tion criterion did not contain hydric soils and were therefore
determined to be non-wetland.
A complete list of vegetation noted on the site is included in Appendix E.
3.3 Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment
Slope Determination
Topography of the site is generally level,and slopes on the site are less than 25%.The vegetated corridor
setback required by Clean Water Services(C WS)adj acent to the perennial streams and wetlands greater
than 0.5 acre is 50 feet from the edge of stream bank or wetland boundary for areas with a slope of less
than 25%adj acent to the water resource(Table 3.1,Appendix C).The location of the vegetated corridors
adjacent to streams and wetlands on the site is shown in Figure 6.
Ve�etated Corridor Condition Assessment
The condition ofthe vegetated corridors on the Fanno Creek Park site was deternuned according to Clean
Water Services'Design and Construction Standards,Resolution and Order#04-09,effective March 1,
2004.The vegetated corridor condition is based upon the percent tree canopy and percent cover of native
trees, shrubs and groundcover(Table 3.2; Appendix C).
The vegetated corridors adjacent to Fanno Creek, the South Wetland and the North Wetland were
evaluated at 4 sample plots (Appendix C). The vegetated corridors on the site consisted of three
communities.Community 1 made up the largest percent of the vegetated comdors on the site(75%)and
was a grass field dominated by colonial bentgrass and tall fescue with orchard grass,common velvetgrass,
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 8
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
and meadow foxtail subdominant in areas.Trace amounts of spotted cat's ear,Queen Anne's lace,chicory
and curly dock were also present.
Community 2 consisted of a disturbed roadside community in the northwest portion of the site adj acent to
Hall Boulevard and contained Himalayan blackberry,Watson's willow-herb,bluegrass,reed canarygrass,
quack grass,tall fescue,common velvetgrass,crane's-bill,and bull thistle.Community 2 comprised 5%
of the vegetated corridor azea on the site.
Community 3 consisted of a riparian fringe along the north side of Fanno Creek.This community was
dominated by Himalayan blackberry with scattered native trees and shrubs including red alder,Oregon ash,
red-osier dogwood,and Pacific ninebark.Areas of reed canarygrass and poison hemlock were also
present.This community was a narrow band ranging from 10 to 15 feet from the top of bank of Fanno
Creek and comprised 20%of the vegetated corridor area on the site.
The three vegetated comdor communities were all determined to be in degraded condition due to having
less than 50%cover of native species(a113 communities)and less than 25%tree canopy(communities 1
& 2 only).
Previously Evaluated Vegetated Corridors
The condition of the 50 foot vegetated corridors required adjacent to Fanno Creek and wetlands
associated with Pinebrook Creek on the new Tigard Library site(tax lots 2S 102DD 100 and 200 and
2S 102DA 600)was evaluated in the natural resource assessment report prepared for the new Tigard
Library site by Kurahasi&Associates in August 2002(CWS File No.2743).The vegetated corridor
communities located on the portion of the library site where the Fanno Creek Trail segment is proposed
to be constructed were all determined to be in degraded condition due to the presence of less than 50%
cover by native trees,shrubs and groundcovers;less than 25%tree canopy;and greater than 20%cover
by invasive species and non-native species(Himalayan blackberty,omamental hawthorn,and Scot's broom
in the riparian community).
3.4 Vegetated Corridor Impacts & Mitigation
Construction of pedestrian or bike paths is an allowed activity within the vegetated corridor provided that
impacts are minimized through choice of mode,sizing and placement(CWS Design&Construction
Standards,R&0 04-9, Chapter 3.02.4 b.2). When paths are greater than 3 feet in width,the square
footage of the excess path width is required to be mitigated for at a 1:1 ratio by enhancing vegetated
corridor on the site to a good condition. An enhancementlmitigation plan is included in Appendix C.
The proposed trail alignment has been located outside the vegetated corridor wherever possible in order
to minimize impacts to the vegetated corridor.Impacts to the vegetated comdor aze only proposed where
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 9
� �,
,.
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
necessary to construct a bridge crossing over Fanno Creek,the bridge approaches, and to meander the
pathway close to Fanno Creek to construct a viewing platform.Vegetated corridor impacts are proposed
in 5 areas of degraded vegetated corridor and tota13,260 square feet.Proposed mitigation consists of
enhancing 4,000 square feet of degraded vegetated corridor located north of Fanno Creek,east of Hall
Boulevard and west of the proposed trail.Proposed vegetated corridor impacts and mitigation are shown
on Figure 6.The proposed enhancement area is greater than the impact area to allow for the possibility that
the proposed vegetated corridor impacts may increase once the final bridge design is determined.If any
additional vegetated corridor impacts are proposed in the future beyond those proposed at this time,the
applicant will submit a revised natural resource assessment to Clean Water Services and will seek a revised
Service Provider Letter for the project.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED VEGETATED CORRIDOR IMPACTS & MITIGATION
Location Proposed Impact Area (SF� Proposed Mitigation Area (SF)
Impact Area 1 135
Impact Area 2 787
Impact Area 3 1494
Impact Area 4 699
Impact Area 5 145
TOTAL 3,260
Enhancement Area 4,000
EXCESS MITIGATION 740
4 CONCLUSION
Fishman conducted a wetland delineation and a vegetated corridor condition assessment on the portion of
the Fanno Creek Park site located north of Fanno Creek and south of an unnamed tributary to Fanno
Creek to meet Clean Water Services nahu�al resource assessment requirements for construction of a new
segment of the Fanno Creek Trail.Fishman delineated 1.55 acres of emergent wetland and permanent
pond on the Fanno Creek Park site.The South Wetland is 0.48 acre and includes a seasonally ponded
area.The North Wetland is 1.07 acres and includes a permanent open water pond.Wetland boundaries
and the top of streambank of Fanno Creek were professionally land surveyed by DeHaas&Associates.
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 10
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
The vegetated corridors on the Fanno Creek Park site consisted of three vegetated corridor communities
that were determined to be in degraded condition.Construction of the trail will impact 3,260 square feet
of vegetated corridor.Enhancement of 4,000 square feet of vegetated corridor located north of Fanno
Creek is proposed as mitigation for the project.
A wetland delineation and natural resource assessment were previously conducted on the new Tigard
Library site located south of Fanno Creek by Kurahashi&Associates in 2002(DSL WD#2002-0324;
CWS File#2743).Fishman has incorporated the results of Kurahashi's investigations into our evaluation
of proposed vegetated corridor impacts due to construction of the Fanno Creek Trail.
5 LIMITATIONS
The following statement is required to be included in wetland delineation reports per DSL's May 21,2004
wetland delineation report rules.
This report documents the investigation,best professional judgment and conclusions ofthe investigators.
It is correct and complete to the best of our knowledge.It should be considered a Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination of wetlands and other waters and used at your own risk unless it has been reviewed and
approved in writing by the Oregon Department of State Lands in accordance with OAR 141-090-0005
through 141-090-0055.
6 LIST OF PREPARERS
Stacy N. Benjamin, Wetland Ecologist
Field Work and Report Preparation
Mazk Vlahakis, Soil Scientist
Field Work
C. Mirth Walker, PWS, CWD, Wetlands Program Manager
Report Review
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 11
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
7 REFERENCES
Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water
Management Resolution and Order No. 04-9. 2004.
ftp://ftp.cleanwaterservices.org/Web/Design & Construction Standards/2004 D&C
Stds-Current/04-09 D&C Stds Manual-WebFormat.pdf Effective March 1, 2004.
Department of State Lands. 2001. Administrative Rules for Wetland Delineation Report Requirements
and for Jurisdictional Determinations for the Purpose of Regulating Fill and Removal Within
Waters of the State. Adopted July 1, 2001 and amended May 21,2004.
- http://www.oregonstatelands.us/141-090f.pdf
Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical
Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,Miss.
Fishman Environmental Services. 1995. City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory "Offsite Option"
and Wetlands Assessment. Prepared for the City of Tigard. FES Project 94043.
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington
Press, Seattle.
Kartesz, J.T.,1994.A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Canada,
and Greenland. Volume 1-Checklist and Volume 2-Thesaurus. Second Edition. In
association with Biota of North American Program of the North Carolina Botanical Garden.
Timber Press, Portland.
Kollmorgen Instrument Corporation, 1998 revised washable edition.Munsell Soil Color Charts.
Baltimore.
Kurahashi &Associates, Inc. 2002. Natural Resource Assessment Report, Tigazd Library. Prepared
for City of Tigard. August 12, 2002. (Clean Water Services File No. 2743)
Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. 2002. Wetland Delineation/Determination Report, Tigard Library.
Prepared for City of Tigard. June 6, 2002, resubmitted September 12, 2002. (DSL WD
#2002-0324)
Oregon Climate Service (http://www.ocs.oregonstate.edu/index.html)
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 12
, �
Fanno Creek Trail,Fanno Creek Park&Tigard Library Segment
Wetland Delineation&Vegetated Corridor Assessment
January 2005
Reed, P.B., Jr., 1988.National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest(Region
9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report No. 88 (26.9).
Reed, P.B., Jr., et al., 1993.Supplement to List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands:
Northwest (Region 9).
USDA SCS, 1989. Hydric Soils in Washington County Area, Oregon.
USDA SCS, 1982. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. United States Department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment
Station.
USDI Fish and Wildlife Service,no date, Beaverton, Oregon National Wetlands Inventory map.
1:58,000 CIR, 8/81.
USGS, 1961, photorevised 1984. Beaverton, Oregon 7.5'topographic quadrangle.
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 13
, -
�
-' " -i�-- ��
� .
I � •; � ��. I , i � I,� ��
, �
��� ' �� ��
,, ,
I��}� � " \� ����` —� � �I .� � � '
� �- ,, ,,,��-�,1 .�:,�, -- J- -+,—! � , ��
I�' ij `` _ �.,�,��'�`;:,�::::$��'f•'. �< •- �; � �I .i i �
I � '�`�\\�, I�` .� �. _"� •Y�: � �'� ����
� .� ' i� �\ � .
� � _ � � � �\ I l : � I ( I�
!I • ,S:-�"�. \ \ � „�L I • �1 I
�.�, ` �►��� J. �
-��. . , ,�t,, , .�-_�_ - .. ,-
. � �� �,���;,.--- � � i
; a��
', i�
� �. --��,
� �
— J` �� \\� jy - , �
I � ,�I►",���� •l��. � � t
I •- �� � •�I � ,11 �� `3'� '� � � `��
--= �.J.� ��ir!�!�'�. � � �
� �� ''� o ��"'- i .� ,;�o; �I t � I ��;
���� %, �;�i ��i � I ,
-T� � �/�� T��� ���
�I �il �f , � ��I�i � . .� �
- �.__ L� f � � ` _
�� -.��--- �.-..�._ � ��a�l�! � C � /� �
,• � !
�.� ) � 1��� ;�� -I�"���3�p—rt�'' ��� ����� �
i �� , r �j �
� �� � ;, . �� -\`.�, '��,,,����;; �'� ID���r�,,o . I
�i�.�. �y ,,..� �.'�°,���l����'.��f����� ��
Tai i�aK' ��� ��" ������ ��� '���. ,./ I��r ��\
� � `�� � � � `� \� � ,I .r� �� .
; I';��. �.� ;� ��"" ,,�y� � . , ��
. , ,
�, `;' +.,�-�+�A�.�__.� .� i ��i��.�,; �i� �' Q�.,; ,�-�'�'_�•` ��- e
� ����—�1� �! — �;-��0' � v��.s�� ��S.�v'"��. � ' �,;,t�'LL�i
;, ���-��, �a�� � � -;�,_� . ;a •\��l �� {
� - � / 1�'�/f' � � � � t
�
"/� �� '�,� s, �/�' . � � � •� . . . . � �.I�
�'�s��=-�����/' `�� .���. '
---�' f � ���'/�' _��� "'� �y��
� �� %—��`��%�/•�' ^ � �y�' 4,;, � %/ �' ��`
� � y_���1� r�-� °�� �,. � , ���
�`�.'�� � �;%v�;�����'������;����'��,„�%, �:, \ r"�r��
�---�� -;i� i(► . - �",jlr 1� ,;a.� i';. �� �� �I
1 ���,� �;� , r ;- �� �,���� �
, � �,�/,� � , � �I� � /'�� ,�.: _ �� �
_ �i � � ` ���I�il a^�,�/�� ; ' ,,a— � � '✓�'���
� . �' f . , � �q_ . i '�—� . • ' ��sv�TJ=
i A,� �—FT� `(,�L�� � . \�/�/ „ � �\` —c - �
/ � I � i � ��L���'�'�. --;I�' ` ��1
�q��.: .lid��l ,�' ���� ��.� �,f -- � ����
�---- r� .� -- ���� �� .�a �.,� � ���
��;���� �,.�IE l�� �������-�,����,� .� � � �
1�!�_...� .. �ia —L�_� _ _ �"� � �,, �
�`,�`;� -,�- ��� ��,,y=�� ��;,�; .,�,��'—.�,� �iii _��.� _ — _ �
►�J� f �j � �. -,:- �� �
� �� ., �I�i I� �� '' ''`"'�"'/"I' r� T-
�a;`l��jy"��_ .� / �� . ���� r - I
r� ' 'E7�
!� � -�- iHij � ��i�i��� � � o_ ;r- °� ��� ��� �'
."►.' ' - �sF_":a� �N�����` 1� �I `• - -- ��1►!i: v� -
� � - "1 � .::�—�J��.� ,�
� .._. ��� `�o '� � :r=T-- �-
� ���r�i�� �I►_-_ --_"�• -- ;�-�-=l�j-- jl �l�7r �fill ` � +!� ,.� ' i�. �--.I' �� �l`\�
-- - --- - � � — �� �,�:,�J�.� �_ ���: � �� ��i�.
.��
, =-t=-- �L�. �;�
• _ ��/,��� � �'�`-- ��� � � � ` f�' �. �[��✓ � �r l�
�---•� _
.� � _;��1; ; .. . �-e� �, _ "t'r -- -�� ��
a '//'I,� � �,:` a��� —, ,� �
� '�� .,;��`—�'-f���' — � —'�!� ��
;��, i�- � ,� ' I
�� .r � � ��� .• a ,
� � � ' � � :' - � � , ' �
� -
� 1 i
` : ' �
'' ' '• 1 1 '
��
�� . • •. � ��
� �. . . � - -. �� -
1 � 1 1 � /' 1 1. � � - � ��
i' • • �� ���• .• � .� � �
2S 1 02DA 2S 1 02DA
i. y i ,�- , �,�,. ; --- _-- -
s ! ,�,. I+� ,w„ �„�.
� � :� i �``* �� - --t---:- --
♦ �
w4�� :.a; 'R. ,_ .Y.. ..� �. �,
u�K; , ;' '�� � -� -t--,�
, p' � � i `� . . . . � :.:�c _�a.r �,o,,, .uw,f �
ey ` . . . / . . . . . I lrr f rrr rrrw i 1
...��i � ,�I �`'� r � .'s —�_� '"'I --
' �r�. � b` I . . . . . � r�-�-._l. '__�_._I fC�I` i�r rJrr I
. 100 � ' ' . l, . . ywI��`.___
IMK . � . 1�1 �':� . . l_�.�Ifr
� I j /r
�� . � � II � . , I . . L JTQM I�il
� 1'� �- I . � �� � �
� WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON
— -- -? � �qr I - . . � NE711SE1/4SECTIONO2T2SMWW.M.
y.,l�,�l I '. . � ��.� �� . . SG1LE t'�100'
,,,,1 .e �
I I I �'� �''r�3 i . 9,� , . . . � -. - �'��• M`► . N�Jf 32�33 I.N �5 M�3i
I
�� zl � �l,9 ° � e e s t � t e
O t f1K
,�y� ��� • � � 9Q � , � � � ` � , )2 � � .� D 10 �1} 14 7�
�� IOia.��T I � . . '
__ �;• � �: i q`.' �.;� , i9 re n se �a :r� �a :e
I �� J
� � 2� fQ �o st n a zr t9
�
�� + 1 � � �- �, �_ � � � m_ � �
� i 1 �� �
i t��. . 3E 3/ J2�.33�t33 Je 71
y; � I �: �}, � � /`� . . � , + I ' �
+ '_.I-L°�.`i J 1__l_r e
� I I `e � . , � !�� fON AOdTIONAL YA/S YISR OUII NEBSITE A�
� (V I � ��x - ---n�r.co.�+��nw.w
� i
, �'__'.
� � TQL'd To �A,�p � ••;00,,. k .°' � � ee � a� �s ,u
I �_ � � r
� - -� ' d ,�. � '.,--- �
i 7.
� � � � ;' � � i � �� � �o
, i `; t
, .
--SECTION
i ; S�T[..iuY A RF,q � � � � i
� � � l a
I i = i �, --;c�-----�n .
I `� �'� cc co x o0
+.;:,., °; _ , �
`"yt 23-74 ' . ,
��� J � . . CarK.WIW Tatbla Far:23102DA
a ! � ! �,.,�.,��,.
�,j � C
�� � , , .
� J � � � � �
` # � - - - - � � �
_-�;_._•.�1 a FANUO CRF'� j � �
�.«.� ;� � �,
� j I i ! � �!I ', �`4� f:r r;�+a��i av s i i 4
� i ►� �, � � �. Ci4l7TOGRAPH!'
� � A�, I ��"`' (� � � � ,..�� p �,� : ��:1 4 I Ge I
„ �.. . �LL,
I � i 1 � ' PLOT OATE:May 24,2004
� 3 FOAASSESSMENTPUAPOSES
I N I � ONLY-DONOTAELYON
i ; • � FOR OTHEA USE
� � I ( . .. . �+�or..ar..rwaw..�.rM.�eQ.w«a�r,.a
I I o.r.m..w�.�.nra.eny.,e+.r�or:�ticw.+.r mwi
� � , I •-�-• �" � anwcropw�beu..aiwa P�..mnauew+ro�an�+�rnyv
+roa
` ' I � b�b � bOrabtM�rtMam�Ym.
— i� � sl
iTREET"'1"." I "� "� �'
-�.,-- �o '..._"-�----�-�--�.._"` ...�._.,-_."-"`—_,,_'C..,�." ;,u¢_,�,�;
� � ,� �--�.�. I t TIGARD
I
2S 1 02DA 2S 1 02DA
L�"d ' Fanno Creek Trail
N ��
Fanno Creek Park Segment
[Inknown.ccale : �o�vas�on or Wetland Delineation
'�J��A & Natural Resource Assessment
.M.o.�„�.y,,,..,,
Portland Office STUDY AREA BOUNDARY MAP
434 NW 3ixth Avenue,Suite 304
Portland,Oregon 97209
Source: Washin ton coun Surve Net. Tel 503.224.0333 Fax 503.224.1851 Figure 2 Dec. 2004 Project 8352-199
g ty� y www.swca.com
� Y f + ;, „
;, �_ _. �l, �r ��`Pf M Y � MIY ;` ` �:.! ;�.:P M11��•�."�I(� �:J sl�,,,��' iil�'.��N ` �t r if��
i i... ''*-_.., � r" 4./I �' ' � �•u�I p�:. aav.t'fi�� ii�"r
/ J � .,�_ q , 1( '��
r 1 '�OWKZh t••' �'� • i., '1'r� ' '' �� . � • ! �; �
s. „��1 �. . i , �� . , •��-�;—PGMIw /;., �.' I
i t I.�r��riiliii t � ' a i� i
� . ; , , .� ' � ,?V
' ' . .ii. , a� t,�,' ,t- � ", .`�'Q[�Y '•P�MIy f %�t „3 �� ,;:'' �
� ) . 1 ,.i , ..,, ' � ' . � (�I'i (�I1, Y�'.1.� .. 'i':• o,�,,"�'• � '�rr.� ��, . . .!,4, il, ; ��1 �i��•�., ....
r' ( .X.�, �w!, ti ` - . _ • ;W�MIY '��� �, � � , � : ,� :, , .. ��•'� 'r+ . i
�w�� ,_ __ ; • , ' .•�� � � 'i � � � .I. '�, � �• ,', ,,� .
. 4 •:`,I . . . '�eMiw��� , ��� r•���dNVZ ' . k ,° ,� ,; �t ��; ;� ��ry`,�/• ,
� P�OI - '� ; � "` �' ,��f, ` / :
Y .. I�� F` � pE �� f'i r.'�) , •• '
,
. ,
.
,
.
, � .I-,.�..P�� . ,,.t\ �. -. �, �-�,�' - � ' ' . � . � ;'� 'r , ,i�!: �.,_ . _�.: G1el M..i.
I ` � �` a �. ' '�� PQW K �
'; �t,�p���P'�/��Y >'' . 1, �a�- ` _" ' i�'.��, `'�.�;.I; ���l� P Y -:�
� �T '�t• � _.��,v.����. k��� �'M " ��t� /�:i � . . :
�.} " �• (". r L.> i
� ' •P h�iilr� •t}�; ' • � ` , 'f':'ir�.i r'%�,�� r�..'�I Mh ;y'. , Rr� 'f
�� � ,��'."•'� � �t..p�r�� .,f_ ,:� a,N,., ,�,. .,� ,. �. � r �: �:.
� ... .� • � � �MIY „�,�,�` x. k�t- •P�Y � �•� �,..3,.
� 'P P�'41�• �,u! ��' ''�.`� ;,• .�. "�: '� SrrE '1 `/ ♦, , ''"''�� i
�} y�. �,
;� P�1��f, ,�, . � i:+��+�.di ,t �� 'y � LOCATION 'r :;�:' -� irEx`�• �,,,,
' 3� �%�'; � .� ,''i 4.,'`•' ,�a�VI�'�•� ,� A� '�i� , �
_,..: . .� - � # ,�� � �
.��.... G � ;: � • ��'�;�,.�=d� "- �. ' PO�Vht� , ,�
. -r.� ` � :
,� �� . _ •• , . � , �
�.�, �" �, ��fy . .i �
� •• .j. �� T .... � .. �r � � �;� �Y �';�, ��
� ; ,,/ � �}�, �,}� � 1 ::: ' ��IFf��Y• t; +K�r �"`� � s :�,_ �t.t'`y ���'i
�� , ;i �>>� � M ' 'I, ,�,�.•. o f �'�� ; • ,bFQI,Y ° �� � �
•`. •' ,) • ���•� � �..�J� • -,�,o���Ktti <'' �q\ k , i
�,� ' • • I �r • , • , C`' �'��._�vFi ."':����V' i ;r „y OIYF'� ���� ���T ,'�
� �� tl��,n ���•r.�r'� '.,�j�'(,I� � �,�. , ', , �-
� ,j . r,�n • i�y ��:� �• �•� ' .�: ,� - �� • .� �' __. '1`_` ._.__ •'��
-. \�'. 1�� � � 4 ./"' �,�ir �t �I�.. T• � � ''•u� �r�'�u.' •?'� : .e i }•T'/•I . �`. 1 •�i
,\ }� i� .f a _- :•�. + - � `
., , ; .��� � � _� _ .
�� .. � .�,.. � _J, t. �� ���.�.� \:��• � �., .t- �� � � _,
'�7v'al`�� _- l •� • � : --,;.,-��,.1' C =�. .i �, !
�.�'j'\ �_ . •I 'rf :� }*, .:� `' ., y( •;}t��nit�`' y%"``�� ^ ,
,ti/ � � ��. � t � �ia. •�;• •�'J {..; , , � � � �^j'�( / '
� ,t'� L�- � ! ' +, � ' •f� Y ` �„N„�• F� •
���'' ��. * ��� h !` +7i:.r"''� •ti.� •••1 f 3%s 'rx:��lky Ir, 7' .r'I:% "Y.� ':� ' •�[.�'�r'���1
! 'f �.-'� ��) >/ ��' �{� •�V •�.� ,��.. ` cR `� �1 �. _I�;t'j .-7 •�+'� ' �• .a, .. � �I� \:1
r '� ` � � '. ���rv � � y ,,,A�a.ia � .� � C � , . �„�
p ,� �� �� �.. �� . . �I} `�' 2';(
, 1 , , l
'�. �s�'� I � �i�� �il, J ( . /�� � � �F c�" y'I i
�� '�'(� I � ��-_� f . Z,• �� � , � .
r ►�» �`'` / -.:'���` �``�`�,`.�r��. �>:,�, �,�-};� � pow x �._ � �J � t II��
�� ;�•,�f�y; � r i ���I r, ' ..yr � , �, i: �-.�t .��-� ��r w��� ��M�Y�,� "A1 I
f��� .�e,,;�. �'� (' ��,�r�� �,�� '� . �i� ,. ./ f � I.
'�,: �,,�r° � .i �'�� ' ��F �� - - s . - ,��� - '•�'. � � ,�' :`a� ,' �"' p.i�j
a . �r�'e.''' :;��.,r � ;i '� .�'3ow�: �1
/�(��,y . •-�ay• .r. . . ;+��� - � ,�, �� I�.I
� WIi4� t ��y�� •'•• . � `'J( y�V►7r�T.KI ,r � .��i . 'n • C�� 1.'���I �
, �.� •� 1' _ ..�.�� lJ I �J: ,-..-. .' ' � i.i t1 p ,,� ,,,j1 � . �i /; . i I
� � � . f+ .'�� i� i
� , ri ) '+ w r,M�. . , . ,� 1 � ` � � s �
..� �.,�a �'��N�.I
.�� I- 1� . , . •.1.1 ��C I ��slla1l u' Sy, � i -.����r JU � � t y
I- � . �.i� T � 1 {' t• �� , I� y )`.. ,-+� �
.��1 ' 4r. .� �� � � �! : �( ��"�.,� . . '4,�� �' ' ���� ��_� Y�� �
: � � .t `�' � ,�,, ,� . i ;'�:. )� ,c!v�oiY �1.' ��K� .�. cow z„ �, �(,�«,� y �
�., ,� ,� �� r,,,�.� / ., .'' •
�K C � ' � v �'#� �{
�'». ...d�� . '�'� \.:►lll ,�„=:�>": �n , . �.. . �I ' �1, �•-. �'� � .... I
Legend � FI����. Fanno Creek Trail
N g"''��� Fanno Creek Park Segment
1 iach=2.R00 feet �oi��s�or.or Wetland Delineation
'"" 5��� & Natural Resource Assessment
����
Portland Office IYATIONAL WETLANDS I1�IVENTORY
434 NW Sixth Avenue,Suite 304
Source:USFWS,Beaverton,Oregon NWI Portland,Oregon 97209
Tel 503.224.0333 Fax 503.224.1851 Figure 3 Dec. 2004 Project 8352-199
quadrangle, 1:58,000 CIR,8/81. www.swca.com
� . �� � . '^ . '�'� �' ° A .�q. y� ''��' -,�`�,.�....� ,f a� t5 �i.sF�v e.o
. � k � y � @ '�� �-,
1 ti '� "'��, `'K�' 'w y �
_ /' � � � _�=���° "�'"" ; .` }� � rt� t � ��� �K � -.
'_ 42 � r� � �* � t � ��`{A6C"t°'
/ 1 Sr��^�_� '2 Z � ;.�'� �� J 4 ���� .F�' �Y�. A;, �a.t
� - �t . l� !n ,�1�'la f�TQe� f i C."}"4. � b ��` ��.
._ � . .� e ts 6 .r � �s�e++.F
y��� `�2 1� �` a�: OTY�E't,fi �..,'� �•�- � < ...x:.� `.^,.� ,�,�;;
`C r � I3 fi . �p � � '---""" "�^"-z,",-,� r
'� IC� t� a x 3• � �. ;� � : `i'
`r '� ' " " °^� '���`� , ° a ' t �, ,`'� �4� .,a� yHv=� '}-�c�t�"� '�
23 . .v�s�.,. 45��: � 8. 1� ,4 1 Kt ��' > }� '4� �` � '�✓ `A'�'u. � �..'ti^"w.°� s
�> 45f3� � , �� �5� + +� ��r t �-. � �3 .�r .. �
� g,��
x: r� �+,t� �r, �c'it'� �"�' �'� r;.' �+s*,�- � � �.�- T��' �' :
� �. , a�? �„ ' , . � ,� r z r, �� `r�' � a�� ����� �c
��� t t -� *tlb o '�� � .�.tr �� .
1 � �L y",� A „� � �y p•�'
"�'\.k 3. '"'� #'�"� 3`�`� 'E .�;,�t*�"�,'�`: r��a � .�,� ��,� �� +.
s �/ � ���� `;�2�'.
:.45Q ° �.. a .�.,s.� „_'t A:, �L� �'�.a.w �,�'` ;,'�£� ..,�'�'a#. '���}. �' "f.� �,� a`��
5A 4�A °� a ;�� 13 '4S`d' � `* �; d ?��x�nnyye.. r �f?�`��r ��'p�� ^� .,p�,� a�
..� .�� 1 �•�F ` $�� '.�p� ���� } v"��E .y::l."� 9 Y;'k�R� } �'. �.
4� �� .f,.�„�� ,j �-�. � � }y.x, ( ?^..-� � _ R �.� - '� -`�f4• _d�
�.--.^^'.- SQ �t *`'v� f� '�2 �J R . � ��g a. �.n� .a+F.y- H
��`w4.�-'—..�%--�'-'-��'. 'a`1�,"' �v � t �� �'`��,X 9��i�f��� "�' �y�,�'`.�rt��`,� � - �� .
�,�� �3� """� ---r L> 8� s} � '��W
� `' �" � � �.� �� `' ; �„� ��� .$: c � � � �"'
,
i.s y F�� y 7 �. +* �., �i. `-� ���� � �y , �13. L+y T�� t
., �� �.J
�34 ° � � � ` t�Fe��,urg a�., .,� ; � 4; � � z'�.:
� x �������� � � ��� � �'�X� � �. � � � q � .
. '� g � r�Q •� ��t+T3 � "-x r ,�- �z"�` y .� e '��:� �� v �` t 3,�'.
.;�',�'' w9� � x"� , �!. . � �.I � ,dlb 2 4v. �., x } S "e'� 2,�i*-:.�t r�
r "�'
�� ,,� , ��.�t � /° I� g7A �� �'��� �C.� w�"t .P � ��z �ri� t� Y.
o,..:. 7C m �*,�a a ..� �� �.> p
�'`�`�'$�a �.�«� f'�` �t '4a. ��, --1 =�',� c� . -'-�... �r*"S'i � • - � ..t�'
"�;��'� -' t''S�k J.. n �79 s a � °��5, " �'.a� ���`�:�r� � '�.a x`^ 3IB . - . .
�i�#w ` '1 + � . � ,��4 '� ,e '�
� g°3^ �` � ��a.�� -� � _ �* ,� ' i�C. � � �' �a� ° ' � ' � �� ;� '�
� �a, 8 ras i ,� �� �r„ L �1 al. � 3� �.F �- z � 'i � i �.� d .
q� 3T.A�� , #1`
� r �•.�v,'���.�.,< �� r' .. � t�'7�,� 7' �� g ��_�3 � .�( (' ��'�sr� �c. � :j �,�.t�s r"�,
y ''� �rt t�r-a i t� �� � �7E�' �2'� � :.:
� �;� , � � � � t � ��� ,� , y .: �� � � *�
, �� p 13 � `�,>�.� i � , � �f � 378a.
''�., '` 'L„. ` ;��3 �` .7 ��° �' � l,,'� ^r .
�
, �.� .-.`� � � � ��'��'rr�"D�� ,,� �''� � i � i '�
� :� �� z >��` � ��' �, � .,<' � � � � a��r,; � � � ,
��= ' ;�.��,,•, ,-^�. ,.. . �.:,, � .r � ���.a-� . . -
�:� j� , fs* ,� �. `�J,'' :.i; � i 1 j� ,-,-,~;"� .�' °r �'�^-':"'
� .�4 a T q� �.,� 45
� r 2 , �1U '� ; 3J�` i� 2 r
y. i�.. �, ,�`
�.�, -� '�'',�r �a �. "F � fK �� w
, ' s
t �,, /
.'� ¢� ,"�3� j.3y a �'}i' >. ��) � y�°��:13• /� •�. ��5 x �.,�,�+'YAS� R �,�� ''�„ �
� 45f3 a�,�� �,°`'` ,`° `�-�d f'; ; ��� � �� � ��45$p� � � ' > � ;
�� y,�. 4�A �0 � �' � Fp` r �€S��3, � f �ic� ' .
a`r�* u"'"�
�,� ��°a�. �„�. . ��r.�� �� ,�.,g�`ri' r9 �"� �: s��'a z�' . ��� ��y 2'; 45€
��h��� i�. yya a s.ra,, - �*'.�. + , ±�4 �'�.N� � 6� '�: f ,� c ::
/ R5rti � � /� � �+�'���' �.,� �� _�� SILL'. _ �� �'°r u� ,�22 a�v
� ��t� ;s „� �, :�, '' ,� ..=� [,O("'�1Tltl� � ? , ' � � ��
� �. . _ � ,� �, , �<
�' ph� � 45S� � �7G' i3'`� x . �.
� ? 45RY;i P' �l t � �-----�' `� � �.« �,�jG`
� r``{ ,,? r ' `�' � 3?�'.�' ¢ 22 � / ;q- , 1. ���a;- „��'" �
h� � 4�L� i �458 � iD" � � ��,,E �1� � ' "� � �
e �.r. � � . ` q .-.k � � !tk �� �� a,` �����' �r ��b�� �
�'3 � ��<�1 ���- ��s�a� �� `�� ne��3. '> �� ;�'�"�`�3�-���
� ,���:Y � � ���a �° �.�-"'�. � �- 3�c� � � � �'�,
M � S 9 �'GA t � ��3 � � � '� ��,o L� ��� � �
5�l�xf. a o ''� ��� r� 37A `� �� a _ ,,.y ' 2 � �` �,'^.�«��; �b`
�, ^ �'�� "s� . .�r �A ?C. ; �IB` ��,� �, � y, '-�
%. �43'�,S � a �'3'r . .t'. �'*'; •=,.u�'e � ",,i � ia '".`Y °� �, �37$ �� d �+ � '��.
� :���- Y ..� - .�. ,'� � �'e� i�?�ig'� ��'7�7 � 4� ���� � �.
a�"' � � �'s� '� � 52378 � 2iB �' s� �-;�a�h���. �l Fa' yQ-�\ ��. ��F� w��
n ' � .'`k. z��: c2 ��� k ''.s.VV.s• n•
M � v 37A ;� � • � Te� i 1 �4�c. ��.< ,
ISD i 3itk' " r: 37g � . �,{ �"`'�� 22
� •� . 3,g, f. �'� 3?R 37G -� � �
A'� �� 3��1 _...._�� ��53 �� � �k��,��� � �.3JE�2 '�i'.
�r
`} � '� � �` 3� 116 . 1 ��.�r-31�; 37A :� �
s::1� ��'�- � . Ii� . �3iB � �^y � i
�2 F}� 21C � 378 � �G 3Q� s��. 37A
��T
��l - -'-- --�- _ IIC - i'�Sl���_. . 3� ��� t t; '3�" '� ��:d6 �i'.'_ ��.-, y i� �-.�
L� Fi ��1I�1�1 Fanno Creek Trail
N -�'��°�1 s� Fanno Creek Park Segment
I inch=I.Fi67 feet „oms�or+oF Wetland Delineation
1—Aloha silt loam(hydric Huberly incl.) J y V�I'"'i. & Natural Resouree Assessment
30—McBee siity clay loam(hydric Cove& °'"'°""°'""°"'""""
Wapato incl.) Portland Office
42—Verboort silty clay toam(hydric) 434 NW Sixth Avenue,suite 3oa SOIL SURVEY MAP
Source:USDA SCS Soil Survey of Portland,Oregon 9no9
Washin ton Coun Ore on, 1982,sheet 44. Tel 503.224.0333 Fax 503.224.1851 Figure 4 Dec. 2004 Project 8352-199
g h'' g www.swca.com
I
y.
� _ . -
I
- _ • - . ,�
_. —�rbu�-arc�� a�` �
� ����`EAM � �' `-;._..�
Z i '\ �.E Ev
r-�---�--'�� wa . s��.
� � t ;87 .�-`�`— ��\
A1 ` .\,
_ \ \
�
� •P4
A1
,�S
WE��'PN� '
•P1
I P2� 4 �
.
•p' \
•P5 _.` F•
A,o �o �� P�p,N
•P3
I A9 �6 �-.--� ,.. 83
pp � 62 ,
� '
� Aa � e
� �
� � •P6 9 �p
�,� �
' �PNO �a � � �
�o I uP ,., ,� .
s � L;,=..
,
� � .P� _�._---) �`� I
i B,2 / A�D .
.�. 12 � �o �
; _ ��
_,_,
B13 �� �� �� �'�OF gR
� AND OGE
13
I •P15 �
PS C8
�
14 C7
, " � .P,o �P�yp
_ •P11 ��� �` 1
�,�� J
•F �g � ;;.
_ . �•;,; ,.
\ • 9 5 `��\
� I
15 .c�� C4 �\�
-___._
./y��f Np 1a��" B 19 •P 13 3
� Y 20 �
I � � � r
� P14 �
,��r�� \
�\ �-�
� �
� GRE�K � . � -- � . ` ,� e2 '� ` �' �
� • FP�N� �
� � . s -
� � �� . � � �� � �,,
�
� ..► —� � .�
� . � � � .
i ; �
$ a, ��. � . �
� .� � �,,
o � ' �
m � ,
I I� e � g. ,
L� Fanno Creek Trail
N F� � �1"l�.Il. Fanno Creek Park Segment
.p1- P15 )e PJv�s �����
�� �� Wetland Delineation
'_ � �OIVi510N OF
, ���� & Natural Resource Assessment
.����. S�c,e1�Ar�a
IMNpxMINUI fOMIWtAMtf
Portland Office WETLAND BOUNDARY MAP
Source: DeHaas&Associates, September 2003. 434 NW Sixth Avenue,suite 304
Wetland boundaries&sample plots professionally Portiand,Oregon 9no9
I inch=50 feet Tel 503.224.0333 Fax 503.224.1851 Figure 5 Dec. 2004 Project 8352-199
land surveyed.Map accuracy+/- 1 foot. www.swca.com
. � • . � . � . . ,
I � I ' ' � ' • I • 'I : ' . '
• . � •
�-..:
„
\
i • r \
0
� ` /
i ► .�
d �� S � �
,
�� � � \ � i ���- ii- • —� � =�
i. �¢ � _
,� ;, x � -� _ -�-i �
�x��ti..,. i �
��•••�. ►-..• -i-i i i
:��'? � 1 / .._..�
i_ �t�i ,► j
— ���� t, -�-. i �
e , //
'"ti,--.°'���� , �� � I'' /I' I
�� : �1;, .� -.
►, �. . .
. �� ..
,�r ..
� ,
;i. �. `
:�, , \:
I ii� i, �:: �
II:%/, ' ,�;` `: �
,_,%. ��./ ;,/s�;�::, � ,�
•/. . _ �.
+, �, , � O y
� ," � �
• �'� '`�' �
�
►� � �_::�- _...:A.::..
;�� ..��....._ ... ...
.... ..:.._ ... ......
.:.�.._ �,�•..... �... ;_
,,y,�i ::� .
�. .-.,
�.... •���y � � .. � I
.,,
��i,�� ���/ `� �
rlii �r �'�.� _� .\
�' <<�� � , /
� `
� �
:�
..
� �.
� __ � .
� i
� � ��/ —
� �' '
�_�
� �'■1;�
�W�r�� , s �
� ����"'�'i��-�F �'-,'��� � ♦�"���� / I
' �������1���.�1"�L�� � ` G��3 �� ' / \ /I
�•• ��.:.■.� = ,-- , ., w.
:� `�� �►
� i��p_''�i����n�q�hrr � � � �, '-.:
4 1i �r �
.■�.. ••., ��i �, ��/.,�
��� �• . ,.. ..- ,/��j:
���■ . �i-1_ ' T _ i � .�� �1��
■nunu�nu�ua������u��u�nuuuuu�� - "� ��� � r �/�� '
'���� ` � w, `,'�
•..�:- ��� � '' �
�� - _ I ���,/�, '���i
�
_ ' � = �` %�%��� i�/
� ,- � .i� �%. ��
.. .� ; ;;.
��;i�� . ` .
- �'!;��I! / � �' 11
iij�ii
� I ,�;..�I� C<, � �
,��,,.. � � /
� II " I ��,�;;:=_-� �� `� ���)
'I`I�II�pT/r�►''���' �/ ��
„�1,11:%J �i; (;
ii■�;��� �/ � ,, � , .�
`�i� i .= � ' �I,,
� ��' �j� /-'�\
.� � .-� �� --- ---_\
. - � �.� ���J�
I �, __ ____ _
`-- -� �� --_ _ -.
` - - - • • � `��'�'� - ---
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Local Wetlands Inventory Map and Summary Sheets
Appendix B: Wetland Determination Data Sheets
Appendix C: Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment Data Sheets
and Vegetated Corridor Enhancement Plan
Appendix D: Site Photographs
Appendix E: Vegetation Table of the Fanno Creek Park Site
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 20
APPENDIX A:
LOCAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP AND SUMMARY SHEETS
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199
CITY OF TIGARD
� :�:-� � , � .� i �,< .;.n�l�y -� �:,,� ,, II I �<.f �' .-�, ,., ; \ .(.:-1��� Wetlands Inver,}ory
�
�" • � '., i ;' , sr �%
; ,:. .�' :�i x �" ; ;� ;- ,i �' �I� � ���.
� �, ,"y'' !,. � � ��; � / ,� � � f � _�__1 U tl I t 7
'��r,. � . 4, �%'�% • `,;. � fs�t< , � '\
�• � ' �. �
- .�,�. "� � �� ;;Ls �o i".,� i ''� �y , �.'� �' I �
/ �� k. ' f ' ll \ :
. , '\ � } �+�� � i� � � 'r r�. ��
� � '� Y ���. ,� <� �/ \ � . ' .�,� � �:�. Identified Wetlands
"' ' ,� '� �' i �.�$}r �� i. ' � . ,j� ,� � . ` �
Fl J,�' ?� I ; L__
• , `GJ� rkyt'�'�' , ' , , °b 9�b � i \
�� ;���� r ,' • :,�-3, s' � �� � Streams
;; -z ,; � -----------
" 1� ,; . ��. • v;.= �' �, ,;�� �'r __ r-� urve
�` .-� -� ��, a ub and
.r�; _ l S.,-�e, _� � P lic L S y
, � }; � ,�i` 4 3 Section IDs
1 ' ��' �F;� I � -- -- 2. // .
,.
; , �' '
i ,r'a ' �" �`.:: ' �' � I��'x' . — '._ _'__—__
t �, J, ^fjZ ��� :% [.
;. �, .��Sr�. � �.�'' - _ � - � �Y
. ..
" � ' " �� � , ; ' ` p ----^ Resource Unit Bounda
, . • ,,' { , //
. . � �' � ,� �p ,% . •a. m - Y � ��
. . Q� � . ., . / 7 � �_ �'-. � � r.; �r .
7 ' , �:. S ' y' �,��. ��+ \ +�?. � /
/ ✓ I r
�� .� .� . �j �� � yt.r�'� ``x �j .:. , -11r.. ,, -1 ,•� � •, � I _ 1 �_I`—
' - ;� ,,;�%�`, �y, ,�-.;.;- �y � ,' :,� } �9 �f��; ' � e �s�� ,� �,r> _�� , __ -1_-� � Sample Plot Location
,. ; ��,��,- � , :,, r � .� y�,j•�r� �:f ,,� '�' i�- ��� `" �i� � ,;r Source. Scient
�, � 1 ; �. � ; / _ _ ific Resources Inc. and
1 '�'�� . � ;�! -';,�. � ��.I�y" �"�• � `'�' '; � "�' , �6 }' Eishman Environmental Services. Aerial
(� � i�\` ,,'� � � `-'� �\/ `y'/� ����..�/ -- — ' P " suh�y _
.�( ' __ photography from April, 1994 at a
1;��� ` a„ ?�� '/�
L `l' \ �c ' �`' ;�- ` ('�� ,�, � � ( -- - - '` -- nominal scale of 1" = 400' .
. . ' _ _ _ .
, :
,: \>- � •� :' _ _ -
-\ �- ��'-�g� �, .�, �'•, _ _ L/'�_� �t\' _�T - _ _ _ ` �' g _►�e ..s --- __ ---
1 -
.
� _
� `�� f � � �� -- �� � - -_---� :-_ - �� ''� -� -- Information on this ma is of a
� �� jx��: i:' , �,�-� ��. �'=.l� - - - - - _�._ P
f � �_tJ � • - ' �� •���'� ��'• y� - - - -I�.�--�` _ _ �_.f I. . `.� � ; __ --- -,� - generalized nature. In all cases, actual
- ,_ �. -- - __
� ���
' � � �a°� '! 'z' ��:�'% --- -- - field conditions determine wetland
, . ��, , ,,, L _��' __l ► __ �: _
f 4 �' 1 ' . ,� .� ` . "_' � �f���I .�' � _�
, _—
� 2 �, � / ' � � - - _-- - -," : _ boundaries
,�` _ _ .
� _� �.,� � ,�', -- - - - - -
. _ __
� . _ ..
S �
9 • �
; . : -. � , . ..� �...._._. ��'i�
� ° _ �:.:��17_L ��
;- �
-_� _ #
',�A��'���� � � � � � _ _ � —1 - - ;` �'�:f � '� 'rublic Land Survey Information: All
"�` s �� "�' / - - - --- - - -- ��� - - `��'�' '' ' � public land survey sections depicted on
� � �. �_�- 1 . r I � ._' ..r � . i� ._ - � .`.�;
Sf � - � , .-' -- -_ . � - �� �� !l� . `his map survey are within either
- _ ;:y , �;.^*� ,�,Lr- � _ • — ;,' or T2SR1W.
I - -- - ---- �
--- - - . _. , - �
� ; , >. l' -- - ,- �_I i-__ ---- - �. - --- - - �----,����
'C1SR1W
1, _ _ __ � -- , ;'9 �.� __ --- - _ ,_ __ - r�K - _,�,;�' ��. � •� � 1 ---- --- - � Index Ma
� . ,
_ .. �
__ _ . �-� _ ____l__ � __f _ _ {.
_ _ _
z� . _ _ �� ,y��,
� ,� - � - -- - -- -- -3 l _ _ _ _ ._. j �,� \ .
, --- ---- f I ��� _
► -1- L 1 � - .�1 - - - .- - -_ _� . � , �:: �-
1 ► � 1_ --r_ _ _C , - - � _- � � ~: t
. _ .
. _ _ _ _ .
r �.
_�. _��_ -. 1 - _
1-; �
{ _.--- ,, 1 f_ _ , __. 11 3 ' ���`t, , - �, �\� a \��---__
� � f Il I
� .�•�l�/EH �-- 1 _.._ - � -- - — 1 _
.. ". •i �. ESf _._'�1 � r
"�___.' .." L�1.I I
__' - i
. , � a __ .__ EGT -. _.__ ___'_. (.f % 1 �.I- _ ll� ` \\�\ a
-� � �::� � . �___ _- -- i- � � '�� _
_ . � ,,
-- ___ --- ` rl�i 1 c = ---- � ` -`�/-- to uu, 1 . �; F,� ` ;
;'.
� . ,.1 -- _. __ _ _�_ �� _�1� titifll� r- �s- f_1 _ � ,,� ;- � � ,
_
---- ' __� r..� - --- v� r„y � — -— ��__I.�I�_ „_� �.1.�-�-1.�_- l�l :� � E-r r �� � �
i i i1�r
;- I7�- �--I_ - -- r�, __ - - -- - - .---- _ ( � J -- ,,f��-7 -_ - =- � ,,� ;, �� , � ____
- -- - . �R .� ��` � �.. .
j� J �_I_ .��_ L, -- � - ��-� . -- - - _ - 4
��• I.I_I
�__ � ,� r1_►
- — . _ .� l ,.
N 1 N. -----.-- �. .
... . ,—}.... _ ._ --- �/ —- �� _ ...._ . __ ._ . ._ __ - .:� ��,�\_. . � �,.� ,r � s
�
~ �� - �
� `
f . , 1 . — __ -_ -_ - _ .
,_ �
� --- � ., --_ ;` - � =_��- ]_�I
_ �- -, - - -- �-- �_�. ---- _ _�l_j l_I I r��.�. - �
f T f 1 _ - _ -- - - _ - - '. - �, � '�5� . .
� �111 �E� '�z5 �
� ;�. ;
J.--.1._ . ! � -- 1--1-- � — � - ��r� — - '��. ��' t_ �-- �`p,.� f.t w \ `. '' ff
� � .
_ _.. _ _ _ _ •
.
_... . j . r¢ . _ � _J�t_3� _-_ - - 1 1-- - ' ';
� - - - - -- -- � ST - - �
� - - ��.� -- - � -- - --1� �_.t�� �-m�' �
11 , . 1 - - - _ _ [ �- - 1.�- - . - -- -- 1 : � _ - :�r��__ _ - ---- -- --._ __-. ---__- � �� 7
�f � j � -- - � .: � - - ..�"`f.f_l .; _ . _ -- :-f - P -- _ _ _ - ---- — _--_- �
, I__[,r , _ �� 1 , ��l � � I � ,
-- ----� -
_ � � - - R�ST - _ _ _ -- - � , �. r�� -;������ � .`� � Y`' --- - -- f M T I .1 ;
_t_ _ - -- - - _ � -. �. - - -� -- __ �
_ � � l�
_ _. _ .
1 I i - - -- - - _��._ �.. - --� �''� �`� , � 1 l i
- ". _
_ - q� l __ �- st� ,:� ,,_ � 8
,::,�_ � � . _ __I -_► -_a_ .. :;-
� �I j � I � � T j _ _� 1 ' _ .___.�.. _. . _r`1 . � ��l_ �_� �_ 1_�F�2� �\ �f � j _.�J._ • _ � f � . . _ _ � » .�'�
� . � � - � � � ..� 1 �I J j� � ������..� ��_ � _I I C� E� I .._ ___- r r,�� *r ,�
: _ `
J � , _ .._ " �' S. . __ : �— .�"° _ K 5 I . ' ,
( � I I ; - - \ ` �� �A � I' . I .. . _'__ '__� .ib�y^ '�„d. r'w �
- , j � _ � � _I f. l� , � 1 -
_
� _ �_ �� F . -, .,�' t ] J I � __ ��„s I. �a 3�L.:, . � S
_
( 1� I ,r � , f- � __ __.j--) , f-.__. � � „ � � � . I I I,
LN�!YNCf _ I ��� UMMICIM � ( `,.,� _7 -� --�- `. " �
..� � f�� � � � II � � � I � ^ �.�
Plot Date: 09/23/95 Scale 1" = 700 feet ""
N
Tigard Local Wetland Inventory - O,�'site Option
WETLAND SUMMARY SHEET
iJNIT: 7 WETLAND: E 14-16, 18-21, 39 Wetland Acreage: 25 Field Date: 9/13/94
(�19 ac PFO/0.25 ac PSS/4 ac PEM/2 ac POR�
Location: Fanno Ck E of SW Hall & N of Colony Ct Beaverton Quadrangle T2S R1W Sec. 1,2
Tax Map: 25102 DA, DD & 25112 BA, BB Aerial: NE (E-20, E-20, 21) & SE
Zoning: R-4.5, I-L, R-12, R-7, Greenway
NWI Classification: POW, PEM, PSS, PFO WWHA Score: 80
Mapped Soils: non-hydric, 42 Verboort SiCL, 13 Cove SiCL, 22 Huberly SiL
Hydrologic Basin: Fanno Sub-basin: Fanno Creek
Hydrologic Source/Comments: Fanno Creek; perennial stream.
Dominant Vegetation:
Trees Shrubs Herbs/Emergents
Fraxinus latifolia (Rubus discolor) Phalaris arundinacea
Alnus rubra Crataegus douglasii Juncus e,�`'usus
Salix lasiandra Spiraea douglasii
Boundary Information: distinct topographic break; vegetation changes to Himalayan blackberry and
pasture grasses.
Buffer Information: Standard 25 ft minimum.
Comments: Fanno Creek, perennial stream with areas of broad adjacent wetlands including forest,
emergent and small pondings. ExceL'ent wil�life habitat�ith diverse vegeta«an. Interspersica �
with stream and upland coniferous woodland. An additional wetland (E-39) between RXR
tracks E of E-21 consists of ash/willow/blackcottonwood and seasonal pond. Steep channel
banks vegetated with Himalayan blackberry and diverse forest cover.
Fishman Environmental Services
Tigard Wetlands Inventory and Assessment
November 1995
Unit 7 Middle Fanno Creek
Unit 7, Middle Fanno Creek, includes the mainstem of Fanno Creek from S.W. Main St.
(south of Highway 99W) southeast to S.W. Bonita Rd., two minor tributaries (E7,8, E17,
E37, E38), and the mouth of Red Rock Creek south of the Southem Pacific Railroad line. Unit
7 contains approximately 54 acres of wetlands including 29 acres of forest, 21 acres of
emergent, 1 acre of scrub-shrub, and 4 acres of open water. The width of the wetland corridor
adjacent to Fanno Creek is approximately 400 feet. The tributary is a narrow wetland conidor
approximately 10 to 25 feet wide.
The northern third of Unit 7, west of Hall Blvd., is within the greenway of Fanno Creek Park
with safe access and a paved trail system. Fanno Creek Park wetlands (E6, E9-13) separate
commercial and industrial land uses on the north from residential land use south of the park.
East of Hall Blvd., Fanno Creek generally travels through residential and agricultural lands.
Agricultural land on the south end of the unit north of Bonita Rd. is being replaced by
commercial development. E22 has been filled since the 1989 inventory.
Unit 7 provides a117 wetland functions evaluated for this project and was rated the highest for
overall wetland functional values in the City of Tigard with Unit 9 (Tualatin River). The high
rating of the wetlands was due to their large size, large adjacent undeveloped uplands, and
public access and trail systems (Fanno Creek Park). Fanno Creek Park (E9-13) contains
diverse wildlife habitat and access for recreation. Wildlife habitat also occurs in the middle of
the unit east of Hall Blvd. and Fanno Creek where expansive uplands occur adjacent to the
creek. The uplands include a large pasture and a large diverse mixed deciduous/coniferous
woodland with two seasonal streams flowing through it. These large adjacent uplands increase
wildlife habitat and aesthetic quality values of sites E14-i6 and E18-21.
1
Fishman Environmental Services page 33
Oregon Method Summary Sheet
Unit 7 Middle Fanno Creek and 2 Minor Tributaries
' Function Evaluation Descriptiort Rationale
Wldlife habitat /� Permanent water,diverse habitat�structure,
connectivity,interspersion.
Fish habitat q Fanno Creek provides fishery;
Water quality q Stream corridor with FO(53%), EM(40%),and OW
(6%);contiguous wetlands trap sediments 8�nutrients.
Hydrologic control q Stream corridor provides runoff and flood storage
opportunities.
Sensitivity to impact B Potentially sensitive
Enhancement potential q Soil compacted by horses/cattle in places;wetlands
connected by stream.
Education q Public access in Fanno Creek Park;safe access.
Recreation q Developed trails and access at Fanno Creek Park.
Aesthetic qualiry q Stream corridor with limited noise and garbage.
Characteristic Description
Physical characteristics of gently sloping topography with approximately 400'wide wetland corridor;includes
watershed or basin 29 acres FO,21 acres EM, 1 acre SS,and 4 acres open water.
Biological information provides diverse wildlife habitat with large adjacent undeveloped uplands(E14-16,
E18-21).
Water quality Fanno Creek has been rated severe WQ condition by DEQ(1988);degraded due
to runoff from agricultural lands and commercial, industrial,and residential
stormwater.
Land use existing land uses within 500'of wetland edge include 30%residential,25%open
space,22.5%commercia�ndustrial, and 22.5%agricultural.
Fishman Environmental Services page 34
APPENDIX B:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEETS
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#:D3o�� Site:A�f-1�-,� Fa1wb C.++eeK County:���iState:0 R Date:���G3 Plot: .�.
ApplicattdOwtle�':Ci SeCty(1/4 S�7 Townshipas Range� et / U
Plot Location: /� ;� ^r� e a
Topographic Location: 0'1� a- `
Do normal environmental conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils_ vegetadon hydrology significantly disturbed? N Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dorninant Plant Species %Co et Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total cover:�(5' radius) Shrnb/Sapling Stratum(%total cover.�.,(10'radius)
1 •S �o_ i.
� a5 2.
3. 1(L � 3.
4. ' � 4. '
� 5, .�f�G- 5.
6, �_ �G= Tree Stratum(%total cover: (30'�adius)
7. f �_ �� 1• �
8. � 2. � � -
9. 3•
Remarks: ✓�
Percent of Domuiant Species that are OB FACW,or FAC(excluding FAC-): _���,. /y
Hydrophytic Vegeta.tion Criterion Met? Y�S NO NWI Class
SOILS
Mapped unit name: ��P r�nr��- Si��ta GI a Tt C�c�� Matches Profile? Y close
Taxonomy: !u(Ji� A�'rn i�.I I�dIS Drainage Class: � .
Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Abund., Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struct,,Other
d-'�o � � �m�,�e� �j .5 S'� 3f3 ��a„r.�$ �si 1., d)fc�nca b('
�-r� -� con ra��.s.�,'L,rnol
-� . � n�
lla..:��' / . ea 2 �r S�GL
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Hi Organic Con�SurE Laya
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Strealdng
Sulfidic Odor C�Mottled(w/i 10")� Organic Pan �f _�R'��
Prob.Aquic Moisture Regime Concretions(wr 3",>2mm) ,�On Hydric S ils List �Major Portion of Root Zone
xemarks: Soi � rr�- �, lo�ve� � aS�-
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators et? NO
HYDROLOGY � „ a la r�,r u(�l
D e pth c�f inundatian: � D e pth to free water:l Q /a D e pth to saturation:�'�o seepage:Si a�C�dlls
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
�Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Mazks Recorded Data Availabl�(ae,rials, gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other: ^����c�� p �'.
Sediment Deposits Remarks: L+ ' et� � Cn�
Drainage Pattems Wetland Hydrology GYiterion/Indicators Met? NO
DETEItMINATION: Is tlus plot a Wetland? NO '
Comments:
Deternuned by: aC � �- �' U a a i Fishman Environmental Services�s�o3
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#:030�� Site;�LY�,a� Fanro C�K County:,�,�.��r�krState:OR Date:�1�G3 Piot: r�
ApplicandOwner:Ci Sect.(1/4) SL� Townshipas Range� et U
Plot Location: ti �
TopograPhic Location: � �
Do noimal environmental conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils vegetation hydrology significantly disturbed N Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species °/.Cover Ind-
Herb Stratum(%total cover:�(5' radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum(%total cov�(lo'radius)
�r'AR�S�-tS �-er,c.�iS � �f� 1.�� --
S a2_E�� 2.
3 n �S2— ��— 3.
4. o � ��d� 4. �
. s. 5 F�k'.� 5•
6_ � ��-Tree Stratum(%total cover:,��(3 ar�s) �
7. 1:Qr.Pr�.uS O�an�ra�na - �
s. - 2. �r�a -b .Sou�,� UPI a�P� �
9. 3.
Remarks: ' � C�(il o
Percent of Dominant Species that aze OB ACW,or FAC(excluding F C-):_.�_ ��'��
Hydrophykic Vegetation Criterion Met? ��NU NWI Class��
SOILS
Mapped unit name: (� �ocf�' Sl 1� C�a(.� �Uc>r� Matches Profile? Y�N close
Taxonomy: T C 'a Drainage Class:�
Depth Horizon Matrix lor Mottle Abund., Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struct�,Other
�_ 3 a — ' S
1 vyR 3h- /� ��.n, r+,�� �.5 S'�L l3 _ -�'1 c.c� �cx�, SAa
�I - Q� � a a car..n�s� �5 4'R /� �i�L w racrhs,�waSALi
Histosol Reducing Co�ditions(test) Hi.Organic Coni Su�Laye�
Histic Epipedon Gleyed �5��s��g
SulSdic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10") Organic Pan �� ,=Low Chroma
Prob.Aquic Moishue Reginne Concretions(w/i 3",>2mm) �On Hydric Soils List � Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: - . .
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met? NO
HYDROLUGY
Depth of inundation: �J Depth to free water. �— Depth to saturation: ��� seepage: ��
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated �xidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials, gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other:
Sed'unent Deposits Remarks: !"� ro
Drainage Patterns Wetland Hydrology Critenon/Indicators Met? YES NO
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? NO � �
Comments: �'Lt 1 '
Detecmined by.�aC T n� r-.in �'�r-K v�a ak+S Fishman Environmental Services�sro3
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#:D3��� Site:Ak�.N-,aL FanrbC,rt�K County..�S6i�State:OR Date:�«1Gt�' Plot: -3
Applicant/Owner:C i Sect(1/4) SiCv Township a S Range�L� Wet /
Plot Location: �- s
TopograPhic Location: �
Do norrnal environmental conditions exist? Explain:
Are soils vegetation hydrology significantly disturUed? N Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Piant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total oover.�(5� radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum(%total cover:�(lo'radius)
S i S ,� ��G 1. �
r � �c_ 2.
3. 1� _�� 3.
4. -� C 4. �
. 5. S �,� 5•
6. �k Tree Stratum(%total cover: (30'�adias)
7. ���i1PT��-S O�aC'�la�a '_I'� -� �
8. - 2, . .
9. 3.
Remarks:
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL,FA or FAC(excluding FAC-): 'l3 = b_
Hydrophytic Vegetation_GYiterion Met? YES � NWI Class
SOILS � � S�o a►1�
Mapped unit name:��e f�cfa- Si��2.,i G�zU �O a� Matches Profile. Y N los �1
Taxonomy. T(�U�C. �'Oi i a� �1� Drainage Class: .
Depth Horizon Matrix 1 lor Mottle Abund., Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struct., Other
Dr5 - 1 .Mar•r�./A��U�clr
1�_� a a . cv*�r s �
a . 1� ; w�-s ,�d4
j -18+ !o a a ----- S,c .��� SA�3
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Hi.Organic Cont Surt Layer
Histic Epipodon Gleyed Orgaaic Streaking
_Sulfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10") OrSanic Pan `�� _L°w Chr°°'a
Prob.Aquic Moisturc Regime Concretions(w/i 3",>Zmm) �On Hydric Soils List J Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: - ' .
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators MetT YES NO
HYDROLOGY _
Depth of inundation: � Depth to free water: '–"' Depth to saturation: � seepage: "—'
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other:
Sediment Deposits Remarks: "''I �o� 4(�l�"
Drainage Pattems Wetland Hydrology GYiterion/Indicators Met? YES �O
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? YFS O '
Comments:
Determined by: 5r}-aC U �f'_n�A�i'r1 �" 1�1�1�U�a a Xi s _Fishman Environmental Services�sro3
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET- 1987 MANUAL
Project#:03��'� Site:ll�'.�1.,nL Fa.,re Crtqe K County:(�.�a.S�ncnk�State:0(Z Date:���G'�P :�
Applicant/Owner:Ci Sect.(1/4) I S�J Township as Range� Wet / U
Plot Location: ti 3o e ti�d e� a �
TopograPluc Location: GG� r� �" fl
Do normal enviranmental conditions exist? N Explain:
Ase soils vegetation hydrology significantly disturbed? N Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover ind. *Dominant Plant Species °�u Cover Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total cover:�)(5' radius) ShrublSapling Stratum(%total cov�(10'r�adi�s)
i �U' S 1'"fK-- 2.
.� -
�D �= 3-
4. �— C� 4• �
- 5. � �-,�G 5. �
6. ) ��G_ Tree Stratum(%total cover:�(30'radius)
�. i.
8. 2. . . -
q. 3.
Remarks:
Percent of Dominant Species that aze OBL,FACW,or FAC(excluding FAC-}: �.� __ �-�
H y d r o p h y t i c V e g e t a t i o n Criterion Met? � NO NWI Class��,/-!
SOILS
Mapped unit name: S' Matches Profile? Y N os S(����
Taxonom . �G a Drainage Class: (o�Ja��
Y'
Dep Horizan Matru Color Mottle Abund.,Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture, Struct.,Other
D-� !0 ala --" 5,'L rn��a�-S, o�f�.u1�r
�- 1 c�,-, v►��� �.SY / i � -��'L crr►,rz�S,Cl�aKSA4
p � n,a.,,. ,,,.� �.5`lR��ti �/6 �;� �w ra�-S r�!SA4
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Hi.Organic Cont Stu�Layer
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Streaking
Sulfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10'� Organic Pan �� ,_Low Chroma
Prob.Aquic Moistiu'e Regime Conctetions{wr 3"�>2mm) �On Hydric Soils List �Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: . '
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met? NO
HYDROLOGY
��th ef in��?tion: Depth to free water: Depth to saturadon: -� seepage:
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indica.tors
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saiurated in uppa- 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge}? Explain:
Drift Lines 4ther:
Sediment Deposits Remarks: ��
Drainage Patterns Wetland Hydrology GYiterion/Indicators Met? YES NO
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? NO ` �
Comments: e. a i � e 6' e
Determined by: 5�'�C��asn�Y`► � +�'�'�k bla�,aKi.S Fishman Environmental Services�sm3
WETLAND DETERI!'IINATI�N DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Proj ect#:D3o�'I Site:�� �na�.�K Co�ty� State:0� Date:�«��' F ot:-�
A licand4wner:Ci Sec�(1/4) SC�.� Township as Range� et / U
PP
Plot Locatian: � 6
Topographic Location: e 1
Do normal environrnen conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils_ vegetation hydrology significantly disturbed Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species %Cover �nd•
Herb Strat�am(%total cover:LC�{5' radius) ShrublSapling Stratum(%total cover-�lo'tadius)
1. f �¢Q_ r�� 1•
�2 U o1��S l a��-�1S .�� F/-�G 2.
3. eU.t �— ���7 3.
4. c,� ' . 5 �-�• �
: s � se ...,� �.A�.= s�
6. Tree Stratum(%total cover: (30'radius)
7. 1. •
8. 2. �
g. 3.
Remarks: -
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL,F CW,or FAC(excluding FAC-):al�. _ �aD�6 n
Hydrophytic Vegetation Criterion Met? �S NO NWI Class T�M
SOILS �
Mapped unit name:vel'��-�- ,,.Si��-U G�c�G/ �O�nr, Matches Profile? Y(N�lose
Taxonomy T ' Drainage Class:Q��`��.1
Depth Harizon Matrix Co or Mottle Abund., Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struck,Other
d-S 3 a �S�'I ,rna�,�� � a�raJ�r-
�_ p o � ��'-,'�-� �.5�� l�t i � - ' c�,r s.rY,�
a �,. � n�,r� �.5 �2 l�i �Mn n��i�s��I�•,�r�wl-s .r�SA�
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Hi.Organic Cont.Sur�Layer
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Streaking
�Sulfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10") Organic Pan �� _Low Chmma
`Prob.Aquic Moisiure Regime _Concretions{w/i 3",>2mm) �On Hydric Soils List J'r Major Portion of Root Zone
Remai�cs: . .
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met? NU
HYDROLOGY r_
Depth of inu�a��n: Depth to free water: Depth to saturation: seepage: ^
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other.
Sediment Deposits Remarks:.SD1�.S u-+
Drainage Pattems Wetland Hydrology Criterion/Indicators Met? YES NO
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? S NO '
Comments !e e o f.' � �l
Determined by:�'�_�P��anni f� �' �!'k V 1 a�,a 1(i S Fishman Environmental Services�sro3
��
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#:030�� Site:�f-l�,aG F�'3nr�C�K County:l.�aSl,fr�knState:02 Date:�l�1�Plot: �.
ApplicandUwner:Ci Sect.(1/4) SLJ Township as Range�� Wet /
Plot Location: /�
Topographic Location: �
Do normal envimnmental conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils vegetation hydrology significantly disturbed? N Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total cover:�(5' radius ShrublSapling Stratum(%total cov�1o'radius)
1. 'S �G 1• r ---
2. �= 2-
3. � �l.t� 3.
4. _�'C' 4• �
� �, n e � FP�C GJ 5.
�. Tree 5tratwn(%total cover: (3a�adins)
�, 1.
8. 2. �
9. 3.
Remarks:
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL ACW,or FAC(excluding FAC-}: _ �D
Hydrophytic Veg�tation Criterion MetY � N� NWI Class
SOILS �
Mapped unit name: ee 6 Matches Profite?r��lose
Taxonomy. � 0 Drainage Class: �S'a-�eIC.f G�Jt°JI
Depthr Horizon Matri�c lor Mottle Abund., Size, Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struct.,Other
�r✓ D 3 'd . . .�1�,C� �a
�-1� 0 3 a --- � ,r�
�.� LoyLz 1a �-- -�,�Mo� S
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Hi Organic Cont.SurE Layer
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Strcaking
_Sulfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10") Organic Pan r/� ;i,ow Chroma
_Prob.Aquic Moisture Rcgime Concretions(w/i 3",>2mm) On Hydric Soils List �7 Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: . .
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met7 YES NO
HYDR4LOGY .�---
Degth�f inanda�ion:�� Depth to free water: �^" Depth to saturation: �- seepage:
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated 4xidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines 4ther:
Sediment Deposits Remarks: l
Drainage Patterns Wetland Hydrology GYiterion/Indicators Met? 'YES O
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? YES '
Comments:
Determinad by: ' -�- Ul a aX�SFishman Environmental Services�sro3
WETLAND DETERIIZINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#:03c��� Site:�,� �sr�G!z°�e JC CountY:�-�-�a-Sl.inc�lt'-r'�State:D� Date:���1G3 Plot: �
Applicant/�wner:C i Sect. 1/4) } S�.? Township'o�� Range��Z Wet /
Plot Location: N 4�
TopograPhic Location: i" /� G�' �
Do normal environmental conditions exist? N Explaiu:
Are soils vegetation hydrology significantly disturbed?QN Explain:
VEGETATI4N
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind.
Herb Siratum(%total cover.1�Q}(5' raaius) Shrub/5apling Stratum(%total cov�(10'radius)
1 �t0)rUS�}-i S �, P��[��i S �Q_ �/�~G 1.
c ,.�._ �/�G_ 2.
'S �-..sz � 3-
4. I uS la�a�uS .�G 4. _ �
s. x - � �"r�c� �_ �
6. �rec Sfratum(%o total c:over: (3Q'rddius)
7. 1•
8. 2• �
9. 3-
Remarks:
Percent of I7ominant Species that are OBL ACW,or FAC(excluding FAC-}t�_°
Hydrophytic Veg�tation Criterion Met? ES NU NWI Class
SOILS
Mapped unit name: �d e S�1 C � Matches Profile? Y�I lose
Taxonomy: 'G G �I" DrainageClass:('"1o�U����
Depth Horizon Matrilc Color Mottle Abund., Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struct.,Other �
-l� )0 3 ��ca ro��-s,c�aK
3 a --- � -S,'L, rn�� s A-�
o�_ 6 � z a ��,�,�.s�4C3
Histosol Reducing Canditions(test) Hi.Urganic Cont Sur�Layer
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Streaking
_S�tlfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i IO")� ._�rganic Pan r// _Low Chroma.
Proh..Aquic Moisture Regime Concrefions(w/i 3",>2mm) _On Hydric Soils List �.7 Major Portion of Root Zone
�Zemar�s: _ .
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met? YES O
HYDROLUGY
��t_h_'�,f����c���qn: `— Denth to free water: ` Depth to saturation: seepage:
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indirators
Iuundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Sahuated in upper 12" Water-stained Ieaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)? Explain:
Drift Lines Other:
Sediment Deposits Remarks: u'�
Drainage Patterns Wetland Hydrology Criterion/Indicators Met? YES O
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? YES O `
Comments:
i?etezmined by: �- C ��a� X�;S Fishman Environmental Services�sro3
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET- 1987 MANUAL
Project#:030�� Site:�f-�,or,G FanrbC�K County: ' State:0� Date:�1��G�VPIot:
ApplicandOwner:Ci Sect.(1/4) I S�J Township as Range� Wet /
Plot Location: /1�
TopograPhic L.ocation: V ��
Do normal nvironmental conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils� vegetation hydrology significantly disturUed? N Explain: a
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cov�r Ind. *Dominant Plant Species . %Cover Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total caver:��(s' radins) ShrublSapling Stratwn(%total cov�{1o'radivs)
1 � �S �S �_ i-
F 2.
3. C S ��� 3-
4. � �� `�• �
- 5.�L-+�GLJS �t°1�t�ti S ��'"�•
6. Tree Stratum(%totai cover:�(30'radius)
7. 1•
8. 2. � �
9. 3•
Remarks:
Perceat of Dominant Species that are OBL,FAC or FAC(excluding FAC-): = 4
Hydrophytic Vegetation Criterion Met? YES ��,(,tk C (oS� NWI Class
SOILS •
Mappeci unit name: MC f�C G Matches Profile? Y N close
Taxonomy. 'G s Drainage Class: ,
Depth Horizon Matri�L lor Mottle Abund., Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texhue, Struct.,O er
Histosoi Reducing Conditions(test) Hi Organic Cont SurE Layer
Hisdc Epipodon Gleyod Organic Streaking
Sulfidic Odor Mottled(w/i lU") Organic Pan _Low Cbroma
Prob<Aquic Moisture Iteg'vne Concretions{w/i 3",>2mm) On Hydric Soils List Iviajor Pbrtion of Root Zone
Rean.arks: �p aG-�a► o,f a(sE� �a� (�dG� �S-)-�-�r�1�_ �I
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met? YES N�
HYDROLUGY r--,
Lepth of inundat�en: Depth ta free water: ^ Depth to saturation: � seepage:
1° Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recarded Data Available(aerials,gauge}?Explain:
Drift Lines Other. -
Sediment Deposits Remarks:
Drainage Pattems Wetlaad Hydrology Criterion/Indicators Met? YES �
DETERMINAT O : Is this plot a Wetland? YES O i S !G a�'J'i al �
Comments: /'0 ���o1�h ol ca ' i e �
Determined by: �- � �la�aJL� Fishman Environmental Services�sro3
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#:030�'� Site:��a� Fanrb C�tqeK County.��,.Sl,trmk�State:OR Date:�1��1�Plot:
ApplicandOwner:Ci Sect.(1/4) .S�J Township as Range� Wet /
Plot Location:/V o ^�� 5 �'
Topographic Location: � x
Do normal environmental conditions exist? N Explai.n:
Are soils� vegetation hydrology significanfly dislurbed? N Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind.
Herb Strahun(%total cover:,l,�(5' radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum(%total cover: �)(lo'radius)
�. -�, • � � 1-.�osa �.t��S�� c�e�� �
c ' �_ �- 2.
U� 'a0 3.
4. �_ �� 4• �
� 5. � 5.
6. Tree Str�atum(%total cover:_)(30'radius)
7. � 1.
8. - 2. . . .
9. 3.
Remarlcs:
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL,FACW,or FAC(excluding FAC-): /3 =��
Hydrophytic Vegetation.Criterion Met? ��NO NWI Class
SOILS �
Mapped unit name: 51�� �0 c1-1''� Matches Profile? Y close �
Taxonomy: 'G X o Drainage Class: .
Depth Horizon Matrix Co or Mottle Abund., Size, Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struct,Other
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) HL Organic Con�Surt Layer
Histic Epipedon Gleyod Organic Streaking
Sulfidic Odor Mottled(w/i 10")' Organic Pan _Low Chroma
Prob.Aquic Moisture Regimc Concretions wr 3",>2mm) On Hydric Soils I.ist Major Portion of Root Zone
R��: C� ro �' '`
Hydric Soil Criterion 1 Indicators Met? YF.S O
HYDROLUGY
Depth of in�dation: J Depth to free water. Depth to saturation: � seepage:
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
��d�� Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" I.ocal Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other: �
Sediment Deposits Remarks: �
Drainage Pattems Wetland Hydrology Criterion/Indicators Met? YES �
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? YES NO i �G a etYa 1
Comments: SDi S c�iS�U(b�� �Lle �Fo� -��1�(�� b 1����'nm pa� �' . .
Determined by: �-�'-�� de-��a��r� �-h'1 c'�-r'�� a' a►J�i.S_Fishman Envirvnmental Services�sro3
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Proj ect#:030�� Site:�tr-�'1,� F�wb C�1���tY LvaSl,ir�lC�State:0 R Date:�1��d3 Plot:
ApplicandOwner:Ci Sect.(1/4) SLJ Township o�S Range� Wet /
Plot Location: /v a
Topograpluc Location: n+ �� I G "�'O i°
Do normal environmental conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils_ vegetation hydrology significantly disturbed? N Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species °o Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind.
erb Stratum(%total cover.�J(5' radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum(%total covet�(lo'radius)
•S � �� �• ^
2 ca anan ,��« .� �- 2.
3. �l 01 G(.IS )�,��uS� 1� �A�- 3.
4. Si� 1�_ r��CLil 4. �
� s. � a 1fZ_ �AGl�! 5• �
6.GiG�,CYi'Ltr� ,Y��s.,�ta S 5 C.t PL Tree Stratum(%total cover: (3o'radius)
�. r 5 F� �.
S. t,�G U S G 2 r D�- � �_ �— 2• . . .
9. 3.
Remarks:
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL,FA or FAC(excluding FAC-): = d
Hydrophytic Veg�tation GYiterion Met? Y�S �bc.�k Gl o Se NWI Class
SOIIS
Mapped unit name: I�G Matches Profile? Y�lose
Taxonomy. 'G � Drainage Class:� ,
Depth Horizon Matrix 3 lor Mottle Abund.,Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture, Struc�,O er
S�I�-
a �� ►�e� �.s yfZ �� cer�e�.�� s�1�--s�
- � IU a ��L 3h s-�w l`�1� n�r,�,�S de�.S�S;CL.�cno�SAC3
��i Reducing Conditions(test) Hi.Organic Cont SurE Layer
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Streaking
Sulfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10")� ._OrSanic Pan _Low Chroma
Prob.Aquic Moisture Regime Concretions w/i 3",>2mm) On Hydric Soils ' Major P.ortion of Root Zone
Remarks: r►-� 1—�e D'� �
Hydric Soil Criterion 1 Tndicators Met? S NO
HYDROLOGY —�
Depth of inundaiion: �r Depth to free water. r� Depth to saturation: '� seepage:
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAGNeutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other: �
Sediment Deposits ReTnarks: SOf
Drainage Patteins Wetland Hydrology Criterion/Indi tors Met? YES O
DETE ATIO : Is this plot a Wetland? YES O '
Comments. L° �'
Determined by: �- f�'��' � :S Fishman Environmental Services�sros
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#:030�� Site:A�f-�'1-,aG Fanrn C.�tqe K County: State:0 R Date:�I�ILt3 P ot: •I I
A licandOwner:Ci � Sect.(1/4) S�J Township a s Range� et / U
PP
Plot Location: /V O '� a
Topographic Location: N � � � .
Do normal environmental conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils vegetation hydrology significandy disturbed? xplain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species % ver Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total cover:�}(5' radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum(%total cov.�(10'radius)
1 -�I r�DeG�.�2�S � n�GU 1 a1�liS �� � 1• , -
2 G a �� 4 C�- 3.
. ll� ��j 4. �
� 5. � ef.'G � �.[Z_ �GU�- 5.
6. ' r �� Tree Stratum(%total cover: (30'radius)
7. �_ �� 1• �
8. - 2. .
9. 3.
Remarks:�41oAec ���a��-�) a,1'i S �t a � �`'aD
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW,or FAC(ezcluding FAC-):�_� ?-n,�
Hydrophytic Vegetation Criterion Met? �NO NWI Class G� -I
SOII.S
Mapped unit name: Si I�'U GI c�L/ ICX�>1`r]— Matches Profile? Y lose �
Taxonomy.�.I� C. 1 Drainage Class:�^'1 .
Dep� Horizon Matrix� lor Mottle Abund., SizeSColo��PoreslPeds? �Tsexture,Struc�, er
� i I�,M��.�13
,5�_ 3 ��e�S�1,��SRb
la-�8 1 3 a �
Ja �ne
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Hi Organic Cont Sur£Layer +n Yn f X
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Strcaking
_Sulfidic Odor �Mottied(w/i 10")� Organic Pan _-L°w Chr°ma
Prob.Aquic Moisture Regime Concretions(w/i 3",>2mm) On Hydric Soils List Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: . . .
Hydric Soil Criterion 1�ndicators Met? S NO
HYDROLOGY �
Depth of intandat���. � Depth to free water: � Depth to saturation: � —� seepage:
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" ' Local Soil Survey Da#a
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves �FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials, gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other: .
Sediment Deposits Remarks: ' '� a! � G�
,�Drainage Patter�s� Wetland Hydro ogy Criterion/lndicators Met? YES NO •
a[ a�� r��i-S
DETERMII�.TI�N: I this plot a Wetland? O `
Comments: Y�d}- 6C� ' iv I� �!- C/� a
Determined by. a � V�a ��� Fishman Environmental Services�sro3
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MA.NUAL
Project#:D3o�� Site:Ak�.�l,aL Fanrb C�eK County:(��a.�'r,�s}rnState:OR Date:�1�L3 P ot:�
A licandOwner:Ci Sect�(1/4) .S�J Townshipas Range� et / U
rr --�
Plot Location: N e �
Topographic Location: � �
Do normal environmental con itio exist? N Explain:
Are soils_ vegetation hydrology significantly disturbed? N xplain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species . %Cover Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total cover: C�,(5' radiUS) Shrub/Sapling Stratum(%total cover:�(1o'radius)
1 �_ �. 1-
� �C.(� 2.
�_ 3.
4. 1� �� 4• �
� 5. � �L �.� 5-
6, Tree Stratum(%total cover:�3o'radius)
�, 1.
8. , - 2. . . .
9. 3.
Remarks:
Percent of Dominant Species that are OB FACW,or FAC(excluding FAC-):�__�i�
Hydrophytic Vegetation.Criterion Met? � NO NWI Class P�M
SOILS r'1 C be
Mapped unit name: �4 Matches Profile? Y lose
Taxonomy. ��- � S Drainage Class: ,
Dep Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Abund.,Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struc�, er
o_� 3 --- s��
,� 3 co,, .� ;�
) 5 �., .5 (Z } .�aen.Se Si 1-�
11-18 _
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Hi Organic Cont.Sur�Layer
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Streaking
Sulfidic Odor Mottled(w/i 10")� Organic Pan �� X Low Chroma
Prob.Aquic Moishire Regime Concretions{w�3",>2mm) On Hydric Soils List �Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: . .
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met? S NU
HYDROLUGY
DepLh of inundatic�n: Depth to fi-ee water: "-- Depth to saturation: �— seepage: ^�
1°Indicators 2°.�ndicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Reoorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other:
Sediment Deposits Remarks: �U� O
Drainage Pattems Wetland Hydrology Criterion/Indicato Met? YES NO
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? NO '
Comments: ,
Determined by: �- U a �C,�S Fis man Environmental Services�sros
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#A��� Site:Arf-}1,� FanreC�eK County:��a.�r�k'nState:�R Date:�l��Ct3Plot:�
Applicand�wner:Ci Sec�(1/4) SL�7 Townshipas Range� et U
Plot Location:/� C� e o 1�" �
Topographic Location: Y� C�SeT �'�" �
Do normal environmental conditions eacist? N Explain:
Are soils_ vegetation hydrology significanfly disturbed N xplain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species °o Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species . °o Cover Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total cover:�J(s' radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum(%total cover�(1o'radius)
(.�1 �1rD�SI-i S -�(.�i S �Q_ �C- 1-
r ,� �� �. 2.
) a �. �a���� 3.
4. e �-� 4• �
� 5. F� 5•
6. j �° �f}f_— Tree Siratum(%total cover: (30'radius)
7. D�(���[.�n-� 6�CS'�ki/�-�[ � 1• �
8. � 2, . . .
9. 3.
Remarks:
Percent of Dominant Species that aze OB FACW,or FAC(eacluding FAC-): 3 = M
Hydrophytic Vegetation.Criterion Met? � NO NWI Class�_
SOILS �
Mapped unit name: f�G e 1 Cx�1� Matches Profile? Y N close
Taxonomy. 'C.. Drainage Class:(Y1 t�lef af#�IU L!�.°II
Depth Horizon Matrix olor Mottle Abund., Size,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture, Struct.,Other
�(.� p 3 � ----' Si 1..,�a�r.���S.G�aX-.�4�
�1- g �
3 � e� 5 3 � Cer�*���1��.�5-�,R��v�S�4l'S
8-13 3 .$ � � � n eS �' , S�('
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Ai.Organic Cont SurE Layer
_Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Strr,�►Icing
Sulfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10")' Organic Pan �� _Low Chmma
Prob.Aquic Moisture Regime Concre6ons(w/i 3",>Zmm) On Hydric Soils List 1-�Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: . .
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met? S NO
HYDROLUGY
Depth of inundation: �- Aepth to free water: �— Depth to saturation:�� seepage:
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in�upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Sa#urated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other: �
Sediment Deposits Remarks: ��S "t
Drainage Patterns Wetland Hydrology Criterion/Indicators Met? YES O
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? N '
Comments:
Determined by: c�C �- C V�a a � Fishman Environmental Services�sros
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL I )�
Proj ect#A3o�� Site:Jlkr-}�1�,� Fanr�o c:+z°�e K CountY(��a-S1,;nrn?t�State:0 R Date:�1��L3 P ot: 1�`f
Applicant/Owner.C i Sect.(1/4) $�J Towns h ip a S R ange�L.� e t / U
Plot Location: ti D ti S�
Topographic Location: ' G l,
Do normal environment conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils_ vegetation hydrology significanfly disturbed? N xplain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species °o Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind.
erb Stratum(%total cover:�(5' radius) Shrab/Sapling Stratum(%total cov�(l0'radius)
1. �_ ��- 1• �
� ��? 2-
e ��-- 3.
4. � � ...�� 4• �
. 5. � a �� j� 5
6, � Tree Stratum(%total cover: (30'radi�s)
7. 1• �
8. � 2. � . .
9. 3•
Remarks:
Percent of Dominant Species that aze OB FACW,or FAC(ezcluding FAC-): _
Hydrophytic Vegetation Criterion Met? � NO NWI Class,��_
SOILS � SUt-��L°
Mapped unit name: '� � Matches Profile? Y lose p—��1 Lf
Taxonomy: 'G Drainage Class: �w �
Dep Horizon Matrix 3olor Mottle Abund.,�ize,Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struct.,Other�� .
_ Si ,M ��}-S �o►�anul�f'
a �.5 y � '� • �L�� Me s�—
- � p k� S�.�.�tn e S a�i 1-�-
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Iii.Organic Conk Sur£Layer
Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Strr.�ng
Sulfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10") Organic Pan 1/ _Low Chroma
_Prob.A 'c Moisture Regime _Concx�etions(w/i 3",>2mm) ; On Hydric Soils List �Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: — �� G � G�'t�t!Z°_
Hydric Soil Criterion 1 Indicators Met? S NO
HYDROLOGY '�
Depth of inundation: '^— Depth to free water: �- Depth to saturation: � seepage: ��
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in�upper 12" Local Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves FAC-Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?Explain:
Drift Lines Other: �
Sediment Deposits Remarks: �'
Drainage Pattems Wetland Hydrology Critenon/indicators Met? YES O
DETERNIINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? NO '
Comments:
Determined by. �- M i� a aK�� is man Environmental Services�.sros
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET-1987 MANUAL
Project#:030�� Site:�lx1-�,aL Fanrb�.�eK County:�.va�Tn�i1t'nState:�R Date:�1��G'S Plot:�
ApplicandOwner:Ci � Sect(1/4)�Township a S Range� et / U
Plot Location: ti �0 a
Topographic Location: ln �
Do normal environmental conditions exist? N Explain:
Are soils vegetation hydrology significantly distiu�ed� N Explain:
VEGETATION
*Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species %Cover Ind.
Herb Stratum(%total cover.�{s' radius) Shrab/Sapling Stratum(%total covet�(1o'radius)
�f�01�0��-i S -�1Y.1 i S �C_ 1.
2. � FAC� 2.
3.,,.,F�,. .1�'a /11nc��Y1aCL2� �_ � 3.
4. 'S �_��"'4. �
� 5. � 'n �_ �— 5•
6. � �a 1 ,�_ � Tree Stratum(%total cover: (30�radins)
7. 1•
g. . 2. � -
9. 3•
Remazks:
Percent of Dominant Species that aze OB ACW,or FAC(excluding FAC-): _ � r�
Hydrophytic Vegetation_Criterion Met? � NO NWI Class CJ �
SOILS
Mapped unit name: S i� G Matches Profile? Y N lose
Taxonomy. ��-�Cr S Drainage Class: G �-° �
Depth Horizon Matri�c 3Golor Mottle Abund.— ,=� Color,on Pores/Peds? Texture,Struct., ther
�3 b S;L,�, ��-s a
o �e .S �; ; �
C� �p 3 ,y�� �1 S� -S i L,.�1'�f'm0� �-d
Histosol Reducing Conditions(test) Hi.Organic Con�Sur�Layer
Iiisdc Epipedon Gleyed Organic Shr�ing
Sulfidic Odor �Mottled(w/i 10")� _Qrganic Pan =�R'��
Prob.Aqoic Moisture Regime Concretions(w/i 3",>2mm) On Hydric Soils Iast Major Portion of Root Zone
Remarks: �
Hydric Soil Criterion/Indicators Met? S NO
HYDROLOGY
D�th ef inun�atio�: - — D�pth to free water. Depth to saturation: - �—seepage:
1°Indicators 2°.Indicators 2°Indicators
Inundated OJCidized Root Channels in upper 12" Loca1 Soil Survey Data
Saturated in upper 12" Water-staiued leaves FAG�Neutral Test
Water Marks Recorded Data Available(aerials,gauge)?F�cplain:
Drift Lines Other:
Sediment Deposits Remarks: � r 4U
Drainage Patterns Wedand Hydrology Critenon/Indicators Met? YES O
DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetl � NO `
Coinments: e � d e�
Determined by:� aC ���m�tn �Y'��'K U a a►X+S Fishman Environmental Services�s�3
.
APPENDIX C:
VEGETATED CORRIDOR CONDITION ASSESSMENT DATA SHEETS
AND VEGETATED CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT PLAN
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199
3.02.7 Tables and Figures
Table 3.1 Vegetated Corridor Widths
Sensitive Area Definition* Land Slope Width of Vegetated
Perpendicular to Corridor per Side
Sensitive Area
Figure 3.1-Grap6ic 1
• Streams with intermittent flow draining:
• 10 to<50 acres <25% 15 feet
• >50 to 100 acres 25 feet
• Existing or created wetlands<0.5 acre �25% 25 feet
Figure 3.1-Graphic 2
• Existing or created wetlands> 0.5 acre
• Streams with perennial flow QS% 50 feet
• Springs with perennial flow
• Streams with intermittent flow draining>100
acres
• Natural lakes,ponds,and in-stream
im oundments
Figure 3.1-Graphic 3
• Tualatin River <25% 125 feet
Figure 3.1-Graphic 4
• Springs with intermittent flow >25% 15 feet
• Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable
• Tualatin River from 50-200 ft**
• Streams with perennial flow
• Streams with intermittent flow draining>100
acres
• Springs with perennial flow
• Natural lakes,ponds,and in-stream
im oundments
Figure 3.1-Graphic 5
• Streams with intermittent flow draining 10-100 >25% Variable
acres from 50-200 ft***
Figure 3.1—Graphic 6
• Redevelopment sites adjacent to Water Quality
Sensitive Areas other than the Tualatin River <25% 25 feet
• Redevelopment sites adjacent to the Tualatin <25% 50 feet
River
* See Chapter 1: Definitions for Sensitive Area,Intermittent and Perennial Flow
** Measured in 25-foot increments from the edge of the Sensitive Area to the break in slope(i.e.<25%).Add 35
feet past the break in slope to determine the Vegetated Corridor width,not to exceed 200 feet.For land divisions,
the entire Vegetated Conidor must be contained in a tract.
***Measured in 25-foot increments from the edge of the Sensitive Area to the break in slope(i.e.45%). Add 35
feet past the break in slope to determine the Vegetated Corridor width,not to exceed 200 feet.For land divisions,
the first 50 feet closest to Sensitive Area must be placed in a tract;remaining area may be contained in easement.
Storm and Surface Water Rules
Chapter 3 --Page 15
Table 3.2 Vegetated Corridor Standards
Vegetated Corridor Condition Definition' Requirements of Vegetated Corridor Protection,
Enhancement,and/or Miti ation
Good Corridor Condition • Provide certification,per Appendix C:Natural
• Combination of native trees,shrubs, Resource Assessments,to District or City/County that
and groundcover covering greater than the vegetated corridor meets condition criteria.
80%of the area and greater than 50% . Remove any invasive non-native speciesZ within the
tree canopy exists(areal measure) corridor by hand and revegetate cleared area using
low impact methods.3
• If impact is to occur,provide District or City/County
with a native plant revegetation plan appropriate to
the site conditions developed by an ecologist/biologist
or landscape architect to restore condition. See
Appendix D:Landscape Requirements.
• Revegetate impacted azea per approved plan to re-
establish" ood"corridor conditions
Marginal Corridor Condition • Provide certification,per Appendix C:Natural
• Combination of native trees,shrubs,and Resource Assessments,to District or City/County that
groundcover covering 50%80%of the the vegetated comdor meets condition criteria.
area and 26-50%tree canopy exists(areal • Remove any invasive non-native species within the
measure) corridor by hand or mechanically with small
equipment, to minimize damage to existing native
(Enhancement up to"good"corridor vegetation.Z
condition required regardless of planned . Provide District or City/County with a native plant
impact) revegetation plan appropriate to the site conditions
developed by an ecologisWiologist or landscape
architect to restore to a good comdor condition. See
Appendix D:Landscape Requirements.
• Vegetate corridor to establish"good"comdor
conditions
Degraded Corridor Condition • Provide certification,per Appendix C:Natural
• Combination of native trees,shrubs,and Resource Assessments,to District or City/County that
groundcover covering is less than 50%of the vegetated corridor meets condition criteria.
the area and less than 25%iree canopy • Remove any invasive non-native species within the
exists(areal measure) corridor by hand or mechanically?
• Provide District or City/County with a native plant
(Enhancement up to"good"corridor condition revegetation plan appropriate to the site conditions
required regardless of planned impact) developed by an ecologist/biologist or landscape
: architect to restore to a good corridor condition.See
Appendix D:Landscape Requirements.
• Vegetate Corridor to establish"good"corridor
conditions '
' When a single plant community type contains multiple condition characteristics,the higher quality condition shall
prevail
2 See Appendix C for plant lists and references.
3 Refer to Integrated Vegetation Management Guidelines for appropriate methodology
Storm and Surface Water Rules
Chapter 3 --Page 20
L
Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment(VCCA) for CWS Natural Resource Assessment
Site: Fanno Creek Trail - Fanno Creek Park Se ment
Investigators: Stacv Benjamin
Fishman Environmental Services
Date: December 3. 2003
Community# 1: Grass field
Plot# VECO1, south of north wetland
%of Corridor 75%
Tree Species, % Cover, Native, Invasive or Noxious - 30-foot radius: 40%cover
*Oregon white oak(Quercus garryana, UPL), native, 40%
Shrub Species,% Cover,Native. Invasive or Noxious - 30-foot radius: 0% cover
Herb Species, % Cover,Native. Invasive or Noxious - 10-foot radius: 100%cover
*colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis [[capillaris]], FAC),non-native, 50%
*tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC-), non-native, 40%
orchard grass (Dacrylis glomerata, FACU), non-native, 10%
common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus, FAC), non-native,trace
meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis, FACVi�, non-native,trace
ornamental hawthorn seedlings (Crataegus monogyna, FACU+),non-native, trace
*Dominant
% Cover by Natives: 40%
% Tree Canopy: 40%
Corridor Condition: Degraded
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 VCCA Page 1 of 4
VCCA for CWS Natural Resource Assessment, cont'd
Site: Fanno Creek Trail - Fanno Creek Park Se ment
Investigators: Stacy Benjamin
Fishman Environmental Services
Date: December 3. 2003
Community#2: Disturbed roadside
Plot # VECO2,west of north wetland
% of Corridor 5%
Tree Snecies, % Cover,Native, Invasive or Noxious - 30-foot radius: 0% cover
Shrub Species.% Cover,Native Invasive or Noxious - 30-foot radius: 80% cover
*Himalayan blackberry(Rubus discolor, FACU), non-native, noxious, SO%
omamental hawthorn(Crataegus monogyna, FACU+*), non-native,trace
Herb Species, % Cover Native Invasive or Noxious - 10-foot radius: 75% cover
*Watson's [hairy] willow-herb (Epilobium watsonii [ciliatum], FACW-), native, 30%
*bluegrass (Poa species, FAC),probably non-native, 20%
reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACV�, invasive, 10%
crane's-bill (Geranium species, FAC-/FACU+/i_TpL),probably non-native, 10%
quack grass (Agropyron [[Elytrigia]] repens, FAC-), noxious, trace
tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC-), non-native, trace
common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus, FAC), non-native,trace
bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare, FACU), noxious,trace
*Dominant
% Cover by Natives: 30%
% Tree Canopy: 0%
Corridor Condition: Degraded
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 VCCA Page 2 of 4
VCCA for CWS Natural Resource Assessment, cont'd
Site: Fanno Creek Trail - Fanno Creek Park Se�ment
Investigators: Stac�jamin
Fishman Environmental Services
Date: December 3, 2003
Community# 1: Grass field
Plot#VEC03, south of north wetland & west of south wetland
% of Corridor 75%
Tree Species. % Cover,Native. Invasive or Noxious - 30-foot radius: 0%cover
Shrub Species.% Cover,Native, Invasive or Noxious- 30-foot radius: 0%cover
Herb Species. %Cover,Native, Invasive or Noxious - 10-foot radius: 100%cover
colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis [[capillaris]], FAC),non-native, 50%
tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC-), non-native, 35%
meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis, FACW), non-native, 10%
common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus, FAC), non-native, 5%
reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACV�, invasive,trace
spotted cats-ear(Hypochaeris radicata, FACU*), non-native, trace
Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota, UPL), non-native,trace
curly dock (Rumex crispus,FAC+), non-native, trace
chicory (Cichorium intybus, UPL), non-native,trace
*Dominant
% Cover by Natives: 0%
% Tree Canopy: 0%
COI'C��n�G�[l�itiQII: Degraded
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 VCCA Page 3 of4
VCCA for CWS Natural Resource Assessment, cont'd
Site: Fanno Creek Trail - Fanno Creek Park Segment
Investigators: Stacv Benjamin
Fishman Environmental Services
Date: December 3. 2003
Community #3: Riparian fringe along Fanno Creek
Plot# VEC04
%of Corridor 20%
Tree Species, % Cover,Native, Invasive or Noxious - 30-foot radius: 30%cover
red alder(Alnus rubra, FAC), native, 15%
Oregon ash(Fraxinus latifolia, FACW), native 10%
walnut (Juglans species, UPL), non-native, 5%
Shrub Species,% Cover,Native, Invasive or Noxious - 30-foot radius: 100% cover
Himalayan blackberry(Rubus discolor, FACU),non-native, noxious (in Oregon), 90%
red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera [[sericea]], FACV�,native, 5%
Pacific ninebark(Physocarpus capitatus, FACW-), native, 5%
Herb Snecies, % Cover,Native, Invasive or Noxious - 10-foot radius: 30%cover
poison hemlock(Conium maculatum, FAC+), noxious, 20%
reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), invasive, 10%
*Dominant
% Cover by Natives: 50%
% Tree Canopy: 40%
Corridor Condition: Degraded
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 VCCA Page 4 of 4
Fanno Creek Trail — Fanno Creek Park/ Tigard Library Segment
Planting Specifications for the Vegetated Corridor Enhancement Area(4,000 square feet):
Scientific Name Common Name Size S acin Seedin Rate Quanti
Trees
Acer macro hyllum big-leaf maple 2 gallon 10 feet on center 15
Pseudotsu a menziesii Douglas fir 2 allon 10 feet on center 15
Quercus gar ana Oregon white oak 2 gallon 10 feet on center 10
Shrubs
Holodiscus discolor oceans ray 1 gallon 4-5 feet on center 70
Ribes sanguineum red flowering 1 gallon 4-5 feet on center 70
currant
Sym horicar os albus snowberry 1 allon 4-5 feet on center 70
Seed Mix
Bromus carinatus native California seed 10 lbs pls/acre As needed for bare
brome soil areas>25 sq.
Elymus glaucus blue wildrye seed 10 lbs ls/acre ft. following
Festuca rubra var. rubra native red fescue seed S lbs pls/acre invasive species
Lupinus polyphyllus large-leafed lupine seed 81bs pls/acre removal
Plantin Notes per CWS Design& Construction Standards.Appendix D Landscape Requirements,March 2004Z
1) Himalayan blackberry is present in the vegetated corridor along Fanno Creek. Due to its proximity to Fanno
Creek, mechanical control by hand consistent with Clean Water Services' Integrated Vegetation and Animal
Management Guide (March 2003)is recommended to control its spread prior to installing plantings.
2) Plantings should preferably be installed between February 1 and May 1 or between October 1 and November
15. Plants may be installed at other times of the year; however, additional measures may be necessary to
ensure plant survival. Irrigation or other water practices(i.e. polymer, plus watering)shall be used during the
two-year maintenance period. Watering shall be provided at a rate of at least one inch per week between June
15 and October 15.
3) Plantings shall be mulched a minimum of three inches in depth and 18 inches in diameter to retain moisture
and discourage weed growth around newly installed plant material.
4) Tree plantings shall be protected from wildlife damage (beaver, nutria) by installing tree-protector tubes or
wire mesh cylinders around newly installed plantings.
Maintenance Plan:
1) Clean Water Services requires a two-year maintenance period for vegetated corridor mitigation. The
mitigation site is to be inspected annually, a minimum of three times during the growing season and one time
prior to onset of the growing season.Invasive species control is to be conducted as needed based upon the site
inspections.
2) Clean Water Services' success criterion for vegetated corridor landscaping is 80% survival of tree and shrub
plantings during the 2 years following planting. The vegetated corridor landscaping should be monitored
annually in the spring or fall to assess survival of tree and shrub plantings. If any mortality is noted on the
site, the factor likely to have caused mortality of plantings is to be determined and corrected if possible. If
survival falls below 80%at any time during the two-year maintenance period,the plantings shall be replaced,
and other corrective measures, such as additional mulching or irrigation, may need to be implemented. If
replanting is necessary,the maintenance period will be extended for two years from the date of replanting.
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 Page 1 of 1
APPENDIX D:
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199
i
� .
Th�i�-U �oGa��'p-,S .� �,•�ec��'cr�S
I
�
�—
I �
� � �bu�arr�� � �
1 t�ic rRe.nM �'°��¢X �;��
� "1 � �-
�F'B:E
� i�'�8!7 � ����~_ t'`��
A1 ., ��//�� �. . � .
� a � � � � ��:
I ' •P4 �— �
A1 ^ �� '
WE��N� J�
�
� J
Pz�4
I 'P
A10 •PS �ao ��(`' P` n^`O P� �
lr��\r
A _ \�
� � � 6 .. - . ,���- 83 R2 .../ <
I � \
� I A8 7 B
., n
� •P6 9 �1�
� N� ��10
I �o � UP�' y
� ���%��-�. ; \
I •P� �.�
a
� 12 �
I�D - ,
I iz ` � �� \
( 873 +`, �� �� ND UNE
I qNp DGE OF BR
13
I PB •P15
C8
14 �� ����:�.
� C7
� I .P,o p
.P„ wE��AN ,��
•P / C6 \
\ / \ � 5 .,.. ,' " \
I � t5 .�,�-"' / 4 _ a�
� �D L r 819 •P13 3
I \ � y ZO �
I � W � 74 `
� . � . �_ . � �:. ��i\. �
� _— -- . . , \ / .
�, � FprNN� �-REEK � �— � .. _ es '° f
, � i e � �
i � . �� \ � •
r!.,_- �.r i »�--r1�_ ,• �, i
. 1 � \��.; >� �
I� � � �
1 � �� � , ,
�.
�� �
� �� � �
. . . .. ..__. . . . ;.
-� Fanno Creek Trail
. �N FIS��ll�C`ill Fanno Creek Park Se ment
P1-P15 ,Sr�le Q1�3S a,�.,�„ws�,e„ g
�,������ _ Wetland Delineation
������ Sk�q A•�a SWCA &Natural Resource Assessment
vort�ene O�tia WETLAND BOUNDARY MAP
Source:DeHaas&Associares,Sepcember 2003. � 434 NW Six[h Avmuc.Suitc 3f14
Wetland boundaries&sample plots professionally ���•^d.�€� 97zo9
Iandsurveyed.Mapaccuracy+/-Ifoot. �'^`h`snf�' Tel 503.zz4.o333 F�so3.u4.�85� Figure5 Dec.2004 P[oject8352-199
- www_�wca.com
Fanno Creek Trail— Fanno Creek Park Segment
t � �
�
, _ .'t�,. �1 ` ':
_� •, � ��� .� y������
� ' ,Q'1'�4�!'�
y'^ .H
• "•1f' '!R�...
� j�� �"��
�.
t
.. y t��=�,
�• �`+r .,��
y 4�•4+
i ... ,
#�~ k� 'A�Ploi-�! ,:T� r , , � . �
, :. .� �e"jS�(k�ts�����z��u �r� �.€..� �
� �•���' � �t��.�,��`��' �,. �1��•
fi...�i� a ,, ,., �,
, � �
:,�.�p�.a ..µ,�., j�
� F t..4 �
,��r � �{��y ''� i
,.
'�w a ' � : � �' � �et,41p�'"i�yM7�t�o4A�j� : � � k � � �� ��. S ,
�t:�ik" . � r .. i '�a� � v"�y 1����:,�,���+�„`F>"t,Sfl� f'� I 4 ,C"'x"'9Xi , '�`}��� ,y„r. � �,.p �'�'� :
�� r � ��� v <. F t � � - f E�, �. q� !B{ . .,•.� .. � �'� R , � .E
S�N�, �t�' +o"t �3 t ° rt � ���� •. ��'jr \�Y �'�S� w .. � s ++ � �.
irl �X t !r r �e ` a^i � � �! p �r ,�
°� �����/ t�y9 �� �jZ 5" y� +r� � .aF � 1��./,c�'°�� t:�' � ..`_ �.
�7��li�. ���g � ��.��.L����a���r � f�•� �a�J'.f+� .�� N+1� ���'"� � .; °'s t��.,' . r
� hk�}�� ��
y r �i � :..� �t1.
(�'!��,{' ;s ��t y A:rr���<�f �y` 1 ��i� rb ' a y� ,�,
w. ! i..1ryo � ��. T��, � ,�. '�!' A,�
fy„'�� +�� I��/�/� rs i t . , ��'t �R .p� �� ���y�4TTfS���,):'�Wi?.. 4, ;�'��
� �! ''ti� I `� �'' .�'S �� F 7 � d `�, �T��' .' ..�,r �p �rc_ ��_
� , r i„ � � , :,�; Lt, �a'? ,/�(��i.{Ci-;i,,.✓,'��" , i.� r ,w�a
� S,l�.� i�. ,�.,✓f��� � ` ^���,i,�•y�'s .,�" T������s'� /P ' °`.lT�F��1 � 1�,.�-+. y::f �/ -�.3cM
:►.� ,�, t •/y'n��. 1�
' '� -`- �.:� i �'.��4w"-�������Ar`';,� ..�:F .'� � 4¢y� ��'£�i ':v+�:�� ���
;�'! * . . -�F '�i-'f . � �, :c . �r � n •L���"
� ��� ���� � �� r �.; .�� ��b �y.-'4' k ��.�JS_�,r,j¢.,�
��j r�'� rO��i � � � y_�lYs'fd* ', l .I� qA Vt'�•e t� - � y'�V� 1t sS�
� �� � ��� <•s� �,/��`'• ..�,a► 2�c-.� t. ..' � ��3�3��j��,, cti 7� �`1
rf... .� T/ Ja�.tss� �.t� -s. -v � d°Y �5�.:• �M 4 �.�. �,
� �t` f�,! .�' '' = rS'r >,Y'�r1?�`'�F '+LY '��` 'd�'�yj 3.�E��� ak� �'�'� "� � .a � •��
r �./ 90' ,,�t!�• , ���/F,.! . - ti 'i�I '�r_o:�Fy!i�y��- ..�,�u. ���.l 0 � .o '` �, ' �O. ;
+�,' I'� ��Q1N/ :,� .��j�K�� l /:�'��±a r��.a" ���'+.Y �I,��,��I �/� �Alr'}�` T�:r�, ._.
�I.. ��.�t�'L'� :e.�.�• .�.l��%A//�►.. �.Y.r.+*G :-f:}�-'^� �w{'.y'�;r� �.� ,i r �_ :�°.V�.sU ��
Photo 1. View south of ponded area of north wetland and wetland plots 1 & 2.
� ,kr � ,r , �— �` —.
� �� ��,��e � y ��� � SL .:n�; �. � r .
�, , t � �� ,
- A�;-_i >�c� �p � ��� ,�' r :. < :.':
..\ �.��. �9. S�,.4�-�.r � ,' j a � '�'r v .
S �x � ' �_ ix 1 t * . ��.�' ?>
^�n�.j., k'� ��C73� `� °T ��S ���}' �• �ti �' --.
Z Fa�1F(�� _'� . '.+ ,�a 1",T,.-r'" ,ry''[_. 4 - fl '`��� `i -�` .
J �
�
�y�r.. :.i. '�s� ::'< �i-v��;: .
? . 'l ' s� � .. .:.� ��-. '�, �,ry��'`�� ..�a �• . k r�u`�=�, tf* r�
,
, ',,,►��''�.;
; '�� � ��',-�'�� ,� � � x.', � °
i._._. i�° �� s,n. � P a.x���). "�r� i �,
1
-� M .i e, ' ���� �X_ '���'Y �a.' ��y�, I �'�.
� 'r :.} �� .,_yk .'1".� 13y , .
,� b .� �' �I $R 1n � I 2` i 1� Y �t �a..i� . µl
0. ����..� ..�G, yR. � /.��y.� ��. 2 � ) � '� "3R .
�'��4��d�!s,5 �+r _..`+�y !''i��rc .:'i��. .��:t� V y�'�:• ;C�:vy 3�K'y�k'�Tr�c�����i7 f,.:1�,,� .,
i '^��.�1�'Ir i r ''�;Y' �� ` ~'�� sl�r,s' �� ..-r .W{ "..f�'i�
�+ �(ai-�y .� "��r� �, �";i�� �.
ak °�'� tt � �"'F�. k�, d. .
/�,k7 ; � t ti I jt � � 2 p!�'A ;A *4, ' ,� f � .
„;r� � �, "�,. t,��e✓ ,� $ t �`�}_ � i �+�. � ,
,r �'� �'ti�� �.; t` � �� {�'� f ��p,�ti '. j , �
�;',s �+�;� � `j �'�a �y°n�� '��#�xfi:� y� s- � ��5t �x ks"' 14 y �-
�'$�Z�� �r#u���yr��F ,�� 'U.��Ri� A A i r.q' [� Y y !''�;� _ � r . ,.
; 7`� i.f.Er +k � s� 4 .. �. � tY
p�f�t g .Es,�� � lr�� t y�' �,�5 .� � � �i('� ;i��.a
�y"�A`�"!� I['� ; ?��,§, �'�,��9�,�'�tAfift� i ,� �� ,,,p ds �",�, r �-.A� r� w ;�+�.:�t�a �' :.
t Y'i�`v r a -a ♦ � � 4� .*. ' t � �
�z,,� ..° �S ,�. , , �1 �,� ,��.`a'� 'a� i s?`"t �ti i r7`�,y'� \y �t , } ��'
�� � �r i � �$� f � iu'r r+ r� i.ya z `r'�x ft tF �e ��F�u.� i �� �� 1.
� � � �".�
� � ✓ ' ,��7 '.l d� .'� j .b�� -��. lk � �. t l � �^ h ��
� ��! ,3 y
�A . � ���t ' 7i2�YF- '�,��� � C 2��� ? 19 i����„ 1�. .jfL�' 'Y.i`� �I17y � ( � � �t�.
� ., 1 ,g * ,'�.� _. '7�.�K``` 1 ��N+'��� ��i�� ,� 1
r, �. . � a�� � ',�i�c x y ��'!' , +� �t � # i i �
, .<� x'�.�� �
�. �t+2 1 i �, �:" ��y+F�.. � �� � �>�' � � � 1 ��4 �� � a� l ��I ��.
� � �, � . �- „�,,t�,r �� ,� �,: r � b ��l� t �t���,� i� .� � -
, at ' °-�,��`rr ,� s,;, �� itf;��t'��, �R 4`�a���6s.,h _,��s �, ���'`°��+,��,/!°�.?;,j�l«��� >,�+,�, , �, r �
�_ryF. � .'�y'v��'".4l �f ' °^�,"C� ��.��{-7' , :I i.�j.V• �- � t diF�.'. (1�i� �' �t� I�� .�t�
_ti�-..'���4!:. �'��. ._•���"T"'�"`�{ ���;y� yv. �`�'s�`-/�+`J0. � �.� ��S �,'L��s�.,," iz�.d�:•�,ptpl�R�,tL��4ii 1;4��.,I
1'b.�P• ♦ . " fj .'�'^v`'�,' �'7 w�� e�i + N ��1 � r
„,.�,"�+�,, ;;,e : •-� ''� �,,�j�'+��';�R, ' ,�� �����;�...,�r � �, y� �t •..3. 'i�,!`�1� � �;.
� ��
.w r _ ,�S 'v, �* t ,, t ,�+�� �r ,E" '� r '��-� it. 1" �,�� ���at� Y 1 r' ��,.
��+ ��'4'�� ..'�ts�i�� r��i''j°� 4;�e� i��r''.., y��C�E.� ��� \ r �' �d i'�
*�. �'���A �"�,� r,'��i��^S� ✓�y��yN��;,l�� �. �„� W'"ka�..r�'� ��i����,1' �Y�:,��{ 1�;�
-� I'��i���.i4a'Ai?'f�Ji ��'f����t 1.,��i�: ''+�V�'� �'j 6'4+ �. �7�3
� ''i r '-� �4 �'� r�ii ,,M1 ,;�
' Y:'4, .� ,�, a' `��t _� w`� 3.MZa�"��� �'��— -�, �
Photo 2. View north of disturbed roadside vegetated corridor(Community 2) adjacent
to north wetland.
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 photos by S. Benjamin 8/12/03
Fanno Creek Trail—Fanno Creek Park Segment .
� � ''�� �
. � � ' � � �
:; ,, �. � -� �
, ,� r. ,.� � ' � �;.
a 1��. t . � : ti� '� ,�. t,r+ti :.. :�. '�Y 4 ��;�
� � �, �'_: 4 Y,y�°'`� ` ':f., . ,a'F r°'
s} :. RL � v, r t'-:s.
�. ��n'�, � �,a���11�����° `•t�' �T '
�.. •y � .s, . {�. ,..�` . .+�,., � . . ,.
}'.ft` �i�' �`•; ,§.l
, . . �,t� '. ,L, ��� . j yµ� .� 'J�L� I I �
r,
M. ,_ ;.. - + � q��s .7.,. ,�k ,
t�.,,�'.�i;�, � � � y Yj�. _:+.`. °ar"' � . > "t. ;.,
. '"�a . ���p . Y .. P �T�
`Y r 1 '
, .
. :-r, r:.f s6, r._ . _ ...
_ , . 4 .
�' �. wt� i�� .��.� , �� _ . _"7 M��� .' _
'� �T y .�s...
�.�ib'S ��� �...�� .:'1.`�`'�!T'i' ?A����.�',ft r, - -,: i6^���,t � �:� � � .
��'
p��,�. ,yd����•� .,''�r ry,� � ' t r ,',�j�+� �'�"�� 4�y ' :� �,..... ..
�A +� . �.Cy S�.L 'r I'� !
�h4 r' e. V � ,:�' �1� ��^
• y�._ �r' ; � r7S5 . �'
"� }� Yk r L �C /�
� ��,:m"�'�r.�"��� �.����.�������+� � . � � � z �:�._.;. .
� j '� r r .
..1� i'�5+�{���� A+.` i' �% ' , .. _ � .
: � , � ,A ,y .i''st .� .
�u% `�;i::� � ,v. y � .
}'� 9/�.� `' '�.. . ��. . . ..
,
„r�`'��_ �'"�� �,� '�r� +�
�,,;�, h �t�:'� �: r,.���,.+F r ' �_. �� . ��4� :� ,-'�.t r��.�.
K:�, �.� .
` �t�: sr. ���'���'',�R'�. ' !�7�''�P 'a, }y '��",
3� ,p,�,� �;�tk°�e,�'��� "..
� ;..
�����'� d*'- t .�. ysf,
!"-,. �r+ '�i�' �" ll�.
,�►=�'.�"��.�. � -„ �r�: �_ . ��. y� .
� � � - .
.a' ~ �
�, : �..�r, ���:i _ �. ^ q,L ���� � -�.�.:. �.- 2 .� � ^'
'� I� 2'.a! �;�M w � w��a'1!'s.�. :.ti.
Yhoto 3. View north of ponded area of south wetland.
-i
�
� `� ' :, ; `,�, * '_
_��- , ,��� �
�,�.k. - _ . •�' a y�}��, �a��i Y + �L�e^ti_.
,. . • , , , ��_f .:"�i.�'� T
.� -.Y��v ...i
. [
�''.3'i i5, ra` '�;,} r r � '�y P�F� i �� � ` �.
�fg ����yr.� f �:.? '���:; i��;�������,�IM}t�� ,�.`+��,y��. �rr .. ��t + ..
• < :. �. .'�'
y`! � � � i���,; _y � f�w� �' . �.
�' , �v � �,� e �' !�,��,,�.•
' .t �j` f ,�C�T���� `� ' '.1'4�"`*'��.,4
.+� `
��.�.y' � " ' 1. `r ' �
4�"' �'.�"'Y~ �� i /wu'„',l' �`.�'��� 't�� �,
,. � � �Nt i,,.,a� �. a�,� �.0+f-.�t �:F ��I � �,�'^s 4�y�� ��t� L O1'5��11 �J
�'- �,, �" � '� � �, �j 'F.{�'! % ti I '1! .�i � � "�. ,`�•`
- � ., {�'�• � , t 2i'� .�li� �`1 � � �l' �-�N ti �. '.,�I �,j��. .
1? 1 �� I;J �(�y� � �� • . j�1 1.'` t ti Fc��/�SD,�` r�i1
�. � •�'� . ... •"1 v. ,i�����' 6S�y ty'• ��� r . 3`���°r���v.r
� * ���` . f �% r i ..t y �� • � ' a rF�y��� '�.'"' �:4° �, ��y^ hp����+ ���4
r� r a,,�
���.� �,� t�� �'!"�����3�������� ���i. t,�'� � ..fb �������'C' t ;r3�''..., 1��Rt!��R y� 'd
� ti��,: �ta .;w����?{���v�I t• �• � � �� `N. + - �� �a��1��t��t��� r�� �•� `+�
t� �y�i- �' � !s',r r��� �ffrq .i♦��fl�•..i ,{' '� � ��L±"l •�d�i.� l
�,���� ,1+�'=�� . . '��. � ' :����'����W",�`.„„R�,_;;�!"A�'Y' .4� �`4. l�a ��•{j':
���1:�� , �'' .. �. �. '�r"!1� ���� �t,.�a'� -� y r� � e��.K� :� .
�e!� ° '�,!'�+''?�`+'��' :a.a.�' �" • �. 4 � ) .ql� °�`
•� .�L.�A_ �V.-��, e� �� . l4 � ` + t����' A�����
����- �
L �Ci.. ��'�L:.�. '���.yG. �
Photo 4. View north of west edge of north wetland and adjacent grass field vegetated
corridor(Community 1).
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 photos by S. Benjamin 8/12/03
� ,
Fanno Creek Trail—Fanno Creek Park Segment
� . �' '�.�,� i��}�5��1 J :�., ,�`, '� 1'� �r� �a - S f r -�' . . � �_��� �{ i '.., f�,�f'�.J�, y � .,'�
��r iw � � F � " / j . � �'�ts?t : �. "� 1 � 1�, �!� ':: i
y� �: « ) p p`�
n. 1 �E � J .1 1 N�� fi� '.� - — 11 .y�1 f � /yr � f Y� �
'�`,„�{ ;� ��" #,�:�U � �. � � „ �� ',�� � � � ���1 � ,:a �F f � > >��.:.
���t�4���.� r�',��yY1'�1�Y�1 ��l¢r�'}�;. t ;� �f� .,��t� ��,y xq�+�� ���1�����7��w��"S� p i a 4 w ��� iF�
a a � ��' � �P�� t 4 i �J.��,y y� Y`e��' ; a�}m,,,. }�r1 ;. `,..-��i � a �y ��� Q `��8,1y�„ t � �r ;.�r
'�, �+ �I � �. fi, � � � a
'�� �:- �'} � X.�, '�r ��� � t ��� /r rE .,,n.
� .,� y�' t ��' \d � '�l� 4 �''�i� 'i'� l�r ' � Yr�4 � ` �� ' +t � ����i�r �t �e� �„���e I ;
� �/ � � 1� �\��� }� ��.: � �� G� d t Ke� .� t�1. ��� "F/ (f-
���° '�"�'�, 1 A 4 i ,'` l� ,,�`. A� '3��' •� �q� +� > '��� ��'�� �� ;
� �� f �; �, �. <b s x'r���y �J 0 rr `�� � 1 ��r yt i �1�`/ 3� .
�; ��n� {1 � ~�I ��D 1 � 1 k�y;F ! � k`.��y tr -t'. \�lf� .ft4(�1j e}�,r �p{'t� F ��j��D �/
r_3�:�y`a,� i.�'c� �����4l��,�q� � ��'��•�1 :� �L,y�XP�(� �:�1'�_T'i. �.°`� T �(crr �7� �7r�/" ff i��_`.t".�i°'`�
�e�, e il � ! r' ,,: � �,, lf S•a � ,t ..
r t"�.�t ,' �1 i !� 1/�1��^+� , 'I R rt �' �+ f"� `3Y,a¢;
�,�,•',�, �Y , ,��,� 1�, , f',q� ' � w( S1,�Ze , � �t �`f'''f� �`�+�� ��
�. r� �, �o es �yi �^r� K 1 ,k �f�:� � �.,p �,� �r ��r�}�
,,.3 I��;��`�.=x�f �`"7q����r �7(s'�� c��` ji� �,t'����i����, ...��� ��I��; a.�., u'��`�'s'`�'�i�c'�j�^9E��,'�,
<r.,�.:'''��,1 r�t f�q � ,�:+� 4J��,A +�i �a([�.:., 'r. a1; i t��� y� �k J�'��' �y�'S c. s..s.
�.�r,��n� ���1 '����y9�Yd .I ,� ',.1 ��1,: �1 C ��'. � '...z l�J ,�_!�� k l'�4 7 � t`�� T-
�` t � �,P 0,� ��`f� � P � e r+ j , ,.Y,� -�..". .� N";
��j� ���'; e �"+ � £� ; -"�,/ b� b.�, ' . ��. `'r,
�h�����i,���y����� t. " r y� �. 1 �„ � �`.f sp�� , �— 4 r� �•4
,hs � ;r ����"� � r .. �� . , ,<,.� � � �r �. �37
t
', 'il�; ,:t, f f�9�� yPt �;x xp�� t'�,.`-f� � '�'�. f, ��� -\ �.�Y + ,.: ..,A� .,i'�; .
T,:. �°i`{� �.�"'i,.�,. �`'!�.4 ��,, 'S 7 L . . �`�1:� �y� .�. t�"�4 i-� cF ,k i
�#� � ~°�'s D�r:f� '�e���'�J'�i'f-t}`:1P1 �(' '� i c. � � .�: ?3;Y � ;,�-.a a R1�,''ar��ry ,��...".�+::
''� � � - �-'aa �!�.
�y'�Q;'"�+� seh�E �� �.e1r'� F.\'L., t ;u�., w. `�� 1'� � ` t �<•��y:_.. � �"
�Mp x �-� � ��\ �.�. t � � l J _..` � ^'i4
r ��,o y �ti. s.�.. c ,M.�,1 �
,X �V'. r
t'�C i L����d���<�� :'^,' '�. �, '�%l" ` . - v' -- , -t a.. �.�,1 �'y , .:'�` .
�, ..^, ` � '�- .�°` �,��� ,i .= . r. (wi.:" � �,r . . � � r
£e�rti� y',F,1�1 5�"'��`.. �''-t—•`�\ * .�_ ,�" r _t j�� �,,tk.:Z
U��s�r �r �J��}>�pf 4 3l',}i.= � -i� � s� ��:\ `� � .:�� .. .'��Z .`,� :.t:.
� ,,G�,kp`._qt ''��� o{ f ��l t.' ` - '4 �" ,: a"`'T �.��. � '� �f"�.�'• `"<-R" ✓`: +}� �}..
`f�Nt�y° ,.`� "`,, _- '4��r r,� .'a 1\ ,4. `y5� ^(. r 1q•�+- � `^L
d` j�,o�i b, r°�' � ���^�..�. ;.��t.°�'i�?��� r�.��-r``�.� �m,y '^`*s�` .�`.��''ey +l�`
i ; . l� � � .ra�F�.� 4; ��, x�.;v„�rt�. � �� y �a','�y : :�:
r'�,ln�:= r �• �(•�"��,� ��'.� �� ..�,� y ..:.,�'.S" M'�. 1��ti-�4 .-, +����, tr.�,A,-3,�, ry r �4�
u" 7;�� r�l- _ '� 3a t ��o��Gir�. . � ..� ', ro . :
����5�� �� /�,r� r_ !�w' �y`�� .�^� �t�c'�w �,,y_ ,�`, �"i� � �4'('�
r � � a.a.� �-_ �_ : i .��. :- �_,;� '�3..t •• ar . I� � n. .:'��;h.�. . '.: ` i
�'✓. � "'' � a. ���� ` , t�A'i ,,' . ,r� ���` yi�c �,�,.
��n .t Y.: '� �'-� . ..� ��"' . ,�' ` Kr RS+t
,q.. "� r , s A''�, , � ,.�` ,p��t y� •. ..
� } � � �s y .4 � �� 1 ��- -a� � - ,)ai,,;�� �,��'~ h l�- fi a'.'c/ �_,��.,
.?..!��� r . '..,�l� a`'�:ff.s�. 1��'`,'rc �.Akia yk � �.\ 9�T� �.`.F ,�".w � �'.a. fi'�7 i .;n..
�1 ♦.�..�� ;.�� ....ti -� .c'R'}. i4�'i�,'' � �.r,�S. �:C
Photo 5. Wetland plot 11 located in vernal pool/depression area portion of south
wetland.
R_,-�?�f'� ",`�jf � ro� �� l j ..��',S`C�
o7ly . �. 1 f�� � � '5��+,
1 �
j �7'�`�, ,, � ,�'
i��' � ��� ','� ��'r�'`' �� �,1`, ..M
I Y Y '.. M ��� ��, ;�d Y .� �� ; �l`4'��I .� ?�.�. 4� h-
�
I ��=� ' � v�' �{ r�"'� �
� � . -t.� , . �.4„1 '�M1 Y �7.:'� 't.. . r�,�� f
i� 5� �� ar uf%�F .� r 63 �; �a .
�� .�� � � ��� ��,�:
p . � f�.,r {,'�' � � .
.� 6` `s ry f
Ir���7! v l �yy1 � 'f F '.. ' y�.� :•, . ���i ,:
""�r 1': �+'�4a���'k�" . f �,; ,�` "t' .
�r �:
I �� .;�r tX��� `i'�1�' is< �•,�� µ� �����'T'T ��,��� t ,�.
K���� � � ,,+; ` '.
' � ti.�,�. c ,�. :�y.
�� w,' �' �'�'w' � .�✓�i ��::,
y. 4f � "���, , � r �.= I. r .��'-,;
•� 1�;,. '� A ei. 1 ,. F.�� t �" � �:� a'� � ��K.Y �;,!
' � '�° ,.1 � 1 : � .��� k �tirl�� t iy�� G�.„ q�``�.
j � +' ..�._, ��� f �� �� � ���� .� � � 7
` .. .9��.'j..�jl� !�`II��x�'��j' 4,���{�����'r �''I �'Yk f!
4'
�at�� ` . ' ''+� . 1..,� . T �ff�I���e ..f�...
Ss tf, (4 � r� S
��, z � 1 � �' . . .
r i i'
��`+�'�� "' � �t�� � � k �/ � 1 � t �id �-��1
� #/'� � tiiC.'�� � ��.. � ,� � �.�����ly;����� �1 �'V aha��� �i'' ��' � ��.�
}� � / � ' ti },� � a !� �.^'" �.
x�_ ��,< ��ea.�'�'�l�jil!�I`�"Txt- F ���y � kj, ������,1 {� ���� +'���1�� ., � t
c'"" •� _ � :� � ° _y�a �A `. ' �. �� t �tr��,��'1 ! ��,���y����� r� 1 :
�4�`'y�� .. ' s '� M% ;p, y,�.,. r� ��.11 �n ��',it ti� ��. � �f Y � � �,y�.
� � . s t. t � � �
` ���, � ,� X/r d �� � �,�1 n�'• y�, . �,,�C ���:��i � r� -�+,
� . , ,�;9, � � �y
.r,� �;r � .�1$r�. *y;��� t#'�:� l.r' ��.,.n f.�, 3 ,� �{t� lir�l,` oi1.�'ttr'' � r �f��I�.��sA."r ��ry�',.v��+ ��'
� ��y �� � � '� �G.�r 1 s t ti ���,�.i� �Z�j�,f ( � , �"1�' ,+�;i� ��
,� ra � �
-S// �r k%� ���S�Y �i 4'��. � Q ��ffi����F ti�,^,Ir���'�f''��'� ���� � ����'�
� �r � � ,� . 'O'� t� t 5` 1i l + F � �� ����� � ��,:}'� ,
':< � .// � �� : :"(�, , �w�, +��t r.y�r {,,{y,�.�?/�a �a� < < � / �.
. r ''n r� / �Sf' n � �;:" :i4�� v.f*3'� � 1 \� ,� �.��'{ 'J y.:�\ � �.� �`,P 4 \. '��j ���t,,1
* '� �4" � "'�� � }�� ���������Y�� ���{�r�i'..,i�� �'`dl �,�.��l��� J
'ti 1 �� �
,,�r..' �r � �. s� Y'x�.• t�� � �. w� °� �°t� �°��i � � � �,1.
� X -�` ��,� k � .�� tihr'�, d �4 .{��t�;� `t
w,, �� ��,n,�6a��,..,� ,,ist , � ,�� � ��{ � ��� �� �� ,1���yt ���g �h �
,'�,�l pr.,_J��, � !.'.�� .S'�St .1��`1, !r� .�.�J 'l��'(�
Photo 6. View east of wetland plot 13 and ripariai�/scrub-shrub fringe in background
near confluence of Fanno Creek and unnamed tributary.
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199 photos by S. Benjamin 8/12/03
Fanno Creek Trail–Fanno Creek Park Segment
�— -�
�� � r . ��
� � k �,
, _
t .;�. -
:-�
.� � � x .i� ��,
��1..} t- �'.4'
�� • p r .,�.5:.
•* � ,a»
� .� '
T�. ' .t. � y°����"^ 7)+�
1 �`���� � ,�;.. Y. _,.:y���c �1.,1��'� K� `. ���. �� 'S� � .��� '���� !��''!�
� ��� 'Y .. ��'�- . . S'�.;�R , `y'.: � .'�. , . . . � f . ..�{x � 6;�
� � . . .. 'x'"�4 ��:�Rxy�1[t�.ii�y '�''�'���IJ��M�. . .. ,¢�7���b�
��� +` l ''r. �:
r�4°���t ! 1�� � ' . . `��, �i�;
��� �C1.
s. �,' ' „ r'1 P,1';`�,�t �� �� 4 < '��a', ' 3a l f , r
� �..� ��'yY � �l 1 . � �, x .
r 1
y ��..� „ �� .,�, �������v����� �e�, �� r ;(. � ` � i A..d'.,� � ����'r`.}'4�:
�s(4}° t �� '."� �.! 1 � �1 '7i i����'' k ',�. , �/ � ±� ' �, �y t`� (y..,, S^_
' '�� 4 �� �.; �., � i:• 1�) �.. �1
R�,�����t)�' �f'��°'{�`-��l.� :�� $r�QtY'�y���ti: �•' i ���t �'�,t �i
��i„ . �7 .;� 1 .,r�� ., (� ��..,��� �r . .,, , ', �. _ ��� ��� � .
�< 5Y �:r � '\
. r� � � r d �` l�n dt*�!��� '��{f yr�r�j; 'i � : i t ,'..� � a . � �l� � � tr��l
�_r rn t'.��!�� r��., . ' 4�'��.i A'r 1'i�5.t i 1 r`}'�I �,1�,'�(!01V ,.�.r � � � t ��c)f1 +. ��:�.
�����f ( m � �1Y� r . �f9,� . d��jh�1�tY��1 Mq ���i{�`��;�'��. �� (.L i' 'F/ 7t�5;��t� 'J}
r � �i�� • �s ^�}, ��s�.a3 r �I�1 ,� �f r � k1 s;,� !a� ,, y ;�� {
. ' , �" i ' 'a�1'r!`�i�}�r�, ,�^,i ;t �. �a '�� e�}��� �i'�� �s}Yl�;
� � � . i .i' ' ��` �;d � ,.., � �x�1 � �� ,z � ��� � �:�
� ��� �f � . . � �1JY ��,V ��f � i$'�t�t. s �iit ` '����' �'��t�_
7 '��� 8'��9yi,�` rv�� "�'�� ,�. ,� ��;'��' � .�: ,;, .?,��� �o. 'i�'� r�p,� '�1���1��t�f���P't� � ' ��a��;:�
r�r �' '"�h,�.'� ,p�g,�r�:: ���y'/� 1�+7. . . �'�:. � �( �.�}����!"i���A���i4�1�.�i'SY '�i��!��1� :i?'F?
�f• �
Photo 7. View south showing narrow riparian/scrub-shrub vegetated corridor
(Community 3} north of Fanno Creek.
awwst3g . . Zt, ,s„ M�S
. ti�����4 rtpks �y�,: ��,
. � ' .
4 � ,i�`��',�Mp��
�; ���� . . . 1� �yp_..'�i. .: tui ..
�'y • , � ` ''`' x`��Y '. .. . .. � �'.. �FSI�K`i++�l'e{i. - �.. '^R
� �. s ,�y+� f p�� �
'�� .' �"" �. ��� �:"T ' � T �•,�'�- t" , �.�'
�.. s� .� • r R.. ,n ; '�Td�t� �. • �
d#���1�r'_ a.�� At :� �� a�?'���' � y �.
;�,.D ` 2 �..!.�/ �' _ ��:�' .1'� .. �"' .;a.:, .
:
�pr `
� 5 .�-a���, ��-`,1„ M, , r�+'� y�' ti � ,-
} � � . L , 'Sl. . ,4'^�°� . �._. 'cY',r�'�� 1 .r,ti
� ;. .'{,4�� q .,'�`tt -� ;��3�.' �� . at �S,#� ..:�' h' t�.�
p�. J� 4.,,. '„� . ^ ..
� -..�=��C Q ,*�� -^1i r'i� �- u�'�� `� � �:: �-�
�.. ' '�( 'C - . •+1F -r 1 . .. . ��;
-,r^t•��- t. k ° C# �i'_ . :�"Lw�' . .� 4, •
i. y - - . .t. -ac c� '�*,`}� 'n. ---- .��.. . �4L'' "'!s'..�,'$�-! "+��.._"Xc° �
r , � . � �, " � Y...a ti` t',.,, ,��+�
{ y., . , , ;�..� �. .> .� .r t. �`�'.
� -.�_. . #�e� �� '�:��� w a`;���+:.• � -- �� � - �' .�er.
iit k �:' �Y � �x..
}T'~� g�r -� °�'1�� 4 . . �lt.� ti�.' ie�r`�"�. �y s}...��.y�� b'f �Y-.,,.
�� ���� '���� "... �� � ��'�°•,.°x' . r-� �, `� ::_
4� `r`�` 4 f ;n'-t N'�►..� .�.. c������6. '�.� . ' . -� „�TT . s�*��` F `��.y.
t.�� µ• _.+Y��' .. C _ � �• µ.tH�. � ���J-� xc'��,•.'�. .
!fT' �
'��,1`��l,� �� �y�� �.'_•^+, � . r �,��M!r2l�" �� ��x_" ��l
�... b_r �{�+w., '! .r x . �"h.. 1) _ �'T..
1 t • J . r .,F ....�� .� ' . .� .'��`, �,�:,'.,I,�. 1
�-Z,�� , �� �i�. . . ��
�� ��• `Y-
�� .,,'"����, �i . � �.. ,��;�� � '� -�. �^�. -
4 4
����� a � �� �� � ' .�����
.t � � � ..:.�.+-5'+.. �� •b. i
?':..R�S.� ;t T . . .. ��
_q �. . ' .. . �
� �°4 '� �* �y�''y. ...�.�.. ,_� ��.
� ...._ . ..._ � . "' .
Photo 8. View west toward Hall Boulevard bridge over Fanno Creek
Fishman/SWCA Pmject 8352-199 photos by S.Benjamin S/12/03
APPENDIX E:
VEGETATION TABLE OF THE FANNO CREEK PARK SITE
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199
TABLE OF THE VEGETATION OF THE FANNO CREEK PARK SITE
Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status Native/
Introduced
WETLANDS
quack grass Agropyron [[Elytrigia]] repens FAC- noxious
colonial bentgrass Agrostis tenuis [[capillaris]) FAC non-native
water foxtail Alopecurus geniculatus OBL native
meadow foxtail Alopecurus pratensis FACW introduced
red alder Alnus rubra FAC native
mayweed chamomile Anthemis cotula FACU introduced
sweet vernalgrass Anthoxanthum odoratum FACU introduced
one-sided sedge Carex unilateralis FACW native
chicory Cichorium intybus UPL introduced
red-osier dogwood Cornus stolonifera [[sericea]] FACW native
black hawthorn Crataegus douglasii FAC native
ornamental hawthorn Crataegus mono�na FACU+ introduced
orchard grass Dacrylis glomerata FACU introduced
ovoid spikerush Eleocharis ovata OBL native
tall fescue Festuca arundinacea FAC- introduced
Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW native
low cudweed Gnaphalium uliginosum FAC+ native ?
[Filaginella uliginosa]
common velvetgrass Holcus lanatus FAC introduced
Mediterranean barley Hordeum geniculatum [hystrix] FACU+ introduced
spotted cats-ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU introduced
orange balsam Impatiens capensis FACW native
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199
TABLE OF THE VEGETATION OF THE FANNO CREEK PARK SITE
Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status Native/
Introduced
soft rush Juncus effusus FACW native
slender rush Juncus tenuis FACW- native
birdsfoot-trefoil Lotus corniculatus FAC introduced
reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea FACW invasive
timothy Phleum pratense FAC- introduced
English plantain Plantago lanceolata FAC introduced
Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus FACW- native
clustered wild rose Rosa pisocarpa FAC native
Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU noxious
curly dock Rumex crispus FAC+ introduced
willow Salix species FAC or wetter native
bittersweet nightshade Solanum dulcamara FAC+ invasive
American speedwell Veronica americana OBL native
UPLANDS
colonial bentgrass Agrostis tenuis [[capillaris]] FAC introduced
meadow foxtail Alopecurus pratensis FACW introduced
chicory Cichorium intybus UPL introduced
ornamental hawthorn Crataegus monogyna FACU+ introduced
Queen Anne's lace Daucus carota UPL introduced
orchard grass Dactylis glomerata FACU introduced
tall fescue Festuca arundinacea FAC- introduced
common velvetgrass Holcus lanatus FAC introduced
spotted cats-ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU introduced
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199
i , .
TABLE OF THE VEGETATION OF THE FANNO CREEK PARK SITE
Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status Native/
Introduced
slender rush Juncus tenuis FACW- native
reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea FACW invasive
Oregon white oak Quercus garryana UPL native �
rose Rosa species - native
Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU noxious
curly dock Rumex crispus FAC+ introduced
red clover Trifolium ratense FACU introduced
Fishman/SWCA Project 8352-199
No-Rise Certification
Pedestrian Bridge Crossing of
_ Fanno Creek Below Hall Boulevard
.E,«r, . f � t� � . fiF f I #. � �
:t .. ,,� r�p^ �?'� .; �� :
• �`� � . � �����.�,. ��r'i� ����• ��*� �yw ���;'�s 4 .:�
��,�.► ��`� i�� ;�. , . -. -��, ,�,._.� �+ ,.� �
;� ::« , , �'y,
,•�, � , � --',� ,. ,�,�,��,�,,- �r.' �,- ,•��(
':�:xdr ,.� . , �,y �.�.g ," �
r•� e. �� b^ 'fy�y�� ` y ���r�
_ . X. :�(�M -'�+"'��y,� �s.'u''"Q' ���•�`' -- ;-''� �+" � ,�
,. .t } 4.���r/ : �,f�;�
��.++ ��.,v�.��'�i._ , ' � � fl� ;1 i *'• ~r+ ti�;9l�a„����'. '� �
��,�.�.t���F��"�+�� �.. �•{. .. �e ���a �� * �� � r a `r ��
..ir'�.�..�.�/p•� _ - _^} ,� .. '. ��'ft�)�s� ,}{ �` yr 1�f`, ��
• �ar
.• ; �,�.
� 1 � .
�r -' .- .•- � 7�r �-t'� �,s,�r,'''" ,
••�' Y"����.- •, � �� y.�. ��� �,i'y
# y^ ���` "�`i� ��i� � . ���^��'y+� �: �.,
* ' � �P
�� � xa•*v , �•� ,.+�, �i:� ' ,�`��� �"' a.
�., ,�—�,,r a_ .. � _�o
�`�c . ��� �� � �y��� � p .
:we��.�.'�' !..��� �`} ,: . tZ�""y'°' ,h �� '�
,�s�. �* '� a, �'. '.,��I�
,w•�--� ,� .: °,�-. '1 ;�'t' r ' ,,
=' k� -�. ��c..� .�
`
r "° ��� •,.� -. � _� . � ' '� .`� ..�r � ...
��. ,fi. —_ +�. ��W � te . ' - �'`_tiJ'y ..�-?$ �� ��
a- ,-
� : ��. -.'' �% �-�''�
, ��.: ��'" a� �,-'-x �
� s �
... ��f" � �6 � � 3+
I ,�}.�yPenn;� .�' Y>x�'��.�� "�.,��.� . . , / 4� �� ��'�"�'
�M
Fe' �j ,m,at�,�� �p +F� �; y
�i ii°r' ' ',w�' 11y� �y'^. ,. � .c8 rj. :� .
. °� �• ,_ � ' -+ +,�i.�„ �, � �.wt� "'�i�
'�k - . r��r r�.` r
q�y�„ . . � i '+��-�+�, t-^T°�= ' � � ��.y
, �. �' # ���j-a:. �. 1��. 3
'�/1 <�� ' " �_���`���k^t.�' +�
.f #i�'� � �'� � ���.Y`� � � •�,•
,���•�., � �.� + �..t' -.e�P�. _ .a.'.�as° ar�-��. �
_.�C.��!+�.. ._ ,P.r-.�.�-' '� �''��' ��il`�
�... ...... 4 .F .�'Y�' i��� ._ .C�i�
. �-� , ,. ' .d
Prepared for: Prepared by:
" The City of Tigard Pacific Water Resources, Inc.
� Capital Improvement Program 4905 SW Griffith Drive, Suite 200
, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Beaverton, Oregon 97005
Tigard, Oregon 97223
li'e Think ih�II"orld nf lf'aler
PACIFIC
WATER RESOURCES, INC.
�1����
������
�..�
Date: July 29, 2005
i
No-Rise Certification, Pedestrian Bridge over Fanno Creek below Ha!!Boulevard
City of Tigard
Executive Summary
The intent of this study is to determine if the pedestrian bridge, proposed as part of the
- extension of Fanno Creek Park, would create a rise in the regulatory water surface
elevation in Fanno Creek. The existing hydraulic computer models for the effective
Flood Insurance Study were modified to include data reflecting the proposed bridge.
' The computer model results indicate that construction of the proposed pedestrian bridge
would increase the 100-year regulatory floodplain profile by approximately 0.01 feet
(1/8") within the area between the proposed pedestrian bridge to Hall Boulevard Bridge
upstream. Based on the computer model, the hydraulic impact of the propopsed
pedestrian bridge does not reach areas upstream of the Hall Boulevard Bridge.
It is our professional opinion that the local rise in the water surface profile will not impose
any meaningful hydraulic impacts to the Fanno Creek system or neighboring properties.
Therefore the proposed project will meet the criteria for "no-rise" certification. The local
rise in water surface elevation is confined to the park area, which as we understand is
City owned property. We encourage the City to verify that the area in question is in fact
owned entirely by the City. It is our determination that the proposed project will not
hydraulically impact adjacent private lands.
Introduction
The City of Tigard has contracted with Pacific Water Resources, Inc. (PWR) to perform a
hydraulic analysis, with the goal of obtaining a "no-rise" certificate, in support of the
installation of a new pedestrian bridge over Fanno Creek. The new pedestrian bridge is
part of the Fanno Creek Park Extension project. A "no-rise" certification is required to
meet the City of Tigard requirement that no rise in water surface elevation occur due to
construction in the floodplain. A "no-rise" certification will assist the City in securing the
necessary construction permits for the bridge project.
Project Description
The proposed project will include construction of a new pedestrian bridge over Fanno
Creek, approximately 150' downstream (east) of Hall Boulevard (see Figure 1). The
• pedestrian bridge is part of the larger project of expanding the Fanno Creek Park east
from Hall Boulevard. The project also includes pedestrian paths, fencing, and additional
landscaping.
The main channel of Fanno Creek in the vicinity of the proposed bridge is defined by a
pebble covered bottom with steep banks covered with blackberry brambles. The south
bank of the main channel is high enough to contain the 100-year floodplain. The north
bank of the main channel is lower than the south bank allowing flood flow to overtop and
enter the overbank floodplain area. The floodplain area is approximately 500' wide and
extends northward from the main channel. During the regulatory 100-year flood event,
the flood water within the floodplain is approximately 4' in depth.
The proposed pedestrian bridge is a clear span wooden bridge that would cross the
main channel of Fanno Creek. The proposed bridge span is 50', which will place the
,� Pacific Water Resources, Inc. Page 2 of 8
�";,� anno Ck No Rise.doc July 19, 2005
No-Rise Certification, Pedestrian Bridge over Fanno Creek below HaU Boulevard
City of Tigard
north abutment within the floodplain. With the north abutment in the floodplain, the
bridge itself will be partially submerged during large runoff events. The south abutment
would be constructed at the top of the existing south stream bank, which lies above the
100-year floodplain.
, ,
�
--s :��_i �i i �, � . '�; �a '` -"
- - r ■�. r. � ' .- ,''���a � � ,a,
:� __ ,��T xa� ' �M .��.,' ,_ ,•;: , � _
. `� �'���,.��': ; � ��.�--� �` �� .. -° _ � °r� �t � - ' � ;+�
. �
� Z. 1 i �1 ,��-� 1' ���!n uiF�u. j � `-� � Y • �'�,���
' �� t•� R.��j� �-� -`� : _ �� �� ..
' sw �. � �ry�i r� ... ,'�,:..:' '
, � : Ak�rth ��� _,�__�; ,��•� .�! '- r u:�,, .. � + �� �'' � �
. � :;..� �'.. �i + �x�� ,1 .' '�;', . .: �� �- : � ,�
s _� � .. .�:. .-i:.r
: * � `, ... �c �'� ' i �� ��t=� —-` /_'�f`t,}
iJ� ¢_�->S r"'�°�� e- �'t-t/��—"f I���' ��.���y!'. . � y� �� �. --�1► V -"' t"�•1
' � ; -� � -.�,��. r�c�p,,�,,� , .; t . -� � .:�
�ij� .i i :: } `'�'' + , ; � �;.� �� :..., ��� ; .,,�
'n .r f �n � 'L�
�4. M n �.' � �h.• '"''�4 a ?r �.... •�'^ ��'�' • ! .� �r
. ��
�;�.� . ... � � � , ' `�•
t.. •% r� f } I -••�fi t��I ,�,,� �!• • r1� �c ,+Tre`e �!'��� 1 f�•.i
.�„r,/ ♦ ' � � � ` I M
�j!\ � 's�..:� �x ' '.j �'�� ; �'�►��v��+ !•,�.�.,_l+�9,' � ,
- , � � 1 �,i '`� � ,��!� ��� �,. -. .. ♦ .w
. ��� ` r 1� �r, Ll��,s/ � �� / �� �,
t� .�1�•1 a• ' ' ... �Y j'• ' • h�f�.�` �
� r� ,. � � i. :� , . ,. f� , � i
r ��i ��r7 � : '�: '�" � � ��. ' f � ° c4\q �:�
, �"'� � ��7: f ' �;':�'�;sx� Project _. �`'� !.
��,�'�` ��- ;�' • �.flcation ;;� , '; `��_.
1 f' � � ���v: c ,�' � Sr�''4 k;����w;{ �7I. .,. ���.✓ p <.-� ;♦
�i� . ��. <<'i � ' . t��
r- . .� •�y,f„ . �•'�4 � . &ri`� �
� '� -,, .� ' . .
• �, �}�, �� � rec.,�.ii...�
Figure 1 — Project Location Map
Regulatory Floodplain Mapping
The project area is within the FEMA designated 100-year floodplain. Figure 2 is a
' portion of the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panel 410276 0517 C. As indicated by
the FIRM map, the proposed bridge is located within Zone AE of the floodplain. FEMA
defines zone AE as a special flood hazard area in which base flood elevations have
� been determined. The special flood hazard area is subject to flooding by the 1% annual
chance flood event. The base flood elevation for the project area is approximately 144'
above mean sea level based on National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) 29.
- Pacific Water Resources, lnc. Page 3 of 8
������ =anno Ck No Rise.doc July 19, 2005
\\\H/
No-Rise Certification, Pedestrian Bridge over Fanno Creek below Ha!!Boulevard
City of Tigard
�, �y �" , ' � .'+�, r 'o- # y ' �,
� . p� `
F l ��� • ` �� ".�� t x��3^�{ �!.1' Ty";� X"¥� .
-.,� f . � � � �; '.&� `'i
.y�'k� � ,s`' S� �.�� ZONE X�� " ��'4a� *t� �t'� , w ��'`� �',s
, ? y,� . ZONE X� `�`�� a�:9� ` i'`�" Sy,�4qy�''�. S{�*�:
._ ti
✓ '+�' 1 �,L%� �� . .�r ,. a iK� ..
..�y a {� 'a h.� � �F ' ' N�I 111Yd
.. �f� �� �j�tY; . ��� �' y�� �'�. a� � i
NEX • t� �>
' O `{ �` �f'�' ., �a..�������` � '�r ��h '��P\� ;��4 .�'
ZONE X " 1.'. u a ca � h i�t . t I .
�� � ,1 �z� � �' e-
� ...,f �f r �� � .
� aJ P � ' � � �t•� ZONE X � \ ,;
�t> < :a�� ���r' `�'.
(f�f /yy \ �._.. �,��ryk a PrQ�PiC.I `�;. �5� �
V . � .�� f .. ��.
ZoNE x -,� � �y-+"'w_"'ZONE X y'ysr Location � �,- � r ��
_ " . \\ . �.. i,d` �Y�.. �,
` f�
. . Y
�(. � `s"� �, 'Q� # � ✓ ^ - .
ZONE X � '� p ar
�:
r
,e q,�. �; ^ � .�.�'w
�.x. �c
�; 2 = r 20NE X N ���J'�
=�`'e�.,� t?"` .' -t� .
�r� � .
�st`� k �j���'k n.,� ZONE X . �7 �. .
� _ � # ; .. \ � \ . ..
'�;>. z�.� � �� -�'"��+ 4 � -
• ,,� i / `� �.....,,. . � „ "� ,�
. �s� ��Funm�� ✓ '�z.F,t �. i �
��' . �_. ..��4J �' !f � ,..� `��
����� �, i?�" t 'tl� f,. . f /
A � ' < i - ` '.� 7 t�� E AE�
«•��'� . ��'� * ° �, `Y ZONEX
,W,E�tt�`�'� '�„ � ; � ... ' _'�`�� I
'!� 5 Y �' � � � t.�.t.0 � ,��';;' � ` ;�
. ,, ,
��. �, ,
� � ����
� � " � ZONE X �
�, ,� t �
�� � .�'4, ZO NE X
'k��ta . ' $�3 �. �-.aw� $�.� ry��� � I \\ .'
' SW O M/1�fU S� �
`� ' `�i4 %��m� , �` �������x -��.. i 1 , . � �,1�
f »
"� • � '' �'�s_° °� ;z 20NEX�t-.,r" � °
� r y � :; �
�� . � � . �` y � *� � S !'�
a
� -' � � �•r�ri•��r���i�,,�xi� r��,� ,�.��� T .. ��' � ,
� � � �� £4��� � � zo
` swcocFwotiosr
t. �•^ ��.;°$�, . ,,;r.`' / �
� �3 ���'—Y--
Figure 2— Effective FEMA FIRM Panel
- Hydrology
The source of the hydrology utilized in the determination of this"no-rise" Certificate is the
' effective Flood Insurance Study (FIS) dated September 1981. Peak runoff rates for
Fanno Creek within the project area are listed in Table 1.
Table 1 — Peak Flow Rates for Fanno Creek at the Project Location
Frequency(yr) Peak Flow(cfs)
10 2,862
50 3,702
100 4,072
500 4,943
,� Pacific Water Resources,lnc. Page 4 of 8
!llell ;�nno Ck No Rise.doc July 19, 2005
\�\Il/
�;
�'`,
No-Rise Certification, Pedestrian 8►idge over Fanno Creek below Hall Boulevard
City of Tigard
Hydraulic Modeling
Process
The current FEMA FIS is based on HEC-2 hydraulic model results performed by PWR in
1999. HEC-2 is the previous generation of the Army Corps water surface profile
' computer model. The Corps no longer supports HEC-2 and has moved on to the latest
generation, Hydraulic Engineering Center River Analysis System (HEC-RAS). The
HEC-2 model was converted to HEC-RAS version 3.1.2 as part of this study. Since
HEC-RAS is a slightly different model and many improvements have been made over
HEC-2, the results of the models differ slightly. In the project area, the 100-year water
surface elevations increased approximately 0.10' when compared to the regulatory
elevation. The converted HEC-RAS model is the 'baseline' model. This `baseline' will
be modified to include additional data reflecting the proposed bridge and path
improvements.
A total of four cross-sections are normally required to perform bridge and/or culvert
modeling. The first cross-section is normally placed at a distance equal to the width of
flow (or main channel) upstream of the structure. The second is located at the upstream
face of the structures with the third at the downstream face. The fourth and last is
located approximately four times the width of the flow (or main channel) downstream of
the structure.
In this case, cross-section No. 21597 from the original HEC-2 model is located along the
creek approximately where the proposed bridge is to be located. Cross-section No.
21597 was copied and placed as the downstream face of the bridge (No. 21585).
Based on field observation, existing cross-section No. 21597 appropriately represents
both the upstream and downstream creek conditions of the proposed bridge.
Based on the fact that the stream cross-section varies slightly from upstream to
downstream of the proposed bridge location, survey data for two additional cross-
sections was collected in accordance with standard bridge modeling protocol. The City
provided PWR with two additional cross-sections, one upstream (No. 21646) and one
downstream (No. 21547) of the proposed bridge. The new cross-section data from the
• City was incorporated into the 'baseline' HEC-RAS model. The results of the HEC-RAS
modeling indicate an approximate increase of the 100-year water surface elevation of a
maximum 0.05'. The rise in water surface elevation decreases back to the `baseline'
- profile within 650'. This revised model with the additional cross-sections will be
considered the 'revised baseline' for which further modifications, such as the insertion of
the proposed bridge geometry will be compared.
Bridge data, per the plans and details provided by the City, was inserted into the `revised
baseline' HEC-RAS model. Based on discussions held July 11, 2005, it is assumed that
the hand railing and the structural balusters would remain per the bridge details provided
the non-structural balusters would be changed to '/<" diameter aircraft cable strung
horizontally at 4" on center. The cable balustrade allows water and debris to flow
through the railing. The height of the hand railing would be set 42" above the deck
- Pacific Water Resources, Inc. Page 5 of 8
��� Fanno Ck No Rise.doc July 19, 2005
:;
No-Rise Certification, Pedestrian Bridge over Fanno Creek below Ha!!Boulevard
City of Tigard
surface. In the HEC-RAS model the wood members are represented as a solid mass.
The horizontal cables are modeled as open and unobstructed.
Proposed plans for the Fanno Park Expansion indicate placement of chain link fencing
• along the proposed pedestrian path within the floodplain area. It was discussed and
agreed in the July 11, 2005 meeting that the chain link would be replaced with the same
'/4" diameter cable used for the bridge balustrade. Cable would be strung horizontally at
• 8" on center between wood posts. As with the bridge, the cabling will allow debris and
water to flow through with minimal accumulation when compared to chain link. Debris
accumulation is thought to be minimal with cabling, therefore only the vertical wooden
posts were included as obstructions in the hydraulic model overbank area.
Cross-Sections
As noted previously, two additional cross-sections were field surveyed in support of the
hydraulic model. PWR prepared AutoCAD line work representing required cross-section
geometry and locations consistent with the current FIS. City of Tigard survey crews
performed the field survey in conformance with the data request prepared by PWR.
---— ---- ___.. _- — - -_ _ ---
� '
� � � � � �
N � � ���4�'`
� % �� ^ ��,
4�� yi �
E X > , t `�, .'*.
'�.,, .x � r� �� j . ;:,"
� �� m� � Legend
J �" � � ; New CrossSection
I `/ "�'� ExisUngCross-Section'
r� �, � �, . �
i
�,"F•� � ^ � � �`; m= �
� � /� J J ; � 'I
� '' �f ZQN AE� , �
�
� �
, -
' �- Bridge Z0�
�'"; �� � Location
�_, r� � i � ,.... �
, r.� I
A i �;!':-t �
N � � a , � ;
�/��' G `❑ +�. � ,- i . .' , .r � �
'4 �� `O�7� � ,.?�� .�4�> � ~ � I
I
�;, �,,�, 4`' Zptlt�;X � ;
. f
�,e�, r;� � \ ;Z O N!
� � _ , ._ .
, ,
��F r . � ,
� � ' -- --'1_-----_..
Figure 3-Cross-Section Location Map
- Pacific Water Resources, Inc. Page 6 of 8
������ Fanno Ck No Rise.doc ,IUIy 19, 2005
\\\N/
' No-Rise Certification, Pedestrian Bridge over Fanno Creek below Nall Boulevard
,.
City of Tigard
Existing cross-section No. 21597 is essentially located at the upstream face of the
proposed bridge. This cross-section was copied to No. 21585 to provide an immediate
downstream bridge cross-section. All cross-section locations within the study area are
shown on Figure 3.
Expansion and Contraction Coefficients
� Expansion and contraction coefficients are based on and consistent with the HEC-2
model, which is the basis of the effective FIS. Due to the effect of the expansion of flow
downstream of the Hall Boulevard Bridge, the expansion coefficients for cross-sections
are set to 0.4 rather than the standard 0.3. Based on standard hydraulic modeling
practices the expansion of flow downstream of the Hall Boulevard Bridge will occur over
several hundred feet, which encompasses the proposed project area. Likewise, the
contraction coefficient was set at 0.2 rather than 0.1 to compensate for slightly more
rapid contraction than normally expected.
At the proposed bridge, values of 0.5 and 0.3 are specified for expansion and
contraction respectively. These values are normally specified for bridge structures and
are somewhat conservative based on the fact that the flow area is much wider in the
floodplain overbank than the bridge span. Even during the more frequent events (i.e. 2,
5, 10-year) the flow in Fanno Creek enters the floodplain therefore the flow width is not
constricted by the proposed bridge span.
Manning's `n' Values
Manning's `n' values for the new cross-sections are consistent with those used in the
original HEC-2 model. Values were slightly reduced to account for the proposed bridge
approach path and shoulders in the overbank area. The original value of 0.083 was
reduced to 0.050 only in the areas where the path is present. Normally an `n' value for
pavement would be much lower at 0.015, but 0.050 considers landscaping adjacent to
the path. Differences in roughness within the cross-sections are accounted for utilizing
the horizontal varying 'n' value routine in HEC-RAS.
Blocked Obstructions
. Blocked obstructions are specified in the overbank areas of two cross-sections, No.
21646 and No. 21597. The blocked obstructions represent vertical wooden posts of the
fencing along the pedestrian path. The posts were assumed to be 9" in diameter or
• square and extend 48" above the ground surface. Horizontal structural or architectural
members were not considered.
Ineffective Flow Areas
Ineffective flow areas are specified for cross-sections No. 21597 and No. 21585. These
cross-sections are immediately up and downstream of the proposed bridge. Ineffective
data is specified for only the left bank and at the overbank elevation. While in this case
the ineffective flow data does not modify the results of the profile, the data was specified
in the model as standard bridge modeling practice.
` Pacific Water Resources, lnc. Page 7 of 8
������ ;anno Ck No Rise.doc July 19, 2005
\\\I//
No-Rise Certification, Pedestrian 8ridge over Fanno Creek below Hal!Boulevarci
City of Tigard
Bridge Structure
The bridge structure is modeled on the basis of the plans and details provided by the
City of Tigard. Copies of these drawings are provided in the Appendix for reference.
. Dimensions of the bridge modeled are: 10' width, 50' clear span, 42" high hand rails, 15"
thick structural members, and vertical balusters of 4 '/�" width at 10' on center along the
length of the bridge.
Modeling Results
The computer model results indicate that the 100-year regulatory floodplain profile will
increase approximately 0.01 feet (1/8"), with a maximum of 0.02' (1/4"), within the area
between the proposed pedestrian bridge to just upstream of the Hall Boulevard Bridge.
Based on the computer model, the hydraulic impact of the pedestrian bridge does not
extend upstream of the Hall Boulevard Bridge. Table 2 below presents the water
surface profiles for the 'revised baseline' model and the revised model with the
pedestrian bridge.
Table 2 —Water Surface Profiles within Project Area
100-year Water SurFace Elevation(ft) Increase in
Cross-Section No. Description Revised Baseline Model with water Surface
Model Pedestrian Bridge Elevation(ft)
21352 Existing XS Dnstm of Ped Bridge 143.94 143.94 0.00
21547 New XS Dnstm of Ped Bridge 144.06 144.06 0.00
21585 Dnstrm Face of Ped Bridge 144.14 144.14 0.00
21597 Upstm Face of Ped Bridge 144.15 144.16 0.01
21646 New XS upstm of Ped Bridge 144.27 144.28 0.01
21716 1'Dnstm of Hall Blvd Bridge 144.25 144.26 0.01
21717 Dnstrm Face of Hall Blvd Bridge 144.10 144.12 0.02
21791 Upstm Face of Hall Blvd Bridge 144.51 144.51 0.00
Summary tables from HEC-RAS for the `revised baseline' and the model with the
proposed pedestrian bridge are included in the Appendix for reference.
Conclusion
It is our professional opinion that the local rise in the water surface profile created by the
construction of the pedestrian bridge will not impose any meaningful hydraulic impacts to
the Fanno Creek system or neighboring properties. Therefore the proposed project will
meets the criteria for a "no-rise" certification. The minor local rise in water surface
elevation shown in Table 2 is confined to the park area which, as we understand, is City
owned property. The proposed project, as we can determine, does not hydraulically
impact adjacent private lands.
- Pacific Water Resources, Inc. Page 8 of 8
"'�� Fanno Ck No Rrse.doc ,lUly 19, 2005
ENGINEERING"NO-RISE"CERTIFICATION
�
This is to certify that the attached technical data supports the finding that the proposed
project, Pedestrian Bridge Over Fanno Creek, when constructed in accordance with
- the preliminary plans (June 16th, 2045) and details (July 13th, 2005) via email and as
attached to this report will not increase the 100-year flood elevations on Fanno Creek at
published sections in the Flood Insurance Study for City of Tigard dated February 2005
and will not increase the 100-year flood elevations at unpublished cross-sections in the
vicinity of the proposed development.
July 27,2005 � ����
(Date) (Signature)
Fred MacGregor,PE
Senior Water Resource Engineer
Pacific Water Resources, Inc.
4905 SW Griffith Drive, Suite 200
Beaverton,OR 97005
503-671-9709
SEAL:
���ED PROFFSs
��g �NGINE,,c9 i0
�, 2
�' 76904 9r
. >
�:
;��- 7�L 7 �S
; � ��ORFGONG� OQ,
�`(�j �Y 12 �G C�
�� MAGU��
EXPIRATIOPd DATE: �° -�y �,•�,
.
�.,�'
7�"�j
�.�:
�.�
�;�
. q
�Y
Appendix
�
� .
�
�
�w.�
. ,.� �.
.�-
>:... .........�--- �a '' -- --- -- ---
.-t:�=-•: -�---�--- -�-�: -=�- ..:- .:-::::::�-:�::::: :::.......
�� o.
�
;' ;' ;' '.. :: : ��a«���.
::: � ::'::::::::::: ::y�-. :::. :::: ::_::_:_::" :�: :::::_:::: '
litlb0 �W9
- ni lOtl : ■Yx-[1�R!Id A61 I�C
!Il1IC lOtl : R�10N�!C
W1pIY : 1[SO�S�YWGIS�i�fli'M-WiO�.f
a oRO.
�a[f�K wrtmm�nnu
rriwia � aaa.w.wo..w�K�c�x
ri aur n¢n aiu. m or icis wiu.
���P : A[�V�[MlKiI�bJ�U6
BR1DG%CUT-A1AY PLAN YIL�II u�ni°nn . .�rc i��mo��waE
nur.mir inirtsnm¢,rca.xns.nmec.e.
�uanc.im�s r u�u.
w�mr in ms oaun rie���a an
� oui.c un na.
o��ortu
ii�¢�� � rt�orzs
rinsi : s[nu.nm m�.�u��en
s.i we�R i�nias ru�
snn aw[s : �sn.�
wwo.R : an+.w�
• • f . ioi DIV GYWWIi�C y�SIE�s am ruwiuna.
y______ ____ -�L _
- - - - -- - xi RtG�i t01[KI!!'[C�li41iEE�r Rlhi�i[0
n¢n. +R�i a�rine�miria��oc y mo
HRlOGI M-I�IY fLfYI1Jd1
Yl O�K4qS0 Mf YO�Q[f��tiy[��l[�uL pyL I(
w0[Rip 10 R[mR IIG1R�1.IA�i Nl IlClp NIS iY0
�0[5�I�x @s[�WFlWMR i�I�YMQ�ilx ip
fSGifiG1 W�w.
�rt��aur wt[Rix ntx Rm,niaw[n iM i�on a�tn
ro.��x�rY��ertM�w v o.�io rt+/w v[c���t+�ia
ct. �au anuiu��aa nrc.+rn.
14�1 3�1 ll![9�iT�iFYftll00�[R ix lipf f0.KV1 10
��ixiu,rt�H�[��ip O 0.�W e[R ww YECi�ip�iM tl.
!w�[ NOIi -�m[-
�K�ueie.,o nu..w ix�s wana.�e w�ma ra.im
�N RMIMId�FR W�OI IIB.R
rviQ lit[. Oe�fx 90AU V4 CL�O�R�6[ix��uCI�S
r_p KR�l��[ !�Hi6. Mi0 OiPLL1 IIi�fGxln[t�ilx 1N
11CSM�IiH T'rtMirC��9 Wt¢ASS.�OG 4[[YF
I Y! OmS�9Q10 Y50 RM�fMY w4 u0 C?4FSlY r�W iU�[U.
L ��� rr[a�B���BlOd�i
0 P,(0 QR�45 W��[�ARK[S�R A�FM LI4
n ffM1a u�t�ri6�w����p. ix[4 MS1NS tM Y M6t0 Ot
s+tn rwri ruo ar�K veias a iK m�o¢, va�s uiiuc
y w[uss a orKx swwss se,En+o na�c mn�cr. n<aaoi�c
- 4 I Y+1'nurrm «o�ran�.a.s����v:.us�w��iM�m.��«rK
.imKx�c mroi��oa.
- inw.a mrnou,o.w.¢n.��..i.i w s�.�x nusa
w[�[reu[o.�r[e. iirce�e..m n..iian
}1HM1 P[�IMIOpA[F1 9p10 i01 Z m61RRD K
mIKM w5[.V[0. E�[RrEiS
]�GYY Rd iYM Oml YS�i�RS�4f i W�i0[n[D 5����nu�C45 b��OY•
GLLw 11M � (�i[IIJ fbl�i 0�IN�000 9M.�Q5.
y !IR fI�Ll �t q�pQ M![II��L�510 R S�OP�il[G��M S�R. Il�
i �![t�Dl��ll[�V.Yt[I1 N•IS 510[O a���YP'61MF;n
Il Y61 Y9!�f1�0�11x 0.��CI M1f11 W1I111N A
nortn i� s�ioa�ro cvt�r.u�ria
' � Y � .s nas�K���w ocon.
nu.W nmi u � �.au.r nm
�� � naa cr ruw
�
r-r
TYPIGL SdCT10N 0 FLOOR BdAM/ABUTMENT
�
. . . , . . . . , , ' �����,, - - .�� � — �� �. , , " �/
�� �
, . , . . . , . . � „ , . , , , - :! • �; . /
' , ::�: ;�.�,
, . , , . . . . ,r , . , . . - ::il , /
� - . . , , � * � , , = , �
•,
-:�:-:-:�: � �
_•.-.•.-.•.•.-.• • i -
• • • - � -
�:� �'� ':-'-:--� '- , , . ,� � * -;il � ' '/ ir w wm w,..
. . . . _ - • � * � •.� . . . . . . . ��1 � .
- - � j -
.�
. , � J.: - . M/ :� � � �� ���
:-:�_=:=:-:�:=:�: :�:�:, , . i '-' '�:�'�'-:�'-:�'�'�'�:+ ,
. {�^ �/p �,t�� � !
J:Sfti:-(�S�:F'J.vt.ifJ�:�
.:::::::::::::::::::::::: , ; � :�� � Ait�:�=EE:tr�r44" � � • �
�===���==='�="='===�:�:�==-� � : - � - F :f .
- - ` - :.:=::::.=�=�:�: : , �,
�-:
.
`a` � . .'��-�r,i—r�_'�`' " •
_ ,
�•� � + � � ♦ � •�t���_� > � > � ' � > � ' � ' r / � •
- - - - - - .'. • , . . • /, . }
' . t� •%+ ��% �C . . s s �� , , i • s � • . �
- ='�•�.•• 9 !� . + �`— • ' �' � �
I - - - - - -::feri�e•— �248 L-F , i � { . �,�T —� � '� • .
s s • • i i • r�' __�,�fµ.�' "
'p.��..- r*
_ _ _ _ _ s i � � � � � � r f/ > > >� 1 � . �
+ • .�✓ � , > > > �� _
�. . , . , . , , , + . . ' � ' , ' ' . , ,
i > > �/, 6
, . . , . . , . . ' _ _ � ~ � �� / ' ' ' ' ' ' , . ,
- - - - • - _ � ` �> , . , � , . � : T� .------��
�.___.
, . . : .
--r___..�. .___
� -_�__,— — . ._ _ � —
� s
�C��.��;:�� ;,
. ,�.
"' �,���� :�, ::;��
: : . . . . .: , . . .
_ _
_ . ,� � �.,. � �
�ri
�@� �
� � �
; A�P�a�r
rc�1
'i� G��
�"
�
��-
� �--�� .
� � ���
� ' � �q'I'O
� B
�r �� ���p9�
h � � �''��.
1 ��
_ - � i ��
� � ;�
, � ��� ,;
' � '� M
' Cy
� ' �,
� � AT -
�o�� ' `x \ � \ / � 4 9' .
, SE
\ , —�. E S
� -\' — >�� -� � i � � HEE7'
� - —� . � •�2
o /
� '� _ 1� �}� ` � � !o
� � � � I (0 p PL IN ' I \�'q�P
, � i Q � �.
' � � � ~ �
., �\ \�Op/J ✓ � � a
f, /
� r �— -� pa�o�a6a� \ �,�i���/ l �O� I al EXIST
/ � ,�s, �/� i � � � w SHELTER
� Fonno Creek �/ � / ,�/ `—� h E ST 2
Bridge / � . �
� O � �Q-/ / • S ALE
, . � �/j �/ n��, �Q,Q� �
y9"
.__ - -,_� 'a- � \ - � OQj6 O j
i `A ' ` � '�/ �
� , �`�'\'„� � / / / .
�.. , � , �, ' , ' . , '.< ��� _ %r�� �� ,� .� � /
. ����; �
HIGH P01 T ELEV = 1 4.26
HIGH PO! T STA = 4+ 0.02
ELEV 138.92 PW TA = 4+3
.� _ �- . - _ _ P19 fan
NIGH POI 7 tLt V = 7 4.Lb
HIGH POl T STA = 4-1- 0.02
� PN TA = 4+3
160
I A. . _ —8.72
PVI STA = +43 = 4.59 �
V1' ELEV = 39.34 � 0.00' VC �
— F-
— W
K = 7. � w
� 40.D0� � � a °� t=A
� � �
- w 150
_ � � � �" N
� `r m � �" �
i + � ~ m +
� � V � — _ �'
_ ' � 4 _2 3X x
; ! j ' W la1— ------ -- _ _-- - U
i n' .89� �` a
I �
�_. 140
_— 1
--_ _ — ----- —` � f
� �
� 50' wide �
� es rr n br ._
- � /
\
\ /�
� /
'' __ - 130
2+50 3+00 3+50 4t00 4+50
'.���� CITY OF TIGARD T I T L E
� � � ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
�x TIGARDS OR GON 9722�3 D E S C R 1 P T I O N
ie.�� � VOICE: 503-639-4171
r No� FAX: 503-624-0752 3HEET NAME
�r.�i—
WWW.CI.TIGARD.OR.US
`Revised Baseline' HEC-RAS Model
�.'�`' �
�
Fanno Creek Hydrautic Model
Model is'Revised Baseline' Condition
' River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch EI W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width
cfs ft ft ft ft ft/ft ft/s s ft ft
, 15320 10 yr 2889 118.84 136.82 136.85 0.000323 1.83 2120.28 422.26
15320 50 yr 3749 118.84 138.03 138.06 0.00029 1.84 2644.34 444.31
15320 100 yr 4125 118.84 138.5 138.54 0.000289 1.87 2860.95 472.21
15320 500 yr 5009 118.84 139.65 139.69 0.000268 1.89 3442.63 540.05
16224 10 yr 2889 122.84 137.17 137.25 0.001317 3.35 1892.91 470.64
16224 50 yr 3749 122.84 138.33 138.4 0.00111 3.28 2455.18 498.66
16224 100 yr 4125 122.84 138.8 138.86 0.001049 3.26 2689.58 510.22
16224 500 yr 5009 122.84 139.92 139.98 0.00092 3.23 3281.75 553.12
18358 10 yr 2889 125.87 139.13 139.17 0.�00867 2.46 2470.14 594.72
18358 50 yr 3749 125.87 140.1 140.13 0.000853 2.58 3085.07 673.45
18358 100 yr 4125 125.87 140.48 140.52 0.000825 2.59 3345.37 687.6
18358 50�yr 5009 125.87 141.4 141.44 0.000742 2.57 3994.95 721.72
19928 10 yr 2889 127.57 140.2 140.27 0.001418 2.85 1465.85 434.85
19928 50 yr 3749 127.57 141.05 141.13 0.001219 2.79 1842.89 449.82
19928 100 yr 4125 127.57 141.38 141.46 0.001166 2.79 1993.6 455.67
19928 500 yr 5�09 127.57 142.18 142.26 0.001031 2.75 2363.56 471.04
20298 10 yr 2889 124.64 140.87 141.3 0.005701 5.59 635.8 209.51
20298 50 yr 3749 124.64 141.61 142.09 0.006203 6.13 811.88 263.61
20298 100 yr 4125 124.64 141.91 142.41 0.00626 6.27 894.9 285.59
20298 500 yr 5009 124.64 142.64 143.11 0.005923 6.38 1257.3 537.36
21352 10 yr 2889 129.89 142.9 142.94 0.000885 2.25 2046.89 561.35
21352 50 yr 3749 129.89 143.65 143.69 0.000856 2.32 2477.66 591.73
21352 100 yr 4125 129.89 143.94 143.98 0.000851 2.35 2649.52 603.43
21352 500 yr 5009 129.89 144.56 144.61 0.000843 2.43 3029.31 624.19
21547 10 yr 2889 127.7 143.03 143.08 0.000845 2.31 1758.83 334.67
21547 50 yr 3749 127.7 143.77 143.84 0.000951 2.56 2010.32 340.27
21547 100 yr 4125 127.7 144.06 144.13 0.000997 2.67 2108.38 342.43
21547 500 yr 5009 127.7 144.68 144.76 0.001135 2.95 2324.12 359.23
21585 10 yr 2889 129.57 143.1 138.93 143.12 0.000522 1.67 2266.57 427.68
' 21585 50 yr 3749 129.57 143.85 13926 143.89 0.000579 1.84 2591.86 432.16
21585 100 yr 4125 129.57 144.14 139.39 144.18 0.000604 1.91 2718.49 435.32
21585 500 yr 5009 129.57 144.78 139.64 144.82 0.000659 2.06 2999.51 453.22
21597 10 yr 2889 129.57 143.1 138.93 143.13 0.00052 1.67 2269.29 427.72
21597 50 yr 3749 129.57 143.86 139.26 143.89 0.000577 1.84 2594.92 4322
21597 100 yr 4125 129.57 144.15 139.39 144.19 0.000602 1.9 2721.7 435.53
� 21597 500 yr 5009 129.57 144.79 139.64 144.83 0.000656 2.05 3003.17 453.45
21646 10 yr 2862 126.67 143.2 143.22 0.000369 1.89 2639.9 573.78
21646 50 yr 3702 126.67 143.97 144 0.00039 2.03 3084.09 576.11
21646 100 yr 4072 126.67 144.27 144.3 0.000401 2.09 3256.59 577.01
21646 500 yr 4943 126.67 144.91 144.95 0.000425 2.23 3631 579.64
Fanno Creek Hydraulic Model
Model is'Revised Baseline' Condition
River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch EI W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width
cfs ft ft ft ft ft/ft ft/s s ft ft
21716 10 yr 2862 129.42 143.18 137.8 143.33 0.001717 3.61 1212.09 349.71
21716 50 yr 3702 129.42 143.95 138.88 144.11 0.001762 3.87 1481.82 362.16
21716 100 yr 4072 129.42 144.25 139.22 144.41 0.001786 3.97 1588.45 369.58
� 21716 500 yr 4943 129.42 144.9 139.99 145.07 0.001804 4.16 1849.07 385.57
21717 10 yr 2862 129.42 143.07 137.8 143.44 0.003328 4.99 690.02 253.51
21717 50 yr 3702 129.42 143.81 138.87 144.25 0.003716 5.56 881.85 273.05
21717 100 yr 4072 129.42 144.1 139.22 144.56 0.003842 5.77 960.33 280.6
21717 500 yr 4943 129.42 144.74 139.99 145.23 0.00405 6.17 1138.16 296.79
21754 Bridge
21791 10 yr 2862 129.42 143.56 137.8 143.85 0.002553 4.53 815.3 266.43
21791 50 yr 3702 129.42 144.25 138.87 144.6 0.00294 5.1 1001.65 284.44
21791 100 yr 4072 129.42 144.51 139.22 144.88 0.003109 5.33 1�72.91 290.95
21791 500 yr 4943 129.42 145.04 139.99 145.46 0.003428 5.79 1249.35 305.97
21966 10 yr 2862 129.98 144.09 144.16 0.000957 2.58 1555.09 311.04
21966 50 yr 3702 129.98 144.86 144.94 0.001058 2.84 1798.39 320.43
21966 100 yr 4072 129.98 145.15 145.24 0.001108 2.96 1891.79 325.75
21966 500 yr 4943 129.98 145.75 145.85 0.001227 3.23 2089.07 335.55
22485 10 yr 2862 131.64 144.46 144.52 0.000661 2.49 1858.15 360.53
22485 50 yr 3702 131.64 145.27 145.34 0.000728 2.74 2155.76 374.15
22485 100 yr 4072 131.64 145.58 145.65 0.000759 2.85 2271.59 379.32
22485 500 yr 4943 131.64 14622 146.3 0.000834 3.09 2518.04 389.38
22609 10 yr 2862 132.04 144.55 139.39 144.59 0.000661 2.12 1957.38 403.74
22609 50 yr 3702 132.04 145.36 140.41 145.41 0.000697 2.31 2290.13 41029
22609 100 yr 4072 132.04 145.67 140.54 145.73 0.000717 2.39 2418.14 412.78
22609 500 yr 4943 132.04 146.32 140.96 146.39 0.000797 2.63 2690.13 430.94
�•
22613.5 Bridge
22618 10 yr 2862 132.04 144.56 139.39 144.6 0.000656 2.11 1962.65 403.84
' 22618 50 yr 3702 132.04 145.38 140.41 145.43 0.000692 2.3 2295.41 410.39
22618 100 yr 4072 132.04 145.69 140.54 145.74 0.000713 2.39 2423.51 412.88
22618 500 yr 4943 132.04 146.34 140.96 146.4 0.000793 2.63 2695.55 431.55
22684 10 yr 2858 131.96 144.61 144.64 0.000477 1.9 2320.03 473.69
22684 50 yr 3695 131.96 145.43 145.46 0.00051 2.07 2715.72 489.28
22684 100 yr 4063 131.96 145.74 145.78 0.000526 2.15 2870.05 495.23
22684 500 yr 4932 131.96 146.4 146.44 0.000586 2.36 3202.58 523.44
23473 10 yr 2858 131.01 144.89 144.93 0.000551 2.26 2193.31 498.84
23473 50 yr 3695 131.01 145.72 145.76 0.000556 2.38 2609.9 507.06
23473 100 yr 4063 131.01 146.04 146.08 0.000563 2.44 2772.04 511.56
23473 500 yr 4932 131.01 146.72 146.77 0.000594 2.6 3130.6 543.74
23562 10 yr 2858 130.9 144.91 139.14 144.95 0.000705 2.15 2115.59 466.4
23562 50 yr 3695 130.9 145.74 141.57 145.79 0.000712 2.3 2502.73 472.18
,
,
U.
,'+
��:
�..._..__ _ _
G1i•
. •v�
i��
1r``�'L.'.
].":i..
r
e•
�
r
,..
`Revised Baseline' w/ Bridge HEC-RAS Model
�
Fanno Creek Hydraulic Model
Model is'Revised Baseline' Condition with Proposed Pedestrian Bridge
River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch EI W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width
cfs ft ft ft ft ft/ft ft/s s ft ft
� 15320 10 yr 2889 118.84 136.82 136.85 0.000323 1.83 2120.28 422.26
15320 50 yr 3749 118.84 138.03 138.06 0.00029 1.84 2644.34 444.31
15320 100 yr 4125 118.84 138.5 138.54 0.000289 1.87 2860.95 472.21
� 15320 500 yr 5009 118.84 139.65 139.69 0.000268 1.89 3442.63 540.05
16224 10 yr 2889 122.84 137.17 137.25 0.001317 3.35 1892.91 470.64
16224 50 yr 3749 122.84 138.33 138.4 0.00111 328 2455.18 498.66
16224 100 yr 4125 122.84 138.8 138.86 0.001049 3.26 2689.58 51022
16224 500 yr 5009 122.84 139.92 139.98 0.00092 3.23 3281.75 553.12
18358 10 yr 2889 125.87 139.13 139.17 0.000867 2.46 2470.14 594.72
18358 50 yr 3749 125.87 140.1 140.13 0.000853 2.58 3085.07 673.45
18358 100 yr 4125 125.87 140.48 140.52 0.000825 2.59 3345.37 687.6
18358 500 yr 5009 125.87 141.4 141.44 0.000742 2.57 3994.95 721.72
19928 10 yr 2889 127.57 1402 140.27 0.001418 2.85 1465.85 434.85
19928 50 yr 3749 127.57 141.05 141.13 0.001219 2.79 1842.89 449.82
19928 100 yr 4125 127.57 141.38 141.46 0.001166 2.79 1993.6 455.67
19928 500 yr 5009 127.57 142.18 142.26 0.001031 2.75 2363.56 471.04
20298 10 yr 2889 124.64 140.87 141.3 0.005701 5.59 635.8 209.51
20298 50 yr 3749 124.64 141.61 142.09 0.006203 6.13 811.88 263.61
20298 100 yr 4125 124.64 141.91 142.41 0.00626 6.27 894.9 285.59
20298 500 yr 5009 124.64 142.64 143.11 0.005923 6.38 1257.3 537.36
21352 10 yr 2889 129.89 142.9 142.94 0.000885 2.25 2046.89 561.35
21352 50 yr 3749 129.89 143.65 143.69 0.000856 2.32 2477.66 591.73
� 21352 100 yr 4125 129.89 143.94 143.98 0.000851 2.35 2649.52 603.43
21352 500 yr 5009 129.89 144.56 144.61 0.000843 2.43 3029.31 624.19
21547 10 yr 2889 127.7 143.03 143.08 0.000845 2.31 1758.83 334.67
21547 50 yr 3749 127.7 143.77 143.84 0.000951 2.56 2010.32 340.27
� 21547 100 yr 4125 127.7 144.06 144.13 0.000997 2.67 2108.38 342.43
21547 500 yr 5009 127.7 144.68 144.76 0.001135 2.95 2324.12 359.23
' 21585 10 yr 2889 129.57 143.1 138.93 143.12 0.000522 1.67 2266.57 427.68
21585 50 yr 3749 129.57 143.85 139.26 143.89 0.000579 1.84 2591.86 432.16
21585 100 yr 4125 129.57 144.14 139.39 144.18 0.000604 1.91 2718.49 435.32
• 21585 500 yr 5009 129.57 144.78 139.64 144.82 0.000659 2.06 2999.51 453.22
21591 Bridge
21597 10 yr 2889 129.57 143.11 138.9 143.14 0.000512 1.66 2250.44 427.77
21597 50 yr 3749 129.57 143.87 139.22 143.91 0.000565 1.82 2577.36 432.27
21597 100 yr 4125 129.57 144.16 139.33 144.2 0.000589 1.88 2704.69 435.89
21597 500 yr 5009 129.57 144.8 139.59 144.85 0.000639 2.03 2987.46 453.87
1
�
Fanno Creek Hydraulic Model
� Model is'Revised Baseline' Condition with Proposed Pedestrian Bridge
River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch EI W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G.Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width
cfs ft ft ft ft ft/ft ft/s s ft ft
� 21646 10 yr 2862 126.67 1432 143.23 0.000366 1.88 2605.24 573.8
21646 50 yr 3702 126.67 143.98 144.01 0.000385 2.02 3050.86 576.14
21646 100 yr 4072 126.67 144.28 144.31 0.000395 2.08 3223.91 577.05
� 21646 500 yr 4943 126.67 144.93 144.97 0.000417 2.21 3599.42 579.7
21716 10 yr 2862 129.42 143.19 137.8 143.34 0.001708 3.61 1214.82 349.84
21716 50 yr 3702 129.42 143.96 138.88 144.12 0.001751 3.86 1485.44 362.42
21716 100 yr 4072 129.42 144.26 139.22 144.42 0.001775 3.96 1592.43 369.85
21716 500 yr 4943 129.42 144.91 139.99 145.08 0.001792 4.15 1854.01 385.88
21717 10 yr 2862 129.42 143.08 137.8 143.45 a.003313 4.98 692.07 253.72
21717 50 yr 3702 129.42 143.83 138.87 144.26 0.003694 5.55 884.75 273.33
21717 100 yr 4072 129.42 144.12 139.22 144.57 0.003817 5.76 963.59 280.91
21717 500 yr 4943 129.42 144.75 139.99 145.24 0.004021 6.16 1142.18 297.14
21754 Bridge
21791 10 yr 2862 129.42 143.57 137.8 143.85 0.002545 4.53 816.73 266.57
21791 50 yr 3702 129.42 144.26 138.87 144.6 0.002934 5.09 1002.63 284.53
21791 100 yr 4072 129.42 144.51 13922 144.88 0.003101 5.33 1074.41 291.08
21791 500 yr 4943 129.42 145.05 139.99 145.47 0.003409 5.78 1252.8 306.47
21966 10 yr 2862 129.98 144.09 144.16 0.000955 2.58 1556.33 311.07
21966 50 yr 3702 129.98 144.86 144.95 0.001056 2.84 1799.18 320.47
21966 100 yr 4072 129.98 145.15 14524 0.001106 2.96 1892.96 325.82
21966 500 yr 4943 129.98 145.75 145.86 0.001223 3.22 2091.6 335.64
22485 10 yr 2862 131.64 144.47 144.52 0.000659 2.49 1859.3 360.59
22485 50 yr 3702 131.64 14528 145.34 0.000727 2.74 2156.51 374.18
22485 100 yr 4072 131.64 145.58 145.65 0.000758 2.85 2272.69 379.37
22485 500 yr 4943 131.64 146.23 146.31 0.000832 3.09 2520.39 389.46
� 22609 10 yr 2862 132.04 144.55 139.39 144.59 0.00066 2.11 1958.61 403.76
22609 50 yr 3702 132.04 145.37 140.41 145.41 0.000696 2.31 2290.9 410.3
22609 100 yr 4072 132.04 145.68 140.54 145.73 0.000716 2.39 2419.28 412.8
' 226a9 500 yr 4943 132.04 146.33 140.96 146.39 0.000795 2.63 2692.6 431.22
22613.5 Bridge
22618 10 yr 2862 132.04 144.56 139.39 144.6 0.000655 2.11 1963.88 403.87
22618 50 yr 3702 132.04 145.38 140.41 145.43 0.000692 2.3 2296.18 410.4
22618 100 yr 4072 132.04 145.69 140.54 145.74 0.000712 2.38 2424.65 412.9
" 22618 500 yr 4943 132.04 146.34 140.96 146.4 0.000791 2.62 2698.01 431.82
22684 10 yr 2858 131.96 144.61 144.64 0.000476 1.9 2321.42 473.75
22684 50 yr 3695 131.96 145.43 145.46 0.000509 2.07 2716.61 489.32
22684 100 yr 4063 131.96 145.74 145.78 0.000526 2.15 2871.37 495.28
22684 500 yr 4932 131.96 146.4 146.45 0.000584 2.35 3205.5 523.77
23473 10 yr 2858 131.01 144.89 144.93 0.00055 2.26 2194.53 498.87
23473 50 yr 3695 131.01 145.72 145.76 0.000555 2.38 2610.69 507.07
1