MLP2007-00013 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISI�N
„
MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 2007-00013 -
� ) ',�`.;
,:y �
LAWRENCE PARTITION
120 DAYS = 10/19/2007
SECTION I. APPLICATION SiJMMARY
FILE NAME: LAWRENCE PARTITION
CASE NOS: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2007-00013
Adjustanent{VAR) VAR2007-00021
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three lots of 7,519 SF,
7,505 SF and 7,550 SF forsulgle-familyhomes. The existing single-familyhome and accessory
structure will be demolished. The a�plicant also requests an ad�ustment to the landscaping
standards (VAR2007-00021) to use ex�stuig trees as street trees.
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER Lawrence Resources,Inc. REP: SR Design,LLC
Attn:Bob Lawrence Attn:Jeff Caines
6770 SW Alfred Street 8196 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97008
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R 4.5: Low Density Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate
detached single-fartuly homes with or without accessory residential units at a minunum lot size
of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family u.nits are pernutted conditionally.
Some civic and institutional uses are also petmitted conditionally.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street;Washington County Tax Map 1S 125CA,Tax Lot 3700.
PR�POSED PARCEL 1: 7,519 Squaxe Feet
PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 7,505 Square Feet
PROPOSED PARCEL 3: 7,550 Square Feet
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715,
18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
SECTION II. DECISION
Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the
request for a partition subject to certa.in conditions and has DENIED the request for an adjustment to landscaping
standards. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V.
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENCE PAR7TTTON PAGE 1 OF 22
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY
ONSITE INLI'ROVEMENTS, INCLUDING DEMOLITION, GRADING, EXCAVATION AND/OR
FILL AGTIVITIES:
e app cant s contact or su riut e o owing requirements to e CI Y RIS , ODD RAGER
(503) 7T8-2700:
1. Prior to site work, the tree plan shall be revised to identify trees # 236, 237 and 238 as trees to be removed.
A�ny tree protection measures concem�n� trees #236, 237 and 238, as well as overall mitigation calctilations,
shall be revised accordingly. Trees #236,�37 and 238 are not subject to mitigation.
2. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the site plan to show building footprints that do not overlap with
the tree protection fencing.
3. Prior to any_site work the a�pplicant shall install all proposed treeprotection fencing as approved bythe Project
Arborist. The f encin g shalI be inspected and a pproved by the �t y Arborist prior to be guuung any site work
The tree protection tencing shall remain in p lace through the duration of all of the building construction
phases, until the final inspection has been passed. After approval from the City Arborist, the tree protection
measures may be removed.
If the Builder is diff erent from the developer or initial applicant:
Prior to issuance ot building permits the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicating the location of the
trees that were preserved on the lot c�tu7ng srte development,locat�on of tree protecuon fencuig,and a signature
of approval from the Pro�ect Arborist regarding the placement and construcuon techruques to be employed in
building the structures. All proposed protecuon fencrog shall be installed and inspected prior to 6eguuiuig
construction. The fencu�shall remaui ui place th.rough the duration of all of the building construcuon phases,
until the final inspection has been passed. After approval from the City Arborist,the tree protection measures
may be removed.
4. The Project Arborist shall submit written reports to the City Arborist,at least once every two weeks, from
initial tree protection zone ('I'PZ� fencing installation through the bLUlding construction phases, as he/she
monitors the consuuction activiues and progress. This inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection
fencin ,deternzine if the fencing was moved at anypoint during construction, and determine if anypart of the
Tree �rotection Plan has been violated. These reports must be Provided to the City Arborist unt�l the fuial
inspection. The reports shall include any changes that occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and
location of the tree protection fencing. It the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arborist shall
justify why the fencing was moved, and shall certify that the constxuction activities to the trees did not
adversely unpact the overall,long-term health and stab�lity of the tree(s).
If the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the scheduled intervals, and if it appe�ars the TPZ's or
the Tree Protection Plan are not being f ollowed by the contractor or a sub-contractor,the �;ity can stop work
on the project until the Caty Arborist and the Project Arbonst can do an inspection.
5. Prior to site work,the ap licant shall submit security in the form of cash or other means acceptable to the Caty
for the e quivalent value o�tree mitigation required at$125.00 per caliper inch. If additional rrutigation trees are
preserved throu�h the partition improvements and construction of houses, and are properly protected through
these stages by the same measures afforded to other protected trees on site, the amount ot the cash assurance
may be correspondingly reduced. Any trees planted on the site or off site in accordance with 18.790.060.D will
be credited agauzst the assurance f or two years f ollowin,g f inal plat approval. After such time,the applicant shall
pay the re g�value of the assurance as a fee in-heu of planting. Any planting by the applicant must be
approved by�City Arborist.
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT:
e app cant s ,prepare a cover etter an su mit it, ong wi any supportin ocuments an orp ans at a ess
the following re_qLUrements to the C[JRRENT PLANNING DIVISION, A�: EMILY ENG (503) 718-2712. The
cover letter s�all clearlyidentifywhere in the submittal the required inforn�ation is found:
6. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall revise the site plan to show a visual clearance triangle for each
proposed driveway.
NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTITION PAGE 2 OF 22
i p
7. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate new street trees on SW Cedarcrest
Street and SW 74th Avenue. The revised site plan shall indicate the species of the proposed street trees. Size
and spacing of street trees shall be as stated in Code Section 18.745.040.�2. Proposed dnveways shall be
included on the site plan to verify that tree spaculg standards are met. Small-stature trees are required for SW
74th Avenue. Street trees shall be chosen from the Cat�s street tree list.
The ap�plicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it,along with� �an��ysu po documents andlor plans that address
the folIowing_requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPAR1TvIE�, A�: KIM MC�VIILLAN 503-639-4171,
EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identif y where in the submittal the required inf om�ation is f ound:
8. A Public Facility Imp rovement (PFI) permit is required for tivs project to cover the public sidewalk and any
other work in the ublic ht-of-wa . Six (6) sets of detailed ublicunprovement lans shall be submitted for
review to the Eng�ees�ng�epartment. NOTE: these plans are in addition to a y drawings rec�u.ired by the
B u i l ding Div�sion an d s ho u I d o�n l�y inc lu de s heets re levant to pu b lic improvements. P u b lic Fac i l iry
Im provement (PFI)�pe�rn� ut plans shall conf orm to Ci t y of T'�gard Pubhc Im provement Desi g n Standards,which
are available at City F�a ll an d the Cit�s web page (www.tig a r d-or.gov).
9. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and tele�phone number of the
individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Pernuttee", and who wiIl provide the financial
assurance for the public improvements. For exarriple,specify if the entity�s a corporation, lunited partnership,
LLC,etc. ALso specify the staxe within which the ent�ty is incorporated and provi-de the name of the corporate
contact person. Failure to provide accurate inforn�at�on to the Engineeruig Department will delayprocessuig
of project docuinents.
10. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the Gty Engineer.
The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase.
11. The Caty Engineer rr�y deternune the necessity for,and requ.ire submittal and approval of,a construction access
and��parkuig plan for the.hoine building phase. If the GtyEngineer deems such a plan necessary, the applicant
shalrprovide the plan pnor to issuance o}building permits.
12. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall paythe addressing fee. (STAFF GONTACT: BethanyStewart,
Engineering�.
13. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility
Improvement pernut,.indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 74th
Avenue as a part of th�s project:
A. 5-foot concrete sidewalkwith 5-foot planter strip;
B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements;
G streetlight layout by applicant's engmeer,to be approved by Caty Engineer; and
D. driveway apron(�f appIicable).
14. The applicant's plans shall showthe existing access for Lot 3 to be closed and relocated to a location at least 10
feet from the pouzt of curvature of the radius at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue.
15. The applicant shall execute a Restrictive Covenant whereby they agree to complete or participate in the future
im�provements of SW 74th Avenue and SW Cedarcrest Street ad�acent to the subject property,when any of the
f oIlowing events occur:
A. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for by the formation of a
Local Improvement D�strict,
B. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or pud for in whole or in part bythe
Ciry or other public agenry,
G when the improvements are part of a larger project to be constructed by a third party and involves the
shanng of design and/or construction expenses by the third party owner(s) of property in addition to
the su6ject property,or
D. when construcuon of the improvements is deemed to be appropriate by the City Engineer in
conjunction with consuuction of unprovemenu by others adjacent to the subject site.
NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LA`YIRENCE PARTITION PAGE 3 OF 22
16. The applicant's er�ineer shall submit preliminary sight distance certification to Washington County LUT for
review and approval.
17. The applicant shall obta.in a facility permit from the Department of Land Use and Tx�ansportauon of
Washington County,to perform work v�ntlun the right-of-w�ay of SW C:edarcrest Street. This work shall include,
but is not lunited to, a concrete sidewalk to County standards, relocation of the e�sting driveway and adequate
roadway drainage. A copy shall be provided to the City Engineering Department pnor to �ssuance of a Public
FacilityImprovement(PFI) perniit Permit.
18. The applicant's plans shall be revised to extend the public sewer main along the SW Cedarcrest Street frontage
with later�als,no more than 50 feet in length,to serve Parcels 1 and 2.
19. The applicant shall obta�n a proval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection
pnor to�ssuance of the Ci�Public Facility Improvement pemut.
20. An erosion control plan shall be �rovided as part of the I'ublic Facility Improvement (I'FI) errnit drawings.
The plan shall conform to the Erosion Prevent�on and Sediment �ontrol Design and T�lanrung Manual,
Februa.ry 2003 edition."
21. The applicant's final plat shall conta.in State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the Cit�s global
po�sitionuig system(GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22) as recorded in Washington County survey records.
These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the sameprec�sion as required for the subdivision
plat-bounda.ry. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground
measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be
established by:
. GPS tie networked to the Cit�s GPS survey.
. By random trave�e using conventional surveying methods.
22. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements:
A. Submit for Caty review four (4) pap er copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to
practice in Oregon and necessary data or narrauve.
B. Attach a check in t�e amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Planning/Engineering Pemzit
Technicians,at (503) 639-4171,e�.2421).
C. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the m;,,;r„um standards set forth bythe Oregon
Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Was�on County,and bythe Cityof Tigarci.
D. The right-of-way dedication for SW C:edarcrest Street (30 feet from centerline� and SW 74th Avenue
(29 feet from centerline) shall be made on the final plat. The right-of-waydedication shall include the
re quired corner radius.
E. N(�TE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from
the Engineering Department indicaung that the City has reviewed the final plat and submitted
comments to the appIicant's surveyor.
F. After the City and C:oun have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the finalp lat for
Caty Engineer signature�for partitions), or City Engineer and Community Development I�irector
signatures (forsubdivisions).
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF SITE OR BLTILDING PERMITS:
e app cant s pre�are a cover etter an su mit it, a on wi any supportin ocuments an orp ans
that address the followin� mquirements to the CURRENT P�ANNING DIVISI�N, ATTN: EMILY ENG
503-718-2712. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found:
23. Prior to receiving a building�ernut, the applicantlowner shall record a deed.restriction to the effect that any
e�sting tree greater than 12' diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a
certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved ui
accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. The form of thLS deed
restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director.
NOTIC�,OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTITION PAGE 4 OF 22
The a plicant shall pre are a cover letter and submit it, along with any su ortin documents and/or lans
that address the }ollowin requirements to the ENGINEERING �EP�TMENT, ATTN: �M
MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, �XT 2642. The cover letter shall cleady identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
„ 24. Prior to issuance of building ermits the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a
"photomylar" copyof the recorc�d fina�plat.
25. Prior to issuance of building perniits the applicant shall provide the Caty with as-built drawings of the public
un�rovements as follows: T) 3 mi� mylar, 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" forn�at, if available;
otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable and 3) the as-built drawi.ngs shall be tied to the Cat�s GPS network. The
applicant's engineer shall provide t�ie Gry with an electronic f�le with pomts for each structure (manholes,
catch basins,water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective
X and Y State Plane Coordinates,referenced to NAD 83 (91).
26. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines alon�SW 74th Avenue unde round as a part
of this project, or theyshall paythe,fee in-lieu of undergrounduig. The fee shall be calculated�ythe frontage
of the site that is parallel to the ut�ility lines and will be $35.00 per luieal foot. If the fee option�s chosen, the
amount will be$ 3,675.00 and it shalT be paid prior to issuance of building pemuts.
27. During issuance of the building permit f or Parcels 1 2 and 3,the applicant shall pay the standard water quality
fees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest approved�yC,'WS).
28. During issuance of the building permit for Parcels 1 and 2,the applicant shall pay the standard water quantity
fees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest approved byCWS).
29. Prior to issuance of building pernlits,.the applicant's engineer shall submit to Washington County the final
certification of adequate sight distance in accordance with County Code.
30. Prior to issuance of building pernuts, the road improvements required by Washington County along
Cedarcrest Street shall be completed and accepted by Washington County.
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO A FINAL INSPECTION:
e app cant s prepare a cover etter an su nut rt, a on wi any supporting ocuments an orp ans
that address the followm� requirements to the CURRENT P�ANNING DIVISION, ATTN: EMILY ENG
503-718-2712. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found:
31. Prior to a final inspection, the ProJ'ect Arborist shall submit a final certification indicaun�the elements of the
Tree Protection Plan were followed and that all rema.ining trees on the site are healthy,stable and viable in their
modified growuig envirorunent.
32. Prior to a final inspection,a member of the plaruung staff will visit the site to ensure that the development is in
confornlance with this decision.
THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS OF THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION NOTED UNDER THE PROC�SS AND APPEAL SECTION
OF THIS DECISION.
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORNIATION
Site Information:
e su �ect parcel is located on the northwest corner of SW Cedarcrest Street and SW 74�'Avenue,both of which are
neighborhood routes. The parcel is 24,210 square feet with an e�sting single-family dwelling and accessory structure.
The area is primarily single-farruly residential and surrounding properties with�n the City.are zoned R 4.5. The west
boundary of the sub�ect parcel borders unincorp,orated Washuzgton Counry. A conservat�on easement aLso lies to the
west of.property A o 0-foot storm easement ex�sts within the property along its entire west boundary. The property
slopes a6out 4/o to 5/o westvvard.
NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTI'ITON PAGE 5 OF 22
There are no previous land use decisions related to the subject parcel. The existing dwelling was built in 1939.
P�ro os�al:.�
The applicant is requestin approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three lots of 7,519 SF, 7 505 �F and 7,550 SF
for single-family homes. �e ex�sting su�gle-family home and accessory stnicture will be demo�ished. The applicant
also requests approval of a landscapuig adjustment to use ex�sung trees as street trees.
SECTION IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Staff sent notice to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and received 1letter.
John Frewing's letter has been included in the land use file. H�s concerns are sllmmari�Pd below:
1) Overhead utility lines: Mr.Frewing argues that the app licant should place the overhead utilities underground as part
of the infrastructure work of this pro�ect. He indicates that the same ap licant has pa�rtitioned lots on the same side of
SW 74`�Avenue to the north and south of the sub ject site (MI..P2007-0�001 and MI1'2007-00005). He says that from
observation no new pole installations wo u l d be necessary an d cites t h at new po les are t he princip a l reason for waiving
the underground utility rule. Mr.Frewing-uses the Wei�ela Terrace subdivision as an e le of a nearby development
that was required to underground utiliry lines. Lasdy, he poults out that the presence o�f�ie utility lines conflicts with
the applicant's intent to retain the ex�sting trees that are under the lines, suggesting that the utiliry lines be under-
grounded for th�s reason as well.
2) Street Imp rovements: Mr. Frewing notes that the application appears to indicate street sections on SW 74`�Avenue
and SW Ceclarcrest Street that do not complywith the Cit�s standard.
3) Tree RemovaVPreservation: Mr.Frewing notes that there is some conflict with the tree plan and proposed bwlding
f ootprints.
4) Relationship to Adjoining Developments: Mr. Frewing notes that the applicant states that no sidewalk would be
necessazy on SW 74�' Avenue; however, for the previous ne�'ghbonn� partitions the applicant was requi�red to install
sidewalks that meet the Cit�s standards. He also notes that the app�icant statec�in the narrative for ML,I'2007-00005
that he would install sidevvalks that meet Citystandards on SW Cedarcrest Street,therebyproviding a basis for meeting
City standards on the County street.
RESPONSE:
1) The applicant applied for each partition (MI.P2007-00001, -00005 and-00013) at a different time. The City cannot
make reqlurements }or one�project based on past projects Just because the applicant is the same. Past pracuce shows
that partit�ons are generall not required to underground utihues because the cost of under-grounduig �s not
proportionate to the size o�development. Rather, partitions are� ge�nerally requ.ired to pay a fee-in-lieu if overhead
utilities exist. Code section 18.810.120.0 states, "The developer sha11 pay a fee in lieu of under-grounding costs when
the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing ut�ties which are not underground w�ll serve the
development and the approval authontydetem�ines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities
outweighs the benefit of undergrounc�ng in conjunction with the development. The deternunation shall be on a case-
by-case basis." The project engineer must submit an estimate to the City Engineer. of what it would cost to
underground the utility lines, sub�ect to the City Engineer°s approval. In this case, as with most paztitions, the City
cannot re quire undergrounding because the rough proportionality test will not support it. Mr Frewing cites that new
poles are the principal reason for an exception to under-grounding. However the code says that while it's a common
reason, it's not the only reason. With re ard to the three trees under the uti�ity lines, the adjustment to use them as
street trees has been denied because of �eir poor condition and unsuitable location. Therefore the trees will not be
interfering with the e�sting utility lines. Lastly, it would be difficult to compare the proposec� partition to Weigela
Terrace (SUS2003-00012),whtch�s a subdivision and was reviewed bydifferent standards.
2) The Code requires half-street improvements on SW 74`� Avenue along�the project's frontage. The pre-app notes
indicate that the following is included: 18 feet of pavement from centerline, concrete curb, storm sewers and other
unde�ground utilities, 5-}oot sidewalk with 5-foot planter strip, street trees, street signs traffic control devices,
streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. The applicant is required to construct a 5-foot sic�ewalk and to plant street
trees between the sidewalk and future curb. For the remainulg streetunprovements,the applicant is required to sign a
restrictive covenant. The previous pattitions MLI'2007-00001 and -00�05 were requ.ired the same. SW Cedarcrest
Street is a County Street, for which the applicant has been conditioned to work anth Washington County to meet
County standards.
NOTTCE OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�,PARTITTON PAGE 6 OF 22
3) Staff agrees that there is some conflict with the tree protection.plan and building footprints. The applicant has been
conditioned to revise the pernutted building footprints to be cons�stent with the tree protection plan.
4) While the applicant states and has stated in past a�pplications that no sidewalk will be provided, the ap licant is
required for this application, and has been required in rhe past to construct sidewalks because they have been�ound to
be roughlyproporuonal to the size of each development.
SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIAAND FINDINGS
Land Partitions (18.4201
Approval Criteria (18.420.050.A):
1.The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations;
The proposed partition complies or can be made to comp l�y with all statutory and ordinance requirements and
regulauons as demonstrated by the analysis contained within this admimstrative dec�sion and through the imposition of
conditions of approval. Provided all conditions of approval are satisfied as part of the development and building
process,this critenon�s met.
2.There are adequate public facilities available to serve the proposal;
Public facilities are discussed in detail later in this decision under Street & Utility Improvement Standards (Chap ter
18.810). Based on the analysis provided therein,adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal. Theretore,
this cntenon is met.
3.All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standar�ds;and
The public facilities and proposed u'np rovements are discussed in the Public Facility Concems section of this decision.
Conditions of approval will ensure tFiat all proposed improvements meet City and agency standards. Improvements
will be reviewed as part of the pemut process and dunng construction, at which time the appropnate review authority
will ensure that City and apphcable agency standards are met. Based on the analysis in th�s decision, th�s criterion �s
met.
4.All proposed lots confoirn to the specific requirements below:
(�a) The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable zoning
district
The width of the building envelope area for Parcels 1,2 and 3 is 75 feet, 73 feet and 78.2 feet respectively. Therefore,
the standard of 50 feet is exceeded.
(b) The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning district In the case of a flag lot,the accessway
may not be included in the lot area.
The lot area for Parcels 1 2 and 3 are 7,519 s quare feet, 7,505 s qua�re feet and 7,550 square feet respectively.
Therefore, all parcels meet t�e required muumum of 7,500 square feet. None of the lots are flag lots.
�c) Each lot created through the partition process shall front a public right-of-�ay by at least 15 feet or have a
egally recorded minimum 15-foot wide access easement
Parcels 1 and 2 will have 7� feet and 73 feet of frontage on SW Cedarcrest Street. Parcel3 a corner lot, will have a
combined frontage of 183.2 feet on SW Cedarcrest Street and SW 74�'Avenue. Therefore, a�l lots exceed the required
f rontage of 15 f eet.
(d) Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district
Parcels 1 and 2 meet the setback requirements of 20 feet front, 5 feet side and 15 feet rear for interior lots. Parcel3, a
corner lot,meets the setback requirement of 20 feet front,5 feet side, l5 feet street side and 15 feet rear.
NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�,PARTTTION PAGE 7 OF 22
(e) When the partitioned lot is a flag lot,the developer may deterniine the location of the front yard,provided
that no side yard is less than 10 feet Structures shall generally be located so as to maxirnize separabon from
existing structures.
None of the proposed lots will be flag lots. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
�fl A screen shall be provided along the propetty line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an accessway
is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accordance with Sections 18.745.040. Screening may also be
required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed
development
There are no proposed driveways within 10 feet of an abutting lot. Therefore,the applicant is not required to provide
screening.
(g) The fire district may re quire the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway would have
a detrimental effect on fire-�ighting capabilities.
The applicant does not propose any private accessways. All parcels will have direct access to a public street.
Therefore,th�s cntenon does not appIy.
(h) Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement which will
ensure access and rnaintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partition map.
A common drive is not proposed or required. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
5.Any access way shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705,Access,Egress and Circulation.
As shown later in this decision under"Access,Egress and Circulation(18.705)," the standards in Chapter 18.705 have
been met. �
6. Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred year floodplain, the
city shall reguire consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjouung and
witlun the fIoodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a
pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway
plan.
The proposed partition is not a_�dJ'acent to or in the one-hundred year floodpla�in. The nearest floodplain is about 1/� mile
away from the partition site. Theh�gh� est elevation of the nearest floodplain is 180 feet. The lowest elevation of the
partit�on site�s 265 feet. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
7. An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in accordance with
Chapter 18.370,Variances and Adjustments. The applications for the partition and variance(s)/adjustment(s)
will be processed concurrendy.
The applicant has requested a landscaping adjustment to use existing trees as street trees,the application for which has
been processed concurrently with this dec�sion.
FINDING: All approval criteria for the proposed partition have been met or can be met by satisfying
condiuons of approval.
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTION PAGE 8 OF 22
Residential Zoning Districts (18.510)
Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2. Below is a comparison
of the development standards and the proposed dimensions:
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS and PROPOSED DIMENSIONS
R-4.5 Pa�ell Parcel2 Pa�e13
Standaids Pro osed Pro osed Pro osed
�num L.ot Size
-Detached unit 7,500 sq.ft. 7,519 sq.ft. 7,505 sq.ft. 7,550 sq.ft
Average Muumum I.ot Width
-Detached unit lots 50 ft. 75 ft. 73 ft 782 ft.
Muumum Setbacls
-Front yard 20 f� 20 f� 20 ft. 20 ft.
-Side facing street on comer&rhrough lots 15 ft. NA NA 15 ft
-Side yard 5 ft. 5 fG 5 ft 5 ft.
-Rear yard 15 ft 15 fc. 15 ft. 15 ft.
-Distance between ro line and front of e 20 ft. 20 fG 20 ft 20 ft
Nlaximum He' ht 30 ft. G�n bet met Can be met Can be mec
FTNDING: As shown in the comparison table above, development standards have been met or can be met
during building plan review.
Access E�ress and Cir�culation(18.705)
Chapter 18.705 establishes standards and regulations for safe and efficient vehicle access and egress on a site
and}or general cimulation within the site.
General Provisions (18.705.030):
Continuing obligation of property owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in
this tide are cont�niung requirements for the use of any structure or parcel of real propetty in the City.
Access plan requirements.
No buiiding or other pernut shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and�app roved as provided by this
chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be ftilfilled. The applicant shall
submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed infornlation about this submission
requiremen�
The applicant has submitted a site plan showing how access, egress and circulation requirements will be fulfilled.
Therefore,this criterion is met.
Public street access.
All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall connect directly with
a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required
standards on a continuous basis.
Parcels 1, 2 and 3 have direct access to SW Cedarcrest Street. Parcel 3, a corner lot, also has frontage on SW 74�'
Avenue.
Curb Cuts. Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N.
The applicant is not requ.ired to install a curb.
Inadequate or hazardous access.
(1) Ap�hcations for building permits shall be referred to the Commission for review when, in the opinion of
the Ihrector, the access proposed would cause or increase e�risting hazardous traffic conditions; or would
provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles; or would in any other way cause hazardous conditions to
exist which would constitute a clear and present danger to the pubIic health,safety and general welfare.
NOTTCE.OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITTON PAGE 9 OF 22
The Director has not determined the proposed accesses would require review by the Conunission. Therefore, this
criterion does not apply.
(�2) Direct individual access to arterial or collector streets from single-family dwellings and duplex lots shall be
discouraged. Direct access to major collector or arterial streets shall be considered only if there is no practical
alternat�ve way to access the site.
SW 74�Avenue is not a collector or arterial street. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
(3 In no case shall the desi�n of the service drive or drives requ� ire or facilitate the backward movement or
o�er maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. Single-family and duplex dwellings are
exempt from tlus requirement
No service drive is proposed or required. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
Access Management
(�) An access repott shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways
and streets are safe by meeting adequate stackin needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by
ODOT,Washington County,the City and AASH�O.
The applicant's engineer, SR Design LL� submitted a preluYUnary Sight Distance Certification, dated May 15, 2007.
There are three dnveways proposed on Cedarcrest Street. The engineer states that with a posted speed of 25 mph,
wizich requires a minirnum of 230 feet of sight distance,the requirement can be met.
Washington County has jurisdiction over Cedarcrest Street up to 74th Avenue. As such,the City of Tigard has received
their comments and those comments are incorporated as art of this land use decision. The apPlicant will be required
to submit a copy of the preliminary sight distance ce�cation to WACO LUT for approval pnor to the County
permitting access to Ceciarcrest Street.
Upon completion of the required im�pro� vements,the engineer shall provide final certification of adequate sight distance
in accordance with County code. Ttvs must be reviewed and accepted by the County prior to issuance of bwlding
pernzits.
�2) Driveways shall not be pernutted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street
intersections. Influence area ot intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach
to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street inteisection shalll�e 150
feet,measured from the rig ht-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway.The
setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as detemuned from City Engineer review of a
traffic impact report submitted by the applicanYs traffic engineer. In a case where a pro�ect has less than 150
feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any opt�on for shared access witii the ad�acent pa�el. If
shared access is not possible or practical,the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible.
SW Ta�lors Ferry, a collector,is parallel to SW Cedarcrest Street and intersects with SW 74th Avenue. Cedarcrest and
SW 74 are both neighborhood routes. With all proposed driveways on Cedarcrest, it would not be possible to be in
the influence area of a collector.
As a note,SW Cedarcrest Street is a Countystreet. According to the Washington CountyDepartment of Land Use and
Tr�ar�sportation (comments dated 7/26/2007)? the p�roposed driveway on Parcel3 does not meet the driveway spacing
standard from a ne hborhood route intersecuon. The dnveway must be relocated at least 25 feet from the intersecuon
of SW Cedarcrest �treet and SW 74`� Avenue (10 feet from the point of curvature of the radius). The applicant is
conditioned to revise plans accordingly.
Minimum Access Requirements for Residential Use
�1) Vehicular access and e ress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwellin units on
individual lots and multi-farru�y residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.�and Table
18.705.2;
Table 18.705.1 states that the nununum vehicular access and egress for single-family dwelling units on individual lots
shall be one 10-foot paved drivewaywithui a 15-foot-wide access for up to 21ots. The site plan shows that each lot has
a 30 foot-wide access. The applicant's narrative states that the driveway pavement will comply with the minimum of
10 feet. Therefore,this critenon�s met.
NOTICE OF DEQSION ML,I'2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTTTION PAGE 10 OF 22
►
FINDING: Based on the findings above,the access,egress and circulation have mostlybeen met.
OONDITTON: The applicant's plans shall show the existing access for I.ot 3 to be closed and relocated to a location
at least 10 feet from the point of cluvature of the radius at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and
74th Avenue.
Density Computations (18.715)
Section 18.715.020 provides density calculation formulas. Number of dwelling units is deterniined by the
following:
A. Definition of net development area. Net development area, in acres, shall be deternuned by
subtracting the following�land area(s) from the gross acres, which is all of the land included in the
legal descnption of the property to be developed:
1. All sensitive land areas
2. All land dedicated to the public for park purposes;
3. All land dedicated forpublic rights-of-way.
4. All land proposed for private streets; and
5. A lot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an existing dwelling
is to remain on the site.
The applicant provided the following calculation for net developable area:
Gross site area: 24,210 SF
Public ROW dedication: -1,636 SF
et eve opa e area: ,
B. Calculating ma�mum number of residential units. To calculate the maxirrium number of residential
units per net acre,divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum ntunber of square
feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district
The r„aXimum number of residential units permitted is 2,as shown below:
22,574 SF/7,500 SF = 3.00 unirs =3 units
G Calcttlatin minimum ntunber of residential units. As re quired by Section 18.510.040, the minimum
number o�residential units per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the maximum number of
units deternuned in Subsecbon B above by 80% (0.8).
The m;nimum nutnber of residential units is 2,as shown below:
3.00 units x 0.8 =2.40 units =2 units
FINDING: The proposed partition complies with the density permitted by the Code.
Variances and Ad�ustrnents (18.3701
Adjustments to lan sc�p �requirements (Chapter 18J45)
a. Adjustment to use o} existing trees as street trees. By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by
Section 18.390.030, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for the use of
existing trees to meet the street tree requirements in Section 18.745.030 providing there has been no
cutting and filling around the tree durin� construction which may lead to itsloss, unress the followin can
be demonstrated: (1) The ground withm the drip-line is altered merely for drainage purposes; and�2) It
can be shown that the cut or fill will not damage the roots and will not cause the tree to die.
The applicant has applied for an adjustment to use e�sting Dou�las Fir trees (#236, 237 and 238) as street trees and
allow a meandenn sidewalk While the City Arborist concludes That construct�on of the sidewalk would not harm the
trees,Caty Staff an�the Caty Arborist agree that the proposed street trees are in poor condition and will continue to be
in poor condsuon because of the ex�sting overhead utility lines. .The condition of the trees would always be
compromised because of the need to contmuously top them to maintain the overhead utility lines. Therefore, the
adjusunent is denied for the reasons below:
NOTTCE OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTTTTON PAGE 11 OF 22
Adl'ustment for street tree requirements. By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section
18.390.030, the Director shall a rove, approve with conditions or deny a request for the adjustments to
the street tree requirements in�ection T8.745.030, based on t�e following approval criteria: (1) If the
location of a proposed tree would cause potential problems with existing uhlity lines; (2) If the tree would
cause visual clearance problems; or(3) If there is not adequate space in which to plant street trees.
The City requ.ired the applicant to provide additional evidence of the subject trees' condition. On August 8,2007, the
applicant's arborist, Terence Flanagan, climbed the northernmost tree (#236) and confirmed that the topping activity
has led to some decay. In a letter dated August 10, 2007, Mr. Flanagan stated that the side branches of the tree �ust
below the topping cut have experienced sunscald daro ge, causing the upper section of the branch's bark to die and
allow for additional decay organisms to enter the wo d of the branches. In addition, these trees, beu� cl�ose to the
electrical lines, should be considered a safety hazard for people and esp ecially for children interested in cTimbing them.
With the utiliry lines being 35-40 feet high, the trees have not been a61e to grow to their typical height of 120 feet or
higher. The lower branches have been retained to provide a screen, but also making them within reach of any�ne on
the ground wishing to climb them. Removing the lower branches to prevent climbing would severely deform the trees
as their tops have already been removed.
The City Arborist states that the existing_Douglas Fus (236� 237 and 23� can not be used to meet the street tree
requirements. The location of the trees will cause problems with e�sting u ty lines: Mitigation requirements f or these
trees will not apply because their poor condition and proximity to exisung uuhty lules makes them hazardous.
However, the ex�sting trees should be replaced with street trees that do not interfere with the existing utility lines and
will meet other requirements listed in Section 18.745.040.
Both the City and the applicant agree that, while the original intent was to save the u-ees, a better and safer option
would be to remove and replace them with street trees that will be suitable to the location.
Landscaping and Screening (18�745)
Street trees (18.745.040):
A. All development projects fronting on a public street,private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet
in length approved after the ado�ption of this tide shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the
standards in Section 18.745.040G
The applicant has applied for an adjustment to use existing trees on SW 74`�' Avenue as street trees and has indicated
those trees on the tree removal plan and gradin plan. The applicant's narrative indicates that there will be new street
trees of at least 2 caliper inches. However, t�e apphcant has not indicated any new street trees on the site plan.
Therefore, rior to final plat approval, the applicant shall rev�se the site'plan to indicate new street trees on SW
Cedarcrest �treet and SW 74�' tLvenue. Proposed driveways shall be incruded on the site plan to verify that tree
spacing standards are met. Small-stature trees are required for SW 74�'Avenue.
B. Street Tree Planting List Certain trees can severely damage utilities, streets and sidewalks or can cause
personal injury.Approval of any planting list shall be subject to review by the Director.
Street trees shall be chosen from the City's street tree list.
G Size and Spacin of Street Trees. The specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as stated in
Section 18.745.040.�2 of the code.
The revised site plan shall indicate the species of the proposed street trees. Size and spacing of street trees shall be as
stated in Code Section 18.745.040.G2.
FINDING: Based on the findings above, all Landscaping and Screening criteria are met or can be met by
satisfying conditions of approvaL
CONDITION: Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate new street trees on SW
Cedarcrest Street and SW 74th Avenue. The revised site plan shall indicate the spec�ies of the
�roposed street trees. Size and spacu� � of street trees shall be as stated in C:ode Section
8.745.040.�2. Proposed driveways shall be included on the site plan to verify that tree spacing
standards are met. -Small-stature trees are required for SW 74th Avenue. Street trees shall be
chosen from the Cit�s street tree list.
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 12 OF 22
�'
Off-Street Parkin�and Loading Requirements 18.765
Section 18.765.02 .A states that at e time o the erection of a new stn.icture within any zoning district,
offstreet vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18J65.070 (minimum and maxirrium
� parking requirements).
For single-family dwellings, one parkin space per dwelling unit is required. The applicant acknowledges thiz
requirement. In addition,compliance will�e regulated at the tune of btulding pemZits. There�ore,th�s cntenon�s met.
Section 18.765.030.5.1 states that off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-
family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwelling(s).
The applicant indicates that the parlflng spa_ces will be provided on the individual lots. In addition, compliance will be
regulated at the time of building pernuts. Therefore,th�s criterion is met.
FINDING: Based on the findings above,parking and loading requirements have met.
Tree Removal�8.7901
Tree Plan Requirements (18.790.030):
A. A tree plan for the lantin , removal and rotection of trees repared by a certified arborist shall be
provided tor any lot, pap cel og combination o�lots or parcels for wFiich a development app lication for a
subdivision,parhtion, site development review,planned development or conditional use is filed Protection is
preferred over removal wherever possible.
A tree preservation and removal plan has been prepared byTerrence Flanagan,certificate number P1�0120 BMT.
B. Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following:
1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as
significant by the city;
The tree inventory identifies the size and species of all e�cisting trees including trees over 6 caliper inches. The tree
removal plan (Sheet CZ of submitted plans) shows an inventory table and locauon of all trees. Therefore,this criterion
i�met.
2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper.
Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the following
standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping,
streets and parking lots:
(a) Retention of less than 25°/o of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in
accordance with Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees;
(b) Retention of from 25% to 50% of e}cisting trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the
trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
(c) Retention of from 50% to 75% of e�sting trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the
trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
(d) Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation.
The ap plicant has proposed to retain 9 of the 13 trees over 12 caliper inches. Of these trees,the applicant has applied
for a Iandscap ing ad�ustment to use three retained trees as street uees.and allow a meandering sidewalk As discussed
before, the three trees are m an unsuitable location under the utility lines and in poor condition as a result of to�ppin .
Staff has denied the adjustment and required the applicant to remove the trees and constn�ct a standard side�
Therefore, trees # 236, 237 and 238 have not be counted toward mitigation. The applicant w�l be retainirig 6 of 10
trees over 12 caliper inches (60%) and will mitigate for 50% of the inches removed. The applicant is removing 73
inches total and will have to mitigate 36.5 inches by.planting and/or pay�'ng a fee of $125 per cahper inch. The total
mitigation cost is $4562.50. Any plantulg on or off site shall be approved by the City Arbonst.
N�TIC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 13 OF 22
3. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed;
The tree plan does not identify all trees to be removed. The tree plan shall be revised to identify trees # 236, 237 and
238 as trees to be removed. Any tree protection measures for trees #236, 237 and 238, as well as overall mitigation
calculations,shall be revised accordingly. Trees#236,237 and 238 are not subject to mitigation.
4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect
trees during and after consttuction.
The tree plan includes a protectionprogram However,the tree protection fencing appears to overlap with part of the
pemutted building footprint for each lot. The applicant shall revise the site plan to show building footprints that do not
overlap with the tree protection fencuig.
G Subsequent tree removal. Trees removed within the period of one 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
18.790.060D.
No trees have been removed in the past year prior to this application being submitted. Therefore, this criterion does
not apply.
Subsequent Removal of a Tree(18.790.040):
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 a�pp roval for a conditional
use, and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. TFie prope�rty owner shall
record a deed restriction as a condition of aQprovaI of any development pernut affected by tliis sechon to the
effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arboris�
The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved ul accordance with this
section should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. The form of tlus deed restriction shall be subject
to approval by the Director.
A condition of approval requiruig the above shall ensure that this criterion is met.
FINDING: Tree protection has not fully been met. The applicant shall satisfythe conditions below:
CONDI'ITOIVS:
. Prior to site work,the tree plan shall be revised to identifytrees # 236, 237 and 238 as trees
to be removed. Any tree protection measures for trees #236, 237 and 238, as well as
overall mitigation calculations,shall be revised accordingly.
. Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the site plan to show building footprints that do
not overlap with the tree protection fencing.
. Prior to any site work the applicant shall install all proposed tree protection fencin as
approved by the Project.Arbonst. The fencing shall be inspected and approved by the�ty
�rborist pnor to begiruzu�ig any site work The tree protecuon fencu'�g shall remain in place
thro h the duration of allof the buildu'�g construction phases,unti�the final ins ection has
been passed. After approval from the City Arborist, the tree protection measuPi�es may be
removed.
I the Builder is di erent from the developer or initial applicant:
rior to issuance o uilding pernuts,the applicant shall subrrut site plan drawings indicating
the location of the trees that were preserved on the lot d�'n'n�site development,locauon o}
tree protection fencing, and a signature of approval from the7'roject Arborist regarding the
placement and construction tech�cugues to be emp loyed in bwlding the structures. All
proposed, protection fencin shaIl be installed and u�spected prior to begiruung
construcuon. The fencin�g s�remain ui place through the du.ration of all of the building
construction phases, until the final inspection has been passed. After approval from the
City Arborist,the tree protection measures may be removed.
NOTTCE OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITTON PAGE 14 OF 22
. The Project Arborist shall submit written reports to the City Arborist at least once
every two weeks, from initial tree protection zone ('I'PZ) fencing installation through
the building�c�onstruction phases, as he/she monitoxs the construction activities and
progress: 'I�his inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection fencing, deternzine if
the}encuig was moved at any�point during construction, and detemzine �f any part of
� the Tree I'rotection Plan has been violated. These reports must be provided to the
Caty Arborist until the final inspection. The reports shall include any changes that
occurred to the TT'Z as well as the condition and location of the tree protection
fencing..If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arborist shall�usufywhy
the fencing was moved, and shall certifythat the construction activities to the trees did
not adverselyimpact the overall,long-term health and stabilityof the tree(s).
If the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the scheduled intervals and if it
appears the 'IT'Z's or the Tree Protect�on Plan are not being followec� by the
contractor or a sub-contractor, the City can stop work on the pro�ect until the Caty
Arborist and the Project Arbonst can do an inspection.
. Prior to site work, the ap plicant shall submit security in the form of cash or other
means acceptable to the City for the equivalent value of tree mitigation required at
$125.00 per caliper inch. If additional mitigation trees are preserved throu�h the
partition unprovements and constnution of houses,and are properlyprotected through
these stages by the same measures afforded to other protected trees on srte,the amount
of the cash assi.�ruice may be correspondingl reduced. Anyuees planted on the site or
off site in accordance with 18.790.660.D �be credited against the assurance for two
years. following final plat approval. After such time the applicant shall pay the
rernauiing value of the assurance as a fee in lieu of p�anting. Any planting by the
applicant must be approved by the C�ity Arbonst.
. Prior to a final inspection,the Project Arborist will submit a final certification indicating
the elements of the Tree Protection Plan were followed and that all rema�n,ng trees on
the site are healthy,stable and viable in their modified growing environment.
. Prior to receiving a building permit,the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction
to the effect that any existing tree greater than 12" diameter may be removed only if the
tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restnction may be
removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance wrth this
decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree.
Visual Clearance Areas (18J95�
This pter requires t a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to
intersecting nght-of-ways or the inteLSection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area
shall contain no vehicIe, hedge, pl�anting fence, wall stiucture, or temporary or pernzanent obstruction
exceedin� three�3) feet in height �I'he coc�e provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall
be visua y clear etween three (3) and eight(�) feet in height Trees may be placed within this area provided
that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by
measuring from the corner, 30-teet along the right of way and along the driveway and connecting these two
points with a straight line.
FINDING: A visual clearance triangle is shown on sheet C3 of the submitted plans. Because the�roposed
development is on the northwest side of the intersection between Cedarcrest and 74 , a visual
clearance t le has been drawn at the northwest corner 30 feet along Cedarcrest and 30 feet
along 74�'.��ile this triangle meets the standard for non-arterial streets more than 24 feet in
width. the applicant has not included visual clearance triangles for each proposed driveway.
There�ore,this cntenon has not been fullymet.
CONDITION: Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall revise the site plan to show a visual clearance triangle
for eacli proposed driveway.
Im�act Study�18.390)
Sect�on 18360.090 states: "The Director shall make a finding with res�ect to each of the following criteria
when approving, approvrng with conditions or denying an application:'
NOTiC�OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 15 OF 22
Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of
development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the
study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the
development on the public at large,public facilities systems, and affected private property users.
In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the
applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or�rovide
evidence that supports that the real roperty dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts
of the develo ment Section 18.390.�40 states that when a condition of ap roval requires the transfer to the
public of an interest ui real property,the approval authority shall adopt findn gs whicFi support the conclusion
that the interest in real prope�ty to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed
development will have on tlie public.
The applicant has provided an impact studythat quantifies the effect of the proposed partition on the services below:
Sewer. The three homes will connect to the existing sewer line in SW 74`�Avenue. Each parcel will be connected with
an individual private four-inch lateral.
Water. The applicant is providing two new service meters f or Parcels 1 and 2. Parcel3 will utilize the existing meter.
Storm Draina e: Stonnwater runoff from the site drains from the north to southwestern corner of the property by
over an ow. The roof dx�ains from all dwe units will connect to the storm e system, The a hcant's�-lans
indicate improvements to the roadside ditch�along both the Cedarcrest Street an� Avenue frontages in order to
accommodate upstream drainage.
Parks: To rrutigate impacts to the Cat�s park system, the applicant will pay a parks systems development charge at the
time of building pemuts.
Trans ortation: The proposed three-parcel partition has frontage on the north side of SW Cedarcrest Street and west
side o SW 74 Avenue. All parcels will have direct access to SW Cedarcrest Street. Parcel3 will also have direct access
to SW 74`� Avenue. Tri-Met bus 43 is within 500 feet of the site, provid�n� another transportation option. With the
two additional lots and two additional single-family homes, the additionar daily traffic increase would be about 20
vehicle trips. The applicant is required to construct a sidewalk and half-street unprovements on SW Cedarcrest, a
County street. A sidewalk and half-street u'np�rovements are also re quired on SW 74`�Avenue,a City street. In addition,
the applicant wrll pay a Washington CountyTraffic Impact Fee for the two additional houses.
Miti ated Costs and Ro h Pro ortionali .
e app 'cant will pay a as � on County Traffic Impact Fee �F) at the ti.me of building permits. The TIF is a
mitigauon measure that is required for new develo�pment. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr.
David Lazson for the A Boy E�ansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61,TTF's are exp e�cted to recapture 32 percent of the
traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system The ap plicant will be regu�ired to pay
TIF's of approximately$3,020 (Effective July 1, 2004) per new dwelling tuut. Therefore, the 'ITF for tfvs proposed
development is $6,040 ($3,020 '`2 new dwelling units).
Based on the estimate that total TTF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street impr�ovements citywide, a fee
that would cover 100 percent of this project's traffic imp act is $18,875 ($6,040 =0.32). The d.�ference between the TTF
paid, and the full unpact, is considered the tuuiuu ated impact on the street system, The ururutigated impact of this
project on the uansportation system is $12,835 (�18,875 - $6,040). Calculauons for the mitigated impacts do not
ulclude nght-of-way dedicauon or unprovements on SW Cedarcrest Street because they are County extracuons. The
applicant will be required to dedicate to the Caty additional right-of-way along SW 74�' Avenue of approximately 420
square feet.The approximate value of urumproved residenti�ally zoned property�s $3.00 per square foot,for a total value
of$1,260. The �tycalculated the cost of cons full ha.lt-street unprovements along the project's portion of SW
74�' Avenue to be $20,000 at $200 per lineal foo�t(�0 feet}, which would exceed the value of the unprovements the
City could require based on ro h proportionaliry. Therefore, the app licant is required to construct a sidewalk at its
ultimate location along SW 74`��venue and plant trees between the sidewalk and future curb. The applicant may enter
into a restrictive covenant for the rest of the half-street improvements. The cost for the sidewalk is estunated at$32.50
per lineal foot for a total of $3,250. The applicant's total cost of rrutigating traffic imp acts is $4,510 ($1,260 + $3,250).
To reiterate, this estimate does not include�ounty unp rovements requu-ed on SW Cedarcrest Street. There �s $8,325
worth of tuunitigated impacts left. Based on the anaiysis below, the required right-of-way dedication and half-street
improvements do not exceed the estimated value of the unmitigated impacts.
NOTIC�,OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTTTTON PAGE 16 OF 22
�
. ,
Estimated Value of Im acts
FI�mpact... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... $18,875
Less TIF Assessment... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .6,040
- Less Miti ated Costs...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 510
� Estimate Value o Unrrutigate Impacts $ 8,325
PUBLIC FAQLITY CONCERNS
Street And Utility Imgrovements Standards (Section 18.810 :
apter 18.810 provides construction standards or the implementation of public and private facilities and
utilit�es such as streets,sewers,and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below:
Streets:
Improvements:
Sect�on 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in
accordance with the TDC standards.
Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an e�usting
street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TUC.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a Neighborhood Route with bike
lanes to have a 58 foot right-of-way width and 36-foot paved section. Other imp rovements required may
include on-street pari{ing, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street ligFiting, storm drainage, and
street trees.
T�vs site lies ad�J'a�cent to SW 74th Avenue,which is classified as a Neighborhood Route with future bicycle lanes on the
City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present,there is approximately 25 feet of ROW from centerlule,according
to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 29 feet from
centerline and the required corner radius.
SW 74th Avenue is currently_ partially improved. In order to mitigate the unpact from this development,the.applicant
should construct a sidewalk at its ultunate location and enter into a resuictive covenant for future half street
improvements.
Minimum Rights-of Way and Street V�dths: Washington County requires a Neighborhood Route (local
street) to have a 60-foot right-of-way width. Other improvements required may include on-street parking,
sidewalks and bikeways,undetground uhhties,street ligI�ting,storm drainage, and street trees.
This site lies adjacent to SW Cedarcrest Street, which is classified as a Neighborhood Route by WAGO LUT. At
present,there is approxunately 25 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The
apphcant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 30 feet f rom centerline and the requu-ed corner radius.
SW Cedarcrest Street is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the
applicant should constn�ct a concrete sidewalk and provide adequate roadway drainage along the site's Cedarcrest Street
frontage. These unprovements shall be done in accordance with Washington CountyLUT standards.
Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed
which shows the pattern of existing� and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land
division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or pemut a satisfactoYy future
division of adl'o- ining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a
barricade shall be consttucted at the end of the street These street stubs to adjoining properties are not
considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at suc-h time as the
adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property
owners wluch shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included
in the street construction cost Tem orary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be
constructed for stub streets in excess o�150 feet in length.
This development is located at the inte�section of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue. There are no oppomuuties or
need for additional streets or extensions of streets.
NO'TI� OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITION PAGE 17 OF 22
Street Ali nment and Connections:
Section 1�.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between
connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-
existing�developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrict�ons e�usbng prior to May 1
1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulatec�
water feature if regulations would not permit construction.
Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a
development site shall be extended within t�ie site to provide through circulation when not precluded by
environmental or topographical constraints, e�usting development patterns or strict adherence to other
standa�is in this code. A street connection or eactension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or
reconfi�ure the street pattern to�rovide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained
if the slope is greater than 15/o for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or
topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection
is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection.
Since this development is at the inte�section of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue there is no need to create blocks that
would be substandard in size.
Grades and Cutves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten pe�ent on arterials, 12% on
collector streets, or 12% on any other street(except that local or residential access streets may have segments
with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shaII be as
deternlined by the City Engineer.
The e�sting grades on Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue are much less than 10%.
Block Desig ns - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with
due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for
convement access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and
oppom.uiities of topography.
Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800
feet measured along the right-of-way line except
• Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wedands or other bodies of water or, pre-
e�sting development or,
• For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways,major collectors or railroads.
• For non-residential blocks in which intemal public cinculation provides equivalent access.
No new blocks are being formed or required. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average
lot width,unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district
All lots are less than 1.5 times the minisnum lot size (1.5 x 7,500 SF = 11,250 SF�. Therefore,this criterion does not
apply.
Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private
streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c ap lies,wluch requires a parrel to
either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a rrurumum 15-foot wide reco�ed access easement In cases
where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 feet
All lots have more than 15 feet of frontage required for partitions. Parcels 1, 2 and 3 have 75 feet, 73 feet and 183.2
f eet of f rontage,respectively.
Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be
located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets
shall have sidewalks on at least one side.
The applicant's plans indicate they will construct public sidewalk along the frontages of Cedaxcrest Street and 74th
Avenue,thereby meeting this critenon.
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTI'ITON PAGE 18 OF 22
Sanitary Sewers:
Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new
development and to connect developments to e�sting mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in
� Design and Construction Standards}or Sanitary and Surface Water Management(as adopted by Clean Water
Servxces in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the
comprehensive plan.
Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional
development within the area as projected by t7ie�omprehensive Plan.
The ap licant's plans indicate there is an existu�public sewer line in 74th Avenue. There is an existing sewer lateral
that�be used to pro��vide service to Parcel3. Parcels 1 and 2 shall connect with an extension of the existing public
sanitary sewer per G'W5 R&O 07-20, Section 5.09.2. The service laterals shall be in accordance with current G'WS
Design and Construction Standards. Per Section 5.09.3,the laterals shall be less than 50 feet in length. The laterals as
proposed by the applicant do not meet these standards.
Storm Drainage:
General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storrn water and
flood water runoff.
Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility
shall be lar�e enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside
or outside the development The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility based on the
pro� visions of Design and Constiuction Standards for Samtary and Surface Water Management�as adopted by
�lean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments).
The applicant's plans indicate improvements to the roadside ditch along�b�oth the Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue
f rontages in order to accommodate upstream drainage,thereby meeting this criterion.
Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer
that the additional tunoff resWti_ng from the development will overioad an exist�ng dramag e facility, the
Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for
improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff
caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and
Surface Water Management(as adopted by C1ean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or
amendments).
In 1997, C1ean Water Services (CW5) completed a basin study of Fanno Cxeek and adopted the Fanno Creek
Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that Plan includes a recommendation that local govemments institute a
stormwater detention/effective im�pervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up
to the 25-year event. The City wiIl require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces
provide onsrte detention facilities, unless the development �s located ad�acent to Fanno Creek. For those
developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff will be pernlitted to d�scharge without detention.
The runoff from this site, pre- and post-development, is,directed to the ditch along Ceciarcrest Street. Detention for
minor land partitions is not typically required and Washington County did not require it for this development. They
did� however,,require that the appl�cant provide ade uate roadway draina�e along SW Cedarcrest Street frontage (to
inc ude cleanuig, grading and shapu�l of the ditch�. The applicant's p ans must be reviewed and approved by
Washington County before a WACO�acilities Penrut will be �ssued. Th�s pernut must be issued before any Ciry of
T'igard perrruts will be issued.
Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways:
Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments ad'oinin proposed bikeways identified on
the Cit�s adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions �or the�ture extension of such bikeways
through the dedicat�on of easements or nght-of-way.
S.W. 74th Avenue is classified a bicycle facility.
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LA��/RENCE PARTTTTON PAGE 19 OF 22
Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development pernuts issued for �lanned unit
developments, conditional use pexrnits, subdivisions, and other develo�ments which will principally benefit
from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construct�on of bikeway improvements.
The applicant is required to enter into a restrictive covenant for half-street im�rovements along their 74th Avenue
frontage. These half-street unprovements will include the cost of bikeway unprovements, thereby meeting this
criterion.
Utilities:
Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication,
lighdng and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed under�ro� und, except for surface
mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above
ground,temporary utility service facilities during constcuction,high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000
volts or above,and:
• The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the
underground services;
• The �ity reserves the ri�ht to approve location of all surface mounted facilities;
• All underground utilit�es, incIuding sanitary seweis and storm drains installed in streets by the
developer,shall be constructedp rior to the surfacing of the streets;and
• Stubs for service connections sFiall be long enough to avoid disttubing the street improvements when
service connections are made.
Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-
lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing
utilities which are not underground will setve the development and the approval authority detemunes that the
cost and technical difficulty of under-groundin� the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in
conjunction with the development The detemunation shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most cornmon,
but not the only such situat�on is a short frontage development for which under- rounding would result in
the placement ot�additional poles, rather than the r+emoval of above-ground utilities�acilities. An applicant for
a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public
right-of-way from the applicanYs propetty shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding.
There are e�sting overhead utiliry lines along the frontage of SW 74th Avenue. The City is not re qu�iring
undergrounding because the cost of the undergroundin wouId not meet the rough proportionality test, especially f or
under�rounding beyond the project's frontage. If the �ee in-lieu is proposed, it �s equal to $35.00 per lineal foot of
street�rontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site u 105 lineal feet; therefore the fee would
be $3,675.00.
ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONC,ERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY
IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS:
Public Water S stem:
ere is an e�sting water main in C:edarcrest Street. Tualatin Valley Water District ('I'VWD) provides service in this
area. The applicant's plans indicate two new water meters for Parcels 1 and 2 from the main line in Cedarcrest Street.
The applicant will be required to obtain approvals and pernuts from TVWD prior to issuance of any C�ity of Tigard
pernuts.
Storm��/ater Chzality:
The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Gean Water
Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which
require the construchon of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65
percent of the phosphon.is contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff�enerated trom newly created
unpervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and
method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year.
The C.,�WS standards include a provision that would exclude small proJ�ects such as residential land partitions. It would
be impractical to�re quire an on-site water guality f acility to accommodate treatment of the stonn water f rom Parcels 1-
3. Rather, the C:� standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed
appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this application.
NOTIC:�OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTITTON PAGE 20 OF 22
f
� Gradin�and Erosion Control:
CWS Des�ign and Consttuction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and
other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development,
construct�on, gradin�, excavatin�, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS
regulations the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to
issuance o�'City perrnits.
The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan with the Public Facility Improvement (I'FI) pernut application for
review and approval.
Address Assignments: �
The City of Tigard is responsible for assi�ning addresses for parcels within the Caty of Tigard and witlun the Urban
Service Boundary(USB). An addressuig ee in the amount of$50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be
paid to the Caty pnor to f ulal plat approval.
Surve Re uirements•
The applicant's .inal p�t shall contain State Plane Coordinates AD 83�(9� 1)] on two monuments with a tie to the
Cit�s global pos�tiorung system(GPS) geodetic control network�GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line
and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plax boundary. Along with the coorciinates the plat
shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from nort�to grid
north. These coordinates can be established by:
. GPS tie networked to the Cit�s GPS survey. .
. By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
In addition, the applicant's as-built drawu�s shall be tied to the GPS network. The applicant's en�ineer shall provide
the City unth an e7ectronic file with po� ts�or each structure (manholes, catch basins,water valves,-hy�irants and other
w�ater system features) in the development, and their respecuve X and Y State Plane Coordinates, re ef renced to NAD
83 (91).
SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The Ci of Tigard En ineering Departrnent has reviewed the proposal. Full corrunents are included in the land
use file�MI.I'20D7-00013�. Fin�d�in�gs and condit�ons of approval are included in the Access, Egress and Circulation
(18.705) secuon and Streets and Uti.Lity Improvements (18.8 TO) section of this decision.
City of Tigard Building Departrnent has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it.
SECTION VII. AGENCY/OTHER SERVICE PROVIDER COMMENTS
Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation has reviewed the proposal and provided
comments for im rovements on SW Cedarcrest Street, a Countystreet. Full comments are included in the land use file
(1VII�'2007-00013� The City of Tigard Engineering Department has included Washington Count�s requirements in its
conditions of approval.
Clean Water Services (CWS) has reviewed the proposal and provided general comments and comments related to
sanitary sewer, storm drainage and water uality and erosion control. FuIl comments are included in.the land use file
(MI,I'2007-00013). The City of Tigard �ngineering Department has included CWS comments in its conditions of
approval.
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed the proposal and provided the comments regarding fire apparatus
access road width and vertical clearance, re uired fire flow for single-famil dwellin s and access and fire fi htin
water supply durin construction. Full com�menrs are included in the land use file (�ILP2007-00013). The �ty o�
Tigard Engmeeruig�epartment has included T�1F&R requirements in the conditions of approval.
Qwest has reviewed the proposal and notes that it has aerial facilities in the area,but has no objections to the partition.
NOTTCE OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 21 OF 22
Comcast Cable has reviewed the proposal and has no objections.
SE CTION VIII. PROCE DURE AND APPE AL INFORMATION
Notice: Notice was mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owner of record within the required distance
X Affected government agencies
Final Decision:
THIS DEQSION IS FINAL ON AUGUST 17,2007 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 1,2007 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
��eal:
iT�' e D'u�ector's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise
a dverse ly a f fecte d or aggrieve d by t he decision as provi de d in Section 1 8.3 9 0.0 4 0.G.1. may appe a l t h i s d ecision in
accordance with Section 18.390A40.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written
ap eal to,gether with the re�quired fee shall be filed with the Director withui ten (10) business days of the date the Notice
o}�ecision was mailed. The ap�eal fee schedule and fom�s are a�ailable from the Plaruiing Division of T'igard City
Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,�I"igard,Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant,the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the
specific issues ident�fied in the written comments subnutted by the parties during the comment period. Additional
evidence concerning issues_Qroperly ra.ised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party dunng the appeal
hearing,subject to any addit�onal rules of procedure that may be adopted f rom time to tune by the appelIate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 31,2007.
stions•
If y�u have any questions, please call the Caty of 'T�igard Ciurent Plamling Division, Tigard Ciry Hall, 13125 SW Hall
Boulevard,T'igard,Oregon at (503) 639-4171.
August 17,2007
P Eng DATE
Assistant Planner
• August 17.2007
REVIEWED BY: Richard Bewersdo f DATE
Planning Manager
NOTTCE OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 22 OF 22
- -- — —� ----.— - • ' ,
i GEOGRAPHIC INFORMAtiUN SvS�FM
a I' VICINITY MAP
_
^ SW GNASE LN a
�
� MLP2007-00013
' Rp O VAR2007-00021
�� _� __________
. 0 , PA�ti'�NO�
. U O �
d
�
�
�� Tq yC =
ST ��S ���
, LEGEND:
� svsJECr
i � CT - � SITE
, ; ,
�" HtiF
ST CEDA ST' ---- - -- a R� - -=
�� SG�ci FE�y j . ��`�t
� _',���/� �' _
Q � _ •,
K�t,_� `�.
_ '���ih�YaT��e Qr . � rtn
^ _. '��—r-� - ; �
� . � � � � _fREEf AENO RO`� p� Rp
� . • �
S� Tgard Area Map � /
. __
N
EL T �N o eo ,6o Z,a 3zo 40o Feet
LOLA
1'=307 feet
R
_
� • � �
BARBARA I
Iniomwtion on this map is for general location only and
should be verified with the�evebpment Services Division. �
13725 SW Hall BNd
Tigard,OR 97223
(503)639-4171
httpJhvww.ci.tigard.or.us
Community Development Plot date:Jul 12,2007;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR
I
� � 1
I . � .
a
�' i ' I I\��,� ��l��w
i
'__'__"__'_' I I I F�� ��� `3
. '__'___'�"_�"�_'�___'_—_'_�J is;. -°
� I " '—"—"'— —{I I I � - B�b ���
m•,_,:,�' � $�� �
; � I I ' I '° � ��
I I � lom� I � I I �
� � I I � ; ��� �
� "LAWRENCEI PARTITION" I �_g\�=,,?
� I ' � I I ` ���
� � II � e �
l � ' � �
W � _ � � �
Z r�iaoT_'- sxnt �ad- r
,
'T -- � � �
` O , f _ ___—_�_�_____ —�� __�__�T i .
I � I
Q�f , i r __ � � � T_L_3700_w'10��0„ � '
�r mc
� � ' � I I I � �� � � I ' � F .
� � umar i
W I � lil �j � � � i � ' I �a � �i
� � I � � ' I ' g �� 3
( �i� I PARCEL 1 I� I PARCEL 2 �
O I�) I PARCEL 3 I � � �� I � �� �
V � 7,519 Sf � � 7,505 SF � � 7,550 SF r i f �F �
LOT 11 � I
-
I "BOULEVARD HEIGHTS" I I .,d� � �� I I �r � i � �I I � 6� � A �
� �----- -� �------- J �------J 1 � � �
• ------- '
I � �- ------- ---�--------------- ' °��
;--r-�`------- '
I� �� �
N ��_�__-_�------�p�-- � I
-------------- -----�---=-`--=-_=-_- ----- �
' Ii
��r.�. �..�R^' ------- I
—-—-—-—-—- -— ---8W C�ARCREBT STREE7 i �
— —-—�
�
I �
�
g
g
G� c
�a �
. . � �o�re , s�,aro�'
' DE9CNEDi A NCIAM
' . DI44/FD1� S INPfA
pEfJtm�
- � . srtrr nne
� . PRELM.UYOUT
. � . 5r¢r wnBW
C3
_..
Y �
NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION
, „
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2007-00013 =,;G���
�l.��
LAWRENCE PARTITION ` �' ���
a ;���,
120 DAYS = 10/19/2007
SECTION I. APPLICATION SLTMMARY
FILE NAME: LAWRENCE PARTITION
CASE NOS: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2007-00013
Adjustment (VAR) VAR2007-00021
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three lots of 7,519 SF,
7,505 SF and 7,550 SF for single�-family homes. The ex�sting single-farnilyhome and accessory
structure will be demolished. The applicant also requesrs an adjustment to the landscaping
standards (VAR2007-00021)to use ex�stuig trees as street trees.
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER Lawrence Resources,Inc. REP: SRDesign,LLC
Attn:Bob Lawrence Attn:Jeff Caines
6770 SW Alfred Street 8196 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97008
Z4NING
DE SIGNATION: R 4.5: Low Density Residential. The R 4.5 zoning dastrict is designed to accommodate
detached single-fanvlyhomes with or without accessoryresidential units at a tnixunium lot size
of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-familyunits are perniitted conditionally.
Some civic and institutional uses are also pernutted conditionally.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street;Washington CountyTax Map 1S125CA,Tax Lot 3700.
PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 7,519 Square Feet
PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 7,505 Square Feet
PROPOSED PARCEL 3: 7,550 Square Feet
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: CommunityDevelopment Code Chapters: 18370, 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715,
18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
SE CTI ON II. DE CISION
Notice is hereby given that the City of 7"igard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the
above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at
City Hall.
THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS
FROM THE EFFEC'I'IVE DATE OF THIS DEQSION.
All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection.at no cost or copies can be
obtained for twent�five cents (25C) per page,or the current rate charged for copies at the tune of the request.
SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION
Notice•
Notice mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owrier of record within the required distance
X Affected government agencies
Final Decision:
THIS DE CISION IS FINAL ON AUGUST 17, 2007 AND BE COME S
EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2007 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
pA� Dea� l-:
The D-irector's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise
adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as�provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in
accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code wluch provides that a
written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director wrthin ten�10) business days of the
date the Tiotice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forn�s are av able from the Planning
Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard,Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the
specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional
evidence concerning issues properly ra.ised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrntted by any party during the appeal
hearing,subject to anyaddrtional rules of procedure that maybe adopted from time to tune bythe appelTate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 31, 2007.
estions:
For urt er information lease contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Emil En at (503) 639-4171, Tigard
City Hall, 13125 SW Hall�oulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223 or by email to emily�ga -or.gov.
� vic► .,.,.....,....,...
� N1T1"MAP
e
� titLr�rx�--000i3
� �O v_�x?orr,-oou�i
� L�INRENCE
P.jRTITTON
T,q
57 n�4s �p.P
LEGEND
SUBJSCI'
� S�
ST %�
� ,�3'��.
r°q ^�"�--�Q.�,"�.
h '.
� ��,� ':,�}'v�
:: i
� '�
��'�
5T ".�
N
N �
�
��1 • �.."�.,.A
f ' -a
. . ._.._' __�_ . I .. . ..'�..�
.__.` ._.�..�.�.__. I .' � "'I
� .� �,� 1'�L�
I i � ,,
� . I � 1AM11ENt[PM111qN� I Q���
I I
� ���'� ' � ,
� ,
- ----- 's-;°°--
< �j;----- -,� �
� I ;;; �!-I I � �` �I�
i FAitCF1 I I�I PMCEI 2 1�I 7ANCR 7 � ��
I.NI s I 1 �,�! � � 1.Sf0■ ' `�`
LOT fl �1 i - � {�7
'BWIFVMD HFIONTY "'��j ��� � � . . .. p �
_____ �IL______ �I�______� �
-------- _�`:_-_-_�--�-�_------_---- � �
--------='�"-� ---------��,_ i
- i
9�
�
�-
�
NOTI�TO MORTGAC�E,LIENHOLDER,VENDOR OR SELLER
'I�-� TIGARD DEVELOPMENT �DE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU REC�IVE T�-IIS NOTIC�, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY
FORWARDED TO THE PURC�-�ASER
NOTICE OF PENDING ,,
LAND USE APPLICATION :
MINOR LAND PARTITION . , ,
DATE OF NOTICE: July 12, 2007
FILE NOS.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2007-000013
��us�N'r' (v�z) 200�-0002i
FILE TITLE: LAWRENCE PARTITION
APPLIC'.ANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER Bob Lawrence REPRESENTATIVE: Jeff Caines
6770 SW Alfred Street SRDesign,LLC
T'igard,OR 97223 8196 SW Hall Blvd.
Beaverton, OR 97008
REQLJEST: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three (3) lots of 7,519 SF,
7,505 SF and 7,550 SF for single-family homes. The existing single-family home and accessory
structure will be demolished. The applicant aLso requests approval of to use existing trees as street
trees by means of a landscaping Adjustment.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street;Washington CountyTa�c Map 1S125CA,T�Lot 3700.
ZONE: R 4.5: Low Densi Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached
single- 'y omes wit or without accessory residential uruts at a minirnum lot size of 7,500 square
feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are pernutted conditionally. Some civic and
institutional uses are also pernutted conditionally.
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725,
18.745, 18.765, 18.7g0, 18.795 and 18.810.
YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS:
Prior to the Ciry making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written
comments on the application to the Ciry. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON JLJL;Y 26, 2007.
All commenu should be directed to Emily Eng, Assistant Planner(x2712) in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW
Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at 503-639-4171 or by e-mail to
emil tigard-or.�ov.
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CIT'Y OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE
DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION-
MAKING PROCE SS
TI� QTY OF TIGARD APPREQATES REC�IVING COMIVIENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMNIEN7'S WILL
BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN T�-� NOTICE OF DEQSION. A DEQSION ON T�IIS ISSUE IS
TENTATTVELY SCI-�DLJI,ED FC�R AUGUST 13, 2007. IF YOU PROVIDE COIvIIv1ENTS,YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY
OF THE FULL DEQSION ONC� IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMiv1ENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF
7T-� PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN'THE FOLLOWING INFORMATTON:
1
• Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be
applicable to this proposal;
♦ Raise anyissues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the Cityto provide a response;
♦ Commenu that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with �
sufficient specificityon that issue.
FAILURE OF ANY PARTY TO ADDRESS '1'�� RELEVAN'I'APPROVAL CRITERIA WITH SUFFIQENT SPEQFIQTY
MAY PREQ.UDE SUBSEQUEN'T APPEALS TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS OR QRCCTIT COURT ON
THAT ISSLIE. SPEQFIC FINDINGS DIRECTED AT TT� ftELEVANT APPROVAL C�ITERIA ARE WHAT
CONSTITUI'E RELEVANI'EVIDENCE.
AFTER THE 14-DAY CONIlvIENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALI. ISSUE A TrPE II ADMII�TISTRATIVE DEQSION. 'I�
DIRECTOR'S DEQSION SHALL BE MAILED TO Tf-�APPLICANI'AND TO OWNERS OF REOORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500
FEET OF T�IIE SUBJEGT SITE,AND TO ANYONE EISE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMIv1ENTS OR WHO IS 01'HERWISE ENTITLED TO
NOTTCE. 'I�DIRECTOR'S DEQSION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF'IT�E RELEVAN'I'APPROVAL QZITERIA. BASED UPON TI�C�tITERIA
AND'I�FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN'IT�REOORD,TfIE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE,APPROVE WITH GONDITIONS OR DENY Tf�
REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACITON.
SLJMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAHING PROCESS:
• The application is accepted bythe City
• Noace is sent to property owners of record within S00 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14day written
comment period.
• The application is reviewed by Gty Staff and affected agencies.
• CityStaff issues a written decision.
• Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record
of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any Cit�recognized
neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an
intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or any�ne who is otherwise
entitled to such notice.
INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW:
The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to n�ke this decision are contained
within the record and are available for public review at the Caty of Tigard Community Development Department. If you want to
inspect the file,please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the plaruiing technicians. Copies of these items may
be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be
directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written
Comments."
.........................
� � VICINITl hf:1P
e
� \ILP3(�--00013
qp o,�O �'_�R:'00_00021
�0 L_�\GRENCE
P_�RTTTION
Tq
Sf ��S f�p�
LEGEND:
SUBJECT
S11'H
sT , 7`'
� r--����`I
2 yr r�-n
� �._�"l.e _t.-'.__
� � _'�f7 ' � ,s
Y � F
5T r,�;,�;
.
�
T N .
. q� �Iltlllllr
nM � •. t. . ,�meq�cuu
� �.
RE QUE ST FOR COMME NTS ��
-
DATE: Tuly 13,2007 , � �
TO: PER ATTACHED
FROM: Cit�of Tigard Planning Division
STAFF GONTACT: EmilvEng,Assistant Planner(x2712�
Phone: (503) 639-4171 F�: (503) 624-3681 Email:emily�t��ard-or.gov
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2007-00013/ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2007-00021
- LAWRE NCE PARTITION -
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approva to�artition one 24,209-SF lot into three 3 lots o 7,519 SF, 7,505 SF
and 7,550 SF for single-family homes. The existu-ig suigle-family home and accessory structure will be demolished. The
applicant also requests approval of to use e�stuig trees as street trees by means of a landscaping Adjustment.
LOC.ATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street; Washington County Tax Map 1S125CA, Tax Lot 3700. ZONE: R 4.5: Low
Density Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is des�gned to accommodate detached single-farruly homes with or without
accessory residential units at a ininunum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-faxnily units are
permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pemutted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW
CRITERIA: Commuruty Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745,
18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Ap licant's Materials for your review. From inforn�ation supplied by
various departments and ag�encies and from other�ornzation available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the pro osal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: �LJLY 27 2007. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate etter to return your comments. I u are una e tb�o r�ond b the above date, please phone the staff contact
noted above with y�ur comments and co irmy�ur comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions,
contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, T"igard,OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
_ We�iave reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
Please contact of our office.
Please ref er to the enclosed letter or email.
_ Written comments provided below:
Name&Number of Person Conunenting:
�� . �- ' Y OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR -'1MMENTS
NOTIFICATIUN LIST FOR & COMMUNITY DE, _JPMENT APPLICATIONS
FILE NOS.: FILE NAME: d-L -- �bD � � �'���
CITY OFfICES
LONG RANGE PLANNINGlRon Bunch,Planning Mgr. CURRENT PLANNING/Todd Prager/Arborist POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer
BUILDING DIVISION/Mark(residential)Brian(commercial) ENGINEERING DEPT./Kim McMillan,Dvipmnt.Review Engineer _HEARINGS OFFICER(+2 sets)
ADMINISTRAfiIONlCathy Wheatley,City Recorder PUBLIC WOR�ob Murchison,Project Engineer PLANNING COMMISSIONIGRETCHEN(+�y sets)
COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT.1PIanning-Engineering Techs. PUBLIC WORKS15teve Martin,Parks Supervisor _FILEIREFERENCE(+2 sets)
_CODE ENFORCEMENT/Christine Darnell,Code Compliance Specialist(DCA)
SPECIALDISTRICTS
�C TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.►� � ESCUE�► ICT�► CLEAN WATER SERVICES�
Planning Manager i d in ra ive ice arvin piering �Ffogram
15707 SW Walker Road John K.Dalby,Deputy Fire Marshall PO Box 745 155 N.First Avenue
Beaverton,OR 97006 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124
Beaverton,OR 97005-1152
LOCAL AND STATE IURISDICTIONS
CITY OF BEAVERTON � CITY OF TUALATIN� OR.DEPT.OF FISH 8 WILDLIFE OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS
_ Planning Manager Planning Manager Devin Simmons,Habitat Biologist MBIIfld2 WDOd(WLUN Form Raquirad)
_ Steven Sparks,Dev s��s Ma�a9e� 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue North Willamette Watershed District 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100
PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road Salem,OR 97301-1279
Beaverton,OR 97076 Portland,OR 97231
_ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM.
METRO-LAND USE 8 PLANNING � OR.DEPT.OF GEO.8 MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE
_ CITY OF DURHA�A � 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380
City Manager Portland.OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232
17160 SW Upper Boones Fry.Rd. _ Joanna Mensher,DaiaResourcaCenler(ZCA) US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG.
Durham,OR 97224 _ Paulette Allen,GrowthManagernentCaordinata OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.B DVLP. Kathryn Harris�M,P.acws�.n.�o��Y�
_ Mel Huie,GreenspacesCoordinatw(CPNZOA) M8f8 VII02(Canp.PlanAmenOments&Measure37) Routing CENWP-OP-G
CITY OF KING CITY+If _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,Ragbnal Planner(Wetlantls) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946
City Manager _ C.D.Manager,GraMhManagementServices Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946
15300 SW 116th Avenue
King City,OR 97224 GTQN COUNTY�
OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY IPOwe��mes i�n�eal OR.DEPT OF AVIATION�Monopo�e Towers) ept.of Land Use&Transp.
Bonneville Power Administration TOm Highl2nd,P�a��i�g 155 N.First Avenue
_CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO� Routing 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�,�.a�ncvsa
Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _Planning Division�zcn>MS,a
_ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALI7Y(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 � Brent Curtis ican�
CITY OF PORTLAND (NOUtytw WetlanES ana Potemial Emironmemai Impacts) Development Review Coordinator poria Mateja czcn�Ms,a
Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section�v��KK,s� _Sr.Cartographer,cPazcA�MS„
1900 SW 4'"Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,s�rve��,z�A,M5,5
Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037
OR.PARKS 8 REC.DEPT.
WA.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A� _ODOT,RAIL UIVISION STATE HISTORIC
DaveAustin�wccca�°9�r•c«�,o�.ro.,.�.i S2fT1HUf121dI,ASSistanlDistr�clManager (NotifyifODOTRIR-Hwy.CrossinpisOnlyACCesstoLand) PRESERVATIONOFFICE
PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road Dave Lanning,Sc Gossing Safety Specialist (Noti(y If Property Has HD W�day)
Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221 555-13'"Street,NE,Suite 3 725 Sumner Street NE,Suite C
Salem.OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301
UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES rte.d_ � r
� PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Buriington Northem/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor)
Bruce Carswell,President&General Manager
1200 Howard Drive SE
Albany,OR 97322-3336
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS :OMCAST CABLE CORP. �TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT.
Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmert�,�e•a��o�so��Y� Gerald Backhaus,s�M�o�«A�ea���n, (IfPrqedisWl�hln'/.MileofaTransitROUte)
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
�L PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC �NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY �VERIZON (MC030533) �QWEST COMMUNICATIONS
Ken Gutierrez,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. Brandon Kahler,Engineering Lynn Smith,Eng.ROW Mgr.
9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue 20575 Vonnewmann Dr.,Suite 150 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110
Wilsonvitle,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97075-1100 Portland,OR 97219
TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J _BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 ACAST CABLE CORP. �COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC.
Teri Brady,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist,Demographics r+iex Silantiev ,s��ow,�a�,�c, Brian Every��osEo����.MO���
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
IF INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL
CITY PROJECTS (Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify�. h:lpatty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED: 6-1un-07)
(Also updale:i:\wrpin\setup\labels\annexations\annexation_utilities and franchises.doc,mailing labels 8 auto text when updating this documei
. . ��,,,`,,.e-d_. '( ' ���o� - �+cc-
RE QUE ST FOR COMME NTS ��
-
DATE: Ju1�13 2007 . . �
TO: Mark Vandomelen,Plans Examination Su�ervisor
FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division
STAFF CONTACT: Emil�Eng,Assistant Planner(x2712�
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 624-3681 Emai.l:einil tigard-or.gov
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2007-00013/ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2007-00021
- LAWRENCE PARTITION -
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approva to�artition one 24,209-SF lot into t ee 3 ots o 7,519 SF, 7,505 SF
and 7,550 SF for single-family homes. The existu�g sulgle-family home and accessory structure will be demolished. The
applicant also requests approval of to use e�stu7g trees as street trees by means of a landscaping Adjustment.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street; Washington County T� Map 1S125CA, Tax Lot 3700. ZONE: R 4.5: Low
Density Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without
accessory residential units at a m;n;mtun lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family uriits are
pexmitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pernutted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW
CRITERIA: Commuruty Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745,
18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Ap licant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by
various departments and ag�encies and from other �ornzation 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 conunent on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: TULY 27 2007. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate letter to return your comments. I u are una e tb�o r�ond b the above date, please phone the staff contact
noted above with your comments and co umyour comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions,
contact the Tigard Plaruiuig Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,T"igard,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 or email.
_ Written comments provided below:
Name&Number of Person Corrunenting:
S
Emily Eng - Received the Lawrence Partition- This area belongs to Quest. Page 1
From: <john.cousineau@verizon.com>
To: <EMILY@TIGARD-OR.GOV>
Date: 7/19/2007 8:19:29 AM
Subject: Received the Lawrence Partition-This area belongs to Quest.
John R. Cousineau
Network Engineer
OSP Network Engineering and Planning
Verizon Communications
Office - 503.643.0371
Fax -503.643.0977
john.cousineau@verizon.com
Emily Eng - Re: Received the Lawrence Partition-This area belongs to Quest. Page 1 �
From: <john.cousineau@verizon.com>
To: "Emily Eng" <Emily@tigard-or.gov>
Date: 7/19/2007 2:21:13 PM
Subject: Re: Received the Lawrence Partition-This area belongs to Quest.
The whole map 1 S 1 W 25CA is in Quest franchise.
John R. Cousineau
Network Engineer
OSP Network Engineering and Planning
Verizon Communications
Office-503.643.0371
Fax - 503.643.0977
john.cousineau@verizon.com
"Emily Eng"
<Emily@tigard-or.
gov> To
John R.
07/19/2007 01:54 Cousineau/EMPL/ORNerizon@VZNotes
PM cc
Subject
Re: Received the Lawrence
Partition-This area belongs to
Quest.
Which area related to the site (7407 SW Cedarcrest Street) belongs to
Quest?
Thanks,
Emily
-------------------------------------------------------------
Emily Eng
Assistant Planner
City of Tigard Community Development
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
www.ci.tigard.or.us
T: (503) 718-2712
F: (501) 598-1960
" � JUL, 24, 2007 1 : 01 PM N0. 585 P, 1
� 2Y0 NW Yr+O nv6NUf
� I pppZ��Na,oa97209
F A C S I M I L E � NW Natural TeL 509.226.4211
Nw..nv�.l�r�l,co�
COV�R LETTER
Date: July 24, 2007
TQ� Emi1y Eng, Assistant Planner
Company: City of Tiga�d
�ax#: 503-624-3681 Telephone#: 503-G39-4171
# of��ges: 2 Including this cover letter
F�om: Ryan 7ruair
�ax#: 503-721-2523 7efephone#: 503-226-4211 x.3047
E-Mail: r�t@nwnatural.com
Subject: Winco Foods Expansion
� Urgent [� For Review � Please Comment � Please Reply
�� NW Natural0 ��ooswTEroNaVENUE
TUALATIN.OR 97U62
rE` 503.226.4211
i � eKT ar�i
Ryan Truair F^x 503.T21.2523
aREa eNCiNEER
SOUTH GENTER C�ll�503.708,269p
rya�.�rua irOnwnatural.com
, -._...'-..--'-'----'-"-'.-'-.--_.— ..--"-'._... . _L.._._�.._...�.,.. .,.,._....---.�
8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd.
Portland,Oregon 97219
R
QWe St3
RECEIVED PLANNING Spirit of servrce'M
July 20, 200� JUL 2 3 2007
CITY OF TIGARD
Emily Eng
City of Tigard Planning Division
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Re: Lawrence Partition
Dear Ms. Eng:
In response to your Minor Land Partition notice dated July 13, 2007, I have reviewed these areas
with our engineer and determined that Qwest currently has only aerial facilities in this area;
therefore, we have no objection to the proposed land partition.
If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at 503-242-6376. Thank you for the
opportunity to respond on this proposal.
Sincerely,
QWEST CORPORATION
�
Lynn M Smith
Manager, Right-of-Way
Oregon
� . � . .. � ♦
� �������� ��#
Ms Emily Eng, Planning Division �� � luly 23, 2007
City of Tigard ' e� �►
,_. �� J 2O';17
13125 S W Hall Blvd
Tigard, OR 97223 ' :: � �'�'��"�:^��t�
Dear Emily,
This letter contains my comments on a pending land use application, MLP 2007-00013,
`Lawrence Partition', located at the northwest corner of SW 74th and Cedarcrest. Hopefully you
will see that the thrust of all my comments is that this development(and all developments)
should result in the best possible result for Tigard—that is,a development consistent with the
values found in Tigard visioning documents, goals and policies found in our comp plan(both old
and new) and regulations which both require some minimum conditions but also give Tigard
staff flexibility in demanding certain urban features for such developments.
If, before you act on this application, you need clarification of my comments, please feel free to
call me at 503-245-5760. During this same review period, I would also be glad to meet with the
developer, Mr Lawrence and/or Jeff Caines, and you to discuss solutions to the issues I raise in
these comments.
1 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. Utilities include not only sewer and water, but also natural
gas, p�wer and telecommunications facilities. The application at page 66 notes that `the
applicant ....will make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the
underground services.' However,the applicant later claims he `may' pay a fee inlieu for
overhead power lines.
I think that the pre-app Engineering Department notes at page 3 of 6 misstate the Tigard code
when it is stated that `at the election of the developer', an inlieu fee can be paid rather than
actually place utilities underground. The code at 18.810.120 does offer some specific
exemptions from undergrounding, but they are well defined,narrow in scope and not `at the
election of the developer'. The utilities along SW 74`}'and along Cedarcrest should be placed
underground as part of the infrastructure work for this project since there are no severe
topographic or soil constraints which would result in undue costs at this site. Further, since the
applicant does not claim any exemption for the existing overhead telecommunication lines, a
utilty ditch will be provided along SW 74th. Power lines should be included in that utility ditch.
My argument for undergrounding is strengthened by the fact that this same developer has
partitions and development of lots already recently approved on the same side of SW 74�'both
north and south of the site under 00013. A total of some 400 feet along SW 74�' is involved. In
MLP 2007-00005, the developer proposes to authorize three houses, one of which fronts on SW
74`�', with overhead utilities presently existing along that frontage. In MLP 2007-00001,the
developer proposes to authorize two houses, both of which front on SW 74`h, with overhead
utilities presently existing along that frontage (one of these lots is a flag lot with a very limited
frontage on SW 74th). Looking at the location of the poles for these overhead utilities, there is a
pole at the southern end and the northern end of these three developments, so no new pole
installations would be involved in undergrounding the utilities for 00001, 00005 and 00013
combined. New pole locations are cited in the code as the principal reason for waiving the
underground utility rule.
, � +
Other development along SW 74�' in Tigard (Weigela Terrace)to the south several blocks has
been required to provide underground utilities; a similar requirement should be firmly applied
here.
The proposal to save several trees along the lot fronting on SW 74�'has a major shortcoming in
that even if these trees are saved, they will require major pruning to avoid the overhead utilities.
If the trees are not pruned severely,they will interfere with the overhead utilities; if the trees are
pruned severely,they will not be allowed to mature. Placin�the utilities underground avoids
such problems. The combination of retaining these trees and continuing to use overhead utilities
does not meet the criterion for landscaping adjustments noted in the code at 18.730. Excavation
is already required along the SW 74�'frontage for other utilities; undergrounding of the present
power and telecommunications lines should be accomplished at the same time.
2 STREET SECTIONS WITH PAVEMENT CURBS PLANTER STRIPS AND
SIDEWALKS. The application appears to offer a street section along SW 74 which does not
provide a gutter and curb as called for in Tigard street standards, and along Cedarcrest, proposes
no curb, a swale and then a floating sidewalk—this design does not meet city standards. My
comment is that all of the street sections in Tigard should meet Tigard street standards.
Along SW 74�',the application proposes to alter the sidewalk placement so as to preserve several
existing trees as street trees; I applaud the developer for this intent to save existing trees. But
apart from this special relocation of the sidewalk,there appears to be no curb and associated
planter strip as required by Tigard standazds. The intent to save trees is wonderful, but the facts
are that these three trees (236,237, 238) are not the trees that should be saved. The tree plan and
its Tree Inventory, (Appendix 2) shows that these three trees are in poor condition,poor structure
and have been topped. These Douglas Fir trees are located immediately beneath existing
overhead utilities. The minimal radius for tree protection around these trees is 13 feet,which
extends so faz as into the paved section of SW 74`�.
The pre app conference notes from Engineering (page 1 of 6)notes that along SW 74�', a
concrete curb is required, contrary to the application drawing(Sheet C4). The solution I
envision for the SW 74`"frontage is to move the sidewalk to the west side of the existing trees
(placing it in the 10-foot pedestrian access easement), leaving the trees in a planter strip and then
providing a curb and this planter strip along all of the frontage of SW 74th. SW 74`�' is an
important street for pedestrian access north to Taylor's Ferry Road. It is the only connection for
much of Northeast Tigard to Taylor's Ferry Road. The closest thru connections to Taylor's
Ferry Road are at SW 62"d in Portland and SW 80�' in unincorporated Washington County.
Recent development along SW 74`�to the south will increase the need for safe and convenient
pedestrian access on the frontage of this proposed development. Developments along SW 74�' to
the south have been required to provide street and sidewalk sections which meet Tigard
standards. See attached photo.
Along Cedarcrest, a `roadside ditch' is proposed. This simply does not meet Tigard standards.
The pre app conference notes from Engineering (page 2 of 6)notes that at least a concrete curb is
required, as well as some unspecified `other'. As a reviewer, I don't know what this `other'
requirement is and can't therefore comment on it. The application has conflicting statements in
it(see page 14 for example), saying both that the design of the partition shows a floating
sidewalk along both Cedarcrest and 74�', and in the next sentence saying that all improvements
� � '
� will be designed and constructed to both County and City standards. City standards appear in the
code at 18.810 and call for a 5-foot planter strip with very narrow exceptions which do not occur
here. New development in Tigard to the south on SW 74�'have required 5-foot planter strips.
Along both 74�'and Cedarcrest,there are large portions without ANY sidewalks, but it is a
developing area and should be developed to meet Tigard's urban standards. To the west on
Cedarcrest,(in unincorporated Washington County)there aze developments, some of which have
curbs and planter sh-ips and others which have no curbs, with swales and a floating sidewalk.
See attached photo. This development is within the city limits and city standards should apply.
The application in addressing street improvements states clearly (see page 48)that the design of
both Cedarcrest and 74`�will `meet the standards of this chapter', referring to the city code,
chapter 18.810. The design drawings show that this is not so, by comparing such drawings with
standard street specifications adopted by the City Engineer pursuant to code 18.810.020.B.
The application, in addressing sidewalks says{page 60) that sidewalks will be installed along
74�' `that meet the City standards'. That is not the case as shown in the sections on applicant
drawing C4. This same portion of the application says that on Cedarcrest, sidewalks `will match
existing sidewalks to the west', but does not specify what portion of sidewalks to the west will be
matched. This is important, since, as noted above,there are different design standards for
sidewalks to the west(which, incidentally, are not in the city,therefore not relevant for
comparison).
3 PRESERVATION OF TREES TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. The Tigard code at
18.360.090 requires that trees be preserved to the extent possible. There is no demonstration of
this being met in the application. In fact, there is no information on the proposed housing
footprints that would allow any such determination to be made. The only information provided is
the information on required lot line setbacks for housing construction,which is quite different
than actual proposed housing footprints. Please demand from the developer housing footprints
(including the extent of impervious walkways,driveways or patios and including alternate
designs and locations)so that you,representing the City of Tigard,can make the judgment of
`extent possible'. The Tree Plan says that the trees which are to be removed include#306, 307
and 1091, "which are located in or close to the footprints of the proposed new construction", so
apparently the developer does have some footprints, but which are not part of the application,
and the azborist indicates that some slight adjustment of building footprint may result in saving
these trees.
The drawings accompanying the application contain conflicting information that should be
resolved before approval. Drawing C4 shows tree protection fencing around two trees in the
northwest portion of Parcel 1, yet the protected trees are shown as `existing trees to be removed'.
Please resolve this conflict in favor of protecting and preserving these two trees.
4 RELATION TO ADJOINING DEVELOPMENTS. Please note that the above comments
are made in the context of the two in-progress developments by the same developer immediately
north and south of MLP 2007-00013 along SW 74�'. In his application for 00001 (to the north),
the developer stated at page 61 that he proposes no sidewalks due to the size of the partition. In
justification of this,he states on page 62 that `the city engineer has indicated in pre app notes
dated November l4, 2006 that no sidewalk would be necessary.' However, if one looks at the
' � � �
application file,one finds a LATER document, Engineering notes from April 16, 2007, which
clearly state (page 3)that"the applicant shall construct a 5-foot sidewalk at ultimate grade and
location". Thus,there is an existing sidewalk for property to the north of 00013. This
Engineering statement is made pursuant to the requirement of Tigard code at 18.810.070 that
sidewalks be constructed to City design standards, which I take to include a paved street section,
a curb with drainage to a storm sewer, a planter strip and then a 5-foot sidewalk.
Similarly, in his application for 00005 (south across Cedarcrest),the applicant stated on page 62
that `the applicant will install sidewalks that meet the City standards at ultimate location along
Cedazcrest". Thus there is basis in the applications themselves and in the city review notes to
require all three partions/developments to install streets and sidewalks which meet all City
standards.
Please enforce the words of both the city and applicant to ensure that these three developments
get the same kind of up-to-date urban infrastructure that all other parts of Tigard get. For multi-
lot developments in the city on Bull Mountain, overhead utilities and these kind of`roadside
ditches' are nat approved by the city. Just because these are three separate developments, or just
because they aze located in the less expensive Metzger portion of the city, or just because these
developments adjoin unincorporated Washington County does not justify approving second-rate
(less desirable) infrastructure features here on SW 74`h and Cedarcrest.
Sincerely,
�
Jo rewing
7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard, OR 97223 jfrewin�(�a,teleport.com 503-245-5760
attachment
cc Tom Coffee
I .. '��I�ar�`K._. '�C'.�> . '�,r" - � w- ��z.. ,-..a - '� . .
y � � �}.
.. . .�Y, .r 'p{;�.,. lr . � .,6� � •i, . ��" _
>A� �y��� 4 �� �' '� . iG'` 4 �1 � !r
'�tl f ,�y ��- i' �.��`ti''"' � • .
�,��.. ? �- 4 �� t,` �j y n?,�. / : � A-,
,�� ,F- tr� y „
n�Y►��� :. � t< ,�:r � •�'`10�` �+���'�
T '� �� * � '�,.
< �'F� - l
� : �-�".�� . -
• . . ' . �w R � � r � { s � � �?
. � . > s� ',d?`_. �.i. , G� � i
� � �� 6�� � ��* .. �� ^ . .��(Ty',�y�� 3� � �4s �.
I _g'.rfl�,"���'�'�,' ,. � ; b� . ,�� .s: �a.� � ! t{ �' -a+
_ ;��; � .. Ps ^�r'y 4.; �_�'f`at t P>. �+� • ����!��.
, �y ��:
- � � - „�",�`, `� �� � � � �: v; �:.:;���' ;�� �a�ar�' ., ��
. . I ,4fi �I`�,� } �, r P �� -�,� � 'P r� � TM� .
,, �� `r_.� � ���.�- � � � �, �
. �� , �!�' �� �• V ,�� �� � �
. ,� .
. -. _
�
,. . . .. �
.. . _ , �
, �f�
.:- . . �iF.v.� . ' V.��r.. ._r� .. ._. 4�'
` ° -
: } � ..�
„ �` .
•,j ' + '-_�.. :..
'
+f 4
�i
: a
r �� ��
{.' .. ...._ .... . . �� ._ . .. ...
� �--S k
r�s � ... `�k. X�!- -, y�. .
i
� , •, . �
� `
� '� _ . . „7 r �l,- .
� r .
"�__�'��. .�,�y,���,.� �i ,�,; -
'4-i^�'�``t � '� ,��^-^i'� �'+'�.;tx ' -c - �
S. �,�,.� �i�: ., �&��.
r,� , °�.
.���r,�. • , ,; - f�, r�a
t N hy.,��r�'�`"a� �`« � .. . : �� .�..�. .�� .-. - . ._
. �,�� i�'.T.�, i. F,•;� HC qFy.. '�yl 9f'� � =� ����. .•1� 7
_ ,��� -.. � r. �'� °a� t��, � � .1s,� i�;, �-_
. 1. .� ' . �iyF 4.�•¢f .y C �'.. Y,� .F'�'�s ��AY �x . ���" 1` �t�d;�' �r+�
; Y �' _ �y , . , . ,s i:� � :�' < s""'-q ` �' •,s
p 4,��'}�":`�� �fC�.*i �� {T �.��` �.f .,� �+ ;,��c -��xe� 3t�,e*� •"�+�. � �� .
� a �' 1. d, _'., ''' ,�� , r�
, f,� � 1¢r ��t� `�� �: 3. � '��` � ��ri-e; _ .�.� � � _ .
� y ...f 3 �' " � �§ y j�'��? ��� �. ..'f' 1° °'` � ..��.
��+��f � � � J ��� � i� `�-
r �4 .�P s��� ^s � J� '� y, 7K r.. . r' ��+ � r .�.'��,'�'°�y .�t .
r 1� .T4 : 4 �` R, .a � .:., . ,..;�. W ; .
� � ,
�f '� [,� � �.•'� -� ;. �r'lr � �.�PRa i. ! � --:�'. �¢ ,. .',�"''r. "� � .. .
�� �k � �.��� y; �' . �� �" ����' c'�
� '�
Y'�., . !� y�y n' _ '
. ., id,. ` c! �"�. � ,�I r
' ;. � . y�v� . �, �, � �. y 3.. . ( Y' _ �_ � - �+ �� _- s
Ry � .Sa%�''� . ,� .����� '�� `� . � � . �
_, .o .- _ . . �£. ' ' . , ' .: r ..,_- ,_.. - —
.
'
,
�
�«
� <
�
': _-'� �,� . :'*i3 ' 4. .. ,.• $ R!!+.. �'...
. _- ,�r . .i'� . . . �� � �.�.
������ � . �. , �f � l�- ..��:.. . , . . . � � .
� . � .,, r '�� '� .. l _ ' .
. _ Y 4 �,< .T . .y.� \p�:: .o.. ' c. .1� _'. ..
�
#1 Curbs,planter strip and sidewalks ����,�F,{"�;°".` � r-0 ��� �
west on Cedarcrest 5L �� ��`� �
„
,, ..
#2 Drainage swale and floating side- ��,� �:�'� � � ���yµF � �'T; _
__�,1�ryy,�' .e. �SB��`. ` J�bi .. .
walk west on Cedazcrest ��. " ,' ^ ,����� �, �'��- ., sT,��,��;�}�����,,>�:' ,. .
#3 Underground urilities and curb,planter , , �, ,, ti , � ��rv �, .� � . ,
strip, sidewalk south on 74th `�,�;,���`�,' {� ' �� - 5 ,.� . � ,-. „$`-°="�
� �� , � . "c�.'�
45�.,� t¢ .;.' a i � - r r�y a� �'� -„w^ i �'.e:��� wC �.� - .�;�f`
�- 'a " .ri,`�..,1' � � ;.
.A+ �'.��' �`i r . �- yp:E�
������ � A� '�.'.: ,� . . " .. .��� l .e . ...
, `.!�/
��\
CleanWater Services
c��,� �,��,,,,,�r�„�,�� �� � i�.�, RECEIVED PLANNING
JUL 2 5 2007
CITY OF TIGARD
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 24, 2007
FROM: David Schweitzer, Clean Water Services
TO: Emily Eng, City of Tigard
SUBJECT: Review Comments—MLP 2007-00013 VAR 2007-00021, Lawrence Partition
GENERAL COMMENTS
■ This Land Use Review by Clean Water Scrviccs (District) does not constitute approval of
storm or sanitary sewer compliance with the NPDES permit held by the District. The
District, prior to issuance of any connection permit, must review and approve final
construction plans.
■ All provisions of the development submittal shall be in accordance with current Clean Water
Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards, presently Resolution and Order No. 07-
20 (R&O 07-20), and all current Intergovernmental Agreements between the City and CWS.
■ Final construction plans must be reviewed and approved by CWS for conformance with
current Design and Construction Standards. A Stormwater Connection Permit shall be issued
by CWS prior to construction.
SANITARY SEWER
■ Each Yarcel shall be provided with a gravity service lateral and direct connection to the
public sanitary sewer. Parcel 3 may connect with the public sanitary sewer located within
SW 74�' Avenue. Parcels 1 and 2 shall connect with an extension of the existing public
sanitary sewer located within S W Cedar Crest St. per R&O 07-20 section 5.09.2. The
service laterals shall be in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards,
per section 5.09.3 they shall be less than 50 feet in length. The laterals as proposed do not
meet these standards.
STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY
■ Each Parcel shall be provided with a separate individual connection to a public storm
conveyance in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards.
2550 SW Hilisboro Highway• Hillsboro, Oregon 97123
Phone: (503) 681-3600• Fax: (503)681-3603 •www.CleanWaterServices.org
■ The Developer shall pay a system development charge-in-lieu of constructing a water quality
facility, as approved by the City and per R&O 07-20 section 4.05.
■ A hydraulic and hydrological analysis of the existing drainage and downstream storm
conveyance system, in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards
(presently R&O 07-20), is required. The applicant is responsible for mitigating downstream
storm conveyance if the existing system does not have the capacity to convey the runoff
volume from a 25-year, 24-hour storm event.
SENSITIVE ARF,A
■ Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on or within 200 feet of this site. CWS has issued
Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment File No. 06-002699, dated August 31, 2006
for development of this site. This document serves as the Service Provider Letter(SPL) in
accordance with R&O 07-20 for this site (Tax/Map 1 S 1 25CA-03700).
EROSION CONTROL
• Provide erosion control in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards.
' � i
.
Tualatin Valley � `-
Fire & Rescue
July 26, 2006
Emily Eng, Assistant Planner
City of Tigard Planning Division
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: (MLP) 2007-00013
Dear Emily,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed site plan surrounding the above named development
project. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions
of approval:
1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads
shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet(12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory
buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus
roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway
and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 26 feet wide but less than 32
feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed.
Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. (IFC 503.2.1)
The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway
width is not provided.
2) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family
dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the
structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC
Appendix B. (IFC B105.1)
The fire hydrant shown on the submitted drawings must be capable of providing the required fire
flow. If the hydrant has not been flow tested within the last five years, a flow test must be conducted
and the test results forwarded to this office.
3) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus
access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible
construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1)
We trust this letter will be helpful with the final design of this proposal insofar as fire apparatus access and
firefighting water supplies are concerned. If there is anything about this letter you do not understand, disagree
with, or wish to discuss further, please call me.
Sincerely,
�oizn .J�. �LJalbc�
John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshal II
Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, North Division
14480 SW Jenkins Road
Beaverton, OR 97005-1152
(503) 356-4723
Nortli Division Offrce
14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton,OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.rifr.com
- . � •
,
Tualatin Valley
Fire & Rescue
�
Nortli Division Office
14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton,OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.tvfr.com
� � WASH CO LAND DEV. Fax:503-846-2908 Jul 27 2007 9�09 P.01
WASHINGTQN COUNTY, OREGON
�� Qepartment of Land UsE dnd TrdnBportatlon,Land DevelOpment Services
� 155 North First Avenu2,Suita 350-13,Hillsborv,Oregon 97124
(503)846-8761 FAX�(503)846-2908
.iuly 26, 2Q07
Emi{y Eng
City of Tigard Planning Division
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223 w '� ; . ' '' �; #_j
FA,X: (503) 624-3681
No. of pages: 5
RE: Lawrence Partition '� � " ' ���p`�'�
City File Number: (MLP) 2007-00013
Tax Map and Lot Number: 1S1 25CA 3700
Location: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street
Applicant: Bob Lawrence
r
; �
�
; i--�
� �t �
, � ;
Washington County Depa�tment of Land Use and Transportation has reviewed this
development application and submits the following comments and required conditions for
access to SW Cedarcrest Strest, a County-maintained Neighbarhood Route.
NOTE: A pre-existing driveway which is part of a redeveloping site is subject to Caunty
review and conditions for access approval.
COMMENTS
1 . All residential, commercial, institutional and industrial uses with seventy (70)feet or
more of frontage will be permitted direct access to a Neighborhood Route.
The proposed lots me�t this requirement. The existing driveway for propos�d
Lot 3 must be relocated at ieast twenty five feet from the intersection of SW
Cedarcrest Street and SW 74tn Avenue (ten feet from the point of curvature of the
radius}.
. WASH CO LAND DEV. Fax:503-846-2908 Jul 27 2007 9�09 P.02
2. Resolution �nd Order 86-95 requires a minimum sight distance (measured in feet) equal
to ten times the vehicular speed of the road(s) at proposed access tocation(s). This
requirement applies to sight distance in both directions at each access.
Before the County will permit access to SW Cedarcrest Stre�t, the applicant will be
required to provide certification from a registered professional engineer that
adequate sight distance exists in both directions far each proposed driveway,
including the access for th� existing dwelling (or can be obtained pursuant to
specific improvementsj.
3. Consistent with statewide pedestrian circulation/linkage goals of the Transportation
Planning Rule and the County's R&d 86-95 (road safety requirements), the County
normally requires sidewalk installation as a minimum road safety impravement along site
frontage of all County-maintained raads. Sidewalks further establish future street
profiles, demarcate County or City right-of-way, and address drainage issues. Sidewalk
requirements are not generally waived, even when sidewalk is not currently presen#on
neighboring praperties. Rather, even non-contiguous sidewalk is considered to provide
some measure of pedestrian refuge and ideally, makes possible eventual connection of
sidewalks (as surrounding develvpment takes place and is likewise conditioned to
provide sidewalk).
The applicant is requir�d ta construct a concrete sidewalk to County stanctard
aiong the site's SW Cedarcrest Street frontage.
4. Section 501-8.1.C. (of"Critical Services") of the Washington County Community
Development Cod� requires pr'ovision of adequate drainage.
The applicant shall provide adequate roadway drainage along the site's SW
Cedarcrest Street frontage (to incfude cleaning, grading and shaping of the ditch).
5 . The statewide Transportatian Planning Rule requires provisipn far adequate
transportation facilities in order for development ta occur. Accordingly, the County has
classified roads and road segments within the Caunty system based upon their
function. The current Transpartation Plan (regularly updated)contains adequate right-
of-way, road width and lane provision standards based upon each roadway's
Classification. 5ubject right af way is considered deficient if half-width of the existing
right of way does not meet that determined necessary within the County's current
transportation plan. Sections 418��.2 and 5�1-8.4 of the Washington County
Community Develapment Code require dedication of additional right-of-way along site
frontage of a Gounty road when existing right-of-way is deficient.
Dedication of additional right-of-way to provide 30 feet from centerline of SW
Cedarcrest Street, including a 6 foot public utility easement, is required.
Additionally, dedication of additional right-af-way to provide adequate corner
radius at the intersection of SW Cedarcrest Street is required.
� ' WASH CO LAND DEU. Fax�503-846-2908 Jul 27 2007 9�10 P.03
RE(�UIRED CaNDITI OVAL
IMPORTANT:
Road improvements required along site frontage shall apply to frontage of all land within
fhe subjeCt site that�buts the Gounty roadway. 7"he subject site shall be cansidered
to include:any lot or parce! to be partitfoned or ofherwrse subdivided (regardless of
whether it confarns exisfing sfructures or not); and any contiguous lots or parcels that
consfifute phases of the currenfly proposed development.
If the applicant proposes to develop the profect in phases, all County-required fronfage
improvements must be constructed with the first phase. In addition, off-site
improvements warranied by the frrst phase must also be completed with the frrst
phase.
I, PRIOR TO F1NAL APPR4VAL OF THE PARYITION PLAT BY TNE CITY�F TIGARD:
A. Submit to Washington County Land Development Services (Public Assurance
Staff, 7racy Stone/Carol Pollard/Kathleen Haupt, 846-3$43}:
1. Completed "Design Option" form.
2. $3,500,00 Administration Deposit,
NOTE: Any portion of the Administration Deposit not used by Washingtan
County for plan approval, field inspections, �nd contract administratidn will
be returned to the applicant. If at any time during the project, the County's
costs are higher than the amount deposited, Washington County will bill
the applicant the amount needed to cover its costs.
3. A copy of the City's Land UsE Approval with Conditions, signed and dated.
4. Preliminary certification of adequate sight distance for eaCh aCCess point to
SW Cedarcrest Street, in accordance with County Code, prepared and
stamped by a regist�red profession�l engineer, as well as:
a. A detaifed list af improvements necessary to produce adequate
intersection sight distance.
5. Three�(3) sets of�omplete engineering plans for construction of the
following public improvements:
a. Concrete sidewalk to County standard along SW Cedarcrest Street
� site frontage.
b. Adequate roadway clrainage along SW Cedarcrest Street frontage
(to include cleaning, grading and shaping of the ditch).
c. Access to SW Cedarcrest Street ta County standards.
, � WASH CO LRND DEV. Fax�503-846-2908 Jul 2� 2007 9�10 P.04
d. Improvements within the right-of-way as necessary to provide
adequate intersection sight distance at each access point to SW
Cedarcrest Street.
e, Close and relocate the existing access to proposed Lot 3 to a
Iocation that is at least 10 feet from the point of curvature of the
radius at the intersection of SW Cedarcrest Street and SW 74�'
Avenue.
C. Obtain a Washington County Facilitv Permit upon completion of the following:
1. Obtain Engineering Division approval and provide a financial
assurance for the construction of the pu�lic improvements listed in
conditions f.A_5.
NOTE: The Public Assurance staff(Tracy Stone/Caroi Pollard/Kathleen
Naupt at$46-3843)of Land D�velopment Services will send the
required forms to the applicant's representative after submittal and
approval of items listed under I.A., above.
Please not hat Washin ton Count 's "Facili Permit"
differs fr m an "Access Pel'mi� An Access Permit rs f�r less
comprehensive in nature fhan ihe Facility Permit and its
associated submittal, revr'ew, and monitoring processes. Access
Permits app/y to non-complex land use cases in which the Counfy
requires limited or no impravements of fhe developer. (Access
permifs are cammonly issued rn cases requiring improvements as
minima!as a single driveway cut ta an exisfing house). This
proiect is not currently eli�ib/e for an Access Permit.
The Facility Permit allows construcfion work within County rights-
of-way and permits s;te access only after the developer�rsf
submits plans and obfains Washington County Engineering
approval, obfains repu+red grading and erosion control permits,
and satisfies various ofher requirements of Washingfon County's
Assurances Department including but not limited to executian of
financial and confractual agreements. This process ensures that
the developer accepts responsibilfty for consrructron of publfC
improvements, and ihat improvements are clpsely monrtored,
fnspected, and built to standarc/in a timely manner. Access wi!!
onlv bg permitted under the reauired Washinaton County
F�cili Permit and onl followln submittal and Count
acce tance of all materials re4uired und�r the facilitY permit
proEe�s.
D. The following shall be r�presented on the plat and recarded with Washington
County:
• � WASH CO LRND DEV. Fax:503-846-2908 Jul 27 2007 9:10 P.05
1. Dedication of additional right-of-way to provide 30 feet from centerline of
SW Cedarcrest Street, including a 6 foot pub(ic utility easement.
2. Dedication of additional right-of-wayta provide adequate corner radius at
th� intersection of SW Cedarcrest Street.
II. PRIOR TO 4CCUPANCY:
A. The road improvements required in condition {.A.5. above sha11 be completed and
accepted by Washington County.
e. Upon completion of necessary improvements, provide final certification of
adequate sight distance in accordance with County Code, prepared and stamped
by a registered professional engineer.
Requirements identified within this letter are ca�sidered by the County to be minimum
warranted improvements (and/or analyses)that are necessitated by the proposed
development, therefare it is requested tha#they be conveyed to the applicant within the City's
Approval document. Before the City issues its Final Natice of Decision. please allow the
County to review and acknowledge a draft of#he City's conditions regarding access ta SW
C�darcrest Street, Additionally, please send a copy of the subseq�ent Final City Notice of
Decision and any appeal information to the County.
Thank you for the oppartunity to comment. If you have any questions, please contact me
at 503�846-3839.
4 � r .+-- -� �
' � —���'
aomi V ge- ie �
Associate Plar�n
CC: Phil Healy,Senio�Planner,L.and Development Services
Jinde Zhu,P.E.,Traffic Engineer
Carol Pollard,Assistant Planner,Assurances
Transporfation File
RE QUE ST F OR COMME NT S ��
.
DATE: July 13,2007 . . �
TO: Brian Every,Comcast Cable Communications
FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division ��
STAFF CONTACT: EmilvEng,Assistant Planner(�c2712�
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 624-3681 Email:emil tigard-or.gov
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2007-00013/ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2007-00021
- LAWRENCE PARTITION -
REQUEST: The applicant is requestin� approval to partition one 24,209-SF ot into t ee (3) lots o 7,519 SF, 7,505 SF
and 7,550 SF for sirigle-family homes. The existing single-family home and accessory structure wi�l be demolished. The
applicant aLso requests approval of to use existuig trees as street trees by means of a landscaping Adjustment.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street; Washington County Tax Map 1S125CA, T� Lot 3700. ZONE: R 4.5: Low
Density Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is des�gned to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without
accessory residential units at a minunum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are
pernutted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also pernzitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW
CRITERIA: Commuruty Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18J15, 18J25, 18J45,
18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Ap licant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by
various departments and ag�encies and from other.�orn�ation available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the pro osal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application,
WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: �ULY 27, 2007. You may use the space provided below or attach a
separate letter to return your comments. I u are unable to res ond b the above date, please phone the staff contact
noted above with your comments and co irmyour comments in writin as soon as possible. If you have any questions,
con�act the Tigard Plaiuung Division, 13125 SW I Iall Boulevard,Tigard,�R 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 or email.
_ Written comments provided below:
��<< . -� . .
Name&Number of Perso Commenting:
, ,
MEMORANDUM � � ', � ''r_��
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
DATE: 8/2/07
TO: Emily Eng, Assistant Planner
FROM: Kim McMillan, Development Review Engine
RE: MLP2007-00013 North Cedarcrest
Access Manaqement (Section 18.705.030.H)
Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with
all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and
streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and
deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and
AASHTO.
The applicant's engineer, SR Design LLC, submitted a preliminary Sight Distance
Certification, dated May 15, 2007. There are three driveways proposed on
Cedarcrest Street. The engineer states that with a posted speed of 25 mph,
which requires a minimum of 250 feet of sight distance, the requirement can be
met.
Washington County has jurisdiction over Cedarcrest Street up to 74th Avenue.
As such, the City of Tigard has received their comments and those comments
are incorporated as part of this land use decision. The applicant will be required
to submit a copy of the preliminary sight distance certification to WACO LUT for
approval prior to the County permitting access to Cedarcrest Street.
Upon completion of the required improvements, the engineer shall provide final
certification of adequate sight distance in accordance with County code. This
must be reviewed and accepted by the County prior to issuance of building
permits.
Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways
and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of
driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum
spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet.
Cedarcrest Street is classified as a Neighborhood Route (local street).
Washington County requires that the existing driveway must be relocated at least
25 feet from the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue (ten feet from
the point of curvature of the radius).
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 1
The applicant's plans shall show the existing access for Lot 3 to be closed and
relocated to a location at least 10 feet from the point of curvature of the radius at
the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue.
Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810):
Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of
public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and
drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below:
Streets:
Improvements:
Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets
adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards.
Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width
planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved
in accordance with the TDC.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a
Neighborhood Route (local street) to have a 58-foot right-of-way width and
18-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street
parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm
drainage, and street trees.
This site lies adjacent to SW 74th Avenue, which is classified as a Neighborhood
Route with future bicycle lanes on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At
present, there is approximately 25 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the
most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate the additional
ROW to provide 29 feet from centerline and the required corner radius.
SW 74t" Avenue is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact
from this development, the applicant should construct a sidewalk at its ultimate
location and enter into a restrictive covenant for future half-street improvements.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Washington County requires a
Neighborhood Route (local street) to have a 60-foot right-of-way width. Other
improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and
bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street
trees.
This site lies adjacent to SW Cedarcrest Street, which is classified as a
Neighborhood Route by WACO LUT. At present, there is approximately 25 feet
of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 2
applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 30 feet from centerline
and the required corner radius.
SW Cedarcrest Street is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the
impact from this development, the applicant should construct a concrete sidewalk
and provide adequate roadway drainage along the site's Cedarcrest Street
frontage. These improvements shall be done in accordance with Washington
County LUT standards.
Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states
that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and
proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division.
This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a
satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the
boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be
constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining
properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to
continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is
developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the
property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City
Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost.
Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be
constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length.
This development is located at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74tn
Avenue. There are no opportunities or need for additional streets or extensions of
streets.
Street Alignment and Connections:
Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of
no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where
prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing
developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other
restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street
connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a
regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction.
Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local, neighborhood routes and
collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within
the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by
environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns
or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or
extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure
the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered
topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 3
of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical
constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that
a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the
constraint precludes some reasonable street connection.
Since this development is at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74tn
Avenue there is no need to create blocks that would be substandard in size.
Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed
ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street
(except that local or residential access streets may have segments with
grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii
of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer.
The existing grades on Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue are much less than
10%.
Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape
of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building
sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient
access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of
limitations and opportunities of topography.
Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks
formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-
way line except:
• Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or
other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or;
• For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major
collectors or railroads.
• For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides
equivalent access.
PLANNING
Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections
on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street
connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no
more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or
topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict
adherence to other standards in the code.
PLANNING
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 4
Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being
more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5
times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district.
PLANNING
Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of
frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land
partition, 18.420.050.�4.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a
minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access
easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling
unit, the frontage shall be at least 15 feet.
PLANNING
Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to
meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial,
collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets
shall have sidewalks on at least one side.
The applicant's plans indicate they will construct public sidewalk along the
frontages of Cedarcrest Street and 74ih Avenue, thereby meeting this criterion.
Sanitary Sewers:
Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be
installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to
existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and
Construction Standards for Sanitary and SurFace Water Management (as
adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future
revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive
plan.
Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems
shall include consideration of additional development within the area as
projected by the Comprehensive Plan.
The applicant's plans indicate there is an existing public sewer line in 74tn
Avenue. There is an existing sewer lateral that will be used to provide service to
Parcel 3. Parcels 1 and 2 shall connect with an extension of the existing public
sanitary sewer per CWS R&O 07-20, Section 5.09.2. The service laterals shall
be in accordance with current CWS Design and Construction Standards. Per
Section 5.09.3, the laterals shall be less than 50 feet in length. The laterals as
proposed by the applicant do not meet these standards.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 5
Storm Drainage:
General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make
adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff.
Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a
culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate
potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or
outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary
size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction
Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by
Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or
amendments).
The applicanYs plans indicate improvements to the roadside ditch along both the
Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue frontages in order to accommodate upstream
drainage, thereby meeting this criterion.
Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it
is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from
the development will vverload an existing drainage facility, the Director and
Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have
been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions
have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the
development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards
for Sanitary and SurFace Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water
Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments).
In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek
and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that
plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater
detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net
increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that
all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide
onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno
Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff
will be permitted to discharge without detention.
The runoff from this site, pre- and post-development, is directed to the ditch
along Cedarcrest Street. Detention for minor land partitions is not typically
required and Washington County did not require it for this development. They
did, however, require that the applicant provide adequate roadway drainage
along SW Cedarcrest Street frontage (to include cleaning, grading and shaping
of the ditch). The applicant's plans must be reviewed and approved by
Washington County before a WACO Facilities Permit will be issued. This permit
must be issued before any City of Tigard permits will be issued.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 6
Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways:
Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments
adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted
pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of
such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way.
S.W. 74th Avenue is classified a bicycle facility.
Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development
permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits,
subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from
such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of
bikeway improvements.
The applicant is required to enter into a restrictive covenant for half-street
improvements along their 74�h Avenue frontage. These half-street improvements
will include the cost of bikeway improvements, thereby meeting this criterion.
Utilities:
Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those
required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services
and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface
mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter
cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service
facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at
50,000 volts or above, and:
• The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving
utility to provide the underground services;
• The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted
facilities;
• All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains
installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the
surfacing of the streets; and
• Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing
the street improvements when service connections are made.
Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states
that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the
development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities
which are not underground will serve the development and the approval
authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 7
grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in
conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-
by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a
short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the
placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground
utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by
utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public
right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-
grounding.
There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW 74th Avenue. If
the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage
that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 105 lineal feet;
therefore the fee would be $ 3675.00.
ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND
UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS:
Public Water Svstem:
There is an existing water main in Cedarcrest Street. Tualatin Valley Water
District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant's plans indicate two
new water meters for Parcels 1 and 2 from the main line in Cedarcrest Street.
The applicant will be required to obtain approvals and permits from TVWD prior
to issuance of any City of Tigard permits.
Storm Water Quality:
The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM)
regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and
Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which
require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities
shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100
percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious
surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the
frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained
through the year.
The CWS standards include a provision that would exclude small projects such
as residential land partitions. It would be impractical to require an on-site water
quality facility to accommodate treatment of the storm water from Parcels 1-3.
Rather, the CWS standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of
constructing a facility if deemed appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the
fee in-lieu on this application.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 8
Gradinq and Erosion Control:
CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to
reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public
storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction,
grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates
erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an
erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City
permits.
The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan with the Public Facility
Improvement (PFI) permit application for review and approval.
Address Assiqnments:
The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the
City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee
in the amount of $ 50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to
the City prior to final plat approval.
Survey Requirements
The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates [NAD 83 (91)] on
two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic
control network (GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be
of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the
coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements
to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates
can be established by:
• GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey.
• By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network.
The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points
for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other
water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State
Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91).
Recommendations:
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 9
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO
APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT:
Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642)
for review and approval:
. A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to
cover the public sidewalk and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six
(6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to
the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any
drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets
relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit
plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards,
which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.tiqard-or.�).
. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address
and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be
designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance
for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a
corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which
the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact
person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering
Department will delay processing of project documents.
. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan
for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking
and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase.
. The City Engineer may determine the necessity for, and require submittal
and approval of, a construction access and parking plan for the home
building phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary, the
applicant shall provide the plan prior to issuance of building permits.
. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall pay the addressing fee.
(STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering).
. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department
as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, indicatin�q that they will
construct the following frontage improvements along SW 74t Avenue as a
part of this project:
A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk with 5-foot planter strip;
B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements;
C. streetlight layout by applicanYs engineer, to be approved by City
Engineer; and
D. driveway apron (if applicable).
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 10
. The applicant's plans shall show the existing access for Lot 3 to be closed
and relocated to a location at least 10 feet from the point of curvature of the
radius at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue.
. The applicant shall execute a Restrictive Covenant whereby they agree to
complete or participate in the future improvements of SW 74t" Avenue and
SW Cedarcrest Street adjacent to the subject property, when any of the
following events occur:
A. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or
paid for by the formation of a Local Improvement District,
B. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or
paid for in whole or in part by the City or other public agency,
C. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be constructed
by a third party and involves the sharing of design and/or construction
expenses by the third party owner(s) of property in addition to the
subject property, or
D. when construction of the improvements is deemed to be appropriate
by the City Engineer in conjunction with construction of improvements
by others adjacent to the subject site.
. The applicant's engineer shall submit preliminary sight distance certification
to Washington County LUT for review and approval.
. The applicant shall obtain a facility permit from the Department of Land Use
and Transportation of Washington County, to perform work within the right-
of-way of SW Cedarcrest Street. This work shall include, but is not limited
to, a concrete sidewalk to County standards, relocation of the existing
driveway and adequate roadway drainage. A copy shall be provided to the
City Engineering Department prior to issuance of a Public Facility
Improvement (PFI} permit Permit.
. The applicant's plans shall be revised to extend the public sewer main along
the SW Cedarcrest Street frontage with laterals, no more than 50 feet in
length, to serve Parcels 1 and 2.
. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for
the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility
Improvement permit.
. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility
Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion
Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February
2003 edition."
. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two
monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS) geodetic
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 11
control network (GC 22) as recorded in Washington County survey records.
These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same
precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the
coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground
measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north.
These coordinates can be established by:
• GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey.
• By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
Final Plat Application Submission Requirements:
A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared
by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or
narrative.
B. Attach a check in the amount of the current final plat review fee
(Contact Planning/Engineering Permit Technicians, at (503) 639�171, ext.
2421).
C. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum
standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),
Washington County, and by the City of Tigard.
D. The right-of-way dedication for SW Cedarcrest Street (30 feet from
centerline) and SW 74th Avenue (29 feet from centerline) shall be made on
the final plat. The right-of-way dedication shall include the required corner
radius.
E. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat
until they receive notice from the Engineering Department indicating that the
City has reviewed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's
surveyor.
F. After the City and County have reviewed the final plat, submit fi+►ro
mylar copies of the final plat for City Engineer signature (for partitions), or
City Engineer and Community Development Director signatures (for
subdivisions).
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642)
for review and approval:
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 12
. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the
Engineering Department with a "photomylar" copy of the recorded final plat.
. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the City with
as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar, 2) a
diskette of the as-builts in "DWG"format, if available; otherwise "DXF"will be
acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS
nefinrork. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic
file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves,
hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their
respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91).
. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW
74th Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee
in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the
site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 35.00 per lineal foot. If the
fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 3675.00 and it shall be paid prior
to issuance of building permits.
. During issuance of the building permit for Parcels 1, 2 and 3, the applicant
shall pay the standard water quality fees per lot (fee amounts will be the
latest approved by CWS).
. During issuance of the building permit for Parcels 1 and 2, the applicant shall
pay the standard water quantity fees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest
approved by CWS).
. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant's engineer shall submit to
Washington County the final certification of adequate sight distance in
accordance with County Code.
. Prior to issuance of building permits, the road improvements required by
Washington County along Cedarcrest Street shall be completed and
accepted by Washington County.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS MLP2007-0013 North Cedarcrest PAGE 13
/
MEMORANDUM
, : .�.:�s '� ���.�
TO: Emily Eng
FROM: Todd Prager, City Arborist
RE: North Cedarcrest Partition
DATE: August 6, 2007
Per your request, I have provided comments on the "North Cedarcrest Partition" project.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding my comments please contact me
anytime.
1. Variances and Adiustments
18.370.020.C.6, Ad�ustments to landscapin_q requirements (Chapter 18.745).
b. Adjustment for sfreet tree requirements. By means of a Type I
procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, the Director shall approve,
approve with conditions, or deny a request for the adjustments to the street
tree requirements in Section 18.745.030, based on the
following approval criteria:
(9) !f the location of a proposed tree would cause potentia!problems with
existing utility lines;
(2) !f the tree would cause visual clearance problems; or
(2) If there is not adequate space in which to plant street trees.
Three existing Douglas firs (236, 237, 238) can not be used to meet the street tree
requirements in Section 18.745.030. The location of the trees will cause problems with
existing utility lines. Mitigation requirements for these trees will not apply because their
poor condition and proximity to existing utility lines makes them hazardous. However,
the existing trees should be replaced with street trees that will not interfere with
overhead utility lines and will meet the other requirements listed in Section 18.745.040.
� �
--�
.�
8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone 503.469.1213
-� �� � ; • :, - Toll free 866.469.1213
Fax 503.469.8553
www.srdlic.com .
MEMORANDUM
To: Emily Eng, Assistant Planner-City of Tigard
From: Jeff Caines, AICP—SR Design, LLC
CC: File
Date: August 7, 2007
Re: Public Comment for MLP2007-0013
This memo is to address some of the issues of concern posed by Mr. John Frewing and
the minor land partition located on the northwest corner of SW Cedarcrest Street and
74t'' Avenue in Tigard.
Before I begin to write a response to some of Mr. Frewing concerns, I would like to give
some background information regarding this project and the surrounding
developments already approved by the City of Tigard.
This project is located on the northwest corner of SW Cedarcrest and SW 74th Avenue.
To the north is an already approved land partition (MLP2007-00001) which was granted
final approval on May 7, 2007. Across the street (south of this project) is another land
partition (MLP2007-00005) which received final approval on May 17, 2007. Since all
three developments are under separate applications they should be reviewed on their
own merits. In addition, the two land use applications referenced above have already
received final land use approval and therefore should not be a determinant into the
decision making process to this land use application (MLP2007-00013). Therefore, all
comments and references attempting to associate MLP2007-00013 with MLP2007-00001
and MLP2007-00005 should not be considered in the City's Notice of Decision and
Conditions of Approval.
Another issue that needs to be addressed is the jurisdiction of Cedarcrest Street. At the
beginning of the development process both my client and the City of Tigard was under
the impression that this portion of Cedarcrest Street was under Tigard jurisdiction.
-----..�,,
8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone 503.469.1213
Toil free 866.469.1213
Fax 503.469.8553
www.srdllc.com .
However, as MLP2007-0005 was going through the development process it was
determined that Washington County maintained jurisdiction of Cedarcrest Street
(County Road 1473). Although this development is located within the city limits of
Tigard, the city does not have jurisdiction to require certain road improvements along
Cedarcrest Street. Therefore, all comments referencing Cedarcrest Street and the
associated road improvements, as referenced in Mr. Frewing's letter, should also not be
considered in the City's Notice of Decision and Conditions of Approval. As a result, the
City can only require Conditions of Approval as it relates to SW 74th Avenue while
Washington County reviews and comments on SW Cedarcrest Street; as in the case with
MLP2007-00005.
Issue of Concern 1: Underground of utilities.
Mr. Frewing has stated that this project should be required that all existing overhead
power lines be undergrounded. Mr. Frewing points to Development Code Section
18.810.120 as his basis for under-grounding the overhead utilities. However, there is an
exception to this Development Code Section. Section 18.810.120.C.1 lists an exception
that is applicable to this development. The other properties that have frontage along SW
74t'' Avenue have not undergrounded their overhead power lines, leaving this single lot
to underground the overhead power line.
Section 18.810.120.C.1 states: "The developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs
when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not
underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and
technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of undergrounding in
conjunction with the development."
Since the power lines go over the right-of-way (over Cedarcrest Street) and no other
properties have under-grounded their utilities we find that this exception meet the
criteria listed above.
The other two already approved partitions (MLP2007-00001 & MLP2007-00005)
received the condition of approval giving the developer the option to either pay the fee
in lieu or underground the utilities. The City has already set president on this issue and
. .
-- ..
8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232 �
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone 503.469.1213
Toll free 866.469.1213
Fax 503.469.8553
www.srdllc.com ,
since this is a three parcel partition as in the case with MLP2007-00005, under-
grounding verses the fee in-lieu should not be an issue.
Issue of Concern 2: Street Sections:
The application has been designed to preserve the mature trees along SW 74�" Avenue.
The three trees identified as Tree # 236, 237 and 238 have been reviewed by both the
applicant's arborist and the City arborist. The applicant's arborist has classified the trees
a "poor" not hazardous. In addition, per our on site meeting with Todd Prager, City
Arborist has also not deemed these trees as "hazardous". Therefore, these trees would
be subject to tree mitigation if they were removed during the development process. The
trees were intended to be preserved in order to help screen the new dwelling unit from
SW 74�h Avenue and to keep the existing trees in the neighborhood. During the
development process, the applicant has had site visits with there arborist to determine if
a sidewalk could be constructed without eminent danger to the tree roots. It was
determined that the floating sidewalk, as proposed, would be acceptable to meet both
the engineering standards for a sidewalk and preserve the trees. If the City Arborist
deems the trees hazardous or requires the removal of the trees, then we will abide and
remove the trees. If these trees are required to be removed by the City's arborist, these
trees should not be subject to the City's mitigation standards. If the trees are removed,
then the design of the sidewalk will change and street trees may be placed along SW
74th Avenue, as conditioned by Staff. The applicant will evaluate that situation and act
accordingly based on the City's decision.
Furthermore, a sidewalk is still proposed along both SW Cedarcrest and SW 74�h
Avenue allowing pedestrians to walk safely around the project north to Taylors Ferry
Road. Please note, that the development south of this site on 74�h Avenue, as stated in
Mr. Frewing's letter, is a subdivision while this is a partition, therefore different road
and pedestrian standards may apply. In addition, the areas along SW Cedarcrest that
have gone under development review were required to install sidewalks. However,
these areas are located within Washington County and not subject to City of Tigard
rules and regulations.
8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232 �
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone 503.469.1213
Toll free 866.469.1213
Fax 503.469.8553
www.srdllc.com ,
Issue of Concern 3: Preservation of Trees.
The application has submitted a tree preservation plan to demonstrate which trees are
scheduled for removal and which trees will be retained. Drawing C4 does show two
trees that have tree protection fencing around them and these two trees have been
identified for removal. The purpose of showing the tree protection around the trees to
demonstrate that there may be a possibility to saving the trees after the homes are
constructed. To my understanding, it has been City policy that all trees identified to be
retained must be retained, in good condition, after construction, unless instructed by
the City to be removed. If for some reason the trees identified to retention are removed
during construction of the site, then the possibility of civil penalties and fines may be
imposed upon the developer or property owner. City staff has recommended that we
identify all trees that may have the potential of being removed be identified as
removed, pay the tree mitigation, if any, and proceed with the construction process. If
the trees are retained after construction, then a credit back to the developer or property
owner would be paid from the mitigation fund paid by the developer.
At this point in the development process, the application is proposing to preserve the
trees until such time a building foot print is chosen for the individual parcel. At which
time the trees will either be removed or be retained.
Issue of Concern 4: Relation to Adjoining Development:
Mr. Frewing is attempting to associate this development with the already approved
surrounding partitions. The surrounding partitions have already been through the
public planning process and are final. These developments should have no relevance to
the current development proposal under City review. Therefore, the two land use
applications referenced by Mr. Frewing have already received final land use approval
and therefore should not be a determinant into the decision making process to this
specific land use application (MLP2007-0013). Therefore, all comments and references
attempting to associate MLP2007-00013 with MLP2007-00001 and MLP2007-00005
should not be considered in the City's staff report and conditions of approval.
� Teragan & Ass�ciates, Inc.
Terrence P. Flanagan Arboricultural Consultants
Friday, August 10, 2007
Robert H. Lawrence
Pacific Homes
6770 SW Alfred St.
Tigard, OR 97223
RE: Safety concerns regarding three Douglas-firs (Pseudotsuga menziesiij along SW 74`h Ave.,
Tigard, Oregon, Tax Lot 3700
You requested that I review the condition of the three Douglas firs that are located on the east
end of the tax lot number 3700. The concern was that the trees are under the power lines and that
they may be a safety hazard.
These trees should be considered a safety hazard from the standpoint that they are an
inappropriate tree species to be planted under electrical lines as they will grow through the lines
in a short time period. Where the electrical lines are set approximately 35 to 45 feet above the
ground, the Douglas firs will easily grow to heights of 120 feet tall and higher. In order to
maintain safe clearances from the lines, the electrical utility (PGE) is forced to continually prune
back the tops of these trees. The trees have been topped which has lead to some decay forming at
the point of where the topping was completed as indicated by an inspection done by climbing the
northern most tree, # 236 on 8-8-07. The side branches of the tree just below the topping cut
have experienced sunscald damage causing the upper section of the branch's bark to die allow for
additional decay organisms to enter the wood of the branches. As these branches naturally turn
upward to replace the lost top, they will have to be cut back to maintain the clearance from the
electrical hazard.
In addition to the potential branch failure and decay forming at the top of the main trunk and the
upper branches where the topping cuts have occurred, these trees should be considered a safety
hazard for people, especially children that may be interested in climbing them. The lower
branches of these trees have been retained to provide a screen making them within reach of
anyone on the ground making them real easy to climb into. As the trees are right under the
power lines it is possible that between clearance pruning that PGE completes that the branches of
the trees could grow quickly enough to make contact with the electrical lines creating a very
serious potential for a serious if not a deadly accident. While PGE does an excellent job of
keeping their electrical lines clear of tree branches, it is not that unusually for a branch to break
fallin� onto the power lines and causing a tree to become energized creating a hazard for anyone
on the ground let alone anyone who climbs the tree. Removing the lower branches to remove the
3145 Westview Circle•Lake Oswego.OR 97034•(503)697-197�•Fdx(503)697-1976
E-mail:TerryceTeragan.com
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist.#PN-0120 BMT
Member,American Society of Consulting Arborists
� � ^ Tax Lot 3700
8/]0/2007
Robert Lawrence Page 2 of 2
invitation to climb the trees would severely deform the trees as they have already had their tops
removed.
The decision to remove the trees in good one that will reduce the chances accidents from
occurring. While the original intention to retain the trees was to provide a screen, their removal
is a far better option from a stand point of site safety and reducing the potential failure due to the
decay forming at the topping cut.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding the information above, please call.
Sincerely,
Terrence P. Flanagan
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, PN-0120 BMT
Certified Tree Risk Assessor— PNW-0152
Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists
3145 Westview Circle•Lake Oswego,OR 97034.(503)697-1975•Fax(503)697-1976
E-mail:Terry�Teragan.com
[SA Board Certified Master Arborist,#PN-0120 BMT
Member.American Society of Consulting Arborists
PLANNING
SECRETARY
MATERIALS
� . .
J� .� ,.... �� , _ � _N
� AREA NOTIFIED
�` SW CHASE LN _ �_� -- �SOO�� �
, �� -� ��
, �, ; � T ^; _ ,
� ., ,
�� � � � �„��
RD � � � — � >
� _L_ _ mr��n,., __________= I
� � _ O' FOR: Jeff Caines
�_ � �� ' , � o � '�
` �
_ ; ;
�� �- -� � � �a� _�� — � RE: 1S125Cr� 3700 �.
�i ni:ewmn tbcu� � �� — ————————�——
. I ni:s�eenn
_� . I� Ifl!{W�lO y 2 li1l6C�Rt1� 1l6C���7
— �--- �i - T � �,��«
�L�m:se�mu rscur� �1 �
wm �� �T1_ i Property owner information
' �` iniea +�n�„�� I r�0A �/�'�l2� is valid for 3 months from
- �� 1fIt6w150 ' — lillNt�}B� " �,(1 / %.�/'l� the date printed on this map.
I_ V .1-'jV_� \ I
`V
_- lNNt �
�_��� Iiit60�l�N �
I tiITSM�i/N _ __—__� ..
� 1fii5CU7�tl __ . _. — — '
I
� �lfll5'W17U mliC��l7N �, —
1f1t5CI1�U�Y � lfll6Nltt11 iN�Nf1
�i- t��Y� � -.. .- _ItEli6'Y�71��1f/l6fJq7�! 15175fJN700 .. . . __. __ -_ .-_ I . _ __� -��I �
L.LI � ltliftl�7{M lilif���t�lf.I ______—f 1
Q . I � � I ___ _ _1f7tfU�llN I m:snam� ' �
�,�„ ,�„�..�.' � n„�N� CT
� I m:s�n:m I i'
�_�- � I � I �
-- -�-- .__ ____ I itllN�Q�1� I1f176��N�1i1ltMM1�1 /
�_ l I �NIfSMOfM
—_�—�T� I . — . .. _ __ . .t-__._____ �/' _.._ .
I � ._ —_ ' ., I O L_—_
ltllfl��6�M
lfllSCAN/M —�
6M /
� IEIlSfJ1��IN m itllN11�6�1
_ , �f1t6GM�i ff i6C�W � 151fS��tl7M 16�RiU — �`/ , .
� lSC11M0 f1l6C11M i - - - 1�1
—
_
� • �..���� � �- ��p� � 131f5011M10 -i 1\
� 76CIIIM 1 .�
2, � If176G0�0�0 � j I
- - -- -. S1i5��U111 p�iNORN
_ _
� -___ ... —.— _ ___a lilt�'W7�M :. i . _ ..i_ �� I
L � v�7�� �.. __ _ I ----_ . .. ___ ! � 0 100 200 300 Feet i
lflis��p7��I.
�, _ I -__. 81liNlli�1 1ftt5NN�11�iflli��N�N.lfllir1i11�I %� ' ',.
I � � I — - � 1 �A1 � 1�=243 feet
i � i� t�e�w„� m:s�nm��mtwnnx — i LI V
�6 °""",�" SH�DY �
� � � m:sumu — — —� - � � 1�� "
--1- � - -- -{ ` I
_
. 1f17SNN!/� 1f1i6��NN� lfllSM�SN�I �
_I—__ - __ . ._'. � .. _- _ . _--_
•I . _- . i50111 , � ,
�151�IM01� lEll511B1111 IEIt7110778!
� I ii Infortnation on this map is for general location only and
�---- i i i should be verified with Ihe Oavelopment Services Divisian.
" ELMW�OD S�T' ._ �A' � 13125SWHaIIBIvd
-- � . � �r � _J LOLA �1 V ' ' Tlgard,OR 97223 I
�� (503)639-4171
- — -- � j . _ '. . . ', � ..- --- ------� . . . .. -_I- �'I� ,./ hnp Uwww ci ligartl.or.us
Community Development Plot date:Jun 20,2007;C:lmagiclMAGIC03.APR
1 5CA-0920 1 S125D6-02901
2004- ARTITION PLAT BROWN HARRY L 8�TRACY J
OW R F LOTS 1-3 9280 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D6-04100 1S125CA-03001
ALBERTSON GEORGE R AND BURGHARDT WILLIAM A
ESTHER M CO-TRUSTEES 7645 SW CEDARCREST ST
PO BOX 1329 PORTLAND,OR 97223
SHERWOOD, OR 97140
1 S125D6-12300 1 S125CA-03000
ANEY WARREN W JR&A JOYCE BURRIS JOHN 0
9403 SW 74TH 7625 SW CEDARCREST ST
TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 25DB-12200 ' 1S125CA-04001
AN W EN W JR 8�A JOYCE BURRIS RICHARD
940 74TH 11270 SW BLAKENEY ST
T ARD, 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97008
1S125D6-08400 1S125CA-D3900
BARRON PATRICIA A TRUSTEE CALVI RANDY LEE&KIMBERLY
7220 SW SHADY CT 9385 SW 74TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125D6-0300� 1S125CA-07100
BEKEY RONALD CHAN LAP TAK&SIU LING
9310 SW 74TH AVE 9056 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 125 D B-02500 25AC-900
BENSON FRED O&MARION L CO AT CUSHMAN DOWNS
PO BOX 14652 HO OW RS ASSOCIATION
PORTLAND,OR 97214
1S125CA-08700 1S125D8-10900
BLANTON KATHERINE A&BRIAN K DEHAAN LAURIE&DUANNE
9225 SW 74TH AVE 7465 SW ELMWOOD ST
PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 S125D6-03401 1 S125D8-03200
BRICKLEY BRIAN DONALD 8 DENNY TOM&MAUREEN
SANDRA M 9340 SW 74TH AVE
7830 SW ELMWOOD ST TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD, OR 97223
1S125DB-12000 1S125D8-02800
BROWN CLAY G DEOCA GEORGE
9425 SW 74TH AVE 9230 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-04600 1S125AC-02101
DIGREGORIO LEAH D& GOLSAN MICHAEL G&JENNIFER K
FARIS BROOKS J 7395 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
1556 SE SHERRETT ST PORTLAND,OR 97224
PORTLAND, OR 97202
1S125CA-04700 1S125CA-04401
DIGREGORIO SAMUEL P GORGER RICHARD ALLYN&
1839 SE PARKVIEW CIR MOLLY JANE
MILWAUKIE, OR 97222 PO BOX 230725
TIGARD,OR 97281
1S125D8-03400 1S125DB-04700
DOMINIC JASON HAMILTON RICHAR�F&JUDY E
7305 SW SHADY LN 7175 SW SHADY CT
PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S125D6-11000 1 S125CA-07600
DURR KEVIN A HAYDEN LEONARD&DARLENE
7485 SW ELMWOOD ST 9115 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
isizs�a-o2sao i5i2scn-osaoo
FARCUS IOAN HELGET JAMES H
15646 SE CLATSOP ST 7480 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
HAPPY VALLEY, OR 97086 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125DB-03700 1S125CA-08800
FRAHM STELLA&MICHAEL HIATT LESLIE 0 8 MELVA JOAN
9500 SW 74TH AVE 9235 SW 74TH AVE
PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-03200 1S1250B-08300
GERRITZ BIGGI CUSTOM HOMES LLC HOUSE ROBERT&
9550 SW BEAVERTON HILLSDALE HWY LINDA
BEAVERTON,OR 97005 7230 5W SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223
125CA-03300 • 1S125CA-07800
GE TZ- GI CUSTOM HOMES LLC JONES MICHAEL D&SIGRID S
9550 AVERTON HILLSDALE HWY 7558 SW NIPA CT
AVERTON, R 97005 PORTLAND,OR 97223
isi2s�s-osooa 1S125CA-00101
GINTHER SCOTT T&SUSAN E C JESCHKE WILLIAM D CAROLY
7205 SW SHADY CT 9145 SW 74TH
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S725CA-00200 1S125CA-07700
GOECKS TYLER CHARLES JOHNSON SIDNEY W&CHERYL R
7408 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 13410 SW HOWARD DR
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-04200 1S125CA-03600
KAMAWAL A HASIB&FAZLIA LAWRENCE RESOURCES INC
2247 SE 30TH AVE 6770 SW ALFRED ST
PORTLAND, OR 97214 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-08900 1 125CA-04000
KAMAWAL ABDUL JAMIL& LA N RE50URCES INC
KAMAWAL MAHBOOBA 6770 LFRED ST
2247 SE 30TH AVE T ARD,OR 223
PORTLAND,OR 97214
125CA-09000 1 125CA-03800
KA WAL A L JAMIL& LA EN ESOURCES INC
KAMA AHBOOBA 6770 LFRED ST
2247 30 AVE T ARD,O 7223
TLAND,O 97214
1S125CA-09100 1S125CA-037D0
KAMAWAL TAWAB A&PALWASHA LAWRENCE ROBERT H
2247 SE 30TH AVE 6770 SW ALFRED ST
PORTLAND,OR 97214 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-07500 1S125DB-03000
KAU MARVIN L LEETE KEISHA D
9133 SW 75TH AVE 9300 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125DB-02902 1S125DB-04800
KING DELORES A LINDBERG PAMELA JD
9250 SW 74TH 7185 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 125D6-0290 1 S125DB-02400
KI RES A MARQUARDT JOHN R 8�CHERYL R
925 4TH 5470 SW 195TH AVE
T ARD,OR 223 ALOHA,OR 97007
1S125CA-07300 1S125D6-05500
KINS REBECCA N& MATTHEWS C BLAKE&HELEN MARIE
KUNS DOUGLAS B& PO BOX 23515
KUNS JERI L PORTLAND,OR 97281
9104 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223
15125DB-05100 25DB-036
KOEBER GEORGE R MA S C BLAKE&HELEN MARIE
9320 SW 74TH AVE PO X 23
PORTLAND,OR 97223 RTLAND,O 97281
15125D6-05400 1S125CA-D7200
KOEBER MARY E&ROBERT A MAZZEO OLGA E
7255 SW SHADY LN 9088 SW 75TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 S 125 D B-17 800 1 S 125CA-04300
NEGRU FIRA RIECK KRISTIN L
7211 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 7612 SW CEDARCREST ST
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125DB-08500 1S125DB-04900
NELSON LAUREN S& RYALL TREVOR P&KARYN J
MORRISON EVAN C 7195 SW SHADY CT
7210 SW SHADY CT TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-04900 1S125DB-03300
NEWHOUSE MIMI SETTLE TERRY&SALLIE A
7640 SW CEDARCREST 9380 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-00301 1S125DB-07500
OLSON THOMAS R& SPADAFORA MARLA KAY&GREG
CONRAD MICHELE E 7180 SW SHADY CT
741D SW TAYLORS FERRY RD TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-03400 1S125AC•01900
ORRIS JOHN K SPARHAWK ETHEL G
9205 SW 74TH AVE 7207 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125CA-06900 1S125D8-05300
PERONT ALLEN B&ANN P STARK NAKIA
7440 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 7225 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 125AC-07900 1S125CA-04201
PO PO E STEADMAN CRAIG
OW S OF LOTS 1-15 7606 SW CEDARCREST
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-03100 1S125DB-04600
RADER WARD A&EUNICE M STEIN LAURENCE N&CYNTHIA A
7617 SW CEDARCREST ST 7190 5W TAYLORS FERRY RD
PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S125DB-02600 1 St 25D8-05200
RASMUSSEN LEE W&MONA V STOLL LARRY A
9130 SW 74TH 7215 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D8-12100 1S125DB-04200
REDING LANNY D&BRENDA S STURM DALE E MARILYN M
9415 SW 74TH AVE 9475 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-07400
TANADA TONY N&WENDY F
9138 SW 75TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 125CA-0820
TA OR OODS OWNERS OF
LOT 1
1S125DB-02700
TOWNES WILLIAM B FAMILY TRUST
BY TOWNES WILLIAM B TR
9210 SW 74TH
TIGARD, OR 97223
1 S125CA-04500
WELLOCK CHARLES R&MARYLOU
7620 SW CEDAR CREST ST
PORTLAND, OR 97223
1S125CA-03002
WYANT ELIZABETH A
15693 SW SORA CT
BEAVERTON,OR 97007
Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design �roup
PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren
Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120
Tigard, OR 97223
Sue Rorman Susan Beilke
11250 SW 82nd Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Naomi Gallucci
11285 SW 78�h Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223
Diane Baldwin
3706 Kinsale Lane SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Brad Spring
7555 SW Spruce Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Alexander Craghead
12205 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223-6210
Gretchen Buehner
13249 SW 136th Place
Tigard, OR 97224
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:\curpinlsetupllabelslClT East.doc) UPDATED: 12-Dec-06
Jun, 20. 2007 11 : 57AM No, 0179 P. 1
C1TY Of TIGARD �
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPAATMENT
PIANNING DIVISION GTYDPTIGARD
13125 SW NAI.I BOUIEVARD Community�eveCo�rment
TIGARD, OREGON 97�23 sr�,�y��er�rcom�n�cy
PHONE: 503-639-4111 FA�: 503-S98-I960 (Attn: Patry/Planning)
� o � O Q 11 O O 0 D D O D � VUUUU� L�1�1131� �
Il
Property owner in�ormation is valid for 3 months from the date of your request
[NDICATE ALL PROJECT MAP & TAX LOT NUMBERS (i.e. 1S134AB, Tax Lot 00100) OR THE
ADDRESSES FOR ALL PROJECT PARCEL.S BELOW;
1S1-25CA Lot3'�00
HOLDI,NGBl�OUR NEIGHBOR�COO�Y 1 S�T OF �ABELS WILL BE PROVIDED AT THIS TIME FOR
MEETING. After submittin your land �S appli��tiqr1 to the C�ty, nd
the proJ ect planner has rev�ewed your, application for complete�ess, you will�e �lotitied by means o�an
inco�npteteness letrer to obtain your 2 final sets of labels.
The 2 final, sets of labels need to be placed on envelopes with first class letter-rafe postage on the
envelopes in the form of postage stamps (no metered envelopes and no return address) and
resubm�tted to the C�it� for th� pur�ose of providing notice to prop�rty owners of the pro�osed land us,�
�pplic tion and the ae ision, he 2 sets of envelopes must be kept separate. The person isted below wilE
e cal�ed to pick up and pay for the labels when they are ready.
, _ ������' _�%���il�' � ��?�?
: �
NAME OF CONTACT PERSON: Jeff Caines HONE: 503-469-1213
�AX: 503-469�8553
is request may be mailed, axe or an e ivere to e i y o igar . ease allow a
2-day minimum for processing reques�s. Upon compl�etion of y,our request, the contact person will be
called to pick up their request that will be placed in Will Calr by their last name, at the Community
Development Reception Desk.
The cost of processing your request must be paid at the time of pick up, as exact cosf can not be
pre-determined.
PLEASE NOTE: FOR R�ASONS OF ACCURACY, 4NLY ORIGINAL MAILING LABELS PROVID�D
BY TWE CITY VS. RE-TYPED MAILING LABELS WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Cost Descri�tion:
$11 to generate the mailing list, plus$2 per sheet for prinfing the list onto labels(2Q addresses per sheet).
Then, multi 1 the cosf to rint one set of fabels b the number of sets re uested.
EXAMPLE COST FOR THIS REQUEST
4 sheels of labels x$2/sheet=�00 x 2 se1S= $16.00 �sheel(s)of labels x$2lsheet=�x � sels� � ���-'
2 sheels of labels x$2lsheet for interested parties x 2 sels= $ a,00 / sheet(s)of labels x$2/sheef fa interested part�es=��x�sels= ��f
GENERA7E LIST � $.11.QQ G�N�RATE LIST =
70TAL = .$31.00 TOTAL $`�
1S125CA-03700
LAWRENCE ROBERT H
6770 SW ALFRED ST
TIGARD, OR 97223
�I�,� �7 ���y
l�C.� r�i
��
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING -
��. �..
I, Patricia L. Lunsford being first duly sworn/affirrr�, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Administrative
Assistant for the City of�I'igard,Washington County,Oregon and that I served the following:
<<�,nk,����,x�s��e,w�
❑X NOTTC� OF PENDING LAND LJ�E DEQSION FOR
MI.P2007-00013/VAR2007-00021 - LAWRENC� PARTITTON
❑ AMENDEDNOTICE
(Fde No./Nanr Reference)
� City of Tigard Plaiuiing Director
A copy of the said notice being hereto attached,marked E�chibit"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 Exhibit"B",and byreference made a part hereof,on
Jul�12,2007, and deposited in the United States Mail on Julv 12,2007,postage prepaid.
;
� �'
, ' , �
�
�' 1J`�
(Pe�on that repar�d Notice
STATE OF OREGON
County of Washington ss.
City of Tigard
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the � y dayof ��L���� ,2007.
OFFICIAL SEAL
� �- - KRISTIE J PEERMAN �
NO7AHY PUBUC-0REGON -�QJ��
��' COMMISSION NO.419242
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 28,2011 NOT Y PUBLIC OREGON
My Corrunission Expires: 7� Z g /j/
� � EXHIBIT �
NOTIC:E TO MORTGAC�E,LIENHOLDER,VENDOR OR SELLER
T�-IE TTGARD DEVELOPMENT C70DE REQUIKF.S 'IT�AT IF YOU REC�IVE T�IIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY
FORWARDED TO THE PURQ-�ASER
NOTICE OF PENDING ,,
LAND USE APPLICATION :
MINOR LAND PARTITION . , �
DATE OF NOTICE: July 12, 2007
FILE NOS.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2007-000013
�Jus�N'r' (vAx) 200�-0002 i
FILE TITLE: LAWRENCE PARTITION
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER Bob Lawrence REPRESENTATIVE: Jeff Caines
6770 SW Alfred Street SR Design,LLC
Tigard, OR 97223 8196 SW Hall Blvd.
Beaverton, OR 97008
RE QLJE ST: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three (3) lots of 7,519 SF,
7,505 SF and 7,550 SF for single-family homes. The existing single-family home and accessory
stnicnire will be demolished. The applicant also requests approval of to use existing trees as street
trees by means of a landscaping Adjustment.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street;Washington CountyTax Map 1S125CA,Tax Lot 3700.
ZONE: R 4.5: I.ow Densi Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached
sing e- 'yhomes wit or wit out accessory residential units at a m,n;mum lot size of 7,500 square
feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are pernutted conditionally. Some civic and
instituuonal uses are also pem�itted conditionally.
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Communiry Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725,
18.745, 18.765, 18.7�J0, 18.795 and 18.$10.
YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS:
Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written
comments on the application to the Caty. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON JUL;Y 26, 2007.
All comments should be directed to Emilv Eng,Assistant Planner(x2712� in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW
Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at 503-639-4171 or by e-mail to
emil tigard-or.�ov.
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CIT'Y OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE
DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION-
MAKING PROCE SS
THE QTY OF 7TGARD APPREQATES RECEIVING COMNIENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. CONIlVIEN'TS WILL
BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WIT�IIN TT-� NO7'ICE OF DEQSION. A DEQSION ON T�-IIS ISSLJE IS
TENTA'TIVELY SC.'E-�EDULED FOR AUGUST 13,2007. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS,YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY
OF THE FULL DEQSION ONC� IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMIvIENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF
THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMA'TION:
• Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be
applicable to this proposal;
• Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response;
• Commenu that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with
sufficient specificiryon that issue.
FAILURE OF ANY PARTY TO ADDRESS THE RELEVANT APPROVAL QZITERIA WITH SUFFIQENT SPEQFIQTY
MAY PREQ,UDE SUBSEQUENT APPEALS TO TI�, LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS OR QRCLIIT COURT ON
THAT ISSUE. SPEQFIC FINDINGS DIRECI'ED AT TF-� RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA ARE WHAT
CONSTITUTE RELEVANf EVIDENC�.
AFTER Tf-IE 14-DAY CONIMENT PERIOD Q,OSES, Tf� DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A T�'PE II ADMI1vISTRATTVE DEQSION. T�
DIRECTOR'S DEQSION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANf AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPER'l Y LOCATED WITHIN 500
FEET OF TH3E SUBJECT SITE,AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMI��NTS OR WHO IS O'1"F-IERWISE EN7'ITI.ED TO
NOTIC�. T�', DIRECTOR'S DEQSION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANI'APPROVAL C�ITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA
AND TF-IE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN TF-IE RECORD,TF-IE DIRECI'OR SHALL APPROVE,APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY Tf�,
REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTTON.
SLJMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS:
• The application is accepted by the Caty
• Notice is sent to property ownexs of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written
comment period.
• The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies.
• City Staff issues a written decision.
• Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record
of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized
neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an
intergovernmental agreement entered into with the Caty which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise
entitled to such notice.
INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW:
The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to inake this decision are contained
within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Communiry Development Department. If yr�u want to
inspect the file,please call and inake an appointment with either the project pl�uuier or the planning technicians. Copies of these items may
be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be
directed to the Plaruiing Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written
Comments."
- i -- � -- � -� --
� -- ��ir:i�vi i i ni.ai�
�
� ' ----------
� �[LP'�K�-_���m13
„o �O �"_�R����i__�N��i?1
� � L_�\\REN<'E
P�RTPI�I(.)N
T,q y
5T ��S 4 pa�
LEGEND:
SUBJECT
Sl'I'E
� f.. �I
S� ❑
h �
� � ' �.
L �
Y — �5
5T , W `
♦
'� „
T �N �
BAR ��
mry i a aa�e,u . ��mepcv.0
� � EXH I 611�.�
Bob Lawrence MLP2007-00013/VAR2007-00021
6770 SW Alfred Street
Tigard, OR 97223 LAWRENCE PARTITION
Jeff Caines
SR Design,LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd.
Beaverton, OR 97008
1 5CA-0920 1 S125DB-02901
2004- ARTITION PLAT BROWN HARRY L&TRACY J
OW R F LOTS 1-3 9280 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125DB-04100 1S125CA-03001
ALBERTSON GEORGE R AND BURGHARDT WILLIAM A
ESTHER M CO-TRUSTEES 7645 SW CEDARCREST ST
PO BOX 1329 PORTLAND,OR 97223
SHERWOOD,OR 97140
1S125DB-12300 1S125CA-03000
ANEY WARREN W JR 8 A JOYCE BURRIS JOHN O
9403 SW 74TH 7625 SW CEDARCREST ST
TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 25D6-12200 1 S125CA-D4001
AN W EN W JR&A JOYCE BURRIS RICHARD
940 74TH 11270 SW BLAKENEY ST
T ARD, 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97008
1S125D8-08400 1S125CA-03900
BARRON PATRICIA A TRUSTEE CALVI RANDY LEE&KIMBERLY
7220 SW SHADY CT 9385 SW 74TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125DB-03007 1S125CA-07100
BEKEY RONALD CHAN LAP TAK 8 SIU LING
9310 SW 74TH AVE 9056 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D8-02500 25AC-900
BENSON FRED O&MARION L CO AT CUSHMAN DOWNS
PO BOX 14652 HO OW RS ASSOCIATION
PORTLAND, OR 97214
1S125CA-08700 1S125DB-10900
BLANTON KATHERINE A 8�BRIAN K DEHAAN LAURIE&DUANNE
9225 SW 74TH AVE 7465 SW ELMWOOD ST
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 S125DB-03401 1 S125DB-03200
BRICKLEY BRIAN DONALD& DENNY TOM&MAUREEN
SANDRA M 9340 SW 74TH AVE
7830 SW ELMWOOD ST TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S125DB-12000 1 S125D6-02800
BROWN CLAY G DEOCA GEORGE
9425 SW 74TH AVE 9230 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-04600 1S125AC-02101
DIGREGORIO LEAH D 8� GOLSAN MICHAEL G&JENNIFER K
FARIS BROOKS J 7395 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
1556 SE SHERRETT ST PORTLAND,OR 97224
PORTLAND, OR 97202
1 S125CA-04700 1 S125CA-044D1
DIGREGORIO SAMUEL P GORGER RICHARD ALLYN&
1839 SE PARKVIEW CIR MOLLY JANE
MILWAUKIE,OR 97222 PO BOX 230725
TIGARD,OR 97281
1 S125D6-03400 1 St 25D&04700
DOMINIC JASON HAMILTON RICHARD F&JUDY E
7305 SW SHADY LN 7175 5W SHADY CT
PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D6-11D00 1S125CA-07600
DURR KEVIN A HAYDEN LEONARD&DARLENE
7485 SW ELMWOOD ST 9115 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125DB-02300 1S125CA-06800
FARCUS IOAN HELGET JAMES H
15646 SE CLATSOP ST . 7480 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
HAPPY VALLEY,OR 97086 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125D8-03700 1S125CA-08800
FRAHM STELLA&MICHAEL HIATT LESLIE O&MELVA JOAN
9500 SW 74TH AVE 9235 SW 74TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 125CA-03200 1 S 125D B-08300
GERRITZ BIGGI CUSTOM HOMES LLC HOUSE ROBERT&
9550 SW BEAVERTON HILLSDALE HWY LINDA
BEAVERTON, OR 97005 7230 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223
25CA-03300 1S125CA-07800
GE TZ- GI CUSTOM HOMES LLC JONES MICHAEL D 8�SIGRID S
9550 AVERTON HILLSDALE HWY 7558 SW NIPA CT
AVERTO , R 97005 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125D8-O5000 1S125CA-00101
G�NTHER SCOTT T&SUSAN E C JESCHKE WILLIAM D CAROLY
7205 SW SHADY CT 9145 SW 74TH
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-00200 1S125CA-07700
GOECKS TYLER CHARLES JOHNSON SIDNEY W&CHERYL R
7408 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 1341Q SW HOWARD DR
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-Q4200 1S125CA-03600
KAMAWAL A HASIB&FAZLIA LAWRENCE RESOURCES INC
2247 SE 30TH AVE 6770 SW ALFRED ST
PORTLAND, OR 97214 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-08900 1 125CA-04000
KAMAWAL ABDUL JAMIL 8 LA N RESOURCES INC
KAMAWAL MAHBOOBA 6770 LFRED ST
2247 SE 30TH AVE T, ARD,OR 223
PORTLAND, OR 97214
125CA-090D0 1 125CA-03800
KA WAL A L JAMIL& LA EN ESOURCES INC
KAMA AHBOOBA 6770 LFRED ST
2247 30 AVE T ARD,0 7223
TLAND, O 97214
1S125CA-09100 1S125CA-03700
KAMAWAL TAWAB A&PALWASHA LAWRENCE ROBERT H
2247 SE 30TH AVE 6770 SW ALFRED ST
PORTLAND,OR 97214 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S125CA-07500 1 S125DB-03000
KAU MARVIN L LEETE KEISHA D
9133 SW 75TH AVE 9300 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D6-02902 1S125DB-04800
KING DELORES A LINDBERG PAMELA JD
9250 SW 74TH 7185 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 125D6-0290 1 S125DB-02400
KI RES A MARQUARDT JOHN R&CHERYL R
925 4TH 5470 SW 195TH AVE
T ARD,OR 223 ALOHA,OR 97007
15125CA-07300 1S125D8-O5500
KINS REBECCA N& MATTHEWS C BLAKE&HELEN MARIE
KUNS DOUGLAS B& PO BOX 23515
KUNS JERI L PORTLAND,OR 97281
9104 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S125D6-05100 25D8-036
KOEBER GEORGE R MA S C BLAKE&HELEN MARIE
9320 SW 74TH AVE PO X 23
PORTLAND,OR 97223 RTLAND,O 97281
1S125D6-05400 1S125CA-07200
KOEBER MARY E&ROBERT A MAZZEO OLGA E
7255 SW SHADY LN 9088 SW 75TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S725D6-11800 1S125CA-04300
NEGRU FIRA RIECK KRISTIN L
7211 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 7612 SW CEDARCREST ST
PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125D6-O8500 1S125DB-0490D
NELSON LAUREN S& RYALL TREVOR P&KARYN J
MORRISON EVAN C 7195 SW SHADY CT
7210 SW SHADY CT TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-04900 1S125DB-03300
NEWHOUSE MIMI SETTLE TERRY&SALLIE A
7640 SW CEDARCREST 9380 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-00301 1S125DB-07500
OLSON THOMAS R 8 SPADAFORA MARLA KAY&GREG
CONRAD MICHELE E 7180 SW SHADY CT
7410 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-03400 1S125AC-07900
ORRIS JOHN K SPARHAWK ETHEL G
9205 SW 74TH AVE 7207 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125CA-06900 1S125DB-05300
PERONT ALLEN B&ANN P STARK NAKIA
7440 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 7225 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 125AC-07900 1S125CA-04201
PO PO STEADMAN CRAIG
OW S OF LOTS 1-15 7606 SW CEDARCREST
TIGARD,OR 97223
15125CA-03100 1 S125DB-04600
RADER WARD A 8�EUNICE M STEIN LAURENCE N&CYNTHIA A
7617 SW CEDARCREST ST 7190 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
15125D8-02600 1S125D6•05200
RASMUSSEN LEE W&MONA V STOLL LARRY A
9130 SW 74TH 7215 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S125DB-12100 1 S125DB-04200
REDING LANNY D&BRENDA S STURM DALE E MARILYN M
9415 SW 74TH AVE 9475 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-07400
TANADA TONY N&WENDY F
9138 SW 75TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 125CA-0820
TA OR OODS OWNERS OF
LOT 1
1S125D6-02700
TOWNES WILLIAM B FAMILY TRUST
BY TOWNES WILLIAM B TR
9210 SW 74TH
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-045a0
WELLOCK CHARLES R&MARYLOU
7620 SW CEDAR CREST ST
PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125CA-03002
WYANT ELIZABETH A
15693 SW SORA CT
BEAVERTON,OR 97007
Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group
PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren
Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120
Tigard, OR 97223
Sue Rorman Susan Beilke
11250 SW 82�d Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Naomi Gallucci
11285 SW 78"�Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223
Diane Baldwin
3706 Kinsale Lane SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Brad Spring
7555 SW Spruce Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Alexander Craghead
12205 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223-6210
Gretchen Buehner
13249 SW 136� Place
Tigard, OR 97224
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:lcurpin\setupllabelslClT East.doc) UPDATED: 12-Dec-06
��
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING -
�
I, Patricia L. Lunsford bein� fust duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Administrative
Assistant for the City of�I'iga , Washington County,Oregon and that I served the following:
;c]xrk.-�ry,n qn4no H�nh)Ik�ba;
❑x NOTTC� OF DEQSION FOR
MLP2007-00013/VAR2007-00021 -LAWRENC� PARTTTTON
(File No./Nxme Re(eterue)
� AMENDEDNOTICE
� City of Tigard Planning Director
A copy of the said notice being hereto attached,marked Exhibit"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 E�►ibit"B",and byreference made a part hereof,on
August 17,2007,and deposited in the United States Mail on August 17,2007,postage prepa.id.
�� ����- ��
(Person that Prep d No�
�
STATE OF ORE GON
County of Washington ss.
City of Tigard
�
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the � � J dayof ���� ,2007.
OFFICIAL SEAL
KRISTIE J PEERMAN
, �,i NOTARY PUBUC-0REGON , ������
' COMMISSION N0.419242 ,
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 28,2D11 NOT Y PUBLIC F OREGON
�
My Corrunission E�:pires: 7 Z �' 1 �
EXHIBIT..�
NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION
,�
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2007-00013
LAWRENCE PARTITION
120 DAYS = 10/19/2007
SECTION I. APPLICATION SLJMMARY
FILE NAME: LAWRENCE PARTITION
CASE NOS: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2007-00013
Adjustment (VAR) VAR2007-00021
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three lots of 7,519 SF,
7,505 SF and 7,550 SF for suigle�-familyhomes. The e�sting single-familyhome and accessory
structure will be demolished. The apphcant also requests an ad�ustment to the landscaping
standards (VAR2007-00021) to use ex�stuig trees as street trees.
APPLICANT/ APPLIC.ANT'S
OWNER Lawrence Resources,Inc. REP: SRllesign,LLC
Attn:Bob Lawrence Attn:Jeff Caines
6770 SW Alfred Street 8196 SW Hall Blvd.
T'igard,OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97008
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R 4.5: Low Densit�Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate
detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minunum lot size
of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-familyunits are permitted conditionally.
Some civic and institutional uses are also pernlitted conditionally.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street;Washington CountyTax Map 1S125CA, T�Lot 3700.
PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 7,519 Square Feet
PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 7,505 Square Feet
PROPOSED PARCEL 3: 7,550 Square Feet
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: CommunityDevelopment Code Chapters: 18370, 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715,
18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
SECTION II. DECISION
Notice is hereby given that the City of 'I�igard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the
above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at
City Hall.
THiS APPROVI�I'i. SI�[t�LL BE �%AL,IL FOR 18 MONTHS
FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION.
All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be
obtained for twenry-five cents (25G) per page,or the current rate charged for copies at the tune of the request.
SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION
Notice:
Notice mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owner of record within the required distance
X Affected government agencies
Final Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON AUGUST 17, 2007 AND BECOMES
EFFEC'I'IVE ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2007 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
DAD e-al-:
The I�irector's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise
adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as�provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in
accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code w�uch provides that a
written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten �10) busmess days of the
date the Notice of Dec�sion was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are ava able from the Planning
Division of Tigard CityHall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard,Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the
specific issues ident�fied in the wntten comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional
evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party dunn_g the appeal
hearing,subject to anyadditional rules of procedure that maybe adopted fromtune to tune bythe appellate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 31, 2007.
Fo�estions:
er information lease contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, �Emil E�n at (503) 639-4171, Tigard
City Hall, 13125 SW Hall�oulevard,Tigard, Oregon 97223 or by email to emil a tigard-or.gov.
--- - -, ,. - - - — -
7 ��i�:iiviii nt:�r�
� T '
� ----------
>,
� un-_n i i '
� ii
,
.ILI_ 1.
Ho �O \�_�K3nn_nul�?1
� L.1\\-F�EN�":E
P_�RTITIc>N
rqr �
sr �ORS FEa�`
LEGEND:
� SUBJECT
Srl'E
ST � ,�i
rC�� Sr
. ' a�,... I
�
^ �" �'
Y L
ST � �
j F,
n
N �� ..
I \�/� �
BAR �
. niry el�menl N e.IW 1. ��,C 4meycV.lAGl�3 H
�
�II
�----------— ' � � ji�3s�
--_--� I i � ;����
; �-��-----� i ,
, , ; ,/��q�-
i '��wacHCCla.v�nnarr II I I ¢�V!
� i i f
���-�_���-1 � �, I I
I � - ' �' t_i_noo_�I � � �
f- -� r----- �
�� '�' �'�i 'I ' � §
� {� � I ���
NI I PAf7C[L 1 I�I PMCEL 2 I�I PARCEL 7 �ptp� ��
-� i.sii s i i tea s �.� i.ssc s � � �I I� �
�m n I �-I 4 i�I" i �' _
'BWLEVARp HEIQ115' 1 I I I �I I �
i
�IL______ JIL______J I I �
�_____ _ �____–__'_'_"__
' 1'�'"'___"_' � !
L_ �_-__---- i I �
---------�--�-_-�"_-- ;..-°"-- �
— -��-- i
______—__��._�_ _____'_rc�uosrmsr_i I
I �
G
��
�
�T
q
�
� � � 1S125DB-02901 ` EXH I B IT�..
7 5CA-0920
2004- ARTITION PLAT BROWN HARRY L&TRACY J
OW R F LOTS 1-3 9280 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D8-04100 1S125CA-03001
ALBERTSON GEORGE R AND BURGHARDT WILLIAM A
ESTHER M CO-TRUSTEES 7645 SW CEDARCREST ST
PO BOX 1329 PORTLAND,OR 97223
SHERWOOD,OR 9714�
1 S 125DB-12300 1 S125CA-03000
ANEY WARREN W JR&A JOYCE BURRIS JOHN O
9403 SW 74TH 7625 SW CEDARCREST ST
TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 25DB-12200 1 S125CA-04001
AN W EN W JR&A JOYCE BURRIS RICHARD
940 74TH 11270 SW BLAKENEY ST
T ARD, 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97008
1S125D6-08400 1S125CA-03900
BARRON PATRICIA A TRUSTEE CALVI RANDY LEE&KIMBERLY
7220 SW SHADY CT 9385 SW 74TH AVE
PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125DB-03001 1S125CA-07100
BEKEY RONALD CHAN LAP TAK&SIU LING
9310 SW 74TH AVE 9056 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGAR�,OR 97223
1 S t 25 D B-02500 25AC-900
BENSON FRED O 8 MARION L CO AT CUSHMAN DOWNS
PO BOX 14652 HO OW RS ASSOCIATION
PORTLAND, OR 97214
1S125CA-08700 1S125D8-10900
BLANTON KATHERINE A&BRIAN K DEHAAN LAURIE&DUANNE
9225 SW 74TH AVE 7465 SW ELMWOOD ST
PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 S125DB-034�1 1 S125DB-03200
BRICKLEY BRIAN DONALD& DENNY TOM&MAUREEN
SANDRA M 9340 SW 74TH AVE
7830 SW ELMWOOD ST TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D6-12000 1S125D8-02800
BROWN CLAY G DEOCA GEORGE
9425 SW 74TH AVE 9230 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-04600 � 1S125AC-02101 �
DIGREGORIO LEAH D& GOLSAN MICHAEL G&JENNIFER K
FARIS BROOKS J 7395 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
1556 SE SHERRETT ST PORTLAND,OR 97224
PORTLAND,OR 97202
1S125CA-04700 1S125CA-04401
DIGREGORIO SAMUEL P GORGER RICHARD ALLYN 8�
1839 SE PARKVIEW CIR MOLLY JANE
MILWAUKIE,OR 97222 PO BOX 230725
TIGARD,OR 97281
1 S125D6-03400 1 S125DB-04700
DOMINIC JASON HAMILTON RICHARD F&JUDY E
7305 SW SHADY LN 7175 SW SHADY CT
PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D6-11000 1S125CA-07600
DURR KEVIN A HAYDEN LEONARD&DARLENE
7485 SW ELMWOOD ST 9115 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125D6-02300 1S125CA-06800
FARCUS IOAN HELGET JAMES H
15646 SE CLATSOP ST 7480 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
HAPPY VALLEY, OR 97086 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125D8-03700 1S125CA-08800
FRAHM STELLA 8 MICHAEL HIATT LESLIE O 8�MELVA JOAN
9500 SW 74TH AVE 9235 5W 74TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-03200 1S125DB-08300
GERRITZ BIGGI CUSTOM HOMES LLC HOUSE ROBERT 8
9550 5W BEAVERTON HILLSDALE HWY LINDA
BEAVERTON,OR 97005 7230 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223
25CA-03300 7 S125CA-07800
GE TZ- GI CUSTOM HOMES LLC JONES MICHAEL D 8�SIGRID S
9550 AVERTON HILLSOALE HWY 7558 SW NIPA CT
AVERTO , R 97005 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 S125DB-05000 1 S125CA-00101
GINTHER SCOTT T 8�SUSAN E C JESCHKE WILLIAM D CAROLY
7205 SW SHADY CT 9145 SW 74TH
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-00200 1S125CA-07700
GOECKS TYLER CHARLES JOHNSON SIDNEY W&CHERYL R
7408 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 13410 SW HOWARD DR
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-04200 � 1S125CA-03600 '
KAMAWAL A HASIB&FAZLIA LAWRENCE RESOURCES INC
2247 SE 30TH AVE 6770 SW ALFRED 5T
PORTLAND,OR 97214 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-08900 1 125CA-04000
KAMAWAL ABDUL JAMIL 8 LA N RESOURCES INC
KAMAWAL MAHBOOBA 6770 LFRED ST
2247 SE 30TH AVE T ARD,OR 223
PORTLAND,OR 97214
125CA-09000 1 125CA-03800
KA WAL A L JAMIL 8 LA EN ESOURCES INC
KAMA HBOOBA 6770 LFRED 5T
2247 30 AVE T ARD,O 7223
TLAND,O 97214
15125CA-09100 1 S125CA-03700
KAMAWAL TAWAB A 8�PALWASHA LAWRENCE ROBERT H
2247 SE 30TH AVE 6770 SW ALFRED ST
PORTLAND,OR 97214 TIGARD,OR 97223
7S725CA-07500 7S125D6-03000
KAU MARVIN L LEETE KE15HA D
9133 SW 75TH AVE 9300 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125DB-02902 1S125DB-04600
KING DELORES A LINDBERG PAMELA JD
9250 SW 74TH 7185 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 125DB-0290 1 S125DB-02400
KI RES A MARQUARDT JOHN R 8 CHERYL R
925 4TH 5470 SW 195TH AVE
ARD,OR 223 ALOHA,OR 97007
t S 125CA-07300 1 S 125D B-05500
KINS REBECCA N 8 MATTHEWS C BLAKE&HELEN MARIE
KUNS DOUGLAS B 8 PO BOX 23515
KUNS JERI L PORTLAND,OR 97281
9104 SW 75TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 125 D B-05100 25 D B-036
KOEBER GEORGE R MA S C BLAKE&HELEN MARIE
9320 SW 74TH AVE PO X 23
PORTLAND,OR 97223 RTLAND,O 97281
7S125DB-05400 15125CA-07200
KOEBER MARY E 8 ROBERT A MAZZEO OLGA E
7255 SW SHADY LN 9088 SW 75TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125D8-11800 � 1S125CA-04300 '
NEGRU FIRA RIECK KRISTIN L
7211 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 7612 SW CEDARCREST ST
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125DB-O8500 1S125DB-04900
NELSON LAUREN S& RYALL TREVOR P 8�KARYN J
MORRISON EVAN C 7195 SW SHADY CT
7210 SW SHADY CT TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-04900 1S125D6-03300
NEWHOUSE MIMI SETTLE TERRY 8 SALLIE A
7640 SW CEDARCREST 9380 5W 74TH AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S125CA-�0301 1 S125D6-07500
OLSON THOMAS R 8 SPADAFORA MARLA KAY 8 GREG
CONRAD MICHELE E 7180 SW SHADY CT
7410 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-03400 1S125AC-07900
ORRIS JOHN K SPARHAWK ETHEL G
9205 5W 74TH AVE 7207 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223
1S125CA-06900 1S125D6-05300
PERONT ALLEN B 8�ANN P STARK NAKIA
7440 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD 7225 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 t25AC-07900 1S125CA-04201
PO PO STEADMAN CRAIG
OW S OF LOTS 1-15 7606 SW CEDARCREST
TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 7 25CA-03100 1 S 125 DB-04600
RADER WARD A 8 EUNICE M STEIN LAURENCE N 8 CYNTHIA A
7617 SW CEDARCREST ST 7190 SW TAYLORS FERRY RD
PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125DB-02600 1S125D8-0520D
RASMUSSEN LEE W&MONA V STOLL LARRY A
9130 SW 74TH 7215 SW SHADY CT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S 125 D B-12100 1 S 125DB-04200
REDING LANNY D&BRENDA S STURM DALE E MARILYN M
9415 SW 74TH AVE 9475 SW 74TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
1S125CA-07400 � '
TANADA TONY N 8 WENDY F
9138 SW 75TH AVE
PORTLAND,OR 97223
1 125CA-0820
TA OR OODS OWNERS OF
LOT 1
1 S 125 DB-02700
TOWNES WILLIAM B FAMILY TRUST
BY TOWNES WILLIAM B TR
9210 SW 74TH
TIGARD,OR 97223
1 S125CA-04500
WELLOCK CHARLES R&MARYLOU
7620 SW CEDAR CREST ST
PORTLAND,OR 97223
isizscA-asooz
WYANT ELIZABETH A
15693 SW SORA CT
BEAVERTON,OR 97007
� �. � � �
Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group
PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren
Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120
Tigartl, OR 97223
Sue Rorman Susan Beilke
11250 SW 82�d Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place
Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223
Naomi Gallucci
11285 SW 78th Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223
Diane Baldwin
3706 Kinsale Lane SE
Olympia, WA 98501
Brad Spring
7555 SW Spruce Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Alexander Craghead
12205 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223-6210
Gretchen Buehner
13249 SW 136� Pface
Tigard, OR 97224
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:\curpin\setupllabelslClT East.doc) UPDATED: 12-Dec-06
1�
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING -
I, Patricia L. Lunsford, bein first duly sworn/affinn, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Administrative
Assistant for the City of Tiga�, Washington County,Oregon and that I served the following:
, xrk.:kra�.nv�w�_.����k,,,;
❑X NOTTCE OF DEQSION FOR
MLP2007-00013/VAR2007-00021 - LAWRENC� PARTTTTON
(Filc:Vc�/Name Rrlemncc)
� AMENDEDNOTI(�
� City of Tigard Plaruiing Director
A copy of the said notice being hereto attached,marked E xhibit"A",and by ref erence made a part hereof,was mailed to each
named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s),marked Exhibit"B",and by reference made a part hereof,on
August 17,2007, and deposited in the United States Mail on August 17,2007,postage prepaid.
� ' ��' �l',��� , 1S71 /
(Person that P ared ouce)
STATE OF ORE GON
County of Washington ss.
City of Tigard
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the � y �dayof � ,2007.
OFFICIAL SEAL
^�- KRISTIE J PEERMAN ,
NOTARY PUBLIC-0REGON /
COMMISSION N0.419242 �
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 28,2011
NO ARY PUBL,I F OREGON
My Coiiunission Expires: 7l�� ��I
EXHIBIT �
NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION
. ,�
MIN�R LAND PARTITION (MLP} 2007-00013 -
LAWRENCE PARTITION
120 DAYS = 10/19/2007
SECTION I. APPLICATION SLJMMARY
FILE NAME: LAWRENCE PARTITION
CASE NOS: Minor Land Partition(MLP) MLP2007-00013
Adjustment (VAR) VAR2007-00021
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three lots of 7,519 SF,
7,505 SF and 7,550 SF for single-familyhomes. The e�sting single-familyhome and accessory
structure will be demolished. The a�plicant also requests an adjustment to the landscaping
standards (VAR2007-00021) to use ex�stu7g trees as street trees.
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER Lawrence Resources,Inc. REP: SRDesign,LLC
Attn: Bob Lawrence Attn:Jeff Caines
6770 SW Alfred Street 8196 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97008
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R 4.5: Low Density Residential. The R 4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate
detached single-f amily homes with or without accessory residential units at a m;r,;rT,um lot size
of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are pernutted conditionally.
Some civic and institutional uses are also pernutted conditionally.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street;Washington CountyTax Map 1S125CA,Tax Lot 3700.
PROPOSED PARCEL 1: 7,519 Square Feet
PROPOSED PARCEL 2: 7,505 Square Feet
PROPOSED PARCEL 3: 7,550 Square Feet
APPLICABLE
RE VIE W
CRITERIA: Commuriity Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.420, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715,
18.730, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810.
SECTION II. DECISION
Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the
request for a partition subject to certain conditions and has DENIED the request for an adjustment to landscaping
standards. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Secuon V.
NOTTC�', OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTI7TON PAGE 1 OF 22
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY
ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING DEMOLITION, GRADING, EXCAVATION AND/�R
FILL ACTIVITIES:
e app icant s contact or su mit e o owing requirements to e CI Y ORIS , ODD P GER
(503) 7T8-2700:
1. Prior to site work, the tree plan shall be revised to identify trees # 236, 237 and 238 as trees t� be removed.
Any tree protection measures concernin trees #236, 237 and 238, as well as overall mitigation calculations,
shall be revised accordingly. Trees #236,�37 and 238 are not subject to miugation.
2. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the site plan to show building footprints that do not overlap with
the tree protection fencing.
3. Prior to any_site work the a_pplicant shall install all proposed treeprotection fencing as approved by the Project
Arborist. The fencin� shalI be inspected and approved by the C�ry Arborist prior to beginnuig any srte work.
The tree protection encing shall remain in place through the duration of all of the building construction
phases, until the final inspection has been passed. After approval from the City Arborist, the tree protection
measures may be removed.
I the Builder is different from the developer or initial applicant:
rior to issuance of building pern�its the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicating the location of the
trees that were preserved on the lot c�unng site development,location of tree protection fencu�g,and a signature
of approval from the Project Arborist regardulg the placement and construction techruques to be employed in
buildulg the structures. All proposed protection fencing shall be installed and irispected pnor to beguuzing
construction. The fencin shall remaui ui place through the duration of all of the building constnzcuon phases,
until the final inspection�as been passed. After approval from the City Arborist,the tree protection measures
may be removed.
4. The Project Arborist shall submit written reports to the City Arborist at least once every two weeks, from
initial tree protection zone ('I"PZ� fenculg installation through the biulding construction phases, as he/she
monitors the construction activities and progress. Tlus inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection
fencing,deterniine if the fencing was moved at anypoint during construcnon, and determine if anypart of the
Tree I3rotection Plan has been violated. These reports must be provided to the City Arborist unt�l the fulal
inspection. The reports shall include any changes that occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and
location of the tree protection fencing. It the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arborist shall
justify why the fenculg was moved, and shall certify that the construction activities to the trees did not
advexsely unpact the overall,long-term health and stability of the tree(s).
If the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the scheduled intervals, and if it appe�ars the TPZ's or
the Tree Protection Plan are not being followed by the contractor or a sub-contractor,the C:ity can stop work
on the project until the City Arborist and the Project Arborist can do an inspection.
5. Prior to site work, the ap licant shall submit security in the form of cash or other means acceptable to the City
for the equ.ivalent value o�tree rrutigation required at $125.00 per caliper inch. If additional rrutigation trees are
preserved throu�h the partition improvements and construction of houses, and are properly protected through
these stages by the same measures afforded to other protected trees on site, the amount of the cash assurance
may be corresponduzgly reduced. Any trees planted on the site or off site in accordance with 18.790.060.D will
be credited agau�st the assurance for two yeaxs following final plat approval. After such time,the applicant shall
pay the rema�n,n value of the assurance as a fee ui-heu of planting. Any planting by the applicant must be
approved by the �ty Arborist.
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT:
e app cant s prepare a cover etter an su nut it, ong wit any suppo�rt�ul�g� ocuments an orp ans at a ress
the followin requu-ements to the CCJRRENT PLANI�IING DIVISION, ATIN: EMILY ENG (503) 718-2712. The
cover letter s�all clearlyidentifywhere in the submittal the required inforn�ation is found:
6. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall revise the site plan to show a visual clearance triangle for each
proposed dnveway.
NO7TCE OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITION PAGE 2 OF 22
7. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate new street trees on SW Cedarcrest
Street and SW 74th Avenue. The revised site plan shall indicate the species of the proposed street trees. Size
and spacing of street trees shall be as stated in Code Section 18J45.040.C.2. Proposed dnveways shall be
included on the site plan to verify that tree spacing standards are met. Small-stature trees are required for SW
74th Avenue. Street trees shall be chosen from the Cst�s street tree list.
The ap�plicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it,alon with� �any su�pport� i�ng documents and/or plans that address
the folIowin reqwrements to the ENGINEERING DE�ARTIVIENT, AZ IN: KIM MQVIILLAN 503-639-4171,
EXT 2642. �e cover letter shall clearlyidentifywhere in the submittal the required infornzation is found:
8. A Public Facility Improvement (I'FI) permit is required for this project to cover the public sidewalk and any
other work in the ublic ngh�t-of-wa . Six (6) sets of detailed ublic un�rovement lans shall be submitted for
review to the Engmeenng llepart ent. NOTE: these plans are in addition to ary drawings required by the
Building Division and shouId onl include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Fac�ty
Improvement (I'FI) pern�� iit plans shal�conf orm to City of Tigard Pubhc Improvement Design Standards,which
are available at CityHall and the Cit�s web page (www.tigard or.gov).
9. The PFI pernlit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and tele�phone number of the
individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Pernuttee", and who wiIl provide the financial
assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entiry is a co�oranon, luYUted partnership,
LLC, etc. Also spec�fy the state withuz which the entity is uzcorporated and provi e the name of the corporate
contact person. Failure to provide accurate inforn�ation to the Engineenng Department will delay processu�g
of pro�ect documents.
10. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer.
The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control dunng the pubhc improvement construction phase.
11. The CityEngineer maydeternline the necessityfor,and require submittal and approval of, a construction access
and parking plan for the home building hase..If the CatyEngineer deems such a plan necessary,the applicant
shall provide the plan pnor to issuance o�builduig pernuts.
12. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart,
Engineering).
13. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the En ineering Department as a part of the Public Facility
Improvement perrrut, indicating that they will construct �e followu�g frontage unprovements along SW 74th
Avenue as a part of this project:
A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk with 5-foot planter strip;
B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC reqwrements;
C. streetlight layout by applicant's enguieer,to be approved by City Engineer; and
D. driveway apron(�f appltcable).
14. The applicant's plans shall show the e�sting access for Lot 3 to be closed and relocated to a location at least 10
feet from the pouzt of curvature of the radius at the uztersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue.
15. The applicant shall execute a Restrictive Covenant whereby they agree to complete or participate in the future
im�provements of SW 74th Avenue and SW Cedarcrest Street adjacent to the subject property,when any of the
f ollowing events occur:
A. when the improvements are part of a larger project to be financed or pa.id for by the forn�ation of a
Local Improvement D�stnct,
B. when the unprovements are part of a larger project to be financed or paid for in whole or in part bythe
City or other public agency,
C. when the unprovements are part of a larger project to be constructed by a third party and involves the
sharing of design and/or construction expenses by the third party owner(s) of property in addition to
the subject property,or
D. when construction of the improvements is deemed to be appropriate by the City Engineer in
conjunction with construction of unprovements by others adjacent to the sub�ect site.
NOTTCE OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENCE PARTTTTON PAGE 3 OF 22
16. The applicant's engineer shall submit preluninary sight distance certification to Washington County LUT for
review and approval.
17. The applicant shall obtain a facility Qernut from the Department of Land Use and Transportation of
Washington County,to perform work wrthin the right-of-way of SW Cedarcrest Street. This work shall include,
but is not limited to, a concrete sidewalk to County standards,relocation of the existing driveway and adequate
roadway drainage. A copy shall be provided to the City Enguieering Department pnor to �ssuance of a Public
Facility Improvement (PFI) pernzit Perrrut.
18. The applicant's plans shall be revised to e�end the public sewer main along the SW Cedarcrest Street frontage
with laterals,no more than 50 feet in length,to serve Parcels 1 and 2.
19. The applicant shall obtain a proval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection
prior to�ssuance of the Ci� Public Facility Improvement pe�rut.
20. An erosion control plan shall be �rovided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI)�pernzit drawings.
The plan shall conform to the Erosion Prevention and Sediment �ontrol Design and 1'laruung Nlanual,
Febnaary 2003 edition."
21. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the Cit�s global
positiorung system(GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22) as recorded in Washington County survey records.
These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the sameprecision as reqlured for the subdivision
plat boundary. Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contaui the scale factor to convert ground
measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be
established by:
. GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey.
. By random traverse using conventional survey�ng methods.
22. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements:
A. Submit for City review four (4) pap er copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to
practice in Oregon,and necessary data or narrative.
B. Attach a check ui the amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Plannulg/Engineering Pernut
Technicians,at (503) 639-4171,e�t.2421).
G The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the m;r,;mum standards set forth bythe Oregon
Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05) Washington County and by the City of Tigard.
D. The right-of-way dedication for SW Cedarcrest Street (30 feet from centerline� and SW 74th Avenue
(29 feet from centerluie) shall be made on the final plat. The right-of-way dedication sha11 include the
required corner radius.
E. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from
the Engineenng Department indicatuig that the City has reviewed the fuial plat and submitted
comments to the a�pplicant's surveyor.
F. After the Ci t y and C:oun t y have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final plat for
City Enguieer signature (for partinons), or City Engineer an d C ommunity Deve lopment I�irector
signatures (for subdivisions).
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF SITE OR BUILDING PERMITS:
e app icant s a prepare a cover etter an su mrt rt, a on wi any supportin ocuments an orp ans
that address the followin� requirements to the CiJRRENT P�ANNING DIVISI�N, ATTN: EMILY ENG
503-718-2712. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found:
23. Prior to receiving a buildin �ernut, the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction to the effect that any
e�sting tree greater than 1�' diameter may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a
certified arbonst. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved u1
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 bythe Director.
NOTICE OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�,PAR7TTTON PAGE 4 OF 22
The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, alon with an su oitin documents and/or lans
g y i
that address the }ollowing requirements to the ENGINEERING �EP�TMENT, ATTN: M
MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall cleady identify where in the submittal the
required information is found:
24. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a
"photomylar" copy of the recorded final plat.
25. Prior to issuance of building pernuts the applicant shall provide the Ciry with as-built drawings of the public
improvements as follows: T) 3 mi� mylar, 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available;
otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the Cit�s GPS network The
applicant's engineer shall provide t�e City with an electronic f�le with points for each structure (manholes,
catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective
X and Y State Plane Coordinates,referenced to NAD 83 (91).
26. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines alon� gSW 74th Avenue under�round as a part
of this project, or they shall pay the.fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage
of the site that is parallel to the utihty lines and will be $35.00 per lineal foot. If the fee option �s chosen, the
amount will be$ 3,675.00 and it shall be paid prior to issuance of buildulg pernuts.
27. During issuance of the building pernzit for Parcels 1 2 and 3,the applicant shall pay the standard water quality
fees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest approved�y CWS).
28. During issuance of the building pernzit for Parcels 1 and 2, the applicant shall pay the standard water quantity
fees per lot (fee amounts will be the latest approved by CWS).
29. Prior to issuance of building p�ern�its,.the applicant's engineer shall submit to Washington County the final
certification of adequate sight ctistance u1 accordance with CountyCode.
30. Prior to issuance of building perniits, the road improvements required by Washington County along
Cedarcrest Street shall be completed and accepted by Washington County.
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO A FINAL INSPECI'ION:
e app icant s pre.pare a cover etter an su mit it, a on wi any support7ng ocuments an orp ans
that address the followin� requirements to the CURRENT P�ANNING DIVISION, ATTN: EMILY ENG
503-718-2712. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found:
31. Prior to a final inspection, the Pro'ect Arborist shall submit a final certification indicating the elements of the
Tree Protection Plan were followe�and that all rema;n;r,g trees on the site are healthy,stable and viable in their
modified growing environment.
32. Prior to a final inspection,a member of the platuung staff will visit the site to ensure that the development is in
conforn�ance with this dec�sion.
THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS OF THE
EFFECI'IVE DATE OF THIS DECISION NOTED UNDER THE PROCESS AND APPEAL SECTION
OF THIS DECISION.
SECTION III. BACKGROLTND INFORMATION
Site Information:
e su �ect parcel is located on the northwest corner of SW Cedarcrest Street and SW 74�' Avenue, both of which are
neighborhood routes. The parcel is 24�10.square feet with an e�cisting single-family dwelling and accessory structure.
The area is prunarily single-family residential and surrounding properues within the City,are zoned R 4.5. The west
boundary of the subject parcel borders unincorporated Washulgton County. A conservation easement aLso lies to the
west of,property. A o 0-foot storm easement e�sts within the property along its entire west boundary. The property
slopes a6out 4% to 5/o westward.
NO7TC�OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWREN�PARTITION PAGE 5 OF 22
There are no previous land use decisions related to the subject parcel. The existing dwelling was built in 1939.
�Pro osal:�
The applicant is requestin approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three lots of 7,519 SF, 7 505 SF and 7,550 SF
for single-family homes. �e e�sting sulgle-family home and accessory structure will be demo�ished. The applicant
also requests approval of a landscapuig ad�ustment to use ex�sung trees as street trees.
SECTION IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Staff sent notice to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and received 1letter.
John Frewing's letter has been included in the land use file. H�s concerns are swnmarized below:
1) Overhead utility lines: Mr. Frewing aigues that the app licant should place the overhead utilities underground as part
of the infrastructure work of this pro�ect. He u-idicates that the same applicant has pa�rtitioned lots on the same side of
SW 74�' Avenue to the north and south of the sub ject site (M I.P2007-OQ001 and MLl'2007-00005). He says that from
o bservation no new po le inst a llations wo u l d be necessary an d cites t hat new po les are t he princip a l reason for wa.iving
the underground utiltty nxle. Mr.Frewing�uses the Wei ela Terrace subdivision as an example of a nearby development
that was reqLUred to underground utility7ines. Lastly, �e points out that the presence of the utiliry lines conflicts with
the applicant's intent to retain the e�sting trees that are under the lines, suggesung that the utility lines be under-
grounded f or this reason as well.
2) Street Imp rovements: Mr. Frewing notes that the a lication appears to indicate street sections on SW 74`''Avenue
and SW Cedarcrest Street that do not complywith the �t�s standard.
3) Tree Removal/Preservauon: Mr. Frewing notes that there is some conflict with the tree plan and proposed building
f ootprints.
4) Relationship to Adjoining Developments: Mr. Frewing notes that the applicant states that no sidewalk would be
necessary on SW 74`�' Avenue; however, for the previous neighboring partitions the applicant was requi_red to install
sidewall�s that meet the �standards. He also notes that the applicant statec�u1 the narr~ative for MLl'2007-00005
that he would install side that meet City standards on SW Cedarcrest Street,thereby providing a basis for meeting
City standards on the County street.
RESPONSE:
1) The applicant ap lied for each partition (NII,P2007-00001, -00005 and -00013) at a different time. The City cannot
make requu-ements�or one�pro�ect based on past projects just because the applicant is the same. Past pracnce shows
that partitions are generalry not required to underground utilities because the cost of under-grounduig is not
proportionate to the size ot development. Rather, partitions are ge�nerally required to pay a fee-in-lieu �f overhead
ut�ues exist. Code section 18.810.120.0 states, "The developer shall pay.a fee ul-heu of under-grounding costs when
the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing util�ues which are not underground will serve the
development and the approval authonty detennuies that the cost and technical difficulry of under-grounding the utilities
outweighs the benefit of undergrounding in conjuncuon with the development. The deterniination shall be on a case-
by-case basis." The project enguleer must submit an estimate to the Ciry Engineer of what it would cost to
underground the utility lines, sub�ect to the City Engineer's approval. In this case, as wrth most partitions, the City
cannot require undergrounc�ng because the rough proportionality test will not support it. Mr Frewuig cites that new
poles are the principal reason for an exception to under-grounding. However the code says that while it's a common
reason, it's not the only reason. With re ard to the three trees under the uti�ity lines, the adjustment to use them as
street trees has been denied because of t�eir poor condition and unsuitable location. Therefore the trees will not be
interferin with the e�sting utility lines. Lastly, it would be difficult to compare the proposec� partition to Weigela
Terrace (�2003-00012),wluch�s a subdiv�sion and was reviewed bydifferent standarcis.
2) The Code requires half-street improvements on SW 74�' Avenue along�the project's frontage. The pre-app notes
indicate that the following is included: 18 feet of pavement from centerline, concrete curb, storm sewers and other
underg round utilities, 5-toot sidewalk with 5-foot planter strip, street trees, street signs traffic control devices,
streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. The ap licant is required to construct a 5-foot sic�ewalk and to plant street
trees between the sidewalk and future curb. For t�e Pemainmg street un�rovements,the applicant is required to sign a
restrictive covenant. The previous partitions MLP2007-00001 and -00 05 were required the same. SW Cedarcrest
Street is a County Street, for which the applicant has been conditioned to work unth Washington County to meet
Counry standards.
NO7TC�', OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 6 OF 22
3) Staff agrees that there is some conflict with the tree protection plan and building footprints. The applicant has been
conditioned to revise the perniitted building footprints to be consistent with the tree protection plan.
4) While the applicant states and has stated in past a�pplications that no sidewalk will be provided, the applicant is
required for this application and has been required in the past to construct sidewalks because they have been}ound to
be roughlyproportional to t�e size of each development.
SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIAAND FINDINGS
Land Pattitions �18.420�
Approval Criteria (18.420.050.A):
1. The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations;
The proposed partition complies or can be made to comp l�y with all statutory and ordinance requirements and
regulauons as demonstrated by the analysis contained within this admirustrative dec�sion and through the unposition of
conditions of approval. Provided all conditions of approval are satisfied as part of the development and builduig
process,this cntenon�s met.
2. There are adequate public facilities available to serve the proposal;
Public facilities are discussed in detail later in this decision under Street & Utility Improvement Standards (Chap ter
18.810�. Based on the analysis provided therein,adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal. Theretore,
this cntenon is met.
3. All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards;and
The public facilities and proposed u'np rovements are discussed in the Public Facility Concerns section of this decision.
Conditions of approval will ensure that all proposed improvemenu meet City and agency standards. Improvements
will be reviewed as part of the permit process and dunng construction, at which time the appropriate review authority
will ensure that City and apphcable agency standards are met. Based on the analysis in th�s decision, th�s criterion �s
met.
4. All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below:
(a) The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable zoning
district
The width of the building envelope area for Parcels 1, 2 and 3 is 75 feet, 73 feet and 78.2 feet respectively. Therefore,
the standard of 50 feet�s exceeded.
(b) The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning distric� In the case of a flag lot, the accessway
may not be included in the lot area.
The lot area for Parcels 1 2 and 3 are 7,519 s quare feet, 7,505 s quare feet and 7,550 square feet respectively.
Therefore, all parcels meet t�e required ininunum of 7,500 square feet. None of the lots are flag lots.
�c) Each lot created through the partition process shall front a public right-of-�ay by at least 15 feet or have a
egally recorded minimum 15-foot wide access easemen�
Parcels 1 and 2 will have 75 feet and 73 feet of frontage on SW Cedarcrest Street. Parcel 3 a corner lot, will have a
combined frontage of 183.2 feet on SW Cedarcrest Street and SW 74`i'Avenue. Therefore, a�l lots exceed the required
frontage of 15 feet.
(d) Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning distric�
Parcels 1 and 2 meet the setback requirements of 20 feet front, 5 feet side and 15 feet rear for interior lots. Parcel 3, a
comer lot,meets the setback requu-ement of 20 feet front,5 feet side, 15 feet street side and 15 feet rear.
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITION PAGE 7 OF 22
(e) When the partitioned lot is a flag lot,the developer may determine the location of the front yard,provided
that no side yard is less than 10 feet Structures shall generally be located so as to maximize separation from
e�sting shuctures.
None of the proposed lots will be flag lots. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
�fl A screen shall be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an accessway
is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accordance with Sections 18.745.040. Screening may also be
required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed
developmen�
There are no proposed driveways within 10 feet of an abutting lot. Therefore,the applicant is not required to provide
screening.
(g) The fire district may re quire the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway would have
a detrimental effect on fire-�ighting capabilities.
The applicant does not propose any private accessways. All parcels will have direct access to a public street.
Therefore,tivs critenon does not apply.
(h) Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement which will
ensure access and maintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partit�on map.
A common drive is not proposed or required. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
5.Any access way shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705,Access,Egress and Circulation.
As shown later in this decision under"Access, Egress and Carculation (18.705)," the standards in Chapter 18.705 have
been met.
6. Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred year floodplain, the
city shall reguire consideradon of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adJoirung and
witlun the tIoodplain. This area shall include poctions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a
pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway
plan.
The proposed pattition is not ad'acent to or in the one-hundred y�ar floodplain. The nearest floodplain is about 1/z mile
away from the partition site. �elu�h� est elevation of the nearest floodplain is 180 feet. The lowest elevat�on of the
partition site �s 265 feet. Therefore,this critenon does not apply.
7. An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in accordance with
Chapter 18.370, Variances and Adjustrnents. The applications forthe partition and variance(s)/adjustment(s)
will be processed concurrendy.
The applicant has requested a landscaping adjustment to use existing trees as street trees,the application for which has
been processed concurrently with this dec�sion.
FINDING: All approval criteria for the proposed partition have been met or can be met by satisfying
conditions of approval.
NO7TC� OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 8 OF 22
Residential Zoning Districts (,18.510�
Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2. Below is a comparison
of the development standards and the proposed dimensions:
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS and PROPOSED DIMENSIONS
R-4.5 Pa�ell Pame12 Parcel3
Standatds Pro osed Pro osed Pro osed
Muumum L,ot Size
-Detached unit 7,500 sq.ft. 7,519 sq.ft. 7,505 sq.ft. 7,550 sq.ft.
Average Muiunum Lot Width
-Detached unit lots 50 ft. 75 ft. 73 ft. 78.2 ft.
Muumum Setbacks
-Front yard 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 fr.
-Side facing street on corner&tluough lou 15 ft. NA NA 15 ft.
-Side yaxd 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 fc. 5 fr.
-Rear yard 15 fr. 15 ft. 15 fc. 15 ft.
-Distance between ro line and front of ara e 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft.
Maximum He' ht 30 ft. Can bet met Can be met Can be met
FINDING: As shown in the comparison table above, development standards have been met or can be met
during building plan review.
Access,Egress and Ci�ulation(18.705�
Chapter 18.705 establishes standards and regulations for safe and efficient vehicle access and egress on a site
and }or general cirrulation within the site.
General Provisions (18.705.030):
Continuing obligation of property owner. The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in
this title are cont�nuing requirements for the use of any structure or parcel of real properiy in the City.
Access plan requirements.
No buiiding or other permit shall be issued undl scaled plans are presented and�app roved as provided by this
chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fultilled. The applicant shall
submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about tlus submission
requirement
The applicant has submitted a site plan showing how access, egress and circulation requirements will be fulfilled.
Therefore,this criterion�s met.
Public street access.
All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall connect direcdy with
a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required
standards on a continuous basis.
Parcels 1, 2 and 3 have direct access to SW Cedarcrest Street. Parcel 3, a corner lot, also has frontage on SW 74�'
Avenue.
Cu�fi Cuts. Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N.
The applicant is not required to install a curb.
Inadequate or hazardous access.
(1) Applications for building permits shall be referred to the Commission for review when, in the opinion of
the Ihrector, the access proposed would cause or increase e�sting haza�lous traffic conditions; or would
provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles; or would in any other way cause hazardous conditions to
e�ust which would constitute a clear and present danger to the pubIic health, safety and general welfare.
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITION PAGE 9 OF 22
The Director has not detemiined the proposed accesses would require review by the Coirunission. Therefore, this
criterion does not apply.
(2) Direct individual access to arterial or collector streets from single-family dwellings and duplex lots shall be
discouraged. Direct access to major collector or arterial streets shall be considered only if there is no practical
alternative way to access the site.
SW 74`''Avenue is not a collector or arterial street. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
(3) In no case shall the desi�n of the seTVice drive or drives requ� ire or facilitate the backward movement or
other maneuvering of a velucle within a street, other than an alley. Single-family and duplex dwellings are
exempt from tlus requirement
No service drive is proposed or required. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
Access Management
(1) An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveway s
and streets are safe by meeting adequate stackin needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by
ODOT, Washington�ounty,the City and AASH�O.
The applicant's engineer, SR Design LLC, submitted a preliminary Sight Distance Certificauon, dated May 15, 2007.
There are three dnveways proposed on Cedarcrest Street. The engineer states that with a posted speed of 25 mph,
which requires a ininunum of 230 feet of sight distance,the requirement can be met.
Washington County has jurisdiction over Cedarcrest Street up to 74th Avenue. As such,the City of Tigard has received
their comments and those comments are incorporated as art of this land use decision. The apPlicant will be required
to submit a copy of the prel'uninary sight distance ce�ication to WACO LUT for approval pnor to the County
pernzitting access to Cedarcrest Street.
Upon completion of the required im rovements,the engineer shall provide final certification of adequate sight distance
in accordance with County code. � must be reviewed and accepted by the County prior to issuance of building
pernzits.
�2) Driveways shall not be pernutted to be placed in the influence area of collector or atterial street
intersections. Influence area ofintersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach
to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shaIl be 150
feet, measured from the n�ht-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway.The
setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as detemiined from City Engineer review of a
traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a pro�ect has less than 150
feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any opt�on for shared access with the ad�acent parcel. If
shared access is not possible or practical,the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersect�on as possible.
SW Ta�lors Ferry, a collector,is parallel to SW Cedarcrest Street and intersects with SW 74th Avenue. Cedarcrest and
SW 74 are both neighborhood routes. With all proposed driveways on Cedarcrest, it would not be possible to be in
the influence area of a collector.
As a note,SW Cedarcrest Street is a County street. According to the Washington County Department of Land Use and
Trar�sportation (corrunents dated 7/26/2007)t the p_roposed driveway on Parcel 3 does not meet the driveway spacing
standard from a ne�'ghborhood route intersecuon. The dnveway must be relocated at least 25 feet from the intersect�on
of SW Cedarcrest Street and SW 74�' Avenue (10 feet from the point of curvature of the radius). The applicant is
conditioned to revise plans accordingly.
Minimum Access Requirements for Residential Use
�1) Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units on
individual lots and multi-famly residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.I and Table
18.705.2;
Table 18.705.1 states that the miniinum vehicular access and egress for sin le-family dwelling units on individual lots
shall be one 10-foot paved drivewaywithin a 15-foot-wide access for up to 2�ots. The site plan shows that each lot has
a 30 foot-wide access. The applicant's narrative states that the driveway pavement will comply with the ininunum of
10 feet. Therefore,this critenon�s met.
NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 10 OF 22
FINDING: Based on the findings above,the access,egress and circulation have mostlybeen met.
GONDI7TON: The applicant's plans shall show the existing access for Lot 3 to be closed and relocated to a location
at least 10 feet from the point of curvature of the radius at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and
74th Avenue.
Density Com�utations (18J15�
Section 18.715.020 provides density calculation formulas. Number of dwelling units is determined by the
following:
A. Definition of net development area. Net development area, in acres, shall be deternuned by
subtractin� the following land area(s) from the gross acres, which is all of the land included in the
legal descnption of the propeity to be developed:
1. All sensitive land areas
2. All land dedicated to the public forpark purposes;
3. All land dedicated for public rights-of-way.
4. All land proposed for private streets; and
5. A lot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an eaListing dwelling
is to remain on the site.
The applicant provided the following calculation for net developable area:
Gross site area: 24,210 SF
Public ROW dedication: -1,636 SF
et eve opa e area: ,
B. Calculating maximtun number of residential units. To calculate the maximum number of residential
units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of square
feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning distric�
The maX;mum number of residential units pernutted is 2,as shown below:
22,574 SF/7,500 SF =3.00 units =3 units
G Calculating minimum number of residential units. As req�uired by Section 18.510.040, the minimum
number of residential units .per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the maximum number of
units determined in Subsect�on B above by 80% (0.8).
The m�n�r„um number of residential units is 2,as shown below:
3.00 units x 0.8 =2.40 unirs =2 units
FINDING: The proposed partition complies with the density pernlitted by the Code.
Variances and Adjustments (18.370�.
Adjustments to landscapin�requirements (Chapter 18.745)
a. Ad�ustment to use o} existing trees as street trees. By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by
Section 18.390.030, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for the use of
existing trees to meet the street tree requirements in Section 18.745.030 providin� there has been no
cutting and filling around the tree durin� construction which may lead to its loss, unress the followin can
be demonstrated: (1) The ground within the drip-line is altered merely for drainage purposes; and �2) It
can be shown that the cut or fill will not damage the roots and will not cause the tree to die.
The applicant has applied for an adjustment to use e�sting Dou�las Fir trees (#236, 237 and 238) as street trees and
allow a meandenng sidewalk While the City Arborist concludes that construction of the sidewalk would not harm the
trees, Caty Staff and the City Arborist agree that the proposed street trees are in poor condition and will continue to be
in poor condition because of the existing overhead utility lines. The condition of the trees would always be
comprom�sed because of the need to conunuously top them to maintain the overhead utility lines. Therefore, the
adjustment is denied f or the reasons below:
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITTON PAGE 11 OF 22
Ad'ustment for street tree requirements. By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section
18.�90.030, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions or deny a request for the adjustrnents to
the street tree requirements in Section T8.745.030, based on t�e followin� approval criteria: (1) If the
location of a proposed tree would cause potential problems with existing utilitylines; (2) If the tree would
cause visual clearance problems; or(3) If there is not adequate space in which to plant street trees.
The City required the applicant to provide additional evidence of the subject trees' condition. On August 8, 2007, the
applicant's arbonst, Terence Flanagan, climbed the norther�unost tree (#236) and confirmed that the topping acuvity
has led to some decay. In a letter dated August 10, 2007, Mr. Flanagan stated that the side branches of the tree �ust
below the topping cut have experienced sunscald damag e, causing the upper section of the branch's bark to die and
allow for additional decay organisms to enter the wood of the branches. In addnion, these trees, bein close to the
electrical lines, should be considered a safety hazard for people and esp ecially for children interested in c�bing them.
With the utility lines being 35-40 feet high, the trees have not been able to grow to their typical height of 120 feet or
higher. The lower branches have been retained to provide a screen, but also in��kuig them within reach of anyone on
the ground wishing to climb them. Removing the lower branches to prevent climbing would severely deform the trees
as their tops have already been removed.
The City Arborist states that the existin Douglas Fi� (236, 237 and 238�) can not be used to meet the street tree
requirements. The location of the trees �cause problems with existing utilitylines. Mitigauon requirements for these
trees will not apply because their poor condinon and proximity to ex�stuig utility luies makes them hazardous.
However, the ex�sung trees should be replaced with street trees that do not ulterfere with the existing utility lines and
will meet other requirements listed in Section 18J45.040.
Both the City and the applicant agree that, while the original intent was to save the trees, a better and safer option
would be to remove and replace them with street trees that will be siutable to the location.
Landscaping and Screening (18.745�
Street trees (18.745.040):
A. All development projects fronting on a public street, private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet
in length a.pproved after the ado tion of tlus tide shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the
standards in Section 18.745.040�
The applicant has applied for an adjustment to use e�sting trees on SW 74`'' Avenue as street trees and has indicated
those trees on the tree removal plan and grading plan. .The applicant's narrative indicates that there will be new street
trees of at least 2 caliper inches. However, the apphcant has not indicated any new street trees on the site plan.
Therefore, prior to fina�l�plat approval, the applicant shall revise the site�plan to indicate new street trees on SW
Cedarcrest Street and SW 74`i' Avenue. Proposed dnveways shall be included on the site plan to verify that tree
spacing standards are met. Small-stature trees are required for SW 74`f'Avenue.
B. Street Tree Planting List Certain trees can severely damage utilities, streets and sidewalks or can cause
personal injury.Approval of any planting list shall be subject to review by the Director.
Street trees shall be chosen from the Gt�s street tree list.
G Size and Spacing of Street Trees. The specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as stated in
Section 18.745040.G2 of the code.
The revised site plan shall indicate the species of the proposed street trees. Size and spacing of street trees shall be as
stated in Code Section 18.745.040.G2.
FINDING: Based on the findings above, all Landscaping and Screening criteria are met or can be met by
satisfying conditions of approval.
CONDITTON: Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate new street trees on SW
Cedarcrest Street and SW 74th Avenue. The revised site plan shall indicate the species of the
�roposed street trees. Size and spacing of street trees shall be as stated in C;ode Section
8.745.040.G2. Proposed driveways shall be included on the site plan to verify that tree spacing
standards are met. -5mall-stature trees are required for SW 74th Avenue. Street trees shall be
chosen from the Cit�s street tree list.
NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITION PAGE 12 OF 22
Off-Street Parkin and Loadin�Requirements (18.765)
Section 18.765.02 .A states that at the time o the erection of a new structure within any zoning district,
offstreet vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070 (minimum and maximum
parking requirements).
For single-family dwellings, one parkin space per dwelling unit is required. The applicant acknowledges this
reqwrement. In addition,comphance will�e regulated at the time of bwlding perrruts. There�ore,this cntenon�s met.
Section 18.765.030.B.1 states that off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-
family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwelling(s).
The applicant indicates that the parking spa�ces will be provided on the individual lots. In addition, compliance will be
regulated at the tune of building perrruts. Therefore,this criterion�s met.
FINDING: Based on the findings above,parking and loading requirements have met.
Tree Removal(18.790�
Tree Plan Requirements (18.790.030):
A. A tree plan for the planting, removal and rotection of trees pre�pared by a certified arborist shall be
provided tor any lot, parcel or combination o�lots or parcels for which a development app lication for a
subdivision, partit�on,site development review,planned development or conditional use is filed Protection is
preferred over removal wherever possible.
A tree preservation and removal plan has been prepared by Terrence Flanagan,certificate number PN 0120 BMT.
B. Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following:
1. Identification of the location, size and species of all e�usting trees including trees designated as
significant by the city;
The tree inventory identifies the size and species of all e�sting trees including trees over 6 caliper inches. The tree
removal plan (Sheet C2 of submitted plans) shows an�nventorytable and location of all trees. Therefore,this criterion
is met.
2. Identification of a program to save e�sting trees or miti ate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper.
Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18�90.060D, in accordance with the following
standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping,
streets and parking lots:
(a) Retention of less than 25% of e�usting trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in
accordance with Section 18.790.O60D of no net loss of trees;
(b) Retention of from 25% to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the
trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
(c) Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the
trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
(d) Retention of 75% or greater of eausting trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation.
The applicant has proposed to retain 9 of the 13 trees over 12 caliper inches. Of these trees,the applicant has applied
for a Iandsca.pulg ad�ustment to use three retained trees as street trees.and allow a meandering sidewall�. As d�scussed
before, the tFiree trees are ui an unsuitable location under the utility lines and in poor condition as a result of toppin�g.
Staff has denied the adjustment and required the applicant to remove the trees and construct a standard sidewalk.
Therefore, trees # 236, 237 and 238 have not be counted toward mitigation. The applicant will be retaining 6 of 10
trees over 12 caliper inches (60%0) and will mitigate for 50% of the inches removed. The applicant �s removuig 73
inches total and will have to rrutigate 36.5 inches by planting and/or payu��g a fee of $125 per caliper inch. The total
mitigation cost is $4562.50. Any plantu7g on or off site shall be approved by the Ciry Arbonst.
NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�',PARTITION PAGE 13 OF 22
3. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed;
The tree plan does not identify all trees to be removed. The tree plan shall be revised to identify trees # 236, 237 and
238 as trees to be removed. Any tree protection measures for trees #236, 237 and 238, as well as overall mitigation
calculations,shall be revised accordingly. Trees #236,237 and 238 are not subject to mitigation.
4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect
trees during and after construction.
The tree plan includes a protection prograrri. However, the tree protection fencing appears to overlap with part of the
pemutted.building footpnnt for each lot. The applicant shall revise the site plan to show biulding footpnnts that do not
overlap with the tree protection fencing.
C. Subsequent tree removal. Trees removed within the period of one 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
18.790.060D.
No trees have been removed in the past y�ar prior to this application being submitted. Therefore, this criterion does
not apply.
Subsequent Removal of a Tree (18.790.040):
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 a�pproval for a conditional
use, and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The prope�rty owner shall
record a deed restriction as a condition of a�proval of any development pernut affected by this section to the
effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous accordin� to a ceitified 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 tlus deed restriction shall be subject
to approval by the Director.
A condition of approval reqluring the above shall ensure that this criterion is met.
FINDING: Tree protection has not fullybeen met. The applicant shall satisfythe conditions below:
CONDI'ITONS:
. Prior to site work,the tree plan shall be revised to identify trees # 236,237 and 238 as trees
to be removed. Any tree protection measures for trees #236, 237 and 238, as well as
overall mitigation calculations,shall be revised accordingly.
. Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the site plan to show building footprints that do
not overlap with the tree protection fencing.
. Prior to any site work the applicant shall install all proposed tree protection fencin as
approved by the Project_Arborist. The fencing shall be u�spected and approved by the�ty
Arborist pnor to begirului any site work The tree protection fencin�shall remain in place
thro h the duration of� f the buildin construction phases until t e final ins ecuon has
been passed. After approval from the �ty Arborist, the tree�protection measuPres may be
removed.
I the l3uilder is diff erent from the developer or initial applicant:
rior to issuance of building permits,the applicant shall subrrut site plan drawings indicating
the location of the trees that were preserved on the lot durin site development,location ot
tree protection fencing, and a signature of approval from the�roject Arborist regarding the
placement and construction techrugues to be emp loyed in bwlding the struct�u-es. All
proposed protection fencing� shall be installed and u�spected prior to begiruung
construcuon. The fencui shall ren�un ui place through the duration of all of the building
construction phases, unt�the final inspection has been passed. After approval from the
City Arborist,the tree protection measures may be removed.
NOTTC� OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENC�',PAR7TTTON PAGE 14 OF 22
. The Project Arborist shall submit written reports to the City Arborist at least once
evexy two weeks, from initial tree protection zone ('TPZ) fencu�g installation through
the buildin�g_c�onstruction phases, as he/she morutors the construction activities and
pro ress: This inspection will be to evaluate the tree protection fencing, detern�ine if
the�encu�g was moved at any_point during construction, and detenrune �f any part of
the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. These reports must be provided to the
City Arborist until the final inspection. The reports shall uzclude any changes that
occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and location of the tree protection
fencing. If the amount of TPZ was reduced then the Project Arborist shall�ustifywhy
the fencuzg was moved, and shall certifythat the construcnon activities to the trees did
not adverselyunpact the overall,long-term health and stabilityof the tree(s).
If the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the scheduled intervals and if it
appears the TPZ's or the Tree Protection Plan are not being followec� by the
contractor or a sub-contractor, the City can stop work on the pro�ect unt�l the City
Arborist and the Project Arbonst can do an inspection.
. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit security in the form of cash or other
means acceptable to the City for the equivalent value of tree mitigation required at
$125.00 per cahper inch. If additional mitigation trees are preserved throu�h the
partition unprovements and construction of houses, and are properlyprotected through
these stages bythe same measures afforded to other protected trees on site,the amount
of the cash assurance may be correspondingl reduced. Any trees planted on the site or
off site in accordance with 18.790.�60.D �be credited agau�st the assurance for two
yeais following final plat approval. After such time the applicant shall pay the
rem:,,r,;ng value of the assurance as a fee in-lieu of p�anting. Any planting by the
applicant must be approved by the City Arborist.
. Prior to a final inspection,the Project Arborist will submit a final certification indicating
the elements of the Tree Protect�on Plan were followed and that all rema;ning trees on
the site are healthy,stable and viable in their modified growing environsnent.
. Prior to receiving a building pernzit,the applicant/owner shall record a deed restriction
to the ef f ect that any existing tree greater than 12" diameter may be removed only if the
tree dies or is hazardous according to a cert�fied arborist. The deed restriction may be
removed or will be considered uivalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this
decision should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree.
Visual Clearance Areas (18.795�
This Chapter requires at a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to
intersect�ng nght-of-ways or the inteisection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area
shall contain no vehicIe, hedge, pl�anting fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction
exceeding three (3) feet in height TI'he coc�e provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall
be visually clear between three (3) and eight(8) feet in height Trees may be placed within this area provided
that all branches below eight ($) feet are removed. A visual clearance area is the tnangular area formed by
measuring from the corner, 30-feet along the right of way and along the driveway and connecting these two
points with a straight line.
FINDING: A visual clearance triangle is shown on sheet C3 of the submitted plans. Because the�roposed
development is on the northwest side of the intersection between Cedarcrest and 74 , a v�sual
clearance tnangle�� has been drawn at the northwest corner 30 feet along Cedarcrest and 30 feet
alon 74�'. Wl-ule this triangle meets the standard for non-arterial streets more than 24 feet in
widt�. the applicant has not included visual clearance triangles for each proposed driveway.
There�ore,this criterion has not been fully met.
CONDITTON: Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall revise the site plan to show a visual clearance triangle
for each proposed dnveway.
Impact Study_(18.390�
Section 18.360.090 states: "The Director shall make a finding with res�ect to each of the following criteria
when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:'
NO7TC� OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITTON PAGE 15 OF 22
Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of
development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the
study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the
development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users.
In situations where the Community Develo�ment Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the
applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide
evidence that supports that the real roperty dedication is not roughly propoitional to the projected impacts
of the develo men� Section 18.390.�40 states that when a condition of ap roval requires t�e transfer to the
public of an interest in real property,the approval authority shall adopt findings whici�support the conclusion
that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly propo�tional to the impact the proposed
development will have on tlie public.
The applicant has provided an impact studythat quantifies the effect of the proposed partition on the services below:
Sewer. The three homes will connect to the e�sting sewer line in SW 74`�Avenue. Each parcel will be connected with
an individual private four-inch lateral.
Water: The applicant is providing two new service meters for Parcels 1 and 2. Parcel 3 will utilize the e�sting meter.
Storm Draina e: Stormwater nuloff from the site drains from the north to southwestern corner of the property by
over an ow. The roof drair�s from all dwellin units will connect to the storm drainage system. The a hcant's plans
indicate improvements to the roadside ditch along both the Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue frontages in order to
accommodate upstream drainage.
Parks: To mitigate impacts to the Cit�s park system, the applicant will pay a parks systems development charge at the
time of building perrruts.
Trans ortation: The proposed three-parcel partition has frontage on the north side of SW Cedarcrest Street and west
side o SW 74 'Avenue. All parcels w�ll have direct access to SW Cedarcrest Street. Parcel 3 will also have direct access
to SW 74°i Avenue. Tri-Met bus 43 is within 500 feet of the site, providing another transportation option. With the
two additional lots and two additional single-family homes, the additionai daily traffic increase would be about 20
vehicle trips. The applicant is required to construct a sidewalk and half-street unprovements on SW Cedarcrest, a
Countystreet. A sidewalk and half-street im�p�rovements are also re quired on SW 74'''Avenue,a Citystreet. In addiuon,
the applicant unll paya Washington CountyTraffic Impact Fee forthe two additional houses.
Mit� ated Costs and Ro h Pro ortionali .
The app 'cant ' pay a as � gton County Traffic Impact Fee �'ITF) at the time of building permits. The TIF is a
mitigation mcasurc that is reguired for new development. Based on a transportation unpact study prepared by Mr.
David Larson for the A Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TTF's are exp e�cted to recapture 32 percent of the
traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The ap plicant will be regu�ired to pay
TIF's of approxur�ately$3,020 (Effective July 1, 2004) per new dwelling urut. Theretore, the TIF for this proposed
development is $6,040 ($3,020 �2 new dwelling units).
Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street impr�ovements citywide, a fee
that would cover 100 percent of this project's traffic imp act is $18,875 ($6,040 =0.32). The ditference between the TTF
paid, and the full impact, is considered the tuunitigated impact on the street system The wunitigated impact of this
pro�ect on the transportanon system is $12,835 ($18,875 - $6,040). Calculations for the mitigated impacts do not
uzclude nght-of-way dedicat�on or unprovements on SW Cedarcrest Street because they are County extracuons. The
applicant will be required to dedicate to the Caty additional right-of-way along SW 74`�' Avenue of approximately 420
square feet. The approxunate value of ununproved residentially zoned property�s $3.00 per sguare foot,for a total value
of$1,260. The Citycalculated the cost of construcung full halt-street unprovements along the project's portion of SW
74`�' Avenue to be $20,000 at $200 per lineal foot (100 feet), which would exceed the value ot the unpmvements the
City could requ.ire based on rou�h proportionaliry. Therefore, the app licant is required to construct a sidewalk at its
ultunate location along SW 74`''Avenue and plant trees between the sidewalk and future curb. The applicant mayenter
into a restrictive covenant for the rest of the half-street improvements. The cost for the sidewalk is estimated at$32.50
�er lineal foot for a total of $3,250. The ap plicant's total cost of rrutigating traffic imp acts is $4,510 ($1,260 + $3,250).
o reiterate, this estimate does not include (:ounty unp rovements requtred on SW C:edarcrest Street. There �s $8,325
worth of urunitigated impacts left. Based on the anaiysis below, the required right-of-way dedication and half-street
improvements do not exceed the estimated value of the urunitigated impacts.
NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTION PAGE 16 OF 22
Estimated Value of Im�acts
Full I�m�pact... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... $18,875
I,ess TIF Assessment... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .6,040
Less Miti ated Costs...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 510
Estimate V ue o Uninitigate Impacts $ 8,325
PUSLIC FACILITY CONCERNS
Street And Utility Im rovements Standards (Section 18.810):
Chapter 18.810 provi�es construction standards or�mplementation of public and private facilities and
utilit�es such as streets, sewers,and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below:
Streets:
Improvements:
Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in
accordance with the TDC standards.
Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing
street shall be dedicated and improved in acco�iance with the TDC.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a Neighborhood Route with bike
lanes to have a 58 foot right-of-way width and 36-foot paved sect�on. Other imp rovements required may
include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street ligFiting, storm drainage, and
street trees.
This site lies ad'acent to SW 74th Avenue,which is classified as a Neighborhood Route with future bicycle lanes on the
City of T�igard�ra.nsportation Plan Map. At present,there is approx�rnately 25 feet of ROW f rom centerline,according
to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 29 feet from
centerline and the required corner radius.
SW 74th Avenue is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development,the applicant
should construct a sidewalk at its ultur�ate location and enter into a restnctive covenant for future halt-street
improvements.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Washington County requires a Neighborhood Route (local
street) to have a 60-foot right-of-way width. Other improvements required may include on-street parking,
sidewalks and bikeways,underground utilities,street lighting,stonn drainage,and street trees.
This site lies adjacent to SW Cedarcrest Street, which is classified as a Neighborhood Route by WACO LUT. At
present,there is approximately25 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent taY assessor's map. The
apphcant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 30 feet from centerluie and the required corner radius.
SW Cedarcrest Street is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the
applicant should construct a concrete sidewalk and provide adequate roadway drainage along the site's Cedarcrest Street
frontage. These improvements shall be done in accordance with Washington County LUT standards.
Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed
which shows the pattern of existing� and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land
division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future
division of ad'oining land, streets shall be e�rtended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a
barricade sha� be constructed at the end of the stree� These street stubs to adjoining pmperties are not
considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the
adjoining �rope�ty is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property
owners wluch shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer,the cost of which shall be included
in the street construction cost Tem ora�y hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be
constructed for stub streets in excess o�150 feet in length.
This development is located at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue. There are no oppominities or
need for additional streets or extensions of streets.
NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITTON PAGE 17 OF 22
Street Ali nment and Connections:
Section 1�.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between
connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-
existing�developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restnct�ons e�usting prior to May 1
1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulatec�
water feature if regulations would not permit consttuction.
Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a
development site shall be extended within t�ie site to provide through ci�ulation when not precluded by
environmental or topographical constraints, e�usting development patterns or strict adherence to other
standa�is in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or
reconfi�ure the street pattern to�rovide required e�ctensions. Land is considered topographically constrained
if the slope is greater than 15/o for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or
topograplucal constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection
is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection.
Since this development is at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue there is no need to create blocks that
would be substandard in size.
Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on
collector streets, or 12% on any other street(except that local or residential access streets may have segments
with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shali be as
determined by the City Engineer.
The e�sting grades on Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue are much less than 10%.
Block Desig ns - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with
due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for
convenient access, cirrulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and
opporiuiuties of topography.
Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800
feet measured along the right-of-way line except
• Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-
existing development or,
• For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways,major collectors or railroads.
• For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulat�on provides equivalent access.
No new blocks are being formed or required. Therefore,this criterion does not apply.
Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average
lot width, unless the parY;el is less than 1.5 t�mes the miniiniuii lot size of the applicable zoning district
All lots are less than 1.5 times the m;n;mum lot size (1.5 x 7,500 SF = 11,250 SF). Therefore, this criterion does not
apply.
Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(S) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private
streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.OSO.A.4.c ap lies, wluch requires a pa�el to
either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a rrurumum 15-foot wide reco�ed access easement In cases
where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 fee�
All lots have more than 15 feet of frontage required for partitions. Parcels 1, 2 and 3 have 75 feet, 73 feet and 183.2
feet of frontage,respectively.
Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be
located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets
shall have sidewalks on at least one side.
The applicant's plans indicate they will construct public sidewalk along the frontages of Cedarcrest Street and 74th
Avenue,thereby meeting this cntenon.
NO'ITC� OF DEQSION MLP2007-00013/LAWRENC�,PAR7T7TON PAGE 18 OF 22
Sanitary Sewers:
Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new
development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in
Design and Construction Standards}or Sanitary and Surface Water Management(as adopted by Clean Water
Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted pohcies of the
comprehensive plan.
Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional
development within the area as projected by t-he Comprehensive Plan.
The ap licant's plar�s indicate there is an existin public sewer line in 74th Avenue. There is an e�vsting sewer lateral
that�be used to provide service to Parcel3. �arcels 1 and 2 shall connect with an extension of the existing public
sanitary sewer per G'W5 R&O 07-20, Section 5.09.2. The service laterals shall be in accordance with current G'WS
Design and Construction Standards. Per Section 5.09.3,the laterals shall be less than 50 feet in length. The laterals as
proposed by the applicant do not meet these standards.
Storm Drainage:
General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and
flood water runoff.
Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility
shall be lar�e enou h to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside
or outside the deve�opmen� The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility based on the
pro� visions of Design and Construction Standards for Samtary and Surface Water Management�as adopted by
Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments).
The applicant's plans indicate improvements to the roadside ditch along�b-oth the Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue
f rontages in order to accommodate upstream drainage,thereby meeting th�s criterion.
Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer
that the additional runoff resultin from the development will overioad an existing draina e facility, the
Director and Engineer shall wi�old approval of the development until provisions have �een made for
improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional n.inoff
caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and
Surface Water Management(as adopted by Clean Water Sercnces in 2000 and including any future revisions or
amendments).
In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek
Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a
stormwater detention/effective im�pervious area reduction program resulting ui no net increase in storm peak flows up
to the 25-year event. The Ciry wiIl require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces
provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development �s located adjacent to Fanno Creek For those
developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff will be pernzitted to d�scharge without detention.
The runoff from this site, pre- and post-development, is directed to the ditch along Cedarcrest Street. Detention for
minor land partitions is not typically required and Waslungton County did not requu-e rt for this development. They
did� however, reqture that the apphcant provide ade uate roadway draina�e along SW Cedarcrest Street frontage (to
uic ude cleanulg, grading and shapin of the ditch�. The applicant's p ans must be reviewed and approved by
Washington County before a WACO�acilities Pexrrut will be �ssued. Th�s pernut must be issued before any City of
Tigard perniits will be issued.
Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways:
Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments ad'oining�proposed bikeways identified on
the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions �or the tuture extension of such bikeways
through the dedicat�on of easements or nght-of-way.
S.W. 74th Avenue is classified a bicycle facility.
NOTTCE OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 19 OF 22
Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development pemuts issued for �lanned unit
developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other develo�ments which will pnncipally benefit
from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construct�on of bikeway improvements.
The applicant is required to enter into a restrictive covenant for half-street improvements along their 74th Avenue
frontage. These half-street unprovements will include the cost of bikeway unprovements, thereby meeting this
critenon.
Utilities:
Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication,
lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed under�ro� und, except for surface
mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets wIuch may be placed above
ground,temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operabng at 50,000
volts or above,and:
• The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the
unde round setvices;
• The �ty resecves the ri�ht to approve location of all surface mounted facilities;
• All underground utilities, incIuding sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the
developer, shall be constructed�p rior to the surfacing of the streets;and
• Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid distu�fiing the street improvements when
service connections are made.
Exception to Under-Grounding Requiremen� Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-
lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing
utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority detemunes that the
cost and technical difficulty of under-groundin� the ut�lities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in
conjunction with the development The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common,
but not the only such situat�on is a short frontage development for which under- rounding would result in
the placement ot�additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities�acilities. An applicant for
a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public
right-of-way from the applicant's propeity shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding.
There are e�sting overhead utiliry lines along the frontage of SW 74th Avenue. The City is not re qu�iring
undergrounding because the cost of the undergrounding wouId not meet the rough proportionality test, especially for
undergrounding beyond the project's frontage. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it �s equal to $35.00 per lu�eal foot of
street trontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along th�s site �s 105 lineal feet;therefore the fee would
be $3,675.00.
ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY
IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS:
Public Water System:
There is an e�stuig water main in Cedarcrest Street. Tualatin Valley Water District (�fVWD) provides service in this
area. The applicant's plans indicate two new water meters for Parcels 1 and 2 from the maui line in Cedarcrest Street.
The applicant will be required to obtain approvals and perniits from ZVWD prior to issuance of any City of Tigard
permits.
Storm Water Oualit�
The City has agreed to enforre Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water
Seivices (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which
require the construct�on of on-site water quality faciht�es. The facilities shall be desi ned to remove 65
percent of the phosphonis contained in 100 pement of the storm water runoff�enerated�rom newly created
impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and
method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year.
The C�X/S standards include a provision that would exclude small proJ�ects such as residential land partitions. It would
be impractical to require an on-site water qualityfacilityto accommodate treatment of the storm water from Parcels 1-
3. Rather, the GtiX/S standards provide that applicants should pay a fee in-lieu of constructing a facility if deemed
appropriate. Staff recommends payment of the fee in-lieu on this application.
NOTIC� OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTION PAGE 20 OF 22
Grading and Erosion Control:
CWS Desi n and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and
other pol�utants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development,
construct�on, gradin�, excavatin�, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS
regulations the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to
issuance ot�City permits.
The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan with the Public Faciliry Improvement (PFI) pern�it application for
review and approval.
Address Assi�nments: �
The Caty of Tigard is responsible for assi�ning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban
Service Boundary(USB). An addressulg ee in the amount of $50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be
paid to the Citypnor to fuzal plat approval.
Surve Re uirements•
The app 'cant's in p at shall conta.in State Plane Coordinates AD 83 91)] on two monuments with a tie to the
Cat�s global posiuoning system(GPS) geodetic control network(�GTC 22). �ese monuments shall be on the same line
and shall be of the same prec�sion as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates the plat
shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to gnd measurements and the angle from north to gnd
north. These coordinates can be established by.
. GPS tie networked to the Cat�s GPS survey.
. By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network The applicant's eng'uieer shall provide
the City with an electronic file with points tor each structure (marilioles, catch basins,water valves, h�ts and other
water system features) in the development, and their respecuve X and Y State Plane Coordinates, re erenced to NAD
83 (91).
SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The Ci of Ti arci En ineering Department has reviewed the proposal. Full comments are included in the land
use file�MI,P20�7-00013�. Findin�gs and condiuons of approval are uicluded in the Access, Egress and Circulation
(18J05) section and Streets and UtiTityImprovements (18.810) section of this decision.
City of Tigard Building Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it.
SECI'ION VII. AGENCY/OTHER SERVICE PROVIDER COMMENTS
Washington County Departrnent of Land Use and Transportation has reviewed the proposal and provided
conunents for im rovements on SW Cedarcrest Street, a County street. Full comments are included in the land use file
(MI.P2007-00013� The City of Tigard Engineering Department has mcluded Washington Count�s requirements in its
conditions of approval.
Clean Water Services (CWS) has reviewed the proposal and provided general comments and comments related to
sanitary sewer, storm drainage and water uality and erosion control. FuIl comments are inchided in the land use file
(ML,I'2007-00013). The Ciry of Tigard �ngineering Department has included CWS comments in its conditions of
approval.
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed the proposal and provided the comments regarding fire apparatus
access road width and vertical clearance, re uired fire flow for single-famil dwellin s and access and fu-e fi htin
water supply durin construction. Full comments are included in the land use file (�IL.P2007-00013}. The �ty o�
T'igard Enguieenng�epartment has included TVF&R requirements in the conditions of approval.
Qwest has reviewed the proposal and notes that it has aerial facilities in the area,but has no objections to the partition.
NOTTC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTITION PAGE 21 OF 22
Comcast Cable has reviewed the proposal and has no objections.
SECTION VIII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION
Notice: Notice was mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owner of record within the required distance
X Affected goverrunent agencies
Final Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON AUGUST 17,2007 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 1,2007 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
��eal:
The D'�rector's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All per�ons entitled to notice or who are otherwise
adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal tivC decision in
accordance with Secuon 18.390.040.G.2. of the T"igard Community Development Code which provides that a written
appeal to�gether with the re�quired fee shall be filed with the Director withui ten (10) business days of the date the Notice
o} llecision was mailed. The a eal fee schedule and foxms are available from the Plantung Div�sion of T'igard City
Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,�igard,Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the
specific issues ident�fied in the wntten comments subirutted bythe parties during the comment period. Additional
evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be subrrutted by any party during the appeal
hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted from time to tune bythe appellate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 31,2007.
stions:
If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Current Plaiuiuig Division, Tigard Caty Hall, 13125 SW Hall
Boulevard,T"igard,Oregon at (503) 639-4171.
August 17,2007
P Eng DATE
Assistant Planner
�- -- � • August 17,2007
REVIEWED BY: Richard Bewersdo f DATE
Plancung Manager
NOTIC�OF DEQSION MLI'2007-00013/LAWRENC�PARTTTTON PAGE 22 OF 22
—_
u I � . .
I ; i i i ' �
�_ -�— I I� ;E,,RA���� ,NF���,�- �,N srsTEti�
J VICINITY MAP
� - - - _
_
^ SW GNASE LN a � /
_ ` ——————————
� � � ——————————
�� e MLP2007-00013
� m
Ro �' _ � � �C VAR2007-00021
I ' °� O I� ' LA�JRENCE=_
-- — � °� 7� T T
�6 O 'JAK
. . � �� a � . 1 1 u\��0�
. . 1 . j .. � � ��,
� _ ~
I �m T�Y< I =
ST i O,QS �����1 ��
� � I �---� �1 >'-'� ; LEGEND:
� �! �
w ' j sUBJECI'
� SITE
Q /
CT
I - ST . .. . � � I � "...,.I.::iFENN�
CEDAR�t_S7- - , � ,�;,y�
� � . I O S FE�< ' �`� ��i-
� � � � � �`� ._ ���_ ,� �"�� .
� � , _
I y�
i Q __
' �
I K_
� _.. _ � :�='W�r�n rso � Q�-- n.'..
^ .- - -_ — ��,aoN�rn,l -
� � � i
�N � 1 � 1
` ,. __ . _ SHADY — �Ef BENGFD..� / WRNA!,A �R� I�
S� � ---- I I Tgard Area MaP
� -� __ l -- -- _i !� N
ELMWOOD ST
LOLA LN o eo ,so z4o 3zo 40o Fee�
1"=J07 feet
-- ST i _ ;;
, ,
' !
Q BARBARA � T
Information on lhis map is for general location only and
� � , � should be verified with lhe Development Services Division.
-- • � I 1 �1 --- - I A 1 . 13125 SW Hall Blvd
- __ I r�__ LIV Tigard.OR 91223
1
. .. - - � � � � � � (503)639-4171
� http://w.v�.v.ci.tigard.or.us
Community Development Plot date:Jul 12,2007;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR
� �V
=.�
�N�
I I � s
, I ,
------------ �
— --------------------- ' :
-------- � $�� �� �
i � ST'A[F.'���p� �
� --- -- � � �� �
� � � I 1 I I�7V � � }�9
I � �
� ; I � ��� �
� � , , ,
� ; °LAWRENCEI PARTITION" � � � _�„
W � � � I ����
� � j , � e
� Q I II �
I W �_r �n rum �.r� _ I �r rr rxm � � � I
».o �J—
-----T---
� -- ---- '---
-
. O ' � 71C � ��"�T � i
���-- -----, i �----- — � T_L_3700_r.�mon � i � I
Q ia orR
� I �
u� f i � � � j I
W I I � I � � � I j I i I �a Q �
i I � � � I I � �� �
� � �i9 � PARCEL 1 I� I PARCEL 2 j�l j PARCEL 3 j i �� � I � �� �
LOT t i U i �.519 SF � y 7,5D5 Sf � ' � 7,550 SF ,,. i i i � �� g
� "BOULEVARD HEIGHTS" I I �.ui�m� ��I I I � I � �� i � � �� I � N F �
, i------ —� L------ � �—----- ' ' � � �
I ' �r —-� ' �
; �--------------- ---�--------------- �� ��
�--r-1-------- i I �
� I I� ---'-----------�'�--na_-- �---- ��-_ �1---'--" �
---'----- '
-----�a-- - ----- �
[xti tS RM ntn.�o'��W � I
� —-------—-—- -— ----—----—----Sw CEDARCRESr STAEET I i a
1 ---, ,
� �
I
�
I
�� �
I �a �
o�i[ , !/ra/m'
' . OE9dE0 i A MCNa1
Expr#A11 i S RaPER
G1ECIfm�
sHm nnc
PRELIM.UYOVT
sNCrr xuMeFA
C3
EXHIBIT�
Bob Lawrence MLP2007-00013/VAR2007-00021
6770 S W Alf red Street
Tigard, OR 97223 LAWRENCE PARTITION
Jef f Caines
SR Design,LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd.
Beaverton, OR 97008
John Frewing
7110 S W Lola Lane
Tigard, OR 97223
Applitccx+Cin (5)
Project Suary
May 18, 20�7
North Cedarcrest
Land Partition
A Three-Parcel Partition
Tax Lot 3700 of Tax Map 1S1-25CA
7407 SW Cedarcrest Street
City of Tigard, Oregon
. 97223
Applicant:
Bob Lawrence
6�70 SW Alfred Street
Tigard, OR 97223 .
Office (503) 975-6560
Fax (503) 265-8243
Applicant's Representative:
SR Design LLC
Jeff Caines, AICP
8196 SW Hall Blvd. Suite 232
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone: (503) 469-1213
� Fax: (503) 469-8559
��������'D
JUN 2 1 2007
CITY Q�i'�GAND
PLA�NING/�f��IAlEERlNG
S�❑ �1.���"v�i..i,����
.l�'A! � 1 ?u�3Z
�� t�°?Al�f,�rr-�t�J��:
,,y ���
� PR&APP.HELD BY:
�,
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION
- LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION
._
�j Cily of Ti��arrl Perrnit Ce���ler 1312�SIYI Ha/l 13lUCl., "1 zdard, OK 97223
� � � Pl.�one: �03.639.�171 Fa�r•�03598.1960
File (I,ILr-�ZC��(Tl -C%�Z.'�� OtherCase# �f/1 (�Z.C>C�� - f.,..�c�
Date '� �� ��� By � � � � Receipt# c�� '3�`�'� F'ee '���'� �`�� llate Complete �
TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR
�_�djustment/�'ariance (I or II) �;�finor Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone Change(III)
❑ Comprehensive Plan_lmendment(I�� ❑Planned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change:�nnesauon (I��
❑ Condirional Use(III) ❑ Sensirive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance.�mendment(I��
_� :_.� ' .
❑ Historic Overla}•(II or III) ❑ Site Development Review(II) '
❑ Home Occupation(II) ❑Subdivision(II or III)
LUCA'170N V�"f 31�;12Ii PRC)POtil:l�ACl'I VI'fY\C IIJ.OCCCR(AJdress if a�-nilable)
7407 Cedarcrest Street Ti ard, Ore on 97223
�r:�x nt,�i�s&�i:-��i_c�r N�>s. �
Ma 1S1-25CA, Tax Lot 3700
'I�Uf�_AI.til'1�1�.tii%I�. 7Oti1NG CI.:AtitilPl(::11'IC7N
.56 acres, a roximatel 24,209 s uare feet R-4.5, Low Densi Residential
�i�i�i.ir,:�v�r•
Bob Lawrence
ncvi.iNC:�ot>Rt�_ss�cm�;sr:��n�:/iii'
6770 SW Alfred Street Ti ard, Ore on 97223
YIIONli NO. P:Aa NU.
(503) 975-6560 (503) 265-8243
PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON PI IONI?NO.
Jeff Caines, SR Desi n (A licant's Re ) (503) 469-1213
PR(1PI�:IYCY O\C�V Iilt;Dl�:lil)11(�l.l>i{K(.Anach list i£morc thxn unc)
Same�s A licant
�IAII.ING ADDRI�:SS/CI1�'/S'1'A'Cl�./%IP
PIIONI>NO. 14\X NO.
"��/hen the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with �critten
authorizauon from the o��ner or an agent of the owner. The ownecs must sign this application in the space pro�•ided on the back of this form
or submit a wntten audiorization�vith this a lic�tnon.
��iz��i��>s.�i.s��n�n�-�xy����i��,��t��.�,���n��
The xo osal is to develo the arcel in to three le al lots of record and to save the existin trees alon 74`h Avenue and
use them as street trees.
APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS
DESCRIBED IN THE"BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS"INFORMATION SHEET.
THE APPLICANT SHALL CER"i IFY THAT:
♦ If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance�vith the terms and
subject to all the condirions and limitations of the approval.
♦ r1ll the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted here�vith, 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 applicarion(s).
SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED.
:—,
� ��" �� �- ������---_. s �� � .
`� �c- ,�
✓Owner's Signature Date
l�,;
Owner's Signature Date
Owner's Signature Date
Owner's Signature Date
Owner's Signature Date
C ������
Appli ent/Representative's Signature Date
Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date
N
= LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTI�N
. . ,
120 DAYS = 10/19/2007
FILE NOS.: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2007-00013
1'�DJUSTMENT (V_�R) 2007-00021
FILE TITLE: LAWRENCE PARTITION
APPLICANT/ APPLICANT'S
OWNER: Bob Lawrence REPRESENTATIVE: Jeff Caines
6770 SW r�lfred Street SR Design,LLC
Tigard, OR 97223 8196 SW Hall Blvd.
Bea�-erton, OR 97008
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval to partition one 24,209-SF lot into three (3) lots of 7,519 SF,
7,505 SF and 7,550 SF for single-family homes. The e�sring single-family home and accessory�
structure will be demolished. The applicant also requests approval of to use exisring trees as street
trees by means of a landscaping.�djustment.
LOCATION: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street;Washington Counry Tax Map 1S125CA,Tax Lot 3700.
ZONE: R-4.5: I ow Density Residential. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached
single-family• homes�vith or without accessor�� residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square
feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted condirionall�-. Some ci��ic and
insuturional uses are also permitted condirionall�-. �
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Communit�� Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18390, 18.420, 18.510, 18J05, 18.715, 18.725,
18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.$10.
DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I � T'YPE II ❑ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV
COMMENTS WERE SENT: TULY 12, 2007 COMMENTS ARE DUE:TULY 26, 2007
❑ HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HE1IRING: TIME: 7:00 PM
❑PL.�NNING COMMISSION (MON.) Dr,TE OF HEr1RING: TIME: 7:00 PM
❑CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) DATE OF HE�RING: TIME: 7:30 PM
� STr1FF DECISION (TENTATIVE) Dr1TE OF DECISION: AUGUST 1.3, 2007
COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
� VICINITY�1r1P � DR��INr1GE PLr1N � SI'I'E DISTr�NCE CERTIF.
� SITE PLAN ❑ STOR�'�1 WATER��N,�I,YSIS � Ii�iP��CT STUDY
� N��RR�TI�'E � .�RBORIST REPORT � OTHER: �7ISCEI.I�NEOUS
STAFF CONTACT: Emily Eng,Assistant Planner (503) G39-4171, Ext. 2712
8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232 �— \
,I
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone 503.469.1213
Toll free 866.469.1213 I
Fax 503.469.8553
www.srdilc.com �
Transmittal
To: City of Tigard From: Jeff Caines, AICP
Attn: Emily Eng Date: 5/18/07
Address: Job No.: PAC003 North Cedarcrest Partition
13125 SW Hall Blvd. CC: File
Tigard, OR 97223
Phone:
For Your: ✓ Review& Comment ❑ As Requested ❑ Information & File
Via: 0 Mail ✓ Messenger ❑ Fed-Ex
Number Copies Description
1 3 Narratives w/ 11 x17 site plans
2 3 Full size site plans
Comments:
Emily,
Enclosed are teh three sets for the completeness application for your review. Please let me
know if you have any questions or need additional information.
Si ned: � � � ��
����.��'�! ����..
MAY 1 8 ?007
CITY�'�F i i a�ao
p�ANNIN�lF,�l�,I I�t�E�I�G
City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223
��
June 1�, 2007 i
' � /
Jeff Caines
SR Design,LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
RE: Completeness Review-Lawrence (North Cedarcrest) Partition
Case File No. MLP2007-00013
Dear Jef£
The City has teceived your application for Minor Land Partition (MLP2007-00013). Staff
has determined your application to be substantively complete. Please submit the following
so that your application can be deemed complete.
• Three (3) copies of complete application materials.
• Four (4) copies of full-size plans only.
• Six (6) copies of reduced plans only (l 1 x 17).
• Two sets of envelopes with address labels and first-class stamps.
The review process will begin upon completeness. Please be aware that staff has ns�t
reviewed the application for compliance with the code and may request additional items
during the review period.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (503) 718-2712. Thank you.
Sincerely,
G���'�"�
F,mily Eng
Assistant Planner
Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772
LAND USE APPLIC�IOH Dateect:� � ' -PaOc�'I - oo� � 3
-��, Z
COMPLETENESS REVIEW �OMPL TE ; ❑ INCOMPLETE
�---___
STANDARD INFORMATION:
DeedlTitlelProof of Ownership ❑ , , e Im act A 390____1_____
USA Service Provider Letter ❑� � te Envelopes with Posta e Verif o
ets 0�Application MaterialslPlans-"Paper ' " Pre-Application Conference Notes
#Sets Of Application MaterialslPlans-"CD's"
PROJECT STATISTICS:
�- Building Footprint Size �e �te
�. Lot Square Footage
PLANS DIMENSIONED:
Building Footprint '�R�+�aE+ng F °�- ° ing ' ble
'dmgi�ieight ❑ Access Approach and Aisle � Visual Clearance Triangle Shown
ADDITIONAL PLANS:
Vicinity Map �e��-.
Existing Conditions Plan
Site Plan �j�laa
TREE PLAN 1 MITIGATION PLAN:
I nv�e.h.tvr�-Y �. 'h u.Q,`d'+-
� o.�.0 I�c�Ei�/v� E--� � !a°--
ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports)
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS:
❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review)
❑ 18.340(Directors Interpretation) � 18.705(AccesslEgresslCirculation) ❑ 18.780(Signs)
❑ 18.350(Planned Development) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits)
❑ 18.360(Site Development Review) � 18.715(Density Computations) � 18.790(Tree Removal)
� 18.370(VarianceslAdjustments) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) � 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas)
❑ 18.380(Zoning MaplText Amendments) � 18.725(Environmental Performance Standarcls) ❑ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities)
❑ 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/lmpact Study) . ) �- 18.810(SVeet&UGlity Improvement Standards)
❑ 18.41 O(Lot Line Adjustments) 18.740(Historic Overlay) �` t�3.7�
� 18.420(Land Parti6ons) ❑ 18.742(Home Occupation Permits)
❑ 18.430(Subdivisions) � 18.745(Landscaping 8 Screening Standards)
,� 18.51 O(Residenfial Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations)
❑ 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage)
❑ 18.530(Industrial 2oning Districts) ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming SituaGons)
❑ 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) � 18.765(Off-SUeet Parking/Loading Requirements)
ADDITIONAL ITEMS:
✓ d.�=�taM,u f.�t�h'
�/T �,n.
✓ �wu��'w. - �c ar 1Q.-� �`! R�
� '
I:lcurpinlmasters\forms-revisedlland use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 6-Jun-07
�'��'�' 8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232 .�
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
JUN 2 1 Lu?�� Phone503.469.1213 b
CITYQ�F TI��� Toll free 866.469.1213
E3�R����"°�P'EI,'«iG'�< Fax 503.469.8553
www.srdllc.com �
Transmittal
To: City of Tigard From: Jeff Caines, AICP
Attn: Emily Eng Date: 6/21/07
Address: Job No.: PACOo3Lawrence Land Partition
13125 SW Hall Blvd. CC: File
Tigard, OR 97223
Phone:
For Your: ✓ Review&Comment ❑ As Requested ❑ Information & File
Via: ❑ Mail ✓ Messenger ❑ Fed-Ex
Number Copies Description
1 4 Narratives w/ 11 x17 site plans
2 6 11 x17 site plans
3 4 Full size site plans
4 1 Mailing envelopes (2-sets)
Comments:
Emily,
Enclosed is the required number of items to fully deem the North Cedarcrest Partition Complete
and begin a full partition application review. Please let me know if you have any questions or
need additional information.
Si ned: � �
�
City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 S�Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223
��
June 22, 200� �
' ' �
Jeff Caines
SR Design, LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
RE: Completeness Review-Lawrence (North Cedarcrest) Partirion
Case File No. MLP2007-00013
Dear Jeff:
T'he City has teceived your submittals for Minor Land Partirion (MLP2007-00013). Staff has
determined your application to be complete as of 6/21/2007.
The review period now begins and may take 5-8 weeks. Please be aware that staff has not
re�iewed the application for compliance with the code and map request additional items
during the review period.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (503) 718-2712. Thank you.
Sincerely,
L%!�
Emily Eng
Assistant Planner
Phone: 503.639.4171 . Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772
-i._ _._._.._
8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232 �
Beaverton, Oregon 97008 j
Phone 503.469.1213 ,
Toll free 866.469.1213
Fax 503.469.8553
� srdllc.com �
������� �.�
� . � .. .
Transmittal ,;;� � � ItU��
._ ,, �� 1 fV r�;'�.'`
To: City of Tigard �- + � ' ., T om: Jeff Caines, AICP
Attn: Emily Eng �.-� � Date: 6/25/07
Address: Job No.: PAC001 Lawrence Land Partition
13125 SW Hall Blvd. CC: File
Tigard, OR 97223
Phone:
For Your: ✓ Review& Comment ❑ As Requested 0 Information & File
Via: ❑ Mail ✓ Messenger 0 Fed-Ex
Number Copies Description
1 4 Full size site plans
Comments:
Emily,
Here are the four full size plans sets you requested.
Jeff
.,
Si ned: � ��
Introduction 5
General Information
Summary of Proposal
Site Description
TITLE 18- TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE
Chapter 18.390 -Decision Making Procedure/Impact Study �
18.390.040 Type II Procedure
Chapter 18.420 -Land Partitions 12
18.420.020 Administration
18.420.030 Approval Process
18.420.040 Application Submission Requirements
18.420.050 Approval Criteria
18.420.060 Final Plat Submission Requirements
18.420.070 City Acceptance of Dedicated Land
18.420.080 Recording Partition Plats
Chapter 18.510-IZesidential Zoning Districts 76
18.510.020 List of Zoning Districts
18.510.030 Uses
18.510.040 Minimum and Maximum Densitites
18.510.050 Development Standards
Chapter 18.705 -Access,Egress, and Circulation 19
18.705.020 Applicability of Provisions
18.705.030 General Provisions
Chapter 18.715-Density Computations 23
18.715.020 Density Calculation
Chapter 18.725 -Envirorunental Performance Standards 25
18.725.020 General Provisions
18.725.030 Performance Standards
Chapter 18.730-Exceptions to Developrnent Standards 26
18.730.020 Exceptions to Building Height Limitation
18.730.030 Zero Lot Line Setback Standards
18.730.040 Additional Setback Requirements
Nnrttt Ci�iJau'c'rest I';zrtitic�n C:itv ot'l in:inl 2
SR L?esi�n LLC �fay 18,2l?i)7
Chapter 18.745 -Landscaping and Screening 2�
18.745.020 Applicability
18.745.030 General Provisions
18.745.040 StreeE Trees
18.745.050 Buffering and Screening
18.745.060 Re-vegatation
Chapter I8.765-Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements 36
18.765.020 Applicability of Provisions
18.765.030 General Provisions
18.765.040 General Design Standards
18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards
18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements
18.765.080 Off-Street Loading Requirements
Chapter 18.790 -Tree Removal 40
18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement
18.790.040 Incentives for Tree Retention
18.790.060 Illegal Tree Removal
Chapter 18.795 -Visual Clearance Areas 45
18.795.020 Applicabilif��of Provisions
18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements
18.795.040 ComputaHons
Chapter 18.810- Street and Utility Improvement Standards 46
18.810.030 Streets
18.810.040 Blocks
18.810.0�0 Easements
18.810.060 Lots
18.810.070 Sidewalks
18.810.080 Public Use Areas
18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers
18.810.100 Storm Drainage
18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways
18.810.120 Utilities
18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required
18.810.140 Monuments
18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite
18.810.160 Installation Conformation
North Ci�darc:rest Partiti�n C:itF of.'i'i;�ard 3
SR Design LLC :Ytay Ig,2007
18.810.170 Plan Check
18.810.180 Notice to City
18.810.190 City Inspection
18.810.200 Engineer's Certification
Conclusion 68
Exhibits
Exhibit A-Pre-Application Notes
Exhibit B-Property Title Information
Exhibit C-CWS Service Provider Letter
Exhibit D-Arborist Report
Exhibit E-Preliminary Sight Distance Certification
Exhibit F-TVF&R-E-mails to John Dalby for Fire Department Comments
Exhibit G-Recorded County Road # 1473-Washington County
Exhibit H-Storm Drainage Plan
�c.�rth Ccilarcrest Partition (:ity of"Ii�;ard q
SR Desiy;n LLC �-fay I4,2p{);
INTRODUCTION
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant/Owner: Bob Lawrence.
6770 SW Alfred Street
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Phone: (503) 975-6560
Fax: (503) 265-8243
Contact: Bob Lawrence
Applicant's Representative: SR Design, LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, Oregon 97008
Phone: (503) 469-1213
Fax: (503) 469-8553
Contact: Jeff Caines, AICP, Land Use Planner
Arborist: Teragan &Associates, Inc.
3145 Westview Circle
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Phone: (503) 697-1975
Contact: Terry Flannigan
Tax Lot: Map 1S1-25CA, Tax Lot 3700
Site Address: 7407 Cedarcrest Street
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Location: Located on the north side of SW Cedarcrest, on the
southwestern corner of SW 74�Avenue.
Current Zoning: R-4.5, Low Density Residential (7,500 square feet minimum
lot size)
Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential
Project Area: Gross .56 acres, approximately 24,210 square feet
'�orth C��i]ara'est Partiticin Cit�'ot 1 i,�:!ri3 5
SK D��sifin LLC �-faiy IS,2C?i},`•
Summary of Proposal
REQUEST:
The Applicant requests preliminary approval for a three-parcel partidoned to be designed
and constructed on the above listed parcel.
SITE DESCRIPTION:
The subject site is located within the R-4.5 (7,500 square feet) zoning designation within the
City of Tigard. The Applicant proposes construction of three single family homes on the
site on three-parcels. The gross site is .56 acres, approximately 24,210 square feet in size.
Parcell is approximately 7,519 square feet, Parcel2, is approximately 7,505 square feet, and
Parcel3, the corner lot is approximately 7,550. There is an existing dwelling unit and
detached garage located on the property that will be demolished and trees that will be
removed where necessary. Two neighborhood routes are adjacent to the property forming
an intersection; SW Cedarcrest Street to the south and SW 74th Avenue to the east.
Currently, single family homes border the site in all other directions. Once approved, all
three homes will take access onto SW Cedarcrest Street. Sidewalks will be provided along
SW Cedarcrest Street from the eastern property line to the rounding of the corner on SW
74th Avenue, refer to Sheet C5.
Nc>rth Ccdarcre5t I'artitic'ui C:itt-'oET'i;s;axd (
SR Desi�n LLC :�-1���I4,2U(}-
CHAPTER 18.390-DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES/IMPACT STUDY
18.390.040 Type II Procedure
A. Pre-application conference. A pre-application conference is required for Type II actions.
Preapplication conference requirements and procedures are set forth in section 18.390.OSOC.
Comment: The applicant participated in the pre-application conference held May 10,
2007. The applicant reviewed the planning and engineering notes as a result of this
meeting prior to developing the narrative and the site design for this partition.
B. Appiication requirements.
1. Application Forms. Type II applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director
as provided Uy Section 18.390.080 E1;
2. Submittal Information. The application shall:
a. Include the information requested on the application form;
b. Address the reievant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action;
c. Be accompanied by the required fee;
d. Include two sets of pre-stamped and pre-addressed envelopes for all property owners of
record as specified in Section 18.390.040C. The records of the Washington County
Department of Assessment and Taxation are the official records for determining ownership.
The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to
produce the notice list;
e. Include an impact study. 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 minirnize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems,
and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code
requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur
with the dedication requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the
real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of
the development.
Comment: The applicant reviewed the submittal requirements regarding the Type II
Minor Land Partition and will comply with this Code Section. The applicant has
considered the impacts of this partition per � 18.390.40.B.2 (e). The following Impact
Study outlines the public facilities and services this project affects.
Nortki Ce�darcrest I'artitiait Citg ut"I'9�;riril 7
SR Desi�n L.L.0 �iay 18,20Qi
IMPACT STUDY
Transportation System:
The proposed three-parcel partition fronts SW 74th Avenue to the east and SW
Cedarcrest Street to the south. All three parcels will access SW Cedarcrest Street via
separate driveways on the southern edge of the site. Tri-Met Bus Route 43 provides
additional transportation options within a short distance, approximately 450 feet. A
home on Parcell has been demolished so only two additional homes will be built
with this partition. Therefore, approximately 20 vehicle trips will be added to the
transportation system.
Drainage System:
Storm water runoff from the site drains from the north to the southwestern corner of
the property via overland flow. The roof drains from all proposed dwelling units
will connect to the storm drainage system. There will still be some overland flow,
but it will be minimal compared to what currently exists on the site. This proposed
drainage system meets the City's and CWS specifications. See Preliminary Storm
Drainage Plan (Sheet C5).
Park System:
This development is not proposing to donate any land to the City of Tigard for open
space and parks. Metzger Park is a little over one-half mile away and will
adequately serve this new partition.
�
Sewer System:
The three homes will connect to the existing sanitary sewer line in SW 74�'' Avenue:
each parcel will connect via individual private 4" laterals to SW 74�''Avenue.
Water System:
There will be two new service meters for Parcel 1 and 2. Parcel3 will utilize the
existing meter. This will adequately serve the parcels.
Noise Impacts:
This development is a single-family detached residential partition that should not
generate any extraordinary noise impacts to the surrounding neighbors.
The Applicant has demonstrated by addressing the above listed systems that this
partition meets the impact study requirements listed above.
C. Notice of pending Type 77 Administrative Decision.
1. Prior to making a Type II Administrative Decision, the Director shall provide notice to:
Nort}t C:ciiarc:c�st Pai•titi<�rt C;itv ot"Iir<ari3 g
SR Design LLC �-i�v}� 14,2iH}7
a. All owners of record within 500 feet of the subject site;
b. Any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site;
c. Any governmental agency which ts entitled to notice under an intergovernmental
agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or who is
otherwise entitled to such notice.
2. The purpose of such notice is to provide nearby property owners and otlzer interested
parties with an opportunity to submit written comments concerning the application, prior to
issuance of the Type II Administrative Decision. The goal of this notice is to invite relevant
parties of interest to participate early in the decision-making process;
3. Notice of a pending Type II Administrative Decision shall:
a. Provide a 14-day period for the submission of written comments prior to issuance of a
decision on the permit;
b. List by commonly used citation, the approval criteria relevant to the decision;
c. State the piace, date and time the comments are due, and the person to whom the
comments should be addressed;
d. Include the name and felephone number of the person who will make the Administrative
Decision;
e. Identify the specific permits or approvals reqtcested;
f. Describe the street address or other easily understandable geographic reference to the
subject site;
g. Indicate that failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient
specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to tlze Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit
Court on that issue. Comments directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute
relevant evidence;
h. Indicate that all evidence relied upon by the Director to make this decision shall be
contained within the record, and is available for public review. Copies of this evidence can be
obtained at a reasonable cost from the Director;
i. Indicate that after the comment period closes, tlTe Director sha11 issue a Type II
Administrative Decision. The Director's decision shall Ue mailed to the applicant and to
owners of record of praperty located within 500 feet of the subject site, and to anyone else
who submitted written comments or who is otherwise entitled to notice;
j. Contain the following notice: "Notice to mortgagee, lienholder, vendor, or seller: The
Tigard Deveiopment Code requires that if�ou receive this notice it shall be promptly
forwarded to the purchaser."
Cornment: The applicant acknowledges the norice requirements and will comply with
the submittal requirements as it is stated above.
D. Administrative decision requirements. The Director's Decision shall address all of the
relevant approval criteria. Based upon the criteria and the facts contained within the record,
the Direcfor shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the requested permit or action.
'\c�rth C:trilarcrest Partition Cit�-::�f�l i�ard 9
SR Desi�n LLC �fa�-I'�,20i)7
E. Notice of decision.
1. Within five days after signing the decision, a Notice of Decision shall be sent by mail to:
a. The applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site which is the
subject of the application;
b. All owners of record of property as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll,
located within 500 feet of the site;
c. Any City-recognized neighborhood grotcp whose boundaries include the site;
d. Any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmentai
agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or who is
otherwise entitled to such notice.
2. The Director shall cause an affidavit of mailing of such notice to be prepared and make a
part of the file, which indicates the date the notice was mailed and demonstrates that the
required notice was mailed to the necessary parties in a timely manner;
3. The content of the Type II Notice of Decision shall contain:
a. The nature of the application in sufficient detail to apprise persons entitled to notice of the
applicant's proposal and of the decision;
b. The address or other geographic description of the subject property, including a map of the
site in relation to the surrounding area, where applicable;
c. A statement of where the Director's decision can be obtained;
d. The date the Director's clecision shall become final, unless appealed;
e. A statement that all persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or
aggrieved by the decision may appeal tlze decision;
f. A statement briefly explaining how an appeal can be taken, the deadline for filing such an
appeal, and where further information can be obtained concerning the appeal; and
g. A statement that unless the applicant is the appeIlant, the hearing on an appeal from the
Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments
submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues
properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal
hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time
by the appellate body.
Comment: The applicant acknowledges that the director will base the decision for
approval based on the applicable criteria and will notice all those required through this
Code Section.
F. Final decision and effective date. A Type II Administrative Decision is final for purposes of
appeal when notice of the decision is mailed. A Type II Administrative Decision becomes
effective on the day after the appeal period expires, unless an appeal is filed. If an appeal is
fiied and dismissed after the appeal period has expired, the Type II Administrative Decision
becomes effective on dismissal of the appeal.
Nort}i C:��ilsucrest Partitiorl C:it� vf"Ti�arcl 10
SR De�i�;n LLC i��a}'1�,20t)'
G. Appeal. A Type II administrative decision may be appealed as folIows:
1. Standing to appeal. The following parties have standing to appeal a Type II
Administrative Decision:
a. The applicant;
U. Any party who was mailed written notice of a pending Type II administrative decision;
c. Any other party, who demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that they
participated in the proceeding through the submission of written or verbal testimony;
2. AppeaI procedure.
a. Notice of appeal. Any party with standing, as provided in Section G1 above, ma�appeal a
Type II Administrative Decision by filing a Notice of Appeal according to the following
procedures;
(1) Time for filing. A Notice of Appeal shall be filed with the Director within ten business
days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed;
(2) Content of notice of appeal. The Notice of Appeal shall contain:
(a)An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision;
(b)A statement demonstrating the party filing the Notice of Appeal has standing to appeal;
(c)A detailed statement of the specific issues raised on appeal;
(d)A statement demonstrating that the specific issues raised on appeal were raised during
the comment period, except when the appeal is filed by the applicant;
(e) Filing fee.
(3)AI1 Notices of Appeal for Type II Administrative Appeals shall be filed with the Director,
together with the required fiIing fee. The amount of the filing fee shall be established by the
Director. The maximum fee for an initial hearing shall be the cost to the local government for
preparing and for conducting the hearing, or the statutory maxirnum, whichever is less.
b. Scope of appeal. The appeal of a Type II Administrative Decision by a person with
standing shall be iimited to the specific issues raised during the written comment period, as
provided under Section 18.390.040C, unless the Hearings Officer, at his or her discretion,
ailows additional evidence or testimony concerning any other relevant issue. The Hearings
Officer may allow such additional evidence if he or she determines fhat such evidence is
necessary to resolve the case. The intent of this requirement is to limit the scope of Type 77
Administrative Appeals by encouraging persons with standing to submit their specific
concerns in writing during the comment period. The written comments received during the
comment period will usually timit the scope of issues on appeal. Only in extraordinary
circumstances shouId new issues be considered by the Hearings Officer on appeal of a Type II
Administrative Decision;
c. Appeal procedures. Type III notice and hearing procedures shalI be used for all Type II
Administrative Appeais, as provided in Sections 18.390.050 C-F;
H. Final decision and effective date. The decision of the Hearings Officer with regard to any
appeal of a Type II Administrative Decision is the final decision of the City. The decision of
tiorth C:ed�ircrest Par?ition Cit.v uE.l'iraril 11
SR Desi�;n LLC Nfay Ig,20t);
the Hearings Officer is final for purposes of appeal on the day the decision is mailed. The
decision is effective on the day after the appeal period expires, unless an appeal is filed. If an
appeal is filed, the decision is effective on the day after the appeal is resolved;
Comment: The applicant acknowledges the appeal process and will comply with its
provisions.
Chapter 18.420 - LAND PARTITIONS
18.420.020 Administration
A. Applicant. The applicant of a partition proposal shall be the recorded owner of the property
or an agent authorized in writing by the owner.
B. Conformance with state statute. Any application for a land partition shall be in conformity
with all state regulations set forth in ORS Chapter 92, Subdivision and Partitions.
C. Prohibition on sale of lots. No lot or parcel to be created through the partitioning process
shall be sold until approval and filing of the final partition plat.
D. Future re-division. When partitioning tracts into large parcels, the Director shall require
that the parcels be of such size and shape to facilitate future re-partitioning of such parcels in
accordance with the requirements of the zoning district and this title.
Comment: The applicant of this partition proposal is the recorded owner of the
property and the agent is authorized by the applicant to prepare this application. The
applicant will conform with the state statute as it pertains to the partition. The applicant
will not sell any of the proposed parcels created through the partifioning process until
the approval and filing of the final partition plat. Any future re-division of the parcels
will be the size and shape to facilitate future re-partitioning of the parcels in accordance
with the requirements of the zoning district and this title. The application meets this
criterion.
18.420.030 Approval Process
A. Decision-making process. The Director shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an
application partition, which shall be reviewed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed
by Chapter 18.390, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.420.050.
B. Time limit on approval. The partition approval by the Director shall be effective for a period
of 1-1/2 years from the date of approval.
C. Lapsing of approval. The partition or approval by the Director shall lapse if.�
1. The partition has not been recorded or has been improperly recorded with Washington
County without the satisfactory completion of all conditions attached to the approval;
2. The final recording is a departure from the approved plan.
D. Extension. The Director shall, upon written request by the applicant and payment of the
required fee, grant an extension of the approvai period not to exceed one year provided that:
1. No changes are made on the original plan as approved by the Director;
North Crdarcresi Pai�tition C:it�-oE'l�i�-ard 12
SR Design LLC '�4a} 18,2UU;
2. The applicant can show intent of recording the approved partition or lot line adjustment
within the one-year extension period; and
3. There have been no changes in the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance
provisions on zvhich the approval was based.
Comment: The applicant understands that the approval process involves a decision-
making process that is governed by the Type II procedure using the approval criteria
contained in § 18.420.050, that there is a time limit of one and one-half years on the
decision and that the decision will lapse if the partition has not been recorded or
improperly recorded with Washington County without the satisfactory completion of
all conditions attached to the approval or if the final recording is a departure from the
approved plan. The applicant acknowledges that the he may file an extension should he
deem it necessary so long as he follows the above-listed criteria. The application meets
this criterion.
18.420.040 Application Submission Requirements
A. General submission requirements. All applications shall be made on forms provided by the
Director and shall include information required for a Type II application, as governed by
Chapter 18.390.
B. Specific submission requirements. All applications shall include the preliminary lot line map
and necessary information in graphic and/or written form. The Director shall provide the
applicant with detailed information about these submission requirements.
Comment: The application contains the submission requirements necessary to comply
with the Type II application process as govemed in this Code Section. This application
meets the criterion.
18.420.050 Approval Criteria
A. Approval criteria. A request to partition land shall meet all of the following criteria:
1. The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and
regulations;
Comment: The proposed partition has been specifically designed to comply with all
of Tigard's statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations. Specifically, this
partition has been designed to be compatible with the R-4.5 zoning codes and related
comprehensive planning policies.
2. There are adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal;
Comment: The composite utility plan shows the three sanitary sewer lines that serve
the site. There are individual storm drainage lines serving each of the parcels which will
connect into the existing drainage ditch system. Water meters are shown along the
perimeter of the property lines. Please refer to Sheet C5 for further details. Therefore,
this criterion has been met.
North Ccilarcrest Partition Citv c�("I'i�;tard 13
SK De.�ign LLC 1-tati�I.`�,2�)�}-
3. All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agerccy standards; and
Comment: The design of the partition shows a floating sidewalk along both
Cedarcrest and 74�h Avenue. All improvements will be designed and constructed to
both County and City standards. Therefore, this criterion has been met.
4. All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below:
a. The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the
applicable zoning district.
b. The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning district. In the case of a flag lot,
the accessway may not be included in the lot area calculation.
c. Each lot created through the partition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least
15 feet or have a legally recorded minimum 15 foot wide access easement.
d. Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district.
e. When the partitioned lot is a flag Iot, the developer may determine the location of the front
yard, provided that no side yard is less than 10 feet. Structures shall generally be located so
as to maximize separation from existing structures.
Comment: The site plan sheet C3 shows the building envelopes for each of the
proposed lots. Parcel2 has the smalIest building width of 63-feet;while all three parcels
have approximately the same depth of approximately 68-feet. In all cases the building
envelopes were designed to enable a dwelling unit which would be compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood to be constructed. Finally, the building envelope on Parcel3
shows the side yard setbacks to be 10-feet from the property line. Therefore, this
criterion has been met.
f. A screen shall be provided along the property line of a Iot of record where the paved drive in
an accessway is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accordance with Sections
18.745.050. Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to
provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed deveIopment.
Comment: It is anticipated that once the dwellings have been constructed either a
fence or vegetative screening will be planted to meet this code provision. If required, as
a condition of approval screening will be provided.
g. The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant wYcere the length of an
accessway would have a detrimentai effect on fire fighting capabilities.
Comment: The composite utility plan (Sheet C5) shows that there is an existing fire
hydrant located on the northeast corner of 74th Avenue and Cedarcrest Street. An e-mail
has been sent to the fire marshal to ensure adequate fire protection for the proposed
parcels. Therefore, this criterion has been met.
h. Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement
which will ensure access and maintenance rights sha11 be recorded with the approved
partition map.
'vortti Ce�i]arcrest Parfiti<m C:it�-oP 7 i�.;aril 14
SR Design LtC 1-iac 18,2[)t)7
Comment: It is undetermined if common driveways will be constructed. However, if
common driveways are to be constructed, then a reciprocal easement will be recorded
at the County with the partition plat.
5. Any accessway shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705, Access,
Egress, and Circulation.
Comment: The proposal as submitted complies with the Access, Egress and
Circulation section of the Tigard Development Code. Both Cedarcrest Street and SW
74th Avenue is classified as neighborhood routes. All driveway connections will meet
both City and County driveway spacing standards upon development of the individual
lots.. Therefore, this code section has been met.
6. Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred-year
floodplain, the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area
for greenwa�adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shail include portions at a
suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in
accordance with fhe adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan.
Comment: This project is not located in or near the 100-year flood plain. Therefore,
this section does not apply.
7. An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in
accordance with Chapter 18.370, Variances and Adjustments. The applications for the
partition and variance(s)/adjustment(s) will be processed concurrently.
Comment: This application is not requesting any variances or adjustments with this
application. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
18.420.060 Final Plat Submission Requirements
A. Submittal.All final plats for partitions shall be accompanied by three copies of the partition
plat prepared by a land surveyor or engineer licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary
data or narrative. The final plat shall incorporate any conditions of approval imposed by the
Director as part of the preliminary plat approz�al.
B. Standards. The partition plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum
standards set forfh by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05) and by Washington
County, as described in detail by information provided by the Director at the time of
application.
Comment: The applicant will comply with the final plat submission requirements
prepared by a land surveyor or engineer. The final plat will incorporate any conditions
of approval imposed by the Director as part of the preliminary plat approval.
North Cirdarciest Partitic,n C:itv of".l�i�<:rd 15
SR Desi�;n LLC N[ar• 1R,2{)t?7
18.420.070 City Acceptance of Dedicated Land
A. Acceptance of dedications by City Engineer. The Citi� Engineer shall accept the proposed
right-of way dedication prior to recording a land partition.
B. Acceptance of public easements b� City Engineer. The City Engineer shall accept all public
easements shown for dedication on partition plats.
Comment: The applicant has prepared the site design drawings with a dedication of
30 feet along SW Cedarcrest and 29 feet along SW 74� Avenue in accordance with the
directives as stated in the pre-application notes of May 10, 2007. The applicant meets
this criterion.
18.420.080 Recording Partition Plats
A. Recording requirements. Llpon tlie Director's approval of the proposed minor partition, tJ�e
applicant shall record the final partition plat with Washington County and submit a copy of
the recorded survey map to the City, to be incorporated into the record.
B. Time limit. The applicant sl�all submit the copy of the recorded minor partition survey map
to the City within 15 days of recording, and shall be completed prior to the issuance of any
building permits on the re-configured lots.
Comment: The applicant will comply with the final plat recording requirements and
submit a copy of the recorded survey map to the City to be incorporated into to the
record within 15 days of recording and shall be completed before the issuance of any
building permits on the re-configured lots. The applicant meets this criterion.
CHAPTER 18.510 - RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
18.510.020 List of Zoning Districts
D. R-4.5: Low-Density Residentiai District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to
accommodate detached single family homes with or withoict accessory residential units
at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single family units
are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also perrnitted
conditionally.
Comment: The properiy is within the R-4.5 zoning district in the City of Tigard. The
applicant is proposing detached single-family homes, without accessory residential
units, as a part of developrnent. All of the proposed parcels are greater than 7,500
square feet: Parcel 1: 7,519 square feet, Parcel2: 7,505 square feet, and Parcel 3: 7,550
square feet. This criterion is met.
Nc�rth Ccdarc��est I'�rtition C:it��of Ti�.;raril 16
SR Design LLC \4ay i�,2!!t};
18.510.030 Uses
A. Types of uses. For the purposes of this chapter, there are four kinds of use:
1. A permitted (P) use is a use which is permitted outright, but subject to all of the
applicable provisions of this title. If a use is not listed as a permitted use, it may be
heId to be a similar unlisted used under the provisions of Chapter 18.230;
2. A restricted {R) use is permitted outright providing it is in compliance with special
requirements, exceptions or restrictions;
3. A conditional use (C) is a use the approval of which is discretionary with the Hearings
Officer.
The approval process and criteria are set forth in Chapters 18.310 and 18.320. If a use is
not listed as a conditional use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted used under the
provisions of Chapter 18.230;
4. A prohibited (N) use is one which is not permitted in a zoning district under any
circumstances.
Comment: The applicant is proposing single-family detached dwelling units, a
permitted use in the R-4.5 zone. This criterion is met.
18.510.040 Minimum and Maximurn Densities
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish minimum and maximum
densities in each residential zoning district. To ensure the qualify and density of
development envisioned, the maximum density establishes the ceiling for development in
each zoning district based on minimum lot size. To ensure that propert� develops at or near
the density envisioned for the zone, the minimum density for each zoning district has been
established at 80% of maximum density.
B. Calculating minimum and maximum densities. The calculation of minimum and
maximums densities is governed by the formuias in Chapter 18.715, Density Computations.
C. Adjustments. Applicants may request an adjicstment when, because of the size of the
site or other constraint, it is not possible to accommodate the proportional minirnum
density as required by Section 18.715020C and still comply with all of the development
standards in the underlying zoning district, as contained in Table 18.510.2 below. Such
an adjustment may be granted by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Chapter
18.390, a�sing approval criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.2.
Comment: The minimum and maximum densities are calculated in Chapter 18.715,
Density Computations, later in the narrative. The applicant is not requesting any
adjustments with this application; it is possible to accommodate the minimum density
requirement.
Nr�rtti Cedarc�rest Partition C:itti-oi:'1'i�,.ari3 17
SR Desi�n LLC l�fat-t�,2U07
18.510.050 Development Standards
A. Compliance required. All development must comply with:
1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district,
except where the appiicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance wifh
Chapters 18.370;
2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title.
B. Development Standards. Development standards in residential zoning districts are
contained in Tabie 18.510.2.
TABLE 18.510.2
DE«LOPIIENT S'T��'DARDS L\RESIDE\TiAL Z01E5
57:�-�'DARD R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-�1.5 ft-7
A3inunum Lot Size
-DeMChed unit 3Q000 sq.ft. 20,60Q sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 7,500 sq.ft. 5,000 sq ft.
-Duplcus 10,000 sq.$. 10.000 sq.ft.
-Attached unit 1 5,000 s _ft.
A�rrage Viuumum Lot Width
-Detached unit lofs i 00 fr. 100 ft. 65 ft. 50 fc SD R_
-Duplcx lots 9U fl. 90 fr. 50 ft.
-Attached unit lots qp g
Ma.rimum Lot CotiYra¢e gpg:; z
biwimum Setbac.ks - - - -
-Froat yazd 30 ft. 30 ft. 20 R. 20 ft. 15 ft.
-Sidr facine street on
cozna&through lota 20$. 20 fr. 20 fi. 1 S ft. 10 fr.
-Side}•xd 5 fr_ 5 fr. 5 fr. 5 fr_ 5 R.
-Reazyard 25 ft. 25 fr. IS R. IS ft. 15 ft.
-Side or rear yard abutting more
restnctice zoniag district 30 ft.
-Dsstancc between praperty line
and front of ara¢e 20 fr. 20 8. ZO ft. 20 fr. 20 R.
?�faxiinum Heiaht 30 ft 30 ft. 3Q ft. 30$_ 3�fr.
34immumLandsn R uuemrnt - ?Oso
[1]S�ngle-family attached residrntial units permittrd at one dwrlling per lot��•ith no more that Sre attached units ia one grouping.
[2]Lot coverage inciudes all buildiugs and itnpervious surfaces.
Cornment: Per Table 18.510.2, above, all of the lots are greater than 7,500 square feet
and have a minimum lot width greater than 50 feet, frontage greater than 20 feet, sides
of 5 feet and rear lots of 15 feet. Parcel3 has a side facing a street on the corner which is
at least 15 feet from the street. The application meets this criterion. See Sheet C3.
'v�ortti Ciri]t�rcrest PssrtiG��n Cil�v of"I�i<-ari1 18
SR Design LLC il-1ay 13,20(}7
CHAPTER 18.705 -ACCESS, EGRESS, AND CIRCULATION
18.705.020 Applicability of Provisions
A. When provisions apply. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development
including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures (see
Section 18.360.050), and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading
requirements or which changes the access requirements.
B. Change or enlargement of use. Should the owner or occupant of a lot or building change or
enlarge the use to which the lot or building is put, thereby increasing access and egress
requirements, it is unlawful and is a violation of this titie to begin or maintain such altered
use until the provisions of this chapter have been met if required or untii the appropriate
approval authorify has approved the change.
C. When site design review is not required. Where the provisions of Chapter 18.360, Site
• Development Review, do not apply, the Director shall approve, approve with conditiorts, or
deny an access plan submitted under the provisions of this chapter in conjunction with
another permit or land use action.
D. Conflict with subdivision requirements. The requirements and standards of this chapter shall
not apply where they conflict with the subdivision rules and standards of this title.
Comment: The applicant is proposing to partition the lots, and thus this section
applies.
18.705.030 General Provisions
A. Continuing obligation of property owner. The provTSions and maintenance of access and
. egress stipulated in this titIe are continuing requirements for tlze use of any structure or
parcel of real property in the City.
Comment: Each property owner of the individual parcel will be responsible for the
maintenance of the access and egress onto their parcel. This criterion is met
B. Access plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are
presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and
circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The appticant shail submit a site plan. The
Director shall provide the applicant with detailed inforrnation about this submission
requirement.
� Comment: The applicant has submitted a site pIan that illustrates how access, egress
and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. Each parcel will have separate access
and egress points to er�ter on to SW Cedarcrest Street. Since the application is
requesting that the existing trees along 74�h Avenue remain and be used as street trees,
there is no proposed access point along 74� Avenue.
'�orih C:��darca�est Par[iticm C:it�:ot:�l i�ari1 19
SR DcSign LLC '1-ia�- I$,2Q07
C. joint access. Owners of two or more atses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize
jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses,
stracctures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title,
provided:
1. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or
contracts to establish the joint use; and
2. Copies of tlze deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the
City.
Comment: The applicant is proposing that each of the parcels have their own access
and egress along a public street. All parcels 2 will gain access through individual
driveways onto SVV Cedarcrest. This application meets this criterion. See Sheet C3.
D. Public street access All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and
18.705.0307 shaIl connect directly with a public or private streef approved by the City for
public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuoacs basis.
� Comment: The applicant is proposing that each of the parcels have their own access
and egress along a public street. All parcels ��ill gain access through individual
driveways onto SW Cedarcrest. This application meets this criterion.
E. Curb cuts. Curb cuts sha11 be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N.
Comment: The applicant is proposing curb cuts for each driveway that will connect
with SW Cedarcrest Street to meet the standards set forth in � 18.810.030N. This
criterion is met.
.
F. Required walkway location. On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following
standards:
1. Walkwa�s shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the groLCnd 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 shall be constructed between new and existing
developments and neighboring developments;
2. Within all attached housing (except two family dwellings) and multi family developments,
- each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and
common open s�ace and recreation facilities;
3. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings
shall be designed and Iocated for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shalI be physically
separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6-inch vertical
separation (curbed) or a minimum 3}'oot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian
Nnrth Ccriiarcrest Psrtitic�n Citr ot Ti�r�rd 20
SR Desiy;n LLL �,���1:2�,2Q0-
crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate
landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways
shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclLCSive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions
such as rnailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with
ADA standards;
4. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt,
� stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety
purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are
provided in addition to required pathways.
Comment: The applicant is proposing single family homes and therefore this section
is not applicable.
G. Inadequate or hazardous access.
1. Applications for building permits shall be referred to the Commission for review when, in
the opinion of tlie Director, tke access proposed:
a. Would cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or
�' b. Would provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles; or
c. Would in any other way cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a
clear and present danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare.
2. Direct individual access to arterial or collector streets from single family dwellings and
duplex lots shall be discouraged. Direct access to coIlector or arterial streets shall be
considered only if there is no practical alternative way to access the site. If direct access is
permitted by the City, the applicant will be required to mitigate for any safety or
neighborhood traffic management (IVTM) impacts deemed applicable by the City Engineer.
This may include, but will not be limited to, the constra�ction of a vehicle turnaround on the
site to eliminate the need for a vehicle to back out onto the roadway.
3. In no case shall the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward
movement or other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. Single-
�
family and duplex dwellings are exempt from this requirement.
Comment: The access proposed for the three parcels are not anticipated to cause
hazardous traffic conditions, provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles or
present danger to the public. The proposed partition is not located on streets labeled
arterial or collector streets, but on two neighborhood routes and thus this criterion is
not applicable.
H. Access Management
1. An access report shall be submitted with alI new development proposals which verifies
design af driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance
and deceleration standards as set by ODQT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO
(depending on jurisdiction of facility.)
Nc�rtt�C`��ii�r�xa•est Pax•tftion t:ity ol"1'i��ard 21
SR Design t.LC \-iay 13,20t7�
Comrnent: The applicant is proposing a three-parcel partition located along SW
Cedarcrest and SW 74�Avenue, two neighborhood routes. Additionally, no streets
are proposed within the partition and there are no driveways to be positioned along
. any collector or arterial streets. Adequate site distance exists SW Cedarcrest Street
when measuring 250 feet to the west on SW Cedarcrest and east to the intersection.
SW 74�'' Avenue had adequate site distance to the north and south of the proposed
driveway. This criterion is met.
2. Driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the inflzcence area of collector or arterial
street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic
commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a
collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-wa� line
of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater
depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic
impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less
than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with
the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed
as far from the intersection as possible.
3. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The
minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet.
4. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet.
Comment: The applicant is proposing a three-parcel partition located along SW
Cedarcrest Street and SW 74th Avenue, two neighborhood routes. Additionally, no
streets are proposed within the partition and there are no driveways to be positioned
along any collector or arterial streets, and this section is not applicable.
I. Minimum access requirements for residential use.
1. Vehicular access and egress for single family, duplex or attaclzed single family dwelling
units on individual lots and multi family residential uses shail nof be less than as provided
in TaUle 18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2;
2. Vehicular access to muiti family structures shall be brought to u�ithin 50 feet of the ground
floor entrance or the ground floor landing of a stairway, ramp, or elevator leading to the
dwelling units;
TABLE 18.705.1
�'EffiCIILARACCESS�'ECRESS REQL'IIiEIIE?�TS:
RESIDE\TIAL tiSE 6 4R FER'ER C1�ITS
tiamber D�relling 1linlinum\umber of 1Siaimum Access�Vidth 14Tinimum Paceinent
L'niVLots Dt�ivewa�•s Rr uired �Vidth
1 or 2 1 ]5' 10'
3-6 1 20' 20'
North C�-iiarr.rest I'artitioit Cit�-ot 1 i�ari] 22
SR Design LLC :�fay 13,2tk)7
Comment: The applicant is proposing three single family dwelling units on individual
parcels with individual and separate access/egress driveways for each parcel thus
satisfying the minimum number of driveways as it pertains to Table 18.705.2. The
applicant will comply with the minimum access width of fifteen feet and the minimum
pavement width of ten feet. This criterion is met.
3. Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the
provisions of the Uniform Fire Code;
Comment: The applicant proposes private residential access drives that will be
maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code. This criterion is
- met.
4. Access drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for
the turning aroicnd of fire apparatus by one of the foilowing:
a. A circular, paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured from center point to
� outside edge of 35 feet;
b. A hammerhead-configatred, paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a
minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet;
c. The maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing any driveways in excess of 150 feet, thus
this section is not applicable.
5. Vehicle turnouts, (providing a minimum total driveway width of 24 feet for a distance of
at least 30 feet), may be required so as to reduce the need for excessive vehicular backing
motions in situations where two vehicles traveling in opposite directions rneet on driveways
in excess of 200 feet in length;
6. Where permitted, minimum width for driveway approaches to arterials or collector streets
shall be no less than 20 feet so as to avoid traffic turning from the street having to wait for
traffic exiting the site.
CHAPTER 18.715 - DENSITY COMPUTATION
18.715.020 Density Calculation
A. Definition of net deveIopment area. Net development area, in acres, shall be determined by
subtracting the following Iand area(s)from the gross acres, which is all of the land included
in the legal description of the property to be developed:
1. All sensitive land areas:
a. Land within the 100-year floodplain;
b. Land or slopes exceeding 25%;
c. Drainage ways; and
Nordt Cedarcrest Partitiun Cih�of Tigard 23
SR Desijn�LLC hlati�18,2007
d. Wetlands.
2. AII land dedicated to the public for park purposes;
3. All land dedicated for public rights-of-way. When actuaI information is not available, the
. following formulas may be used:
a. Single family developrnent: allocate 20% of gross acreage;
b. Multi family development:allocate 15% of gross acreage.
4. All land proposed for private streets; and
5. A Iot of at least the size required by the applicable base zoning district, if an existing
dwelling is to remain on the site.
Comment: There are no sensitive land areas, floodplains, excessive slopes, drainage
ways, wetlands, or dedicated parks. However, the right of way will not be considered
as part of the net development area of the property. The net development area was
determined by subtracting the land dedicated for public rights of way and easement
from the gross area. Therefore the gross area 24,210 square feet subtracting the
dedicated area for the right of way dedication, 1636 square feet equals 22,574 square
feet. This criterion is met.
B. Calculating maximum number of residential units. To calculate the maximum number of
residential units per net acre, divide the number of square feet in the net acres by the
minimum number of sqicare feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district.
Comment: The applicant calculated the maximum number of residential units per net
acre by dividing the number of square feet in the net acres by the minimum number of
square feet required for each lot in the applicable zoning district. The maximum
number of additional residential units is (22,574/7,500=3.00) which equals 3 parcels.
C. Calculating minimum number of residential units. As required by Section 18.510.040, the
minimum number of residential units per net acre shall be calculated by multiplying the
maximum number of units determined in Subsection B above by 80% (D.8).
Comment: The minimum number of residential units is 3.00 x .8 =2.40 which equals
two units. The applicant is proposing a three-parcel partition. The applicant has
demonstrated how the partition meets the City's minimum density requirements. This
criterion is met.
tiorth Ceri�arcrest Partitioii C:it1-uf"I'i��:3td 24
SR Desi�n LLC :4fi�=18,2(?t}7
CHAPTER 18.725 - ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
18.725.020 General Provisions
A. Compliance with applicable state and federal regulations. In addition to the regulations
adopted in this chapter, each use, activity or operation within the City of Tigard shall compl�
with the applicable state and federal standards pertaining to noise, odor and discharge of
matter into the atmosphere, ground, sewer system or stream. Regulations adopted by the
State Environmental Qualih� Commission pertaining to non-point source pollution control
and contained in the Oregon Administrative Rules shall by this reference be made a part of
this chapter.
18.725.030 Performance Standards
A. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.40.130 through
7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply.
B. Visible emissions. Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP)
zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other
point-source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure
uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340-28-070)
apply.
C. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is
permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the
property line of the tcse concerned.
D. Odors. The emission of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily
detectable at any point beyond the propert-y Iine of the use creating the odors is prohibited.
DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply.
E. Glare and heat. No direct or sky-reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high
temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be
permitted, and;
1. There shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the
Iot line of the source; and
2. These regulations shaIl not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction
equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title.
F. Insects and rodents. AIl materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shail be
maintained in a manner which wiil not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or
create a health hazard.
Commen� No noise, visible emissions, vibrations, odors, or glare and heat will be
produced from any of the parcels created from the partition. All materials, including
wastes, will be stored and all grounds will be maintained in a manner that will not
North Cedarc�rest 7'�rtition Citj-ofl�ik.ard 25
SR Design LLC :Liae I3,2�1i:)7
attract insects or rodents. The applicant and future residents of the hornes will be
responsible for these standards. This criterion is met.
CHAPTER 18.730 - EXCEPTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
6. Adjustments to landscaping requirements (Chapter 18.745).
a. Adjustment to use of existing trees as street trees. By means of a Type I
procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, the Director shall approve, approve
with conditions, or deny a request for the use of existing trees to meet the street
tree requirements in Section 18.745.030 providing there has been no cutting and
filling around the tree during construction which may lead to its loss, unless the
following can be demonstrated:
(1) The ground within the drip-line is altered merely for drainage purposes; and
(2) It can be shown that the cut or fill will not damage the roots and will not cause
the tree to die.
Comment: The proposed design of the project has been specifically designed to cause
minimal disturbance around the trees in order to keep the trees healthy and in good shape
during the construction of the sidewalk and dwelling units. There will be minimal root
disturbance during the development of the project. An arborist has reviewed the three trees
proposed to remain and has given a report located in the appendix of this submittal. The
application finds that the trees can remain in good health and be used as the required street
trees. Therefore, this criterion ahs been met.
b. Adjustment for street tree requirements. By means of a Type I procedure, as
governed by Section 18.390.030, the Director shall approve, approve with
conditions, or deny a request for the adjustments to the street tree requirements in
Section 18.745.030, based on the following approval criteria:
(1) If the location of a proposed tree would cause potential problems with existing
udlity lines;
(2) If the tree would cause visual clearance problems; or
(3) If there is not adequate space in which to plant street trees.
Comment: The location of the threes trees proposed to remain and used as street trees
are located in the approximate location of the dedicated right-of-way. It appears that the
three trees were originally planted as either street trees or as privacy trees. The trees are
not within the vision clearance triangle. There is no eminent danger that the trees will
cause harm to the existing utility lines. Trees can be manipulated around power lines
and new utilities will be installed to some of the dwelling units. Third, if the trees
would remain there would not be adequate room to plant additional trees. The Tigard
NorttiCeclarcrestPartitiort C:it�,oET'i�tird 26
SR Design LLC '��,��� ig, 2{��};
Code states that trees must be planted every 20-40 feet depending on the size of the
mature tree. As a result, only three trees maximum may be planted according to the
development code. Since there are already there trees, then that requirement has been
met, and the third criterion has been met. By keeping the existing trees, the overall
development would have mature trees located on the site, which is looked favorably by
the general public, since mature trees are generally considered an amenity to
developments. By having the trees remain the city will have mature street trees that also
provide privacy for the new dwelling unit and the surrounding existing properties.
Therefore, the application finds that this criterion has also been met and the three
existing trees should be counted as street trees.
CHAPTER 18.745 - LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
18.745.020 Applicability
_ A. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the
construction of new structures, remodeling of existing structures where the landscaping is
nonconforming (Section 18.760.040.C), and to a change of use which results in the need for
increased on-site parking or loading reqicirements or which changes the access requirernents.
C. Site plan requirernents. The applicant sha11 submit a site plan. The Director shall provide tlie
applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement.
Comment: Since this is a parting, a full landscape plan is not required. Landscaping
will be provided once the homes are constructed, but the specific design will not be
determined at this stage of the development. Therefore this criterion is met.
18.745.030 General Provisions
A. Obligation to maintain. Unless otherwise provided by the lease agreement, the owner, tenant
and his agent, if any, shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all
landscaping and screening which shall be rnaintained in good condition so as to present a
healthy, neat and orderly appearance, shall be replaced or repaired as necessary, and shall be
kept free from refuse and debris.
Comrnent: The applicant will be responsible for the maintenance of the landscaping
until the property is sold to an individual homeowner. At that time, the new
homeowner will maintain the landscaping and screening. This criterion is met.
B. Pruning required. All plant growth in landscaped areas of developments shall be
controlied by pruning, trimming or otherwise so that:
1. It will not interfere with the maintenance or repair of any public utility;
2. It will not restrict pedestrian or vehicular access; and
3. It will not constitute a traffic hazard because of reduced visibility.
Nnr[h.Cedarc.rest 1'artition C'itv vf 1'i�ard 27
SR Design LLC �fa� I�,200-
Comment: All landscaping will be maintained by the homeowner to allow for
maintenance or repair of public utility to allow pedestrian or vehicular access, and to
increase traffic visibility. This criterion is met
C. Installation requirements. The installation of all landscaping shall be as follows:
1. All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures;
2. The plant materials shall be of high grade, and shall meet the size and grading standards
of the American Standards for Nurberg Stock (ANSI Z60, 1-1986, and any future revisions);
and
3. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of this title.
Comrnent: All landscaping will be installed according to accepted planting
procedures, be of high grade and meet the size and grading standards, and will be
installed to meet the provisions of this title.
D. Certificate of Occupancy. Certificates of occupancy shall not be issued unless the landscaping
requirements have been met or other arrangements have been made and approved by the City
such as the posting of a bond.
Comment: The applicant acknowledges that certificates of occupancy will not be
issued until the landscaping requirements have been met to comply with this section.
E. Protection of existing vegetation. Existing vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as
possible:
1. The developer shall provide methods for the protection of existing vegetation to remain
during the construction process; and
2. The plants to be saved shall be noted on the landscape plans (e.g., areas not to be disturbed
can be fenced, as in snow fencing which can be placed around individual trees).
Comment: All trees are to remain on site except for those marked for removal on the
Tree Removal Plan. Appropriate protection measures will be taken to preserve trees
during the construction process. See Sheet C2, Tree Removal and Mitigation Plan.
F. Care of landscaping along public rights-of-way. Appropriate methods for the care and
maintenance of street trees and landscaping materials shall be provided by the owner of the
property abutting the rights-of-way unless otherwise required for emergency conditions and
the safety of the general public.
Comment: The homeowners along SW Cedarcrest and SW 74'h Avenue will maintain
any street trees and landscaping materials along the rights-of-way to comply with this
section. This criterion is met.
�k.�rtti C:ei3ara'esl i'aa'tition C:itv o1 1_i,�M;:rd 28
SR De�ihn LLC '�-iat-18,20i:?7
G. Conditions of approval of existing vegetation. The review procedures and standards for
required landscaping and screening shall be specified in the conditions of approval during
development review and in no instance shall be less than that required for conventional
development.
Comment: The applicant is proposing to dedication right-of-way along SW 74th and
SW Cedarcrest Street. The applicant will not propose to plant trees, shrubs or other
plantings over 18 inches in height along areas that may interfere with the vision
clearance triangle. AIl landscaping standards, as detailed by this Code, will be met as
part of the overall development of three single-family homes in a single family zoning
district. This criterion is met.
H. Height restrictions abutting public rights-of-way. No trees, shrubs or plantings more than
18 inches in height shail be planted in the public right-of-way abutting roadways having no
established curb and gutter.
Comment: The applicant will not plant trees, shrubs or plants that are more than 18
inches in height in the public right of way abutting roadways that have no established
curb and gutter. This criterion is met.
18.745.040 Street Trees
A. Protection of existing vegetation. All development projects fronting on a public street,
private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the adoption
of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section
18.745.040.C.
Commen� The applicant may use existing street trees along SW 74th Avenue in
accordance with this section of the Development Code. Utilizing these trees will serve
to protect the existing vegetation as the front a public street and the sidewalk will
meander to accommodate their location. Other street trees may be planted along
Cedarcrest Street to meet this requirement. This criterion is met.
B. Street tree planfing Iist. Certain trees can severely damage utilities, streets and sidewaIks or
can cause personal injury. Approvai of any planting list shall be subject to review by the
Director.
C. Size and spacing of street trees.
1. Landscaping in the front and exterior side yards shall include trees with a minimum
caliper of two inches at four feet in height as specified in the requirements stated in Section
18.745.040.C.2 below;
2. The specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shaiI be as follows:
a. Small or narrow-stature trees under 25 feet taii and Iess than 16 feet wide branching at
maturity shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet apart;
V�orth Ctrilarcrest Pariitiori Cit�'uf�I�irari3 29
SR Desiy;n LLC \-fa� Ig,2i!Q-
b. Medium-sized trees 25 feet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturity
sha11 be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart;
c. Large trees over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be
spaced no greater than 40 feet apart;
d. Except for signalized intersections as provided in Section 18.745.040.H, trees shall not be
planted closer than 20 feet from a street intersection, nor closer than two feet from private
driveways (measured at the back edge of the sidewalk),fire hydrants or utility poles to
maintain visual clearance;
e. No new utility pole location shall be established closer than five feet to an� existing street
tree;
f. Tree pits shall be located so as not to include utilities (e.g., water and gas meters) in the
tree well;
g. On-premises utilities (e.g., water and gas meters) shali not be installed within existing
tree well areas;
h. Street trees sha11 not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards;
i. New Iight standards shall not be positioned closer than 20 feet to existing street trees
except when public safety dictates, then they may be positioned no cIoser than 10 feet;
j. 4Vhere there are overhead power lines, the street tree species selected shall be of a type
which, at fulI maturity, will not interfere with the lines;
k. Trees shall not be planted within two feet from the face of the curb; and
l. Trees shall not be planted within two feet of any permanent hard surface paving or
walkway:
(1) Space between the tree and tlie l�ard surface may be covered by a nonpermanent hard
surface such as grates, bricks on sand, paver blocks and cobbiestones; and
(2) Sidewalk cuts in concrete for tree planting sliall be at least four by four feet to allow for
air and water into the root area.
Comment: Any additional street trees that may be required will have a minimum
caliper of two (2) inches and be four feet in height as specified in the requirements. The
applicant proposes to utilize three existing street trees along SW 74� Avenue. It is not
known at this time if any street trees will be planted along SW Cedarcrest, but if so,
then the trees will be a species listed on the City's approved tree list. Therefore, this
criterion is met. See Sheet C2.
D. Pruning requirements. Trees, as they grow, shall be pruned to provide at least eight feet of
clearance above sidewalks and 13 feet above local street, 15 feet above coilector street, and 18
feet above arteriai street roadway surfaces.
Comment: If conditioned, any street trees will be pruned and maintained by the
applicant until new owners purchase the individual parcels. At that time, the new
homeowners will maintain the trees to meet the requirements of the section. This
criterion is met.
Nnrt:i Ca�iiarcrc�st Partition C.ity oE"li�;arii 30
SR Design LLC A4ay 13,200-
E. Cut and fill around existing trees. Existing trees may be used as street trees if no cutting or
filling takes place within the drip-Iine of the tree unless an adjustment is approved by the
Director by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, Lcsing approval
criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.4.a.
Comment:The applicant may utilize several existing trees on SW 74�h Avenue to serve
as street trees. Should these existing trees be utilized, no cutting or filling will take place
within the drip-line of the tree. This criterion is met
F. Replacement of street trees. Existing street trees removed by development projects or other
construction shall be replaced by the developer with those types of trees approved by the
Director. The replacement trees shall be of a size and species similar to the trees that are
being removed unless Iesser sized alternatives are approved by the Director.
G. Granting of adjustments. Adjustments to the street tree requirements may be granted b� the
Director by means of a Type I procedtcre, as regulated in Section 18.390.030, using approval
criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.4.b.
H. Location of trees near signalized intersections. The Director ma�allow trees closer to
specified intersections which are signalized, provided the provisions of Chapter 18.795,
Visual Clearance, are safisfied.
Comment: The applicant proposes an appropriate number of street trees to be
replanted and spaced according to city specification and be of an acceptable size and
height. There are no signalized intersections nearby. Those used will be from the
approved street tree list provided by the City. This criterion is met.
18.745.050 Buffering and Screening
A. General provisions.
1. It is the intent that these requirements shall provide for privacy and protection and reduce
or eliminate the adverse impacts of visual or noise pollution at a development site, without
undul� interfering with the view from neighboring properties or jeopardizing the safety of
pedestrians and vehicles;
2. Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a
different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2).
The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective
maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abufting one another
except for separation by a right-of-way, buffering, but not screening, shall be required as
specified in the matrix;
3. In lieu of these standards, a detailed buffer area landscaping and screening plan may be
submitted for the Director's approval as an alternative to the buffer area landscaping and
screening standards, provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as
required by this code.
'�;orth C��i3v�c:�c�5t Partiti<:�ti C:it�-<!t��l��;;;ri1 31
SR Desi�;n LLC A�Sat- i�,2tI!)�
Comment: Ail adjacent uses to this property are the same zoning classification of R-4.5
and are detached single units. The buffer matrix states that no additional buffering or
screening is required. Thus, this criterion is met.
B. Buffering and screening requirements.
1. A buffer consists of an area within a required setback adjacent to a property line and
having a depth equal to the amount specified in the buffering and screening matrix and
containing a length equal to the length of the property line of the abutting use or uses;
2. A buffer area may only be occupied by utilities, screening, sidewalks and bikeways, and
landscaping. No buildings, accessways or parking areas shall be allowed in a buffer area
except where an accessway has been approved by the City;
3. A fence, hedge or wall, or an� combination of such elements, which are located in any yard
is subject to the conditions and reqatirements of Sections 1�.745.050.B.8 and 18.745.050.D;
4. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of combinations for
landscaping and screening as specified in Table 18.745.1. In addition, improvements shall
meet the following specifications:
a. At least one row of trees shall be planted. They shall have a minimi�m caliper of two inches
at four feet in height above grade for deciduous trees and a minimum height of five feet high
for evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing for trees shall be as follows:
(1) Small or narrow-stature trees, under 25 feet tall or less than 16 feet wide at matacriti�
shall be spaced no ficrther than 15 feet apart;
(2)Medium-sized trees between 25 feet to 40 feet tall and with 16 feet to 35 feet wide
branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart;
(3)Large trees, over 40 feet tall and with more than 35 feet wide branching at maturity, shall
be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart.
b. In addition, at least 10 five-gallon shrubs or 20 one-gallon shrubs shall be planted for each
1,000 square feet of required buffer area;
c. The remaining area shall be planted in Iawn or other living ground cover.
5. Where screening is required the following standards shall apply in addition to those
required for buffering:
a. A hedge of narrow or broad leaf evergreen shrubs shall be planted which will form a four-
foot continuaus screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two years of planting;
or
b. An earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials shall be provided which will form
a continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two years. The unplanted
portion of the berm shali be planted in lawn or other living ground cover; or
c. A fence or wall of the height specified in Table 18J45.2 shall be constructed to provide a
continuous sight obscuring screen.
6. Buffering and screening provisions shall be superseded by the vision clearance
requirements as set forth in Chapter 18.795;
'VarthCerii<uc��estPartition C:ityof�I'i�;ard 32
SR Design LLC b4ay 18,2Ot}%'
7. When the use to be screened is downhill from the adjoining zone or use, the prescribed
heights of required fences, walls, or landscape screening shall be measured from the actual
grade of the adjoining property. In this case,fences and walls may exceed the permitted six
foot height at the discretion of the director as a condition of approval. When the grades are so
steep so as to make the installation of walls,fences or landscaping to the required height
impractical, a detailed Iandscape/screening plan shall be submitted for approval;
8. Fences and walls
a. Fences and walls shall be constructed of any materials commonly used in the constrtcction
of fences and walls such as wood, stone, rock or brick, or otherwise acceptable by the Director;
b. Such fence or wall construction shall be in compliance with other City regulations;
c. Walls shall be a minimum of six inches thick; and
d. Chain link fences with slats shall qualify for screening. However, chain link fences without
slats shall require the planting of a continicous evergreen hedge to be considered screening.
9. Hedges
a. An evergreen hedge or other dense evergreen landscaping rnay satisfy a requirement for a
sight-obscuring fence where required subject to the height requirement in Sections
18.745.050.C.2.a and 18.745.050.C2.b;
b. Such hedge or other dense landscaping slTall be properly maintained and shall be replaced
with another hedge, other dense evergreen landscaping, or a fence when it ceases to serve the
purpose of obscuring view; and
c. No hedge shall be grown or maintained at a height greater than that permitted by these
regulations for a fence or wall in a vision clearance area as set forth in Chapter 18.795.
Comment: AlI uses adjacent to this property are under the same zoning classification
of R-4.5 and are detached single units so that no additional buffering or screening is
required. The applicant plans on preserving several existing trees on the eastern
boundary of Parcel 3 and one along the eastern boundary of Parcell to serve as a
buffer. Please refer to Sheet C4 for further details. This criterion is met.
C. Setbacks for fences or walls.
1. No fence or wall shail be constructed which exceeds the standards in Section
18.745.050.C.2 except when the approval authority, as a condition of approvaI, aiIows that a
fence or wall be constructed to a height greater than otherwise permitted to mitigate against
potential adverse effects;
2. Fences or walls:
a. May not exceed three feet in height in a required front yard along local streets or eight feet
in all other Iocations and, in all other cases, shall meet vision clearance area requirements in
Chapter 18.795;
b. Are permitted up to six feet in height in front yards adjacent to any designated arterial or
collector streef. For any fence over three feet in height in the required front yard area,
permission shali be subject to administrative review of the location of the fence or waIl.
North Ct:�i3arc�re5t I'artition Cit4 of'Ii,�;��ri3 33
5R Desi�;n LtC �fay IR,20�}7
3. All fences or walls shall meet vision clearance area requirements in Chapter 18.795;
4. All fences or walls greater than six feet in height shall be subject to building permit
approval.
Comment: The applicant does not propose any fences or walls along local streets nor
will any walls or fences be taller than eight feet in height. This criterion is met.
D. Height restrictions.
1. The prescribed heights of required fences, walls or landscaping shall be measured from the
actual adjoining level of finished grade, except that where parking, loading, storage or similar
areas are Iocated above finished grade, the height of fences, walls or landscaping required to
screen such areas or space shall be measured from the levei of such improvements;
2. An earthen berm and fence or wall combination shall not exceed the six foot height
limitation for screening.
Comment: The applicant does not propose fences that would exceed the height
restriction of this section. This criterion is met.
E. Screening: special provisions.
1. Screening and Iandscaping of parking and ioading areas:
a. Screening of parking and loading areas is required. The specifications for this screening are
as follows:
(1) Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen
the parking lot areas from view. These design features may incIude the use of landscaped
berms, decorative walls and raised planters;
(2) Landscape planters may be used to define or screen the appearance of off-street parking
areas from the public right-of-way;
(3)Materials to be installed should achieve a balance between low lying and verticai
shrubbery and trees;
(4) Trees shaiI be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and sha11 be equally
distributed and on the basis of one tree for each seven parking spaces in order to provide a
canopy effect; and
(5) The minimum dimension of the landscape islands shall be three feet and the Iandscaping
shall be protecfed from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb.
2. Screening of service facilities. Except for one family and two family dwellings, any refuse
container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which
would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public
facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence
or masonry wa11 between five and eight feet in height. Ali refuse materials shall be contained
within the screened area;
3. Screening of swimming pools. All swimming poois shall be enciosed as required by City of
Tigard Building Code;
'Vorth Cedara�est Partition C:ity vf"i i��:rd 34
5R Design LL.0 :14ac 1�,2U07
4. Screening of refuse containers. Except for one- and two family dwellings, any refuse
container or refuse collection area wlzich would be visible from a public street, parking lot,
residential or commercial area, or any public facilify such as a school or park shall be
screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or
evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing any screening situation that would trigger
the special provisions of this code section. 'Therefore, this section is not applicable.
F. Buffer Matrix.
1. The Buffer Matrices contained in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2 shall be used in
calculating widths of buffering/screening and required improvements to be installed between
proposed acses and abutting uses or zoning districts;
2. An application for a variance to the standards required in Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2,
shall be processed as a Type II procedure, as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using approval
criteria in Section 18.370.010. (Ord. 02-33)
Comment: All uses adjacent to this property are under the same zoning classification of
R-4.5 and are detached single units so that no additional buffering or screening is
required. This criterion is met.
18.745.060 Re-vegetation
A. When re-vegetation is required. Where natural vegetation has been removed tlirough grading
in areas not affected by the Iandscaping requirements and that are not to be occupied by
structures, such areas are to be replanted as set forth in this section to prevent erosion after
construction activities are completed.
Comment: This application is not proposing grading within the right-of-way. However,
if there are any areas affected by grading which are not occupied by structure, they will
be replanted to prevent erosion after construction. Therefore, this criterion is met.
B. Preparation for re-vegetation. Topsoil removed from the surface in preparation for grading
and construction is to be stored on or near the sites and protected from erosion while grading
operations are underway; and
1. Such storage may not be located where it would cause suffocation of root systems of trees
intended to be preserved; and
2. After completion of such grading, the topsoil is to be restored to exposed cut and fiil
embankments or building pads to provide a suitable base for seeding and planting.
Comment: This application is not proposing grading on the site as part of this
application. However, if topsoil is removed during construction of the utility
improvements, then any topsoil removed for grading and construction will be stored on
or near the site and protected from erosion as detailed in this section. After grading, the
soil will be restored on the site for planting. Therefore, this criterion is met.
North Ced�ucrest Parti:ion Ci!�'of�l�'i�;ard 35
SR Desi�n LLC �iap 1?,2Qt)-
C. Methods of re-vegetation.
1. Acceptable methods of re-vegetation include hydro-mulching or the planting of rye grass,
barley, or other seed with equivalent germination rates, and:
a. Where Iawn or turf grass is to be established, lawn grass seed or other appropriate
landscape cover is to be sown at not Iess than four pounds to each 1,000 squc�re feet of land
area;
b. Other re-vegetation methods offering equivalent protection may be approved by the
approval authority;
c. Plant materials are to be watered at intervals sufficient to ensure survival and growth; and
d. The use of native plant materials is encouraged to reduce irrigation and
maintenance demands.
Comment: The applicant will perform all re-vegetation as described above to fully
comply with the standards set forth in this Code Section. This criterion is met.
CHAPTER 18.765 - OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS
18.765.020 AppIicabiiity of Provisions
A. New construction. At the time of the erection of a new structure within any zoning district,
off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070.
B. Expansion of existing use. At the time of an enlargement of a structure which increases the
on-site vehicle parking requirements, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance
with Section 18.765.070 subject to the following:
E. Building permit conditions. The provision and maintenance of off-street vehicle parking and
loading spaces are the continuing obligation of the property owner:
1. No building or other permit sha11 be issued until plans are presented to the Director to
show that properhj is and will remain available for exclusive use as off-street vehicle parking
and loading space; and
2. The subsequent use of property for which the building permit is issued shall be conditional
upon fhe unqualified continuance and availabiiity of the amount of vehicle parking and
loading space required by this title;
3. Required vehicle parking shall:
a. Be available for the parking of operable passenger vehicles of residents, patron and
ernployees only;
b. Not be used far storage of vehicies or materials or for the parking of trucks used in conduct
of the business or use; and
c. Not be rented, leased or assigned to any other person or organization.
North Cedarcxest?';zrtition C:itc o�'Ti:;ard 36
SR Di.sihn LLC :�4ay 1g;20t7-
CommenE: The applicant is proposing a three-parcel partition which will be designed
for single-family homes; therefore, this standard is applicable to the development.
18.765.030 General Provisions
A. Vehicle parking plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled
plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress
and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The
Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission
requirement.
B. Locafion of vehicle parking. The location of off-street parking will be as foilows:
1. Off-street parking spaces for single family and duplex dwellings and single family
attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwelling(s);
Commen� The Preliminary Site plan shows how access, egress and circulation to
access each lot will be granted. Although homes are not proposed at this time, each
parcel will have ample room to have passenger vehicles park off street.
C. Joint parking.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing joint parking with this application;
therefore, this section is not applicable to the development.
D. Parking in mixed-use proJects.
Comment: The applicant is not proposing a mixed-use project; therefore, this section
is not applicable to the development.
E. Visitor parking in multi family residential developments.
Comment: This application is for single-family residential development; therefore,
this section is not applicable.
F. Preferential long-term carpool/vanpool parking.
Commen� Carpool and vanpool parking is not required with this development;
therefore, this section is not applicable.
G. Disabled-accessible parking.
Cornment: Parking areas are not required with single-family detached dwelling units;
therefore, this section is not applicable to the development.
18.765.040 General Design Standards
A. Maintenance of parking areas. All parking lots shall be kept clean and in good repair at all
times. Breaks in paved surfaces sha11 be repaired prompfly and broken or splintered wheel
stops shall be replaced so that their function will not be impaired.
'vorthC:trdares'eSfP.irtif�oll C:i:ti�oflir::ri� 37
SR De,ign tLC �Say 1�, 2i)t)-
Commen� A parking lot is not being proposed with this application; therefore, this
section is not applicable to the development.
B. Access drives. With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking:
1. Access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and
constructed to faciiitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and
vehicular traffic on the site;
2. The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter, 18J05, Access, Egress and Circulation;
3. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails,
fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives;
4. Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795,
Visual Clearance;
5. Access drives shall be improved with an asphaIt or concrete surface; and
6. Excluding single family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection
18.810.030P, groups of two or more parking spaces shc�ll be served by a service drive so that
no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-wa� will
be required.
Comment: The access drives for the dwelling units will comply with all of the
standards required for single-family detached residences as stated within this Code
Section. This criterion is met.
H. Parking space surfacing.
1. Except for single family and duplex residences, and for temporary uses or fleet storage
areas as authorized in 18.765.040.H.3 and 4 below, all areas used for the parking or storage
or maneuvering of an� vehicle, boat or trailer shall be improved with asphalt or concrete
surfaces;
2. Off-street parking spaces for singie and two family residences shall be improved with an
asphalt or concrete surface;
Comment All off-street parking spaces will be improved with an asphalt or concrete
surface to comply with this standard for single-family residences.
K. Drainage. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be drained in accordance with
specifications approved by the City Engineer to ensure that ponds do not occur, except for
single family and duplex residences, aff-street parking and loading faciiities shall be drained
to avoid flow of water across public sidewalks.
Comment: All off-street parking spaces for the single-family residences will be well-
drained to avoid flow of water across public sidewalks. Sidewalks are proposed along
SW Cedarcrest Street and they will be designed to avoid sheet flow over them. Parcell
North Cedarcrc�st Partition Cit� oi''l'i�ard 38
SR Design LLC :�4a}- I8,20i)-
and 2 will drain to a storm line along the southern property line boundary and Parcel3
will drain to a storm line along the eastern property line boundary. Therefore, this
criterion is met.
18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards
Comment: According to Table 18.765.2, bicycle parking is not required with this
application.
Table 18.765.2 Minimum and Maximum Required �ff-street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking
Re uirements
MINIMU ZONE A MAXIMUM ZONE B BICYCLE
RESIDENTIAL
Household Livin
Sin le Unit, Detached 1.0/DU None(M) None(M) None(M)
Accessor Units 1.0/DU None None None
(M):Metro Requirement
18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements
A. Parking requirements for unlisted uses.
1. The Director may rule that a use, not specifically listed in Section 18.765.070.H, is a use
similar to a listed use and that the same parking standards shall apply. If the applicant
requests that the Director's decision be rendered in writing, it shali constitute a Director's
Interpretation, as governed by Section 18.340;
2. The Director shall mainfain a list of approved unlisted use parking requirements which
shall have the same effect as an amendment to this chapter.
B. Choice of parking requirements. When a building or use is planned or constructed in such a
manner that a choice of parking requirements could be made, the use which requires the
greater number of parking spaces shall govern.
H. Specific requirements. (See Table 18.7652) (Ord. 02-13)
Comment: The applicant is proposing a three-parcel partition for the development for
single-family detached dwelling units, within the R-4.5 zone, a listed use. The
minimum required off-street parking space is 1.0/DU, per Table 18.765.2. Residential
developments do not have a maximum off-street parking space requirement.
18.765.080 Off-Street Loading Requirements
A. Off-street loading spaces. Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structicres
to be built or altered which receive and distribute materiai or merchandise by truck shall
provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows:
North Cird<ircrest I'artitic�it C:ity.�f'Iis;:iri1 39
5R Dt+si�;n LLC :�fa}'13,20U'
Comment: The applicant is proposing development in a residential zone, R-4.5;
therefore, this section is not applicable to the development.
CHAPTER 18.790 - TREE REMOVAL
18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement
A. Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared b�
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 c�evelopment review,
planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal
wlzerever possible.
Comment: The applicant has prepared a tree plan in compliance with this Code Section.
See Sheet C2. In addition to the tree removal plan, the applicant has supplied an
arborist report prepared by a certified arborist, as required by the City reflecting the
planting, removal and protection of trees.
B. Pian requirements. The tree plan shall include the following:
1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees
designated as significant by the city;
Comment: The tree assessment from the tree plan identifies the location, size and
species of all existing trees on the proposed site. This criterion is met. See Sheet C2.
2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in
caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in
accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other
� development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots:
a. Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation
program in accordance with Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees;
b. Retention of from 25% to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two
thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
c. Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50
percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060D;
d. Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no
mitigation.
Comment: The tree assessment from the tree plan indicates thirteen (13} trees over 12
inches in caliper exist on site and of that number; four are proposed for removal,
meaning that there is a 69.2% retention rate on this site. According to subsection 2.c
(above) only 50°/o of the caliper inches need to be mitigated for or a financial assurance
will need to be paid to the City of Tigard. Therefore, the application will need to
provide a total of 36.5inches of tree mitigation with an assurance of$4,562.50. If trees
tiof�th Ceil��rcrest Partiti<m t:it.�-o(.li�ard 40
SR Dcsiy:,n LtL — :�1ay I�,2t)t)7
are mitigated on site, then a refund will be given back to the applicant. Therefore, this
criterion has been met.
3. Identification of aii trees which are praposed to be removed;
Comment: The tree inventory table on Sheet C2 identifies all trees to be removed on the
site. Therefore, this criterion has been met.
4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to
protect trees during and after construction.
Comment: The Grading Plan (Sheet C2) shows the approximate location of the tree
protection fencing. This fencing will be installed prior to any major site work. Therefore,
this criterion has been met.
C. Subsequent tree removal. Trees removed within the period of one 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 18.790.060D.
Comment: No trees have been removed one year prior to this development
application. All the trees have been identified
18.790.040 Incentives for Tree Retention
A. Incentives. To assist in the preservation and retention of existing trees, the Director may
apply one or more of the following incentives as part of development review approval and the
provisions of a tree pian according to Section 18.790.030:
1. Density bonus. For each 2% of canopy cover provided by existing trees over 12 inches in
caliper that are preserved and incorporated into a development plan, a 1% bonics may be
applied to density computations of Chapter 18.715. No more than a 20% bonus may be
granted for an�one development. The percentage density bonus shall be applied to the
number of dwelling units aliowed in the underlying zone. This bonus is not applicable to
trees preserved in areas of floodplain, slopes greater than 25%, drainage ways, or wetlands
that would otherwise be precluded from development;
2. Lot size averaging. To retain existing trees over 12 inches in caliper in the development
plan for any land division under Chapter 18.400, lot size may be averaged to allow lots less
than the minimum lot size allowed by the underlying zone as long as the average lot area for
all lots and private open space is nof less than that allowed by the underlying zone. No lot
area shall be less than 80% of the minimum lot size allowed in the zone;
3. Lot width and depth. To retain existing trees over 12 inches in caliper in the developrnent
plan for any Iand division under Chapter 18.400, Iot width and lot depth may be reduced up
to 20% of that required by the underiying zone;
4. Commercial/industrial/civic use parking. For each 2% of canopy cover provided by
existing trees over 12 inches in caliper that are preserved and incorporated into a
:VorFh C�rdarcr��st P:irtition Citt�ot"1 i�:�ri3 41
SR D�si�;n LLC :�fay I3,2U1)7
development plan for commercial, industrial or civic uses listed in Section 18.765.080,
Minimum and Maximurn Off- Street Parking Requirements, a 1% reduction in the amount
of required parking may be granted. No more than a 20% reduction in the required amount
of parking may be granted for any one development;
5. Commercial/industrial/civic use landscaping. For each 2% of canopy cover provided by
existing trees over 12 inches in caliper that are preserved and incorporated into a
development plan, a 1% reduction in the required amount of landscaping may be granted.
No more than 20% of the required amount of landscaping may be reduced for any one
development.
B. Subsequent removal of a tree. 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 shail record a
deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by this section
to the effect that sicch 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 rest��iction shall be subject to approval by the Director.
C. Site development modifications granted as incentives. A modification to development
requirements granted under this section shall not conflict wit)i any other restriction on the
use of the property, including but not limited to easements and conditions of development
approval.
D. Design rnodifications of public improvements. The City Engineer may adjust design
specifications of public improvements to accommodate tree retention where possible and
where it would not interfere with safet�or increase rnaintenance costs.
Comment: The applicant does not request any incentives or modifications to the
development requirements with this application. The applicant is proposing no
mitigation of the trees be removed, per� 18.790.030.B.2. T'herefore this section is not
applicable.
18.790.050 Permit Applicability
A. Removal permit required. Tree removal permits sha11 be required only for tlze removal of an�
tree which is located on or in a sensitive land area as defined by Chapter 18.775. The permit
for removal of a tree shall be processed as a Type I procedure, as governed by Section
18.390.030, using the following approval criteria:
1. Removal of the tree must not have a measurable negative impact on erosion, soil stability,
flow of surface waters or water quality as evidenced by an erosion control plan which
precludes:
�orth Ci�darcrest Pa3-titiori C:itc of T'icatd 42
SR Design LLC �Sa}' I8,20Ui
a. Deposits of mud, dirt, sediment or similar material exceeding 1/2 cubic foot in volume on
public or private streets, adjacent property, or into the storm and surface water system, either
by direct deposit, dropping, discharge or as a result of the action of erosion;
b. Evidence of concentrated flows of water over bare soils; turbid or sediment-laden flows; or
evidence of on-site erosion such as rivaclets on bare soil slopes where the flow of water is not
filtered or captured on site using the techniques of Chapter 5 of the Washington County
Unified Sewerage Agency Environmental Pratection and Erosion Control rules.
2. Within stream or wetland corridors, as defined as 50 feet from the boundary of the stream
or wetland, tree removal must maintain no less than a 75% canopy cover or no less than the
existing canopy cover if the existing canopy cover is less than 75%.
B. Effective date of permit. A tree removal permit shall be effective for one and one-half years
from the date of approval.
C. Extension. Upon written request by the applicant prior to the expiration of the existing
permit, a tree removal permit shall be extended for a period of up to one year if the DirectoY
finds that the applicant is in compliance with all prior conditions of permit approval and that
no material facts stated in the original application have changed.
D. Removal permit not required. A tree removai permit shall not be required for the removal of a
tree which:
1. Obstructs visual clearance as defined in Chapter 18.795 of the title;
2. Is a hazardous tree;
3. Is a nuisance affecting public safety as defined in Chapter 7.40 of the Municipal Code;
4. Is used for Christmas tree production or land registered with the Washington County
Assessor's office as tax-deferred tree farm or small woodlands, but does not stand on sensitive
lands.
E. Prohibition of commercial forestry. Commercial forestry as defined by Section 18.790.020
A.2., excluding D.4. above, is not permitted.
Comment: No portion of the site is within a sensitive land as defined by Chapter 18.775.
This criterion is not applicable.
18.790.060 Illegal Tree Removal
A. Violations. The following constitute a violation of this chapter:
1. Removal of a tree:
a. Without a valid tree removal permit; or
b. In noncompliance with any condition of approvai of a tree removal permit; or
c. In noncompliance with any condition of any City permit or development approval; or
d. In noncompliance with any other section of this title.
2. Breach of a condition of any City permit or development approval, which results in
damage to a tree or its roof system.
B. Remedies. If the Director has reason to believe that a violation of this chapter has occurred,
then he or she may do any or ail of the following:
North Ceil�irca�c�5t P:n-titioii Cit�-of"I i�;:azil 43
SR Design LLC ��iav I�,2Ui)7
1. Require the owner of the land on which the tree was located to sacbmit sufficient
documentation, which may include a written statement from a qualified arborist or forester,
showing that removal of the tree was permitted by this chapter;
2. Pursuant to Section 18.390.050., initiate a hearing on revocation of the tree removal
permit and/or any other permit or approval for which this chapter was an approval standard;
3. Issue a stop order pursuant to Section 18.230 of this title;
4. Issue a citation pursuant to Chapter 1.16 of the Municipal Code;
5. Take any other action allowed by law.
C. Fines. Notwithstanding an� other provision of this title, any party found to be in violation of
fhis chapter pursuant to Section 1.16 of the Municipal Code shail be subject to a civil penalty
of up to $500 and shall be required to remedy any damage caused by the vioIation. Such
remediation shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
1. Replacement of unlawfully removed or damaged trees in accordance with Section D below;
and
2. Payment of an additional civil penalty representing the estimated value of any unlawfully
removed or damaged tree, as determined using the most current International Society of
Arboriculture's Guide for Plant Appraisal.
D. Guidelines for replacement. Replacemenf of a tree shall take place according to the following
guidelines:
1. A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species taking into consideration site
characteristics;
2. 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;
3. If a replacement tree of the size ca�t is not reasonably available on the local market or would
not be viable, the Director shall reqttire replacement with more than one tree in accordance
with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required sha11 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 or more replacement trees to be planted
on other propert� within the City, either puUlic property or, with fhe consent of the owner,
pYivate property;
4. The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to
aliow growth to maturity.
E. In lieu-ofpayment. In lieu of tree replacement under Section D above, a party may, with the
consent of the Director, elect to compensate the Ciry for its costs in performing such tree
replacement.
F. Exclusivity. The remedies set out in this section shall not be exclusive.
Comment: The applicant is proposing to meet and follow the guidelines for obtaining a
permit for any tree removal, mitigation and tree permits required for this proposal. The
North Ceiiarcrest Partition Cit�-oETi��::rd 44
SR Design LLC A3ay I8, 2Ut);
applicant does not foresee any tree removal without a permit to trigger compliance with
� 18.790.060 (D). This criterion is met.
CHAPTER 18.795 - VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS
18.795.020 Applicability of Provisions
A. When provisions apply. The provisions of this clzapter shall apply to all development
including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a
change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes
the access requirements.
B. When site development review is not required. Where the provisions of Chapter 18.330, Site
Development Review, do not apply, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or
deny a plan submitted under the provisions of this chapter through a Type I procedure, as
governed by Section 18.390.030, using the standards in tlzis chapter as approval criteria.
Cornrnent: The applicant is proposing a three-parcel partition. All vision clearance
provisions of this Code Section will be met.
18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements
A. At corners. Except within the CBD zoning district a visual clearance area shall be
rrcaintained on the corners of ail property adjacent to the intersection of two streets, a street
and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a pacbiic or private street.
B. Obstructions prohibited. A ciear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting,fence,
wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utiliti� pole
or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb
exists,from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located
in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed.
C. Additional topographical constrainfs. Where the crest of a hill or vertical curve conditions
contribute to the obstruction of clear vision areas at a street or driveway intersection, hedges,
plantings,fences, walls, wall structures and temporary or permanent obstructions shall be
further reduced in height or eliminated to comply with the intent of the required clear vision
area.
Comment: The applicant has illustrated the visual clearance triangle for Parcel3,
located at the southeast corner of the parcel at the intersection of SW Cedarcrest Street
and SW 74�Avenue. The applicant has illustrated the vision clearance triangle on Sheet
C3. The applicant will not obstruct this clear vision area by placing a hedge, planting
fence, wall structure over three feet high measured from the top of the curb. This
criterion is met.
�orth C:r�Jarc'rast Parfition C:itv��t'Ti�arcl 45
5R Design LLC �4ia}'13,2(!t17
18.795.040 Computations
B. Non-arterial streets.
1. Non-arterial streets 24 feet or more in width. At all intersections of two non-arterial
streets, a non-arterial street and a driveway, and a non-arterial street or driveway and
railroad where at least one of the streets or driveways is 24 feet or more in width, a visual
clearance area shall be a triangle formed by the right-of-way or property lines along such lots
and a straight line joining the right of- way or property line at points which are 30 feet
distance from the intersection of the right-of-way Iine and meastcred along such lines. See
Figure 18.795.1:
� . w�t�.� �u�� .. �
�,�Y � , 1 , . .
. :a
,
, � :
\� �v g�`�,.,��- �— � . . �,�
_ L;ne. , •
� � � ___
�jD 30 ^ C,...�g(R1,uT 9J� �d,
�6�+ret'�' ��Y 'cr�rac,{'
FIG[.'RE Y3.79�.1
ILLI'STR�TI01S OF t'ISI:as.L CLE�R��CE REQI'IRE�iE�?S
2. Non-arterial streets less tlian 24 feet in width. At all intersections of two non-arterial streets,
a non-arterial sfreet and a driveway, and a non-arterial street or driveway and railroad
where both streets and/or driveways are less than 24 feet in width, a visual clearance area
shall be a triangle whose base extends 30 feet along the street right-of-way line in both
directions from the centerline of the accessway at the front setback line of a single family and
two family residence, and 30 feet back from the property line on all other types of uses.
Comment: The applicant has prepared the vision clearance triangle for the intersection
of SW 74�h Avenue and SW Cedarcrest Street where the base extends thirty feet along
the street right of way line in both directions. These lines extend from the centerline of
the accessway at the front setback line of a single family residence. This criterion is met.
See Sheet C3.
CHAPTER 18.810- STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
18.810.020 General Provisions
A. When standards appIy. Unless otherwise provided, construction, reconstruction or repair of
streets, sidewalks, curbs and other public improvements shall occur in accordance with the
standards of this title. No development may occur and no land use application may be
approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the public facility
Nnrth Cedaax�res#Purtitic>r� t:it�.uf T'i<�ar�7 46
SR C�esiAn LLC Niay 13,200i
requirements established in this section and adeqtcate public facilities are available.
Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements onl�
when the required exaction is directIy related to and roughIy proportional to the impact of the
development.
B. Standard specifications. The City Engineer shall establish standard specifications consistent
with the application of engineering principles.
C. Section 7.40 applies. The provision of Section 7.40 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply
to this chapter.
D. Adjustments. Adjustments to the provisions in this chapter related to street improvements
may be granted by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using
approval criteria in Section 18.370.030 C9. (Ord. 99-22)
E. Except as provided in Section ?8.810.030S, as used in this chapfer, the term "streets" shall
mean "public streets" unless an adjustment under Section 18.810.020.D is allowed. (Ord.
99-22)
Comment: The applicant has prepared a three-parcel partition application in
compliance with the requirements of this section. T'he applicant makes assurances that
adequate public facilities exist for the development of this partition. The applicant
understands that the City Engineer requires an overall dedication of 29 feet from
centerline on SW 74�h Avenue and 30 feet on SW Cedarcrest Street. This right-of-way
dedication is sufficient to meet the future street improvements. The applicant is
prepared to sign a waiver of remonstrance for future street improvements that will be
recorded with the plat. This criterion is met.
18.810.030 Streets
A. Improvements.
1. No development shall occur unless the development has frontage or approved access to a
public street.
2. No deveiopment shall occur unless streets zvithin the development meet the standards of
this chapter.
3. No development sha11 occur uniess the streets adjacent to the development meet the
standards of this chapter, provided, however, that a development may be approved if the
adjacent street does not meet the standards but half-street improvements meeting the
standards of this title are constructed adjacent to the deveIopment.
4. Any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall
meet the standards of this chapter;
5. If the City could and would otherwise require the applicant to provide street
improvements, the City Engineer may accept a future improvements guarantee in lieu of
street improvements if one or more of the following conditions exist:
a. A partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design
standards;
North Cedarcrest Partition Cih�of Tigard ¢�
SR Design LLC A'Iay 18,2007
b. A partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians;
c. Due to the nature of existing development on adjacent properties it is unlikeiy that street
improvernents would be extended in the foreseeable future and the improvement associated
with the project under review does not, by itself, provide a significant improvement to street
safety or capacity;
d. The improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan;
e. The improvement is associated with an approved land partition on property zoned
residential and the proposed land partition does not create any new streets; or
f. Additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the
street and the application is for a project which would contribute onty a minor portion of the
anticipated ficture traffic on the street.
6. The standards of this chapter inclicde the standard specifications adopted by the City
Engineer pursuant to Section 18.810.020.B.
7. The approval authorit� may approve adjustments to the standards of this chapter if
compliance with the standards would result in an adverse impact on natural features such as
wetlands, steep slopes, or existing mature trees. The approval authority may also approve
adjustments to the standards of this chapter if compliance with the standards wottld have a
substantial adverse impact on existing development or would preclude development on the
property where the development is proposed. In approving an adjustment to the standards,
the approval aut)iority shall balance the benefit of the adjustment witlz the impact on the
public interest represented by the standards. In evaluating the impact on the public interest,
the approval authority shall consider the criteria listed in Section 18.810.030 E.1. An
adjustment to the standards may not be granted if the adjustment would risk public safety. �
Comment: Each parcel in the partition has frontage either on SW Cedarcrest Street or
SW 74�h Avenue. Both of these streets meet the standards of this chapter with the
dedication required by the City and County and illustrated in the design drawings. This
criterion is met. See Sheet C3.
B. Creation of rights-of-way for streets and related purposes. Rights-of-way shall be created
through the approval of a final subdivision plat or major partifion; however, the Council may
approve the creation of a street by acceptance of a deed, provided that such street is deemed
essential by the Council for the purpose of general traffic circuIation:
1. The Council may approve the creation of a street by deed of dedication without full
compliance with the regulations applicable to subdivisions or major partitions if an� one or
more of the following conditions are found by the Council to be present:
a. Establishment of a street is initiated by the Council and is found to be essential for the
purpose of general traffic circuIation and partittoning or subdivision of land has an
incidental effect rather than being the primary objective in establishing the road or street for
public use; or
Nort}t Crrdarcrest Parti:io�i Ci:�, c�t l i�:�r�a 4S
SR Desi�;n LLC Lia}� IQ,2U0-
b. The tract in which the road or street is to be dedicated is an isolated ownership of one acre
or less and such dedication is recommended by the Commission to the Council based on a
finding that the proposal is not an attempt to evade the provisions of this title governing the
control of subdivisions or major partitions.
2. With each application for approval of a road or street right-of-way not in full compliance
with the regulations applicable to the standards, the proposed dedication shall be made a
condition of subdivision and major partition approval:
a. The applicant shall submit such additional information and justification as may be
necessary to enable the Commission in its review to determine whether or not a
recommendation for approval by the Council sha11 be made;
b. The recommendation, if an�, shall be based upon a finding that the proposal is not in
conflict with the purpose of this title;
c. The Commission in submitting the proposal with a recommendation to the Council may
attach conditions which are necessary to preserve the standards of tlzis title; and
3. All deeds of dedication shall be in a form prescribed by the City and shall name "the
public," as grantee.
Comment: The applicant is requesting a three-parcel partition with street dedication
that comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer as provided in the notes at
the Pre-Application Conference held May 10, 2007. This criterion is met.
C. Creation of access easements. The approval authority may approve an access easement
established by deed without full compliance with this title provided such an easement is the
only reasonable method by which a lot large enoa�gh to develop can be created:
1. Access easements shall be provided and rnaintained in accordance with the Llniforrn Fire
Code Section 10.207;
2. Access slzall be in accordance with Sections 18.705.030.H and 18.705.030I.
Comment: The creation of access easements will be provided and maintained in
accordance with the Uniform Fire Code � 10.207. This criterion is met.
D. Street location, width and grade. Except as noted below, the location, width and grade of aIl
streets shall conform to an approved street plan and shaIl be considered in their relation to
existing and planned streets, to topographic conditions, to public convenience and safety, and
in their appropriate relation to the proposed use of the land to be served by such streets:
1. Street grades sha11 be approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Subsection N
below; and
2. Where the location of a street is not shown in an approved street p1an, the arrangement of
streets in a development shall either:
a. Provide for the continuation or appropriate projection of existing streets in the
surrounding areas, or
Nnrth Ceiiarcrest Partition Cit�,af"T i�ard 49
SR Desi�;n LLC \fa�-I8,2i!U;
b. Conform to a plan adopted by the Commission, if it is impractical to conform fo existing
street patterns because of particular topographical or other existing conditions of the land.
Such a plan shall be based on the type of land use to be served, the volume of traffic, the
capacity of adjoining streets and the need for public convenience and safety.
E. Minimum rights-of-way and street widths. Unless otherwise indicated on an approved street
plan, or as needed to continue an existing improved street, street right-of-way and roadway
widths shall not be less than the minimum width described below. Where a range is
indicated, the width shall be determined by the decision-making authority based upon
anticipated average daily traffic (ADT) on the new street segment. (The City Council may
adopt by resoliction, design standards for street construction and other public improvements.
The design standards will provide gttidance for determining improvement requirements
within the specified ranges.) These are presented in Table 18.810.1.
1. The decision-making body shall make its decision about desired right-of-way width and
pavement width of the various street types within the subdivision or development after
consideration of the following:
a. The type of road as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Chapter-
Functional Street Classification;
b. Anticipated traffic generation;
c. On-street parking needs;
d. Sidewalk and bikeway requirements;
�
� t t Ca
� _ � _- Y� O �3 s
� Tipe of Snret �— ? � � =_ � ' l y �y � �
' _ _ � 6� � 1� _ _
' = � �� �� � � c C�
� L _ 1 _ ��'Y _
i .�i � � 7'C `
�'�� ^ L % !. (r ' J. �� I.
Maid 64'-].8' 4'uxx '_.7(Refrc to t2' N!A 6'(V«c 5veen) 8'(Res.&Ind.Zmn! 5' 1"`.c�'
�� i'.6' ut:� Sursn 10'Cocvn Zmeel
Colkctw S8'-96' Vuiea 2-5 L1te.tc n 11' 4A b'(?lea Snem) 6'(Rr�.[•lud.Zones) S' 1:{�
�p� 5'�' snn ScMS 8'Cmun Imnl
Nn Raue 50'-i8' ?E'-36' ID' 6' S'�6' S".6'� 5' �3;A
I.ecil:
UdwuvVCummncwl SO' 36' 2 N/A 5�-6'� S' *Z'A
LoCai:ReNdmml V,'A
lludc I S00 ADT SJ'/50'a 32:^6'� 2 8'(6ws sidaj NUA 5'-6'p 5'
Unda 500 ADT 50'i�6"`30 28•24.m 6'(�r ude) N!A
Uodc 200 AD7 �6'fi?'w ?4''.'10'y 2 (Na N'A
CLl-de-�ac Inilhc m 50' Y.'ndws N.-A N�'A h"A �;"A
loAnvial md ndiuc
Corm¢rcnl zmrcs
Cu4dr�ac bulb�m 4J' 40'rsd�w YsA N�A "L'A N:A N�'A
Rrndenualmnec ndius
'_..........._......_.._............'—__..._—.._ _' .,.�.-.__.._...'—_.____'_.__ _—_"'_'_�.._._ _...._...._""_'____"
Al -. Rnulrnti�! 16' 16' �FIA --�-- YrA--- NiA N;A NiA
AI •�Hwmcu 20' ?D' N,`A NIA N!A N,A V.'A
(Ord.02-33)
`Aled;ws requirea for 5 ava 71u�e ro,davaya.Thn•.cr optiooel h�or 3!me swd�ra}z.
�Sidewallc u'idEu for these�treat�s6ai1 be 5 8 k�th la�vlrcape svtip:6 R if sp�tiou eivb(if petmuud in eccord�mr anth 18.810.070 C).
�..Skiaay Sveet'roadway aidfhs ue pamiaed where cross xe�icm md m�iew�mteri�are mec Refc w cacnyonding crou ucnons(Figmrs IS.810.3.
18.810 4 md 18.8 t0.5)fQ dehils aad caadivau.
Comment: The applicant has developed design drawings to reflect an overall
dedication of 29 feet from centerline on SW 74th Avenue and an overall dedication of 30
�Vc'�rth C:ed�ircrest Partitic��n Cit�;,�f�T�i��<ard 50
SIZ Desiy;n LLC :'�-1ay 1,�+,2Ut?i
feet from centerline on SW Cedarcrest Street. This right of way dedication is sufficient
to meet the future street improvements. The applicant will sign a waiver of
remonstrance to allow street improvements in the future along the entire length of SW
74th Avenue and SW Cedarcrest Street that will be submitted with the final plat. See
Sheet C3. This criterion is met.
F. Future street plan and extension of streets.
1. A future street plan shall:
a. Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition.
The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of
the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 530 feet surrounding and
adjacent to the proposed Iand division. At the applicant's request, the City ma�prepare a
' future streets proposal. Costs of the City preparing a future streets proposal shall be
reimbursed for the time involved. A street proposal may be modified when subsequent
subdivision proposals are submitted.
b. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle rotctes
and pedestrian facilities on or within 530 feet of the site.
2. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land,
streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed, and
a. These extended streets ar street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-
de-sac since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining
property is developed.
b. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the streef by the property owners which sJzall
not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in
the street construction cost.
c. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for
stub street in excess of 150 feet in length.
G. Street spacing and access management. Refer to 18.705.030.H.
- Comment: The applicant is not proposing any future streets or extensions with this
application thus this criterion is not applicable.
H. Street alignment and connections.
1. Full street connections with spacing of no rnore than 530 feet between connections is
__ required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, raiIroads,freeways, pre-
existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing
prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections.A full street connection may also be
exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit constructian.
2. All iocal, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be
extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental
Nort}�Cerilarca�est I?ai~i±ion City o2 Ti.�ard �1
SR Design LLC :�fat�18,2t}i}7
or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other
standards in this code. A street connection or extension is considered precluded when it is
not possible to redesign or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land
is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15%for a distance of
250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topograpJzical constraints, the mere presence
of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant
must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection.
3. Proposed street or street extensions shall be located to provide direct access to existing or
planned transit stops, commercial services, and other neighborhood facilities, such as schools,
shopping areas and parks.
4. All developments should provide an internal network of connecting streets that provide
short, direct travel roactes and minimize travel distances within the development.
Comment: The application and site design does not include any new future street
connections nor does it create any street extensions. Each of the parcels will have
frontage on an existing street. This criterion is not applicable.
I. Intersection angles. Streets shall be laid out so as to intersect at an angle as near to a riglit
angle as practicable, except where topography requires a lesser angle, but in no case shall the
angle be less than 75o unless there is special intersection design, and:
1. Streets shall have at least 25 feet of tangent adjacent to the right-of-way intersection
uniess topography requires a lesser distance;
2. Intersections which are not at right angles shall have a minimum corner radius of 20 feet
along the right-of-way lines of the acute angle; and
_ 3. Right-of-way Iines at intersection with arterial streets shall have a corner radiacs of not less
than 20 feet.
Comment: The application does not create any new streets. This criterion is not
applicable.
J. Existing rights-of-way. Whenever existing rights-of-way adjacent to or within a tract are of
less than standard width, additional rights-of-way shall be provided at the time of
subdivision or development.
Comment: The application contains additional right-of-way dedication for SW 74th
Avenue and SW Cedarcrest Street as recommended by the City Engineer. This criterion
is met. See Sheet C3.
K. Partial street improvements Partial street improvements resulting in a pavement width of
less than 20 feet; while generally not acceptable, may be approved where essential to
reasonable development when in conformity with the other requirements of these regulations,
and when it wiIl be practical to require the improvement of the other half when the adjoining
property developed.
;\orth C��ilarcrest I'artition Citv ok�I'irard 52
5R Dcsi�;n LLC ?�g���:ig,2(}�}7
Comment: The application provides for dedication on SW Cedarcrest and SW 74th
Avenue. The City Engineer has recommended additionai right-of-way that creates a 58
foot overall right-of-way width along SW 74� Avenue and 60 foot overall right-of-way
along SW Cedarcrest Street, both measured from centerline. The current pavement
width is approximately 24 feet on SW 74�' Avenue and SW Cedarcrest Street. The
applicant is not proposing half street improvements but will sign a waiver of
remonstrance that will be recorded with the final plat. This criterion is met.
L. Culs-de-sacs. A cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long shall not provide access to
greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or topographicaI
constraints, existing developmertt pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code
preclude street extension and through circulation:
1. All cuis-de-sac shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other
than circular, shall be approved by the City Engineer; and
2. The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured from the centerline intersection point of the
two streets to the radius point of the bulb.
3. If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street
may be required to be provided and dedicated to the City.
Comment: The application does not contain any culs-de-sacs and thus this criterion is
not applicable.
M. Street names. No street name shall be used which wilI duplicate or be confused with the
names of existing streets in Washington County, except for extensions of existing streets.
Street names and numbers shall conform to the establisl2ed pattern in the surrounding area
and as approved by the City Engineer.
Comment: The application does not propose any new streets and thus this criterion is
not applicable.
N. Grades and curves.
1. Grades shali not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any
other street (except tlzat local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up
to 15%for distances of no greater than 250 feet), and
2. Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer.
Comment: Both SW 74�h Avenue and SW Cedarcrest Street are considered local streets
and do not have a grade of more than 12 %. This criterion is met.
O. Curbs, curb cuts, ramps, and driveway approaches. Concrete curbs,curb cuts, wheelchair,
bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards
specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080; and:
1. Concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required; except
�c�rth C:ei7ai�crc�st Partilion C;itr i±E'I'i�,ard 53
SR Design LLC b1ay-I8,2C)t}7
2. Where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City
Engineer approval; and
3. Asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shall be built to Cih�
configuration standards.
Comment: All curbs, curb cuts, ramps and driveway approaches will be constructed in
accordance with the standards specified in this chapter and � 15.04.080. This criterion is
met.
P. Streets adjacent to railroad right-of-way. Wherever the proposed development contains or is
adjacent to a railroad right-of-way, provision shall be made for a street approximately parallel
to and on each sfde of such right-of-way at a distance suitable for the appropriate use of the
land. The distance shall be determined with due consideration at cross streets or the
minimLCm distance required for approach grades and to provide sufficient depth to allow
screen planting along the railroad right-of-way in nonindustrial areas.
Comment: The application does not contain any streets that are adjacent to railroad
right of way and therefore this criterion is not applicable.
Q. Access to arterials and collectors. V1-�iere a development abuts or is traversed by an existing
or proposed arterial or collector street, the development design shall provide adequate
protection for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic,
or if separation is not feasible, the design sJzall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall
include any of the following:
1. A parallel access street along the arterial or collector;
2. Lots of suitable depth abutting the arterial or collector to provide c�dequate buffering with
frontage along another street;
3. Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a nonaccess reservation
along the arterial or collector; or
4. Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection;
5. If a lot has access to two streets with different classifications, primary access should be
from the iower classification street.
Comment: The site is not adjacent to, abutting or traversed by any arterials or collector
streets and thus this criterion is not applicable.
R. Alleys, public or private.
1. Alleys shall be no less than 20 feet in width. In commercial and industrial districts, alleys
shall be provided unless other permanent provisions for access to off-street parking and
loading facilities are made.
2. While alley intersections and sharp changes in alignment shall be avoided, the corners of
necessary alley intersections shall have a radius of not less than 12 feet.
�;c>rth Cedarcrest Partitic�n Cit1-ot"I i:;:�rd 54
SR Desi�;n LLC �,f��:I a,2{ii}-
Comment: The application does not contain any alleys and thus the criterion is not
applicable.
S. Survey monuments. Llpon completion of a street improvernent and prior to acceptance by the
City, it shall be the responsibility of the developer's registered professional land surveyor to
provide certification to the City that all boundary and interior monuments shall be
reestablished and protected.
Comment: The applicant acknowledges that it is the responsibility of the developer's
professional land surveyor to provide certification to the City that all boundary and
interior monuments will be reestablished and protected. This criterion is met.
T. Private streets.
1. Design standards for private streets sha11 be established by the City Engineer; and
2. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets,
such as a recorded maintenance agreement.
3. Private streets serving more than six dwellTng units are permitted only within planned
deveiopments, mobile home parks, and multi family residential developments.
Comment: The application does not contain any private streets and thus this criterion is
not applicable.
U. Railroad crossings. Where an adjacent development results in a need to install or improve a
railroad crossing, the cost for such improvements may be a condition of development
approval or another equitctble means of cost distribution s12a11 be determined by the public
works Director and approved by the Commission.
Comment: The application is not adjacent to a development that will result in a need to
install or improve a railroad crossing and thus criterion is not applicable.
V. Street signs. The City shali install ail street signs, relative to traffic control and street names,
as specified by the City Engineer for any development. The cost of signs shall be the
responsibility of the developer.
Comment: The applicant acknowledges that the cost of any street signs procured by the
City for the partition will be the responsibility of the developer. This criterion is met.
W. Mailboxes. Joint mailbox faciiities shall be provided in all residential developments, with each
joint mailbox serving at least two dwelling units.
1. Joint mailbox structures shall be placed adjacent to roadway curbs;
2. Proposed locations of joint mailboxes shall be designated on a copy of the preliminary plat
or development plan, and shall be approved by the City Engineer/US Post Office prior to
final plan approval; and
'Vorth Ctrilara•est Partitiai C:it�-of�Tis:aril 55
SR Design LLC �-Say I3,2t!i)7
3. PIans for the joint mailbox structures to be used shail be sacbmitted for approvai by the
City Engineer/i.IS Post Office prior to final approval.
Comment: The applicant will work with the Postal Service and City Engineer to
determine the ultimate location of the mailboxes for this partition. This criterion is met.
X. Traffic signals. The location of traffic signals shall be noted on approved street plans. Where
a proposed street intersection will result in an immediate need for a traffic signal, a signal
meeting approved specifications sha11 be installed. The cost shall be included as a condition of
development.
Y. Street light standards. Street lights shall be installed in accordance with regulations adopted
by the City's direction.
Z. Street name signs. Street name signs shall be installed at all street intersections. Stop signs
and other signs may be required.
Comment: It is not anticipated that traffic signals, street lights or street name signs will
be required with this three-parcel partition. This criterion is not applicable.
AA. Street cross-sections. The final lift of asphalt concrete pavement shall be placed on all new
constructed public roadways prior to final Cit�acceptance of the roadway and within one
year of the conditional acceptance of the roadway unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer. The final lift shail also be placed no later than when 90% of the stracctures in the
new deveiopment are completed or three years from the commencement of initial construction
of the development, whichever is less.
1. Sub-base and leveling course shali be of seiect crushed rock;
2. Surface material shall be of Class C or B asphaltic concrete;
3. The final lift shall be placed on all new construction roadways prior to City final
acceptance of the roadway; however, not before 90% of the structures in the new development
are completed unless three years have elapsed since initiation of canstruction in the
development;
4. The final lift shall be Class C asphaltic concrete as defined by A.P.W.A. standard
specifications; and
5. No Iift shall be less than 1-1/2 inches in thickness. (Ord. 99-22)
AB. Traffic calming. When, in the opinion of the City Engineer, the proposed development will
create a negative traffic condition on existing neighborhood streets, such as excessive
speeding, the developer may be required to provide traffic calming measures. These measures
may be required within the development and/or offsite as deemed appropriate. As an
alternative, the developer may be required to deposit funds with the City to help pay for
traffic calming measures that become necessary once the development is occi�pied and the
City Engineer determines that the additional traffic from the development has triggered the
need for traffic calming measures. The City Engineer will determine the amount of funds
required, and will collect said funds from the developer prior to the issuance of a certificate of
Nprt}t C��ilarc'rc�t Partition Cita'c�("Tii�ari! 56
SR Design LLC :1•fa� 1�,ZUUi
- occupancy, or in the case of subdivision, prior to the approval of the final plat. The funds will
be held by the City for a period of five (5)�ears from the date of issuance of certificate of
occupancy, or in the case of a subdivision, the date of final plat approval. Any funds not used
by the City within the five-year time period will be refunded to the developer.
AC. Traffic study.
1. A traffic study shall be required for all new or expanded uses or developments under any
of the following circumstances:
a. when they generate a 10% or greater increase in existing traffic to high collision
intersections identified by Washington County.
b. Trip generations fi•om development onto the City street at the point of access and the
existing ADT fall within tlze following ranges:
Existing ADT
0-3,000 vpd
3,001-6,000 vpd
>6,000 vpd
ADT to be added by development
2,000 vpd
I,ODOvpd
500 vpd or more
c. If any of the follozving issues become evident to the City engineer:
(1) High traffic volumes on tlie adjacent roadway that may affect movement into or out of the
site
(2) Lack of existing left-turn lanes onto the adjacent roadway at the proposed access drive(s)
(3) Inadequate horizontal or vertical sight distance at access points
(4) The proximity of the proposed access to other existing drives or intersections is a potential
hazard
(5) The proposal requires a conditional use permit or involves a drive-through operation
(6) The proposed development ma� result in excessive traffic volumes on adjacent local
streets.
2. In addition, a traffic study may be required for all new or exparcded uses or developments
under any of the following circumstances:
a. when the site is within 500 feet of an ODOT facility and/or
b. trip generation from a development adds 300 or more vehicle trips per day to an ODOT
facility and/or
c. trip generation from a development adds 50 or more peak hour trips to an ODOT facility.
Comment: Although this is a three-parcel partition, one house already existed on the
site. Therefore the increase in traffic will be from two additional dwelling units,
approximately twenty vehicle trips.This is well under the threshold requirement for a
traffic study or impact statement. This development will not cause traffic congestion
that would trigger traffic calming devises. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
�o��•}i C'iriJarc-rest Partition C.it)-c�f"i�i:-:=u3
, 57
SR Design LLC \fz��13,2C.+t�;
18.810.040 Blocks
A. Block design. The length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to
praviding adequate building sites for the use contemplafed, consideration of needs for
convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of
limitations and opportunities of topography.
Comment: The application does not propose to change the current block design. This
criterion is met.
B. Sizes.
1. The perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 2,000 feet rneasured along the
centerline of the streets except:
a. Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of
water, or pre-existing development; or
b. For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, collectors or railroads.
c. For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access.
2. Bicycle and pedestrian connections on pubiic easements or right-of-ways shall be provided
when full street connection is exempted by B.1 above. Spacing between connections shall be
no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topograpliical
constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in tl�e code.
Comment: The application does not contemplate changing the size of the block and the
current block does not exceed 2,000 feet measured along the centerline of the street. This
criterion is not applicable.
18.810.050 Easements
A. Easements. Easements for sewers, drainage, water mains, electric lines or other public
utilities shall be either dedicated or provided for in the deed restrictions, and where a
development traversed b�a watercourse, or drainageway, there shall be provided a storm
water easement or drainage riglzt-of-way conforming substantially with the lines of the
watercourse.
Comment: The application proposes easements for sewers, drainage water mains, and
electric lines as outlined in the design drawings. This criterion is met. See Sheet C3.
B. Utility easements. A property owner proposing a deveiopment shall make arrangements
with the City, the applicabie district and each utility franchise for the provision and
dedication of utility easements necessary to provide full services to the development. The
City's standard width for public main line utility easements shall be 15 feet unless otherwise
specified by the utility company, applicable district, or City Engineer.
Comment: The applicant has made arrangements that provide for full services to the
development. The applicant has complied with the standard width for public main line
�nrtii Ci�c3arc-rest t'artitin�i C:it�-i�f.�"Ti:;a�ril 58
SR Design LLC �1at-1�,200-
utility easements of 15 feet. There is a utility easement to allow for storm drainage for
all three parcels, connecting to the existing storm line. This criterion is met.
18.810.060 Lots
A. Size and shape. Lot size, width, shape and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of
the development and for the type of use contemplated, and:
1. No lot shall contain part of an existing or proposed public right-of-way within its
dimensions;
2. The depth of all lots shall not exceed 2-1/2 times the average width, unless the parcel is less
than 1-1/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district;
3. Depth and width of properties zoned for commercial and industrial purposes shall be
adequate to proz�ide for the off-street parking and service facilities reqacired by the type of use
__ proposed.
Comment: The application contains parcels that are the size and shape appropriate for
the location of the development. The depth of all proposed parcels will not exceed 2-1/2
times the average width and is zoned residential. This criterion is met.
B. Lot frontage. Each lot shall abut Lcpon a public or private street, other than an alley,for a
width of at least 25 feet unless the lot is created through a minor land paYtition in which case
Subsection 18.162.050 (C) applies, or unless the lot is for an attached single family dwelling
unit, in which case the lot frontage shall be at least 15 feet.
Cornment: The application is for a minor land partition and each of the parcels is
abutting a public street and therefore � 18.162.050 (C) applies. Parcell has 75-feet of
street frontage and Parcel2 has 73-feet. Parcel3 has approximately 78-feet of frontage
along Cedarcrest and 103-feet along 74'h Avenue. This criterion is met.
C. Through lots. Through lots shall be avoided except where they are essential to provide
separation of residential development from major traffic arterials or to overcome specific
disadvantages of topography and orientation, and:
1. A planting buffer at least ten feet wide is required abutting the arterial rights-of-way; and
2. All through lots shall provide the required front yard setback on each street.
D. Lot side lines. The side lines of lots, as far as practicable, shall be at right angles to the street
_ upon which the lots front.
E. Large lots. In dividing tracts into large lots or parcels which at some future time are likely to
be redivided, the Commission may require that the lots be of such size and shape, and be so
divided into building sites, and contain such site restrictions as will provide for the extension
and opening of streets at intervals which will permit a subsequent division of any tract into
Iots or parcels of smaiier size. The Iand division shall be denied if the proposed large
Nr>rt'h Cr,�larcrest Yartition C:it}'c�f"i`in<urt] 59
SK Disi,n LLC :�4ay 18,2007
development lot does not provide for the future division of the lots and future extension of
public facilities.
Comment: The application contains no through lots, the lot side lines are at right
angles to the street and there are no large lots that will likely be re-divided due to the
site development requirements and configuration. This criterion is met.
18.810.070 Sidezvalks
A. Sidewalks. AII industrial streets and private streets shall have sidewalks meeting City
standards along at least one side of the street. All other streets shali have sidewalks meeting
City standards along bofh sides of the streef. A development may be approved if an adjoining
street has sidewalks on the side adjoining the development, even if no sidewalk exists on the
other side of the street.
Comment: The applicant will install sidewalks that meet the City standards at
ultimate location along SW Cedarcrest Street and follow the curb slightly onto SW 74t''
Avenue. It is the intension of the applicant to install sidewalks along SW Cedarcrest
Street to match existing sidewalks to the west. This criterion is met.
B. Requirement of developers
1. As part of any developmenf proposal, or change in use resulting in an additional 1,000
vehicle trips or more per day, an applicant shall be required to identify direct, safe (1.25 x the
straight Iine distance)pedestrian routes within 2/2 mile of their site to all transit facilities
and Neighborhood Activih� Centers (schools, parks, libraries, etc.). In addifion, the developer
may be required to participate in the removal of any gaps in the pedestrian s�stem off-site if
justified by the development.
Comment: Due to the size of this partition, there will be not be an additiona11,000
vehicle trips per day near or at this location, therefore this section is not applicable.
2. If there is an existing sidewalk, on the same side of the street as the development, within
300 feet of a development site in either direction, the sidewaik shall be extended from the site
to meet the existing sidewalk, subject to rough proportionality (even if the sidewalk does not
serve a neighborhood activity center).
C. Planter strip requirements. A planter strip separation of at least five feet between the curb
and the sidewalk shall be required in the design of streets, except where the following
conditions exist: there is inadequate right-of-way; the curbside sidewalks already exist on
predominant portions of the street;
it would conflict with the utilities, there are significant natural features (large trees, water
features, etc) that would be destroyed if the sidewalk were located as required, or where there
are existing structures in cIose proximity to the street (15 feet or dess)Additional
'�,'�n�th Cc��]arcrc�st Partitit3n Cih'of'1 i�ard 60
SR Di�sign LLC '41ay I4,2(k1'
consideration for exempting the planter strip requirement may be given on a case by case
basis if a property abuts more than one street frontage.
Comment: The applicant is proposing an extension of the sidewalk at ultimate location
along the northern side of SW Cedarcrest Street to the intersection of SW 74th Avenue.
See Sheet C4. The applicant is not proposing a planter strip due to the existing condition
of the sfireet where no sidewalks or curbs exist. The applicant understands that the City
Engineer requires a total dedication of 29 feet from centerline on SW 74th Avenue and 30
feet from centerline on SW Cedarcrest Street.This right of way dedication is sufficient
to meet the fixture street improvements. The applicant is prepared to sign a waiver of
remonstrance for future street improvements which will be recorded with the plat. The
applicant will clean out the existing storm drainage ditch adjacent to the street. This
criterion is not applicable.
D. Sidewalks in central business district. In the central business district, sidewalks shall be 10
feet in width, and:
1. All sidewalks shall provide a continuous unobstructed path; and
2. The width of curbside sidewalks shall be measured from the back of the curb.
E. Maintenance. Maintenance of sidewalks, curbs, and planter strips is the continuing
obligation of the adjacent property owner.
F. Application for permit and inspection. If the constrLCCtion of a sidewalk is not included in a
performance bond of an approved subdivision or the performance bond has lapsed, then every
person,firm or corporation desiring to construct sidewalks as provided by this chapter, s1ia11,
before entering upon the work or improvement, apply for a street opening permit to the
Engineering department to so build or construct:
1. An occupancy permit shall not be issa�ed for a development untii the provisions of this
section are satisfied.
2. The City Engineer may issue a permit and certificate aIlowing temporary noncompliance
with the provisions of this section to the owner, builder or contractor when, in his opinion,
the construction of the sidewalk is impractical for one or more of the following reasons:
a. Sidewalk grades have not and cannot be established for the property in question within a
reasonable length of time;
b. Forthcoming installation of public utilities or street paving wouid be likely to cause severe
damage to the new sidewalk;
c. Street right-of-way is insufficient to accommodate a sidewalk on one or both sides of the
street; or
d. Topography or elevation of the sidewalk base area makes construction of a sidewaIk
impractical or economically infeasible; and
3. The City Engineer shall inspect the construction of sidewalks for compliance with the
provision set forth in the standard specifications manual.
No�•th.C:ei3aa�cre5t('artition �:it�,c�f T igari3 61
SR Design t.LC May I3, 20l)V
G. Council initiation of construction. In the event one or more of the following situations are
found by the Council to exist, the Council may adopt a resolution to initiate construction of a
sidewalk in accordance with City ordinances:
1. A safety hazard exists for children walking to or from school and sidewalks are necessary
to elirninate the hazard;
2. A safety hazard exists for pedestrians walking to or from a public bttilding, commercial
area, place of assembly or other general pedestrian traffic, and sidewalks are necessary to
eliminate the hazard;
3. 50% or more of tlie area in a given block has been improved by the construction of
dwellings, multiple dwellings, commercial buildings or public buildings and/or parks; and
4. A criteria which allowed noncompliance under Section E.1.b above no longer exists and a
sidewalk could be constructed in conformance with City standards.
Comment: The City Engineer has indicated through the pre-application notes dated
May 10, 2007 that a sidewalk may be required along SW Cedarcrest Street. It will follow
around the corner of SW 74"'Avenue and connect to the existing sidewalk to the north.
The applicant will dedicate a total of twenty-nine feet from centerline on SW 74�
Avenue and sign a waiver of remonstrance for any future improvements that may be
necessary. This criterion is met.
18.810.080 Public Use Areas
A. Dedication requirements.
?. Where a proposed park, playground or other public use shown in a development plan
adopted by the City is Iocated in whole or in part in a subdivision, the Commission may
require the dedication or reservation of such area within the subdivision, provided that the
reservation or dedication is roaighly proportional to the impact of the subdivision on the park
systern.
2. Where considered desirable by the Commission in accordance with adopted comprehensive
plan poiicies, and where a development plan of the City does not indicate proposed public use
areas, the Commission may require the dedication or reservation of areas within the
subdivision or sites of a character, extent and location suitable for the development of parks
or other public use, provided that the reservation or dedication is roughl�proportional to the
impact of the subdivision on the park system.
B. Acquisition by public agency. If the developer is required to reserve land area for a park,
playground, or other public use, such land shall be acquired by the appropriate public agency
within 18 months following plat approval, at a price agreed upon prior to approval of the
plat, or such reservation shall be released to the subdivider.
Commen� The application does not propose any dedication for a park, playground or
public use as none are proposed within a development plan adopted by the City.This
criterion is not applicable.
North Ctrd.arc:rest Partitinn C:it�,of"1'i:;ari3 62
SR Design tLC �-ta�r 14,2(H)-
18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers
A. Sewers required. Sanitary sewers shall be installed to ser�ve each new development and to
connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design
and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the
Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including ccny future revisions or amendments) and
the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan.
B. Sewer plan approval. The City Engineer shall approve all sanitary sewer plans and proposed
systerns prior to issuance of development permits involving sewer service.
C. Over-sizing. Proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development
wifhin the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan.
D. Permits denied. Development permits may be restricted by the Commission or Hearings
Officer where a deficiency exists in the existing sewer system or portion thereof which cannot
be rectified within the deveiopment and which if not recfified will result in a threat to public
health or safety, surcharging of existing mains, or violations of state or federal standards
pertaining to operation of the sewage treatment system.
Comment: The applicant will meet the City Engineering standards for the sanitary
sewer. The applicant is proposing to connect Parcell and 2 and 3 with four inch laterals
that will connect to the existing sewer system on SW 74th Avenue. The design of the
sanitary sewer system will comply with the Design and Construction Standards for
Sanitary and Surface Water Management and the adopted policies of the
Comprehensive Plan. The City Engineer will review the plans to ensure compliance
with these standards and the applicant will follow the appropriate procedures for
obtaining suitable permits. This criterion is met.
18.810.100 Storm Drainage
A. General provisions. The Director and City Engineer shall issate a development permit onl�
where adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff have been made, and:
1. The storm water drainage system shall be separate and independent of any sanitary
sewerage system;
2. Where possible, inlets shall be provided so surface water is not carried across any
intersection or aIlowed to flood any street; and
3. Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown on every development proposal plan.
B. Easements. Where a deveIopment is traversed by a watercourse, drainageway, channel or
stream, there shall be provided a storm water easement or drainage right-of-way conforming
substantially with the lines of such watercourse and such further width as will be adequate
for conveyance and maintenance.
C. Accommodation of upstream drainage. A culvert or other drainage facility shall be Iarge
enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether
inside or outside the development, and:
NortPi C:eilzucrest I'artition C:it� of"ii��aril 63
SR Desi�;n LLC �4av 19,2007
1. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions
of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as
adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or
amendments).
D. Effect on downstream drainage. Where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the
additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility,
the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have
been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for
storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and
Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the
Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments).
Comrnent: The applicant has designed the storm drainage system based on the
provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water
Management, accommodating the upstream drainage and understanding the effect on
downstream drainage. The City Engineer will review the plans to ensure compliance
with these standards and the applicant will follow the appropriate procedures for
obtaining suitable permits. This criterion is met.
18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways
A. Bikeway extension.
1. As a standard, bike lanes shall be required along all Arterial and Collector routes and
where identified on the City's adopted bicycle plan in the Transportation System Plan (TSP).
2. Developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the Cih�'s adopted
pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways
through the dedication of easements or rights-of-way, provided such dedication is directly
related to and roicghly proportional to the impact of the development.
3. Any new street improvement project shall include bicycle lanes as required in this
document and on the adopted bicycle plan.
B. Cost of construction. Development permits issued for planned unit developments,
conditional use permits, subdivisions and other developments which will principally benefit
from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway
improvements in an amount roughly proportional to the impact of the development.
C. Minimum width.
1. Minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane.
2. Minimum width multi-use paths separated from the road is ten (10)feet. The width may
be reduced to eight (8)feet if there are environmental or other constraints.
3. The minimum width for pedestrian only off-street paths is five (5)feet.
4. Design standards for bike and pedestrian-wa�s shall be determined by the City Engineer.
tiorth Cedarc:zest Partition Citv i�f'li��sri1 64
SR Design LLC �4at-ig;2U0�
Comment: The applicant is not proposing any additional bikeways or pedestrian
pathways other than the sidewalks along SW Cedarcrest Street and SW 74th Avenue.
This criterion is not applicable.
18.810.120 Utilities
A. Underground utilities. All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for
electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be
placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection
boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service
facilities during construction, high capacity eIectric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above,
and:
1. The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the
underground services;
2. The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities;
3. All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets
by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and
4. Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street
improvements when service connections are rnade.
B. Information on development plans. The applicant for a development shall show on the
development plan or in the expianatory information, easements for all underground utility
facilities, and:
1. Plans showing the location of all underground facilities as described herein shall be
submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval; and
2. Care shall be taken in ail cases to ensure that above ground equipment does not obstruct
vision clearance areas for vehicular traffic.
C. Exception to under-grounding requirement.
1. The developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is
proposed to take pIace on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will
serve the deveiopment and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical
difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of undergrounding in
conjunction with the development. The deterrnination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The
most common, but not the onl�, such situation is a short frontage deveiopment for which
undergrounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of
above-ground utilities facilities.
2. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground
and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's properh�shall pay the
fee in-lieu of undergrounding.
3. Properties within the CBD zoning district shall be exempt from the requirements for
undergrounding of utility lines and from the fee in-lieu of undergrounding.
Nc�rth Cc�ilarcrest Partition C'itr•ut'Ti�:iriJ 65
SR Desi�n LLC :via}° 1R,2007
4. The exceptions in Sicbsections 1 through 3 of this section shall apply oniy to existing
utility lines. All new utility lines shall be placed underground.
D. Fee in-lieu of undergrounding.
1. The Cify Engineer shall establish utility service areas in the City. All development which
occurs within a utility service area shall pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding for utilities if
the development does not provide underground utilities, unless exempted by this code.
2. The City Engineer shall establish the fee by utility service area which shall be deterrnined
based upon the estimated cost to underground utilities within each service area. The total
estimated cost for undergrounding in a service area shall be allocated on a front foot basis to
each party within the service area. The fee due from any developer shall be calculated based
on a front foot basis.
3. A developer shall receive a credit against the fee for costs incurred in tl2e undergrounding
of existing overhead utilities. The City Engineer shall determine the amount of the credit,
after review of cost information submitted by tJze applicant with the request for credit.
4. The funds collected in each service area shall be used for undergrounding utilities within
the City at large. The City Engineer shall prepare and maintain a list of proposed
tcndergrounding projects which may be ficnded with the fees collected by the Cit�. The list
shall indicate the estimated timing and cost of each project. The list shall be submitted to the
Cify Council for their rez�iew and approval annually.
Comment: The applicant has designed the partition to enable all utilities to be placed
underground and will make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to
provide the underground services. A public utility easement will be created along the
southern boundaries of all Parcels to accommodate the utilities. The applicant may pay
a fee-in-lieu for any overhead power lines that front the property. The applicant has
shown the easements for all underground utility facilities in the development plans, see
Sheet C3.
18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required
A. Guarantee. All irnprovements installed by the deveioper shalI be guaranteed as to
workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City Council.
B. Cash deposit or bond. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount
of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer.
C. Compliance requirements. The cash or bond slzall comply with the terms and conditions of
Section 18.430.090.
Comment: The applicant will guarantee all improvements installed as to workmanship
and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City Council. The
cash deposit or bond shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the
value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer and comply with the terms and
conditions of� 18.430.090. This criterion is met.
Nortti C:��ilarci:est Partition �'it�-of 1`i�;ard 66
SR Desi�n LLC �fat-1B,2(1U"
18.810.140 Monuments
A. Replacement required. Any monuments that are disturbed before all improvements are
completed by the subdivider shall be replaced prior to final acceptance of the improvements.
Comment: The applicant will replace any monuments that are disturbed before all
improvements are completed prior to final acceptance of the improvements.
18.810.I50 Installation Prerequisite
A. Approval required. No picblic impravements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers,
streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the
plans have been approved b� the City, permit fee paid, and permit issued.
B. Permit fee. The permit fee is required to defray the cost and expenses incurred by the Ci�y for
construction and other services in connection u�itl� the improvement. The permit fee shall be
set by Council resolution.
Comment: The applicant acknowledges that the plans need to be approved by the City
and the permit fees paid and permit issued prior to commencement of the construction of
the public improvements. This criterion is met.
18.810.160 Installation CosTformation
A. Conformance required. In addition to other reqatirements, improvements installed by the
developer either as a requirement of these regulations or at his own option, shall conform to
the requirements of tlzis chapter and to improvement standards and specifications followed by
the City.
B. Adopted installation standards. The Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction,
Oregon Chapter A.P.W.A., and Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and
Surface Water
Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including an�future
revisions or amendments) shall be a part of the City's adopted installation standard(s); other
standards ma�also be required upon recommendation of the City Engineer.
Comment: The applicant will conform to the requirements of this chapter and to the
improvement standards and specifications followed by the City of Tigard. This criterion
is met.
18.810.170 Plan Check
A. Submittal requirements. Work shall not begin unfil construction plans and construction
estimates have been submitted and checked for adequacy and approved by the City Engineer
in writing. The developer can obtain detailed information about submittaI requirements from
the City Engineer.
B. Compliance. All such plans shalI be prepared in accordance with requirements of the City.
Comment: The applicant will not begin work until construction plans and construction
estimates have been submitted and checked for adequacy and approved by the City
'vorthCei3arcrest P�trtition Cit��of.'1'i�;azd 67
SR Desi�;n LLC \4av Ig,20i};
Engineer in writing. The applicant will gain information about the submittal
requirements from the City Engineer and comply with the requirements of the City.
This criterion is met.
18.810.180 Notice to City
A. Comrnencement. Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance.
B. Resumption. If work is discontinaced for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is
notified.
Comrnent: The applicant will not begin work until the City has been notified in
advance. This criterion is met.
18.810.190 City Inspection
A. Inspection of improvements. Improvements slzall be constructed under the inspection and to
the satisfaction of the City. The City ma� require changes in typical sections and details if
unusual conditions arising during construction warrant such changes in the public interest.
Comment: Any improvements will be constructed under the inspection and to the
satisfaction of the City. This criterion is met.
18.810.200 Engineer's Certification
A. Written certification required. The developer's engineer slzall provide written certification of
a form provided by the Cify that alI improvements, workmanship and materials are in accord
with current and standard engineering and constricction practices, and are of high grade,
prior to City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for
operation and maintenance.
Comment: The applicant's professional engineer, will provide written certification that all
improvements, workmanship and materials will be in accordance with current and
standard engineering and construction practices, and are of a high grade, prior to City
acceptance of the subdivisiori s improvements or any portion thereof for the operation and
maintenance. This criterion is met.
Conclusion
The applicant has satisfied the requirements of the Development Code for the City of
Tigard and the three-parcel partition application should be approved.
North C<�darcrest I'artition City o£�Lirard 68
SR Desi�;n LLC �-ia}�I8,2UOi
c
_�
a S �,�� �
� � _ " "rdr�,,�F. PROdECT,� � Z,� ,
y � �� � �� � ITE � < t��
�� `�/ � �/d f���� � Sw Birch Si �
/p �}/ ��
� �L./ � .CdatRCSt$t F ry '^ �'.,.'f'�. I�
iw Chestnut St a ...Sw F�Y�^ � .,Q� I
A �-PARCEL PAI�TITION � � - �
�Elnrvnrod Si E�� ^'m �
� .. �� Sw B2rb0.r2 Ln �.v.P -P si
.. .. ... �'�'n �S �v E
Sw Hatnk�[k 5t " p o o ;
x
----- I � � SW W � � o�
,,_ � -----------� I wrtTSt n Swvmturao� ... � � �
Svr Land'aU$t y �.. m
a �
r �
; � ' ' ' -� VICINITY MAP �at� , I
� I NT5 �4,`�,� n
� �\ a'�n\� ci �
i "LAWRENCEi PARTITION" ' ' � f � SHEET INDEX �' `�� �
� , . � Q .� �
� � z
L1.1 ' � ; ! � ---
� C1 COVER W
� � ' i � �. � �A�• ��20• C2 EXISTING CONDITIONS/7REE REMOVAL/DEMOlJTION
(W I I I ', �� zo �o o zo C4 PRELIMINARY GRADIN6 PLAN
Q � � ; I ` CS COMPOSITE U�LITY PLAN
W � i ! , C6 CIRCULATION PLAN
' �
Z �-,---------- ---- ------- I --- �
o , � �- �----- ---,- � ; ,_-� g
�
� ' i i i T.L. 3700 i , � ' � i �
Q I i � i j
i I ( , PROJECT TEAM tj � O
� ' j I I t i ! � Q�B C I V l L E N G INEER � J � z
i X
W I � I � j � � ; ' e o e�x T u�x C E S R D E.s�a+u C Q � �
� I � � � I I � E � sno sw,urRm siea sw H�u e�w.,/x�z F— o J
� ncu�u,a+9�z2a e�+�tTOn,at e�ooe
� � PARCEL 1 I P A R C E L 2 P A R C E L 3 � � � � �+�E c��>e��-�o PHONE (503)169-1213 � d� �
� I i 7 519 S F I i I I CONTACT: ROBQtT UNRENCE ca+r,�cr: s�ve a o r E x,a� � a (�j � m
U � � 7,505 SF 7,550 SF i I I Q p a F �
LOT 11 ' � � ' i ' ; �'! �� P1d�ldEB V W T
�� �� j � � � � � s�oma+uc ss o�sai LLc V �
B 0 U L E V A R D H E I G H T S I i � I a� eisc sM Hui e�w,�zaz e�ss sw H�u a�w.,�z p.,
I I � � BEA�ERTON.CR 97008 BEAOfRTON�OR 97008 Q
� � I i �� �a�(soa)�e9-iz�a vr�: (soa>�ee-ira �
� I I � ' �; CONTACT: TOBY BOLDFN,PLS CONTACT: ,EFF CAINES,AICP
I � f'-------------------�----------------J �
I � 1 I �
�--r________________ � � � � ; SlTE 1NFORMATION
------- --�----- -----
---- --
..___...�_..__.----._.---.__.�__...._._......__....�________-______ __ ___________�-� .,. . 70TA SRE AREA 0.56 ACRES 24.214 S0.FT.
ZONtlrG R-4.5
; i �
__-_--------------___ ___---__---� � -------
,.-"��' ` R/W DEDICAlION�1E36 S0.FT.
- ' ' TDTAL NET AREA: 22,574 S0.Fi. k-'
"-------------- ------`- --°-----_ _
--'-----------------------'----___--------" ___...----'� � i WHIHWI LOT AREA: 7�50.5 S0.FT. �
�n�r1 A pr+e�eT e�� ! ZMIINC INNIANIY LOT MEk 7,500 50.FT.
� _ �_'_ _ __._ _ _"�' _ _' '_ _ VG✓rVlVilCa71 a71 fl�1 � YA%DEN9TY: 4 LD75
- - - ---- - -- - —._..-- -- — _, �_ _ _-� i i YlNYW DENSTY: 3 LO15
'-'-'-�---------"'_---�, r---"--'-"-' __..___-------"__._._--"------�•--�..
'----'-'--------'---'------------� i
��, '� �---� ( - GENERAL LOCA110N
,� ��.,� � i,_.
----------' __ : � cat�a�
---------- --------�--- �.
� ---__------------ ` + � ' sw°'�u��n s�r�sw�i4�vTMO+�
�— �-----------------�--------
{ � 1
I 1 _____�\\ i i, � 1 1
LEGAL LOCATION �
� I ! ; �, � I i tAG1FD oN 7NE souTHE,►ST Guut7ER oF SEC71oM 25
f TOYMSHIP 1 SOU1H.RAHGE 1 YiEST,OF 1HE Mfl1AMEl1E 4fRIDAH.
71GAR0�ORECON
TAX 11AP 151 25CA MD TA%LOT 370D
0
o z
z �
EE�i�(iM982f � �
LEGEND
W
-------------- oasnNC�aT/ROw w+e � �A�oi�ac�iN MOf1UYQ1T BOX MARKMC 1HE a � �
- E705iING C4ITEPoJNE ONE-OUARIER SEC710N CORNER C0IMION TO SEC110N5 25 AND 38�
-- PRQECT BpAiDAftY 11NE TS R1M1.El£VATION�265.18 iEET DATE i 5/18/07
------------ E}]S11NG AC LIt1E DESIGNm i A VICUNA
- - PROPOSFD PARCFl UNE
ENqNEER� S ROPER
-- PROPOgD Pofi1T-OF-WAY
--------- PROPOgD EASQIENT 11NE CHECXm�
si�r nn.E
COVER
SHEET NUMBER
C1
� Z�I
C9�,il
,r� '.
��
t!1�i
� �\ f����
r ���r.! ��i
��=-�\���:F °`rv o N� �
��V�.� �+�m �$ a
�� ^ +
3
_ � n�i ;
� � Q� '�
SCALE.• 1�70' m � 3�
IO 0 20 �
,�., � , , ,;.�..� , t C ,, � ,� .., �
� i ' u w � ��`,� °LAWRENCE�'�PARTITIQN �;�'/ ` ' ' i`Y � ' �: �
TFiEE NVENTORY TABLE i�I I � � ` � �//, f.�` ,� � t�� ; �:� . � �
�� rn� a,w�ca�na �ov�� W �1 � �` . ''C�,?\- . '� ' ; I� ��`V � � n I � , --� � -��� �+
DIX1GlA5 FlR 23' FNR tFS i 1 . i 1 / _ '� ! � y .. � z
1R 2J8.1 ENCLISH HA1Y610RN 14 NO � '�:.�r � . / � � '''l � � ' i f� / � �`^_� �t` i � 1 ;°`� �.�� i A � S� W
TR 236 DWGUS FlR � W � t / � ' �� �
TR Y37 DWGUS FlR POOR NO � J p � � � � � � � � ' � :
TR 2J8 DIXIGLAS FlR 26 POOR NO ? f � � 1 ' ��n r '.. �w�`n:.y� i I �� i� �
TR 305 UWGUS FlR 28 NO Q �� (� ` \ !�, . . � � ,� � .- �r��� �i I � � `; `��
TR 306 RED ALDEIt t4 FAIR YES � i �I �� f� � �y •. 230.20' ; � � ( i�, � ��� ; �
1R 3W RF➢ALDFA 20 FAIR YES ! I^----- -M---A"^.�J`-.- �����^�"--�-+"'�9RI'fP'k�'""-'^-��--�-� +=� a°��,�w.^ i a i � �y. I
1R 344 BIp.EAF M�PLE 19 AI NO �r_--�-_ ••.,``��� . ' - � -- �� - . _ � �j �� � �,� �
7R 789 SYIFEf CHQtRY 15 � �( � � 369.. � :. •.. �yy .. �"�,t-�,�'=�� ��1 i� �" 2� .� :
m see w.r�n cmut i r+o � i � `':,s4a , ' ' _,_ _ / ,",;;� T 7�0 � %✓���'� " ',!� , ;�
�� rn eoo oaucus rx� ie ra � `t'� �, �.�.� � °�!, �� ,�/, � y��, i i; � � �
�I � ,�, �„� ,B ,� a �I��� � ;, �� �Y ':�� %; � ;!�;`'� �.�'�'�� � ' LEGEND: �
� t ' '1't �'-� o u T e u n n w c 'i--j a � � � c D
II � I I`I 1 r! �i � �,,r��/g,E FtO10\'ED) ', l � g�� �!'. i �1 � � ~
II � I�! 1 '� � i�i < �' � 236.1 �':�,,� 1 1i i
II W 306( ��;,j k � / I,.�� � /� ���% � �� ` I O z cW.>
II � I I ��; � �, , �
, �--�° �,�,. ,,�,. -` � �'� ` l�; � � o z
iiZ ;-="y�`;.�I ",� ,i �o� ! / �/ � 2� �.r�' k\�� — —_ .,- — - - exisnNC coHTOUR (s' iN�rtv�) � w
u - 0 <: '�, r ` '- � ~ �' � . — ...- - - � �o �
I! [, ` � �.� � \ `'237 �� -�;"r�;i' l - E7(IST1NG CONTWR (1' INTERVAL) � �
II STORM NANHIXE v ���?:" ,� 307 `�a. f 'F I � —� --- �� Q W
I� Y EL�261.2 LOT 11 �' -� , i ��> - --,_,_, �;.a� i 1 �,�� • -- - PROJECT BOUNDARY � � m
„rH �
�+ i ��
li IE IN iN�254.6� u n "'� �" � � ` ti� /�/ , �EIOSiMG i . /I `#:�Y��.+f ' � �I � i -------- - EXISTING LOT UNE , ^ � �
�� �iN e�zs+.e• BOULEVARD HEIGHTS �?��" �" '` ! ' , ' �� ' � , '
,�2se
i� IE OUT N)254.7 � I I :i y \ (i0 BERFN0IED}� � �{,j� i � ----------------- - FJ(�S11NC EDGE OF PAVEAIENT
I �� ,� �� . � � �• � : �
'�t
L_ �+ ^ � . - EXIS7ING OVERHEAD UNE
II FL CRATE EL�281.08 � `� �� J' 4' Ot1TFALL �. � 1 ��-LL--"`r�F:-;-L �I� I �. �
��� E OUT(12'�11�2Sa7 12" CULVERT � I ���� IE�263.2' �J�TALL BOLLARD �.�.--��__ � � �;�"" � OPoOP(1� � '� �`, " �� �
2Sa (
�� i� IE 262.9� �� IE 2831�T � � Y I - EXISTING BUILDING UNE 11 t
II i � ------ -�-.-._.
-�i- ---- ''�'' .,�- `' � � .. ;- - ' i i _ 2 � 232 1 ) � - W
�i' := �i.a a - - �w�.---•--• f--� -^-.....M__ -- �_� �" -�.==- SB9l3'�0 E�'r��.s� ��� �-��x � � f -` _e(y� TREE PRDlECT10N FENCE �
Y �.
� _
,.
-----y''�__.�''- - • _. .__�- _— - ��--- " -- � � � .
-- ---
_._.�--- - _._.''��. - --- �- T"
��- _ ....� _ -- -
� - �...^.__ '_._--_.--� - -� ___��__ .�.--- —~_ "`""""' � i't �r �I
�_
.„ `�,
. .._
-- ^ ,,.,.r.--_----"�"__�._�____i _ -- -- . -- - DEGDUWS TREE
�
_ __ � - �'r �
. - ~ E�265.1
--,�-t------ � —-,.�-----._.�,� �-''-- -.— _- __ ` '�,
w ., •---- � - - _........._.__ --- __....___ _ _ ;���
,.� ., i-- � ; �.w._s�-------=-�-1--- -----------�.�-----_ � �/ •I/� /�/� , �
,. �. , y �...-.a- ;. �
.`.......�.. �.- �� Gv
� � � - � r �� V.I VWIYIVIL�V1 �.I,1Yif � i �
_a ,..� f4--_Yr...._..�.r.F�_ � , i .� � 'f� ��.
� �z cu�w�r -p�iY a�wtT - - - - �a'axrFnr-�`—- - - - - __ � ���' I I �
E 2s�.e �-�z� � '�. n ___� 'a��xr .___ - --�"' � _ - �cR� rn� �
- f ------ _..------ --- -- ' - - -- ' ,... �-�.4 — �-x�.e �� ;?'—!� .,,
k__----------r--- >..-�---- -------------- —
_._. - ------------- -----
+�,r, __ --- ___ _ --. - -- ( p ;` �� �,
' �' c�ra�E soewux � ;�--�` — � �.� f '� �' - - J, <� ;Q �,,. --�
_ �' E ,� �
�
r. \�� _ �.,, F -� `i`
_::. -`-__'- ..,,..�., � �,ir----—- � � ----_-"--•— -��Y-�-- � ---\ --�� - - ���'_ ..,✓----�'-.- �v, - APPLE. CHERRY. PLUM. LOCUST
' 40NC i 10'CULVERT i i -}8686''-+` �/ �
BI�RPoG�DE� 10'UILVERT , I ' � `�. ��CRAVEL y � "`—--- -- M�_.T`-�...,,� � i �
IE�2824 z� DMf�-, q E�263.2.' .\' � DRIYEM'AY �, �� � �� �r �,..-' �; � � ( y�
� i \�\ `'---.� �.� � i „�-td WL4ERT �', ��,� ��'; 4 � � - BIRCH. ASH S
; -^"' -7 \ �.,/`"- -"' , _ ��. E�2829 ,--'" �� � i ��
FL GRAIE EL=261.66� �` i � � �/ /� �-•r— -' .— i�" � `� � i
!E WT(M�259.9� �M a�265.15' i` . i � i`
IE IN(E)257.�� ,� ( , � / ���j�1 � � � � i
IE OUT(E)257.0' �. ` � � o i I � � `f�- , I �
I �'"�� C'1�$' � � I /� / : i I � 1. '. Y3' � �, i - FlR� H£AILOq(
� �
� - MAPLE
d
o z
z �
� - OAK U �
� � � �
- PINE, CEDAR. JUNIPER DATE i 5/18/07
DESIGNm i A VICUNA
ENGINEER i S ROPER
�� - EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVEO CHECKED i
SHEET TTLE
EXTG. CONDITIONS
SHEET NUTABER
C2
�, `� �
. z�
�e
, �
�I � �� �
��W�����I
, �
\ �_
I " _
; _� -r� _
:—__.._._____"_—.___._____._�___.._._______".____- i � y
��P ~9
. ..�.__�_���.._��_.._.__�����_�� � � N
-- , � �' 'n e E
' i � ' SCAC£.' 1':20' � � o o ;
� + i I 3 x� v.
� (j ---_------- � I I 0 10 0 ?D a i ��
��` � � � �
� i � I �
i � i : �
I ' � � �
i
I i � �
� � I ' ���'a . �
F- � "LAWRENCE i PARTITION" ! _��� U ^
z jl � W
; �
W ; � , , Q ,�, �
w � � ,
� fi
� ' i
W �5 i ,5� � � i
� REAR YARD SB9217E � RE/�R YAF� REAR TAlm I .
O �_r __ 75.OT___�_____ 73.0.- _ -� __-742'-�U'pUE/ _�� �
� � - - - - i - - - - - - i T.L. 3700 �,r i -1�, �
� i �
Q ,�� r � � -� - - - - - - � i , �
> �,,,aT � I I 5• I I I ' � � ��R� � a O
i � I � i i � ` J Z Z
W I ' � I ( (Tw) � � � � j � I J �+, � � �
v+ ��b � I N� I I�� I I � I�Ib � ' � p J
� <
� �Ig � PARCEL 1 I�I I PARCEL 2 �al ► PARCEL 3 � i ��� I � �
U � � 7,519 SF 5 I I 7,505 SF � � /,550 SF a(%(' � �
,s' I ' a m
� � I � N F �
LOT11 ' � �. �1 ;1 I , I I � , � � � r
°BOULEVARD HEIGHTS" I � �,r,��� � �I I ��r �T I I I i � a' � �j �
� �
� 1- - - - - - - � �- - - - - - - -� L - - - - - - J ,�`,: � � , a a
6� �--------------- I------- ` ^
_ I � I ---' ---NS10N f�\\, I � �j. � �
I �E •
`�.�,` 1
F--r-- -------- ----- 7RIANGtE :
1 �`. ! �.. + �
�- -- 75.0' _.1__ 7J.0' �_ __ �'�� � 1
- - ----- - ---- i �
----- saazs'�o'e � i
------- --------------_ __ --� ----
-- �o, -- -------- — -- !
�' � ;
FXTG.15'R/W PROP.30'R/V! � j
�
SW CEDARCRES`T STR�T i i 3
---_- - -------- - - - -- _� _ __ --- - ------- - ---____ _ ________ _ __._--- - —.____ _ �._.- — - --� �
' ` �' i
�
�
d
d z
U� �W
� Q <
ii
DATE � 5/18/07
DESIGNE�i A VICUWI
ENGINEEf2 i S ROPER
CHECKED�
SHEET i1TlE
PREUM. LAYOUT
SHEET NUUBER
C3
. ''� 1
. . �E 1
�� I
YJ�
W§i i
�� .
E m� - —
%
��P �'� �
�u��¢ �� E
SCALE.� 1�70' � S ,r°,9 ;
� .,��`��v`�'`��e,��"� - ' � --- -------� ----- -�`-�� i.1� '' i I 10 O ?0 m � 4 t!
� � �
( �-.. � � � t � �� �
, , � � —� ��� t '` '�'� ,
����`—,� _�— , i `` i � �
' � ":`� L� =-` � '>> ' •i�` ` ; LEGEND: ��. '
� � � n
\ ' ��.. /+ �� .__ �� ` , � �• �~ \\i� � ' I ����\�^ U y
i �
�� { � �� � 270 -PROPOS�D CON70t1R(5 INIFRVAU � w
l � - c"''' � � t'ti t'1 1 � �
� � � �
, v . ,y m.� '`, ' I \ '�--- -_.. .,,_ i 1 �,' � i � 2ez -aKOPOSm cor�rax�(r ert�xv�) � �
�� ��' � � ' � ' � F � �-- P
`� / !, ,, `\ i � u � ! 1>' � ' '
i l / I K,i---. 1 1 .! 1 i + /�\i -X X— -PttoaOgD SEDIMEH7 FElla+c
� / ; ` � ^•T+F.-, 4+�� � � � �J Y
� � � �J
J �� , ` \ °!�i j I I � ; , -vkoaosm��ohcna►��r+aHc
� , �
, , � , � ; � �
'� � , � ,;i"�� i � I I ''� -- --zm, �. ..... �� �
�,
-oaslwc ca+mim s a+mavu
�, . `'_
�-
� ,'- ;•� � {�,, i, � s � �,,, �: �- ` � � � � � � � — —x�z— — — -oasrnc cara�(r i�xvu)
-- -- -- ���,.-- --; -< —���-- - -- - t�� ; ( � � � ------- -aRO�cr eoaioutr g
� � I \' � � \
, �
� � `1 � ' � � ��s ' r"�� � S� � I ------- -oas�wc ar urE c^�
�� � '� ��r � � � � � � F-
10'EXTG X� �1 y �� 1 `~1 1 ,� I ' � ----------------- -E70S1MG EDGE OF PAYEIENT � O
� i ` I; .� ! ,}�' I� l ��J '`�r i � ~� ��t '�^V" � � � ----------- -��o+r ur� � J � z
� ����� � Y- 1 � W
�4 I 1 �• ' I `� ,,; I " � O -a�ovogn�ET sEDmENr atrohcnon � � �
�x � � I � � � � ���,r.a I �` , �i �I o �
�y;, I , �r, ' �� �� � � '"-,'` � � �U��� ��� i� � ; I � -PROPOSID BIOBAG FROSION CON1fiDL �� �
�- • �z ���,� PARCEL 1 '� � i'��'PARG�L 2 � PARCEL 3�� ,,� a � ;,� � C�
i ry�Y } �-_�n � "' F o
�'� 7�# a._,' ', 1 �.� r: , � ' \ s, � -oasnrc rn�io eE�ovm � �
� �,' �1 � �� ��� � .�- - . - ---�--� � �� ,,i , ��� �
�,t Y I // �;� `—',��� \�• I Y'�
�°�" �� j '�Y/ 1S' .. � � 1'- . Q'✓�I � CRADING NO1E: QQQ���
� � {!` PUE ESIIT �.-�r, , � _ � ALL DRIVEMAT CaNNEC110N5 10 CFDARCREST AYE �
�C � � ',I � �� '`�� - i h, ��'� � � MLL BE 1HROU(i1 BULDWG PQiN1T PROC£55
� r� ., `� ,` \ � � �Y' � . : i NO GRADING NILL TAKE PLACE YA7HR1 1HE RIGHT-dF-WAY
.� I I g' i_'_-1---------�� ---`^�---- --�-'- -'---�` .o� �, �-,, I
�� I ' ��_X_`°-v==X___�__ X \ X X �' X� --- --%�I �� ,'� '^; �^i \ i
,_` � �, �._ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ r , r , ;
_ .
______—_��.:_ . •------- - -- -------- -- ': � • �
—- - ------ - � ��
-- �------ �, . �` �
,� _ , ._ . s — ---
�_ ____ _ , � ..y.:
.
, _ ____ _ . _
_ _.v
.. r..__ . _ ,
__�~ i2'� � =,,,�+
_"`_ .----�._ --�.-.._�— — -_ 1_,.4� _ - pEpy �Q+ti�., 4EWAY
,
DPoYEY/AY—.
.
..._,�
,
_ < < . _... AY
-----------J---- - --------- - --- ---- --�-------�- ---- -��p�M �)
• . , .: ,
, ' , / ,
_ � 267
1... ,
i�
1...�--•- �y �� ,, , 1
��/ � 2+°,n". `----_..----�-� - ---�' --- - �� �I "'-""'_ ,.v 4' �
----�-+ - �r.,� .+C� ��MfMlG�71 ��•�`�.� µ��/F�, .
- -�- - - - - �--- - - ---- - -�.--,- - -- - - -- - - __ - �; - ;�- ~j
i � � �--� __ r -----�- " .�, 7`_.i;
--r------�--------'---�"°-�_ -----�-- �` -- \ ~�" � . i
�T�PIpP
Ex; M� • A( OEDICAl10N �'i IN
a;w 5 R/11 R;� n/ __ (
�.�� I � ,; =k'G R?W I �
{T-�/'H � � �� � V�C
5�� .. � �� � i P..CP ^:+
� PROP�0'R/W FO�R� �--75'��;^,HALr kA6T4 k.'W— --� EX:Ha 9" ^�ti k/'8--i-�
._._�7c•�;=x?C,iiF,LF�OTN H1'n___.��..._-�XTG 25'HAL�N74TH RfW---1� VAAIES
• SEE Pl/JI MEW
I ____�c't—� �� d
—1':t^��---'vAR:-S-- Y�Y YARIFS = z
-_-_ v^=7ES �,i'� ` ,_..______ �_�• - �. U � �
Ey� �-:-� _- RuAL'NA", � a <
iF�A;;wr�, `�,;,f a G� c�
AN�CRASS ~ MPRDYEIAE?1T p�
SW CEDARCREST SFCAON N� 74TH AVENUE ��� , s/ie�o�
N� ��A�� DESIGNED i A NCUNA
(iIlOY Fi�LT�0 l511 ENqNEFR i S ROPER
MOIE•011W lOCA1ED�1EDI SR 2HLP2 NO SGt 7imM M07E�E�AUf IFND0.5 FPDY STk NILN 10 Ak M7lit
SMIF A E OFA7ED F�OI Sfk YWi7 10 STk 2�M11 A OL1ERf 6 10�PIARD U�F71 9E�EMIK A Cd1YE7 CHECKm�
Nt Y1Q 10 M 70!U!CRAiE�1�DI PMCIIS 1!! 1!E IIO�OMM MiF]t FO01►lA�L]ND MOI OIIOI
dt�w�OE��ir��c�ErYx SHEET TTIE
PREUM. GRADINC
SHEET NUMBER
C4
� z�`'�,
' '' ' ' i `_'�'
II � i j
! � �� ,' , i I ��
� I II � ( � ' ;� � W�'
' � �I ; t � � C�� ,
U ` i —
' II � ' � �� Evo �r �
II � i � � ��� °� „
� PARTITION PLAT N0. ; �� ' I � sc�+cF� r•=so� � � �� �
� 2003—049 � �� : i � � � ��
�o o so � � �`
T.L. 8800 _u_�` I
� � . n m
' ' � n �
� -----------------------� '�i � �
t ' �di� �
I T i i 4,�� ^
i i �� j �'s���� �i �
.
-- c -- ; ���� �n
�---.. .---------------__----- � ' rc
;- _��-----�--------� ii � i '� !� ,� x
�' I �'I �I .. � � .� W
+ I _�� r I
1 � 4• �'
I __________—__'_.._...�___ �I
� I �
i � i T
� I •,i�� �� c.
�
,K
I j � I€ `, I i
i i ; �
; Y . � � g
� � i "LAWRENCEi PARTITION" '� � n
Z ' � � !
W � ' •� I ' i--' i �
� � ; � � LEGEND: � o
I,i" '; �j Z Z
(n � � �i � J i C�T -Do51WG wAlEx uEtER '" w �'
CL �a ;� , �, � i � �-, C -E'�571NC WA7Qt YAl1lT � o g
w ,� ( , ; ; � ; � �
� '�-------- �"�t------------� !i.: I -oasnNC w�t¢x vuv� °�
� ___ "1____:—__J �������� �' i � < W
H
Z �� � a'
i I ----- --�-- -- -------� 1 � I , fIPI `•� � � -oasn+c unun vtiur Q F o
Q � '�.I 1 j I � II � � -E)asn+c C�Tai B�sN Q ^ �
' `r� i i i T.L. 3 7 0 0 i � ;� �� i` I O -EfOSMG SANTMY SEMFR YANHOLE
Q I �ii � �
i� I i ( �; � ; � -oasm�c s�w ow�uuc�wvwa.e
� 1 1 I I I � � � ^ -E b 5 N+c 9 p+ � �
_ � 1 II I � , � -���N�
W � I i I-10'PRIVA7E EcTC.FLOw LB� � I � i -
�� � so�uaT , � � ' ,� � -o�asm,c,��r,a�s�x V
' Exrs c�s uNE Ex
U� � �i � � I i I � I �; I � OOSIING POWER RISER
�^ � � EXTG 8'SS 111E -- -PR0.ECT BWNDMY
� ' i1 i PARCEL 1 � I A ,
��� � -�r { � --- - - -._.....--.- _E705IING LOT lNE
PARCEL 2 PARCEL 3 ' ' '
V I ��� � � i I i ` j - - -wioaos�n�or�
L 0 T 11 i_i � � � � � �'', �� ' I Exrc.e'w�� ----___------ -oasn�c m�aF vao�o+r
"BOULEVARD HEIGHTS" I �i i I � � � ' I ;i a�h ; ; -;�s =�aa�+•s,oawu,� �
I I I �/ I �,, i 6'SD PROPOS�D B'SI0f0/lA7FltAL
DITCH INt ET �� � � ( 5• ;j' �j � -PROPOgD MA1ER SERNCE LME
(CY5R75602) I i l �'---------------9SC91-4- -------- / ' �, i
I I IQ �2�� -----I---
� -PROPOStD EASEIIFNT
12'a.vr I. I . - �n � -----------
i i�r'°--------------- � � � ----------- -EbSTNG FASELENT
ii -------- -- -- ----- -- -----
_ ---- ___._- ._.__ __-- - . / - --- . -- - -EpS7YlG flD1Al1E
_-- - - - ; I I � -- --'Z. -- - -------- -------- ,,D i i � p -PROPOSFD STANDARD MGTER ME7Qt
----^-`= — � --' � IXTC.25 R/W DPoVtIYAY DPo4EN'AY � DRIYE'MAY i � ��� ' i (YA7H 1'NATFR gRYIC�
��-----' ------------------.__----= �
_ G _ "_ G _ . '_"_ ' _' ' -- __
_._---.--.-r.-�--- ---- -_.-. � 0 PROPOSED 0.EMIOUT
___ _,�,.T:_------ - . __...__. . _
� � -;--- - _.. .�..�_��_�-_R. Paaa.30'R/w `---- �.�. "" `� ; _
- _ - �
- - - -�*-$- — -- - - --- -- - -_---- F J $��� � ; � �� o�cna�a�r�ow
-N-- �
— — � ^ . _ _ :
DCfG SSAOi' �� __��� �I �
---------------------
------------��106� � �I � ` '
� �-------------- '------- ------ ---- -'--------------------
. r---------- ., _---- -----_ �I , o z
:-- _ I - z
.,, r __ ''°."' __ �
"._ _ _ � - ,.. '� t :
"___"' .� i � y�
__ --__—"' _'-_ � __�_"!_____' -L__'_'�,_- _!`'—_ __ ' � � d Q �
� � __` � i \ i ---- --- _ il � i a � c� X
����NtET � i I � � �� ' .; ,� I '
(C'►6f2758o2) � ` � L.___-� � `� � ' � � <, I
I i �,� n � 5 � ` DATE � 5/18/07
� ���� ; i I ; � i DESIGNmi A NCUNA
� i � ENqNEER� 5 ROPER
I � i � j , ' I i � CHECKm�
I n � :
� � 1 ' f����f�Q�
� p�w�7ER�k1E SHEET T1TLE
� � ! , T.L 3800 �,; COMP. unurr
v�
� - � - SHEET NUMBFR
C5
r�^�!Q't . � rt LCA'
� - � ����� • !�'� ` E �- '�"`� -� ,.� ��.`x�' :..
, �
. ; ,� �� _ w�. � . . "� _�,�! � � ,�-� -
�..::� - � i orR�. �' ��,- m"��-n� .. '�'� _e� i s � ..��:
—.-...._ �� ., �� ��-
•��������������i��.�u� ���� ■ � �. • u�wiL' " " .. � {��.���'j ��� � 1 .. .
�• '1..� .. ���Uilw� �11��1 .���• •���1�l�d�■ u��■ � •�..
� R. � �
� � � � �,. _.ti � ax `�! ��r �R � _..:�� , - - � '-"o � �,� }�`�
� � � ' �,� r��y'
. . ;, �°
„ a. �y,
� ° i e 3y'�s.. , . . y .' - 'r�'�''!�"- � � �„� �y� x+ a' ..
" �"s�' � .� ..r � . , �„_
���� _� � i�.:�� ���: . a ,� �y �„.� ., � �
. � -- � � ��� - ,�� � � � „ ,. , � .�.����
. , ,.
. , . � . �� _- �
� • � i � �� .�, r • p
, s� i+
an , -
I �l�P.. - � i � �, i�i x:.i"'� �g1'� ��p-: r;r�„n�� • �� :��i
� y .z � � . �, k' �y r,-�
. . � � k � � �_� ', e . � �,. ��
� ; ��. y ; �� .,• x ,,w .: � �"�.�•° � t � •.�'� ,F
� '� � ( �, r , � ��
.
,� , :
� ���. � _^ {�.w. � � I¢ .. .. tia �� k , � . .1 _
. . ,
a. � . � , . �.y"'^- f ��c.• ..., �'
5 �` �r
,.
n
I � � . , Y �. ..
« i �� .J:3q ,� A
�� � � � e �* �� �� '�, . �� ��,
� � �„' I €�.'d�, �`+e � �� ,��¢ )` �;� `
' �w I i ���.�� 't L ��� " ,. '�� �
r+ �'
_
. ._
: �`� � � '"3F � �i,�,p,'�+ �. �1 . � ' �'� r ..�;�-, �
- � i � , a
' - ` ` M ;e'+ �d _1�C �,�y
F ,� � i� �_p� '� w
� A �� 'n f�.W } y� �` A Y "�'� ' -� +{�w"]�
�...._�. .�..�..
„
- �� '�r3 �. nfC' � �T' ��
,
_ � ;
• � ■
.. q.s � -� 4� - � � . . .. � �.a.�"° flN�`_ ,.�-�n� �� t� E ..
s! '
� �
�_ �.____"'_'____� __'._'` .�.:
„ y a �aL' . � i`
F� ... � . � �� i .. M � �' � ��t � },il ..
r� , � ^ " . . +� � �� "t
, ; �`
.Mr•� 7��� 2 �
�,1�< � �
,.�, -.--- � �, - � ,�
r t I a j k �y, ,5� °§. :x Ytl '�
.. � �_ _ ' � +i » � ,�,��Jy�fir:St ,
�
,,: . ' � J�, � . � ,� �t� �'� ' � �� �I� s� r! .jj pR
��'�'`� '.� d
� � � �.., ' ... �L �� " ' P � L R .�
_�' �S��� ���� �� '. .. r -,..���, . �Y-*� _ •�^..�. 3�" '3:' "�y`.j�� w�� A� �
�. ,
•' �+,
�` _. ,; ?�,;, ._._..� i : I � �e;; 0'1 �� ' "t "�j i'° � .tli{`� '���'i
et�.�.,.. � � , �. •
�
, • � �.- _
; � �!-� '� � �{ �"-` y � y " _��N . � r` � .. �
'�•. - J f ; _[*''�''w � ... ��� . �
� �
.'xn$ '___,_.-�--�-- l'. ..--------�--'�- _.3 . . , � ,. '� , �� � � i"� '
4. �'� " j f F .� �. � .., .y • e �:. �K: ..7 q� �*s
� � ��P
.� . ' 1 r i, r ; "' i � __ �,._ � 7-,- -_ •. �''- '�' - __ ,i ".__ ._
n.
�•� . i at ` ,�. ' . . ,`� v_- y;°" . ��Q�: �„' d�.����� I n� . _ i ♦ i_.
���r�� �..... . � � � 4< �• � t � � g}7i�� ,�� -i,d �q.h k �
, � . ,. , . . . . +� �
4 3 � � — .: 1 _ , � . . � * S i � . . j�`•�- �': :.�Yeh ,r,a� ..
1 °:. )t� 1
� � . _. t � ':_�.l�.r.' Nt � „ ���f � T' 'R�'� � .. � * .S„�
T �
� '�
�� � �� �i • �r � , A � � � � � � ����t�g��x„' :�� } ��" .eN _ �� r a� ��s, ' , ��W�, x• ;, aw ��`�
. ... I �� �sy i � + .. .. �g _ '�`'.� �}y�a n� _ ,.f,,Y'��" � �
i � � �� � k � � � =
i + > . . ( �� ��'�, ¢
:.� F ,� �"ti i � � � x � °a# �� � ��;� �
��. , .� I i �r � � `� ` I �
• .,, '
. � - � �
I ' ' ;���'., ---- - ���-��,'. i � s , � ���� �
. � � ��' '�" ,� ; �'; ` I � �•o� , �p� ..r� ,�,,. � i
� ��. .
� <� .� �' �:
� ; � �; � r------ ----� �p �� .��� �- �� � '� -
�4 I
I I ��� � �' , 1 , � ����� �;� ���� . �z ' � . � � .
y R�
� � I ,�� �'':-. � � Yr�
� ' ,�w-. ' , I ..'��� � ii��� i �� �p�: �1 .��� .�c �.�ys.� .
' P
� , ' � �� ; � � � �� � ° � �" � � �
e , .
�, :��.1��f � �, �� ' � �' . _ _ � ' � r°`� � �, �_a
� ,
' ° �y, - �� 1 --=---= �^ ►,
r_ � 1 �.
' •� � � - .�F',K i, 9 � I l� � a .!� �� :, „ '� I �,,,�.
£. j 1 ..v ' ' ';:...4 , .
i � �
i
��� � � � � �� M .. 1 � .. � ��� '�.
- ...: y . __'—"'__' '__"—'_'_"_' �y ^ � :I
� ���� �.f (3 �— � ' � �}i � ' .
�a.� ����*� I �� ,!� � ; ���� ����� � x3 I � 'i 3 .i� � I ''.
R
>i p2F .��.. i. - � � . '� ,, � � [' � p
� ��� `'� � g �.,..� � �'
,
���� ,
- � � '' � ; I �'� � i
� 3 � �i� � �
. , , � ; � �
, , ,
i
, � , y�:.: ; �� _.-:� -°-i_ t.
$ ' � . � � � •
� � .� j � P �; ;,,�� °I� �w��� ; � � 1 . a �"�
;,,, , ,� . , , . � � .
� � .
' � �� .�.� ; �
R�,, , j` ' i� , � �. � � ��, ��.��' _� � � � ; �� � ��
.
,�; � �.� . ,''� ������" � �� ;� : ,�,
• , � -
,
�— ��. _ � � ` � ; � "�� g°�f' +�,�� _ � ��—'�, >:
� y � __ � �� �..___,$'`r-_ "'� 't� �,"u.� _ __ --�-'^'--7L"�___— __r�' - k�t .. .�.t �{
_� _..-- -"'----------'-- - ... �
,. y _ .= I -- __
� . �
� _.... i .. .`_ —� �d�t�^r.`i � - _.. < '�` �..�
� •'� n ' o� 4 iy,;� p►(��a'i: �y�``;� � � ����
�:.�'—�-- "` SYY 74iH AVHA� -—-—----I - --J-
. _� _ --------'���------- - ---�-- ---------- ---
'
�- � "w .. :' .� �� �� �� � ,
:
r•" � Br �t1 . � a�, e � -
---� ' ---- - - —g- -------- - — — -------
- -- y� -- -- -�^
�, y .
� i n . . _ p1C. - ° [- - _ � .. � � �� f F�' .
,� § f.. _� ', F' _�__ _ � '
+ M�{ �„ :. ��n..' �_ �" ..a� �k t ; n..- te"7 . ��..
� f ' ^ . ' '. rP131 ..
. � � • , . �.._ ..'y_p , � p ' � . . r. � . �fy r� � .
� � � "� = n r• •
.- , : . . I���
,� , , � .� = �'" �-
.� .�� '� � ��� i � � r � ��_ _�3 �
��, � & .
•" , . . . �4 ^.. .y � ... �
� � � � ��
�iM�� � �� z A � n"$� y{�� r� �, . :' �i'.
.�^ ,
�. •.�a "5 z� I
_i� ��''
4s.� T y� _ �_. "�(4
T" L, � } �
w
} � � -� . . _ �:, .
s � � � 4° �t� �' � ���� �
n � '�d �,,.RC 3 w
� �� , �,, "
.� ��� �� ���. �
d L 4 r �
- ��� _ ,��`-� x��^ � 1�a.`,^ � <:� k� �� �-� g� � . - �...a---��.n
' . ' }. � � 111 �. �Wp .
.. �# .... � C�+�'YX '�"� . .�
� �J
� � _....__" �^ � � .j f �N���'FlL. � ■ r :.'���.r� ,� �i i � R � yT'r .._y.......F.
� � ! �� 3 {`�' i . � ",. � �s;t� � � .. �� . _, °� x ' �4� ,x"��� ��r�,;"xoi+ � '��� � . '��',�
� �I �, R i � � w� �s.»R�� �le '�f 1 *�� `� ih � s. ' `�
�
'I k
_
. �N ° . � ; B,�` � ,,,-,�°. °= � _
,a s . .�� � , ��'� ,�' ��
� � � � - �� � � �� . �
.
� � �� ' � � � ��, "� ' _G
.
. -
r,�.
• .A� . .��� � _ ._ ., � .
-
�:.r
� �
�, �
�" �� �l �,, ����_ '�r
n ,, � ��,
�. � ��...�r ��,.�..�..�...�I..��il� . �..�..�. �.7;...M ..e�.::.�....�..�..�..�..�..�..�..�..�..�..�.. `� ,� � ;:i�
��• • • .. •• ._. .
- ^fi . .
+!' � i+�,n _ ��` ."��x� � ;
,s
�� �' ,�`.. - -
; r• �,�
�, �.'� s�1i.�.�3 � .�,�. - .. ,� ,.- , �ei�_ �:
E�"' _� � .
� • o ' I I �
� o �
' ° III
, � , cc,��77 , , �
���a����A�s U r
� 4���� �, :
��� ��� ° o —
���� � � w
� �
yii �� c� {�z v o PR0.ECT N0. � 06CRIPf10N MTE �n e� rLMI� A PRQ��" ----
� � m Q � � /�/��e� va��r�r�� �NE FYIj 8196 S1V Fiall Boukvard,
Z �� B {� B PAVVW �H CEDARCRE3T PAF�TTTION �r �!�{32? � Sui[e 23) �
� ; �� p CASE FlL£N0. t eearertm.Ora�on970(�N
� m �no�cso3)��„' �
� Z � � m MAP 1S 1 25CA, TAX LOT 3700 ,�,.� ra=csos>a69 A .
� � o TIGARD, OREGON C www srallc � � � � � � (�j, N
� f , r+m,n�n.�ma.cr.,�a s,n.�.p ..;','
ROBERT LAWRENCE EXPIRES 12-71-06"
�
� �
•
� I
� TICOR TITLE fNSURANCE C�MPANY
STATUS OF RECORD TITLE REPORT SUPPLEMENT 1
PORTLAtVD OFFICE (TITLE)
1629 SW Salmon .Portland OR 97205
(503)224-0550 • FAX:(503)219-2219
May 3, 2007
Diane K. Coler
Ticor Title Insurance Company
Peterkort Branch
9755 SW Barnes Rd, Suite 255
Portland OR 97225
Phone: (503} 219-1160
FAX: (503) 297-5991
�rder Number, gg2577
Regarding: Lawrence (Borrower)
Property Address: 7407 SW Cedarcrest Street
Tigard, OR 97223
County: Washington
DA7ED AS OF: April 27, 2007, 8:00 am
PROPERTY
We have searched our Tract Indices as to the following described real property:
See Attached Legal Description.
VESTING
ROBERT H. LAWRENCE
RECORDED INFORMATION
Said property is subject to the following on record matter(s):
NOTE: Property taxes PAID
Tax Year: 2006-07
Tax Amount: $2,083.12
Tax Acct Number: R227819, 1S125CA-0370Q, Code 023.81
1. Easement, including the terms and provisions thereof,
From: George H. Burke and Betty R. Burke
To: Alan R. Chinnock and Debbie A. Schlueter
Recorded Date: February 21, 2003
STATUS OF RECORD TRLE REPORT SUPPLEMENT 1(Tl2a) �
Recording Number: 2003-025824
For; Utilities
Affects: West 10 feet
2. Deed of Trust, including the terms and provisions thereof, given to secure a note,
Amount: $4'71,250.00
Executed By: Lawrence Resources, Inc., an Oregon corporation
Trustee: Ticor Title insurance Company
Beneficiary: Sterling Savings Bank
Dated: November 1, 2006
Recorded Date: November 17, 2006
Recording Number: 2006136379
Loan/Ref. Number: 151117746
Affects: Other property also
THIS REPORT IS TD BE UTILIZED FOR INFORMATION ONLY. Any use of this report as a basis for
transferring, encumbering or foreclosing the real praperty described will require payment in an amount
equivalent to applicable title insurance premium as required by the rating schedule on file with the
Oregon Insurance Division,
The liabifity for TfCOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY is limited to the addressee and shall not exceed
the premium paid hereunder.
TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
Lori Guzman
Title Officer
STATUS OF RECORD TffLE REPORT SUPPLEMENT 1(TI2e) 2
A tract of land in the Southwest one-quarter of Section 25, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the
Willamette Maridien, in th� City �f Titiprd, County of Waohir7gtan and Oluto uf Or oyur�, L,oli�y a Nu�Uu��
of Lot 10, Block 1 BOULEVARD HEIGHTS, aiso being all of that tract of land conveyed to George H.
Burke and Betty R. Burke by Deed Book 1185 page 246 and a portion of that tract of land conveyed to
George H. Burke and Betty R. Burke by Deed Document No. 87-055888, Washington County Deed
Records, and being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning a the Southeast corner of said Lot 10, BOULEVARD HEIGHTS; thence along the North right-
of-way line of SW Cedarcrest Street, being 25,00 feet from the center thereof, when measured at right �
angles, North 89° 23' 40" West 230.10 feet to the East line of Lot 11, BOUI.EVARD HEIGHTS; thence
along the East line of said Lot 11, North 00° 33' 39" East 105.28 feet; thence leaving said East line
South 89° 21' 07" East 230,20 feet to the West right-of-way line of SW 74`" Avenue, being 25.00 feet
from fhe center thereof, when measured at right angles; thence along said West right-af-way South 00°
36' S5"West 105.11 feet to the point of beginning.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION 3
TICOR TITLE lNSURANCE COMPANY
1629 SW Salmon
Portland,OR 97205
�5 �� wa�lnpton County,Oreyon 2003-025824
,L oyzvxoaso�:ss:2� pM
r I � D� CrR■1 Stn�7 K CRUMEIVALD
�¢N�� S1�.00 56.00 i11.00�Total■372.00
���g w I I �
y �� II111111I111 Il IIIIIIIIIIlIII i(i111 llllll
��1—L��C a. 0026T838200300258240D30037
� �$y F..� I,J�rtyX�nten,pncterofAp���m�ntvidT�i.Uon
AF'I'ER RECORDTNG RETURN T0: �r,.,��� � uW 6x-0}llelo CounryG�rMixWa�h�npton Courty, d�'"'`�,:
�4 Qtipon,do h�nEy cMlry th�t t4�wlthln In�Wm►M o�
� �W� ��+' �+rlUnp 1Wt ncNvid Y17 �eoN�d In Vi�book of ; ���;�
�y George H. Burke and Betty R. Burke ����� � � � �
Q � _ �U r.cara�of wa oew,ry. ,� 1..
� � � .; .'
� � Husband and Wife W W� JN R Naraen,Dlneter ��n�mmc�nd Taatlon. �`��
('� 9265 SW 74�'AvCnue ���� ry Etim++�iaco��tic���
�����m
U � Tigard, OR 97223 W}�w p Q
~ �oo��a
a Until a change is requested all tax �$��a N�
V s t a t e m e n t s s h a 1 1 b e s e n t t o t h e f o l l o w i n g �y��'�w�
address: ������
9255 SW venue
Ti , Oregon 97223 ���,�Q� �6p`�I-�_
EASEMENT FOR UTILTTIES
STATE OF ORBGON )
) ss.
County of Washington )
KI��W ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT GEORGE H. BLTftICE and BETTY
R. BU$KE, husband and wife, their heirs, successors and assigns, herein collectively"Granto�",
for valuable consideration of One Dollar($1.00)cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable
consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby sell,
convey, and warrant to ALAN R. CHINNOCK and DEBBLE A. SCHLUETBR, husband and
wife, their heirs, successors and assigns, herein collectively"Grantee", a permanent utility
easement and right-of-way ten feet wide and running along the West side of the below-described
property, with the right to erect, construct, install, lay and thereaRer use, operate, inspect, repair,
maintain, replace, and rework storm water lines,water pipe lines, water facilities, manholes,
pump stations, or other appurtenances thereunto required, over, across and/or under a certain
Page 1 -EASEMENT FOR UTII,ITIES
__.. . _ _.. �, ,
� 2003-23824
parcel of real estate lying and being situated in Washington County, Oregon, more accurately
described as:
BEGI?VNING South 0° 33'30" West 192,0 feet from the Northwest corner of Lot
10, Tract 1 of Boulevard Heights;thence South 0° 33'30" West along the East
line of said Lot 10, a distance of 96.0 feet to an iron pipe; thence North 89° 21'
West parallel with the North line of Lot 10, a distance of 230 feet to an iron pipe
on the West line thereof; thence North 0° 33' 30" East 230 feet`.o the place of
begi�ing.
It is understood and agreed that this easement and right-of-way shall give and convey to
the Grantee herein the right of ingress and egress upon the lands above described for the purpose
of constructing, maintaining and repairing the above described water system utility
improvements.
It is further understood and agreed that the consideration above mentioned shall in fuli
settlement of all claims, grants or rights of action accrued, accruing or to accrue to the Grantor
herein,
Grantor herein reserves a11 oil, gas and other minerals in, on acd under said ]and.
For the same consideration above mentioned, the Grantor herein does h�reby sell, convey,
and warrant to Grantee, a temporary construction easement over, across and under the above-
described property. The duration ofthe said temporary construction easement shall be until
completion of the storm water system utitity project.
The Grantee covenants that following the construction of said water system utility
improvements it will return the surface to as near as original condition as possible.
It is further understood and agreed that this instrument constitutes the entire agreement
between the Grantor and the Grantee, there being no oral agreements or representations of any
Page 2 - EASEMENT FOR UTTLITIES
� (
, Z003-25824
kind made between the Crrantor and the Grantee.
The grant and other provisions herein described shall constitute a covenant running with
the land for the benefit of the Grantee, its successors and assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREFORE, the parties have executed this Easement on the 1c��da
Y
of Fe6rNary ,2003.
GRANTOR GRANTEE
(/�� c
�
Alan R. Chinnock George H. urke
; � `�. , �,�.y�-
Debbie A, Schlueter Betty R. B rke
STATE OF OREGON )
) ss.
County of Washington )
Personally appeared the above named Alan R. Chinnock, Grantor, and Debbie A.
Schluetet, Grantor, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act and
deed.
o�c�s�u. ��
KAHEN HAYg � S
N°T,wr�ve�`°�°p�,� Not Public for the State of Qre n
'� coM►�issiorrHO. ss�e�s �' B
�'�*+Mi`,��n���.�:,aFS uovenre��e,2ooe My Commission Expires: �(�� 9�0 6
STATE OF OREGON )
) ss.
County of Washington )
Personally appeared the above named George H. Burke, Grantee, and Betty R. Burke,
Crrantee, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act and deed.
o��cw.sEU, ���` (.S�t/� J
KAREN HAYS
- ; NOTARY Pl� Notary Public for the State of 0 egon
co��ss►oN r�o. se�aes
MY COMMISSION FJ(pIRE&MOVE1JgEp}p,z� My Commission Expires: ��`! 9 � p-�
Page 3 -EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES
AuB� 31 2006 •2�28PM CLEAN WAT�R SERVICES 503 6814439 No�4445 P. 2
�;� .. a�,__i� [l t�l I?
+I� �UG 2 �4 2�R5
�.� FiieNumber Q6'_ oo.z69q
Clean Water Ser �ces
Our commitnicnt is cica .. y-�---_----.- . i��e Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment
Jurisdiction ��L-R�� � 2, Date 8/t'-f�n G
Map b Tax lot i�i.� SC�► f.�Yc��> Owner ��fa����. /.,T"f��'*' F'�•�••�r�
APPlicant ��i, �- 4�k��c.+�r�- � or�vc.•.s
Site Address �yp � s,�, G���,,�,.,s�p�-;Cornpany --
���X� Address te 770 ,.S'•td. /���i=E o s r",
P�oposed Activity l,��,,� ���„�,,� City state zip �;�..,.�v_p� y>x ;� �-
li.s'st.v.+�,c��s.flnr Phonc �0 3— Q 7.c�r�C'�T��3
Fax Sr�3� ..?�y— f:%���i �
By submitting this form the Owner, or Owner's autharized agent or representative, acknowledges
and agrees that employees ot Clean Water Services have authority to enter the project site af all
reasonab►e times far the pu�pose of inspecting project site conditions and gathering informaiivn
related to the project Site.
Offfcl�l uf�only�eloa thh Ilne
on��r.r�r.enir below thi�lin� Qtfklal u�e only b�b�this fin�
Y N NA Y N NA
Sensitive Area Composite Map �j 5tormwater Intrastructure maps
� � � Map�,+ /�1/L�10 _ � � t'� QS # WO,Z�
Locally adopted sludies or maps Ot�er
Q � � Specify � �� Specify
Based on a review of the above information and the requirements of Clean Water Services
Oesign and Construction Standards Resolution and Order No. 04-9� .
� 5ensitive areas potentiaUy ex�st on site or within 200' of the site. THE APPLICANT MUST
PERFORM A SITE CERTIFICATiON PRIOR TO ISSUANC� OF A SERVICE PRdVIDER. If
Sensitive Areas exist on the site or within 200 feet on adjacent properties, a Natural
Resvurces Assessment Report may also be required.
� Sensitive areas do not appear to exi5t on site or within 200' of the site. This pre-screening
site assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality
sensit�ve areas ii they are subsequently discovered. This document will serve as your
Service Provider letler as required by Resolutian and Order 04-9, Section 3.02.1. All
required permits and approvals must be obtained anC completed under applicable local,
state, and federal law
� The proposed activity does nflt meet the definition of developmenl. NO SITE ASSESSMENT
QR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS RE4UIRED.
Reviewer Comments:
Rev+ewed By� Date: 06'
Official use only
Poat-it"Fa�c Note 7671 �°�° �/3 DA9P9, I Iteturncd tv �lpplicanr
ta �,om � � Mail_�ux Cvuittr:r
Go.IDepl.
Co. CWf �ene Ry�
Pt10ne M Phone N ��7 ' G p.I•r-��
� i/
FAYNsos• x6s• � F.�� �
Tax Lot 3700 5/17/2007
Robert H.Lawrence Page 1 of 6
May 1 b, 2007
Robert Lawrence
6770 SW Alfred Street
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: Tree Plan for Tax Lot 3700
Enclosed is the necessary certified arborist report to complete the property division for lot
3700 on SW Cedarcrest, Tigard, Oregon as required by the City of Tigard code.
Summary
Nine of the thirteen trees currently on the property are to be retained on site. These nine
trees equal 69% of all of the trees on site. This percentage is between 50 and 75% of the
total trees on site requiring the owner to have to mitigate 50% of the diameter inches of
the trees that are to be removed from the property.
Assignment
The assignment that you requested I complete is to;
1. Inventory all trees that are on site. Evaluate the condition of trees in regard to
tree health and tree structural condition
2. Identify those trees that are to be retained on site.
3. Evaluate if the site will allow the tree protection as required by the City of
Tigard given the level of development of the site. If not, proposed and justify
an alternate tree protection plan to protect the trees.
4. Calculate the percentage of tree retention and required mitigation.
Report Use
This report is to certify the trees that are on site, their condition and outline the tree
protection steps to protect the trees to be retained on site. This report is written to meet
the requirements of the City of Tigard for tree protection on properties that are to be
divided into smaller lots.
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
1. Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. The
survey provided prepared by SR Design, LLC was the basis of the information
provided in this report. The species identification and tree diameters were
checked in the field by Teragan and Associates, Inc.
2. It is assumed that this property is not in violation of any codes, statutes,
ordinances, or other governmental regulations.
3. The consultant is not responsible for information gathered from others
involved in various activities pertaining to this project. Care has been taken to
obtain information from reliable sources.
4. Loss or alteration of any part of this delivered report invalidates the entire
report.
5. Drawings and information contained in this report may not be to scale and are
intended to be used as display points of reference only.
6. The consultants' role is only to make recommendations. Inaction on the part
of those receiving the report is not the responsibility of the consultant.
7. This report is to certify the trees that are on site, their condition, outlining the
tree protection steps to protect the trees to be retained on site. This report is
written to meet the requirements of the City of Tigard for tree protection on
properties that are to be developed for residential or commercial use.
Observations
On December 19, 2006 the tree inventory was completed. A spreadsheet of the trees
inventoried can be found in appendix # 2 which lists tree nurnber, species (common and
botanical name), tree DBH, tree condition, tree structural condition, pertinent comments
and tree recommendation. Calculations for the percentage of retained trees and necessary
mitigation are also found on the inventory spreadsheet found in appendix # 2.
Discussion
The subject property is to be divided into three lots. The numbers in the Tree Inventory
Chart correspond to the numbers tagged to the trees and indicated on the survey and on
the inventory of the property.
There are 13 viable trees on site that are over 12 inches in diameter that are not
hazardous. 9 of the trees on site will be retained resulting in 69%retention percentage
rate. The total number of inches that are to be removed equals 73 inches. With the
retention rate of trees being between 50 and 75%, fifty percent of the diameter inches of
the trees to be removed need to be mitigated. 50% of 73 inches equals 36.� inches. If
the owner chooses to pay into the Tigard tree fund, the amount would be $4,562.50
($12�.00 x 36.5 inches); every inch of tree caliper planted on property owned by you
reduces the number of diameter inches that have to be paid for.
Trees scheduled for removal include tree #232 that is in the access area for the lot, and
trees #306, 307, and 1091, which are located in or close to the footprints of the proposed
riew construction.
Exempt Trees
No exempt trees are located on this lot.
Tree Protection
6 trees that are to be retained are located along the east property line (#238, #237, #236,
236.1 #600 and # 599), the remaining two trees are toward the west side of the property
(#305, #344) and tree #369 toward the north end halfway in the middle of the property. It
should be possible to properly protect these trees during construction by following the
tree protection steps as indicated in appendix # 1 and setting the tree protection areas
around the trees at a minimal distance as indicated under the "Tree Protection Minimal"
column in the tree inventory in appendix # 2. The site survey shows approximate
configuration of the tree protection fencing location.
The trees will only be impacted on one side as the trees are located toward the property
lines. The fact that only one side of the root system will be impacted allows for the tree
protection to be reduced from the optimum. There will need to be some extra care
applied to tree # 344 as a four inch water line is scheduled to be installed to the west of
the tree. Tree # 305 will also have to have care taken as the same water line is to be
placed on the tree's east side.
No storage of any material, parking of extra vehicles for construction, parking of utility
or office trailers and even the pedestrian traffic of construction workers should be
allowed within the tree protection areas. Please refer to appendix # 1 for additional steps
in tree protection.
East Sidewalk Construction
The sidewalk is to meander on the east side of the three Douglas firs (236, 237, 238) '
along 74th Avenue in order to avoid impacting the firs. There currently is a road-side
ditch that will have a pipe installed with the sidewalk placed on top of the fill. The
excavation for the pipe will have to done carefully to minimize any excavation where tree
roots may be. The proj ect arborist should be on site to over see the excavation to
properly prune any roots encountered and determine if the trees may need to be rernoved
if too many roots are encountered. The trees have been pruned to a height of less than 40
feet and will be maintained at that height to avoid any conflict with the overhead wires.
Water Line Installation
A four inch water line is to be installed along the west side of the property line within the
easement east of the Douglas fir, tree# 305. The line is to be installed along a line
installed in the past to supply the hoine north of tax lot 3600. The new line is to be
installed carefully to avoid damage to the roots. The tree protection fence will have to be
laid down to allow the installation of the line. The procedure to install the line should be
reviewed with the project arborist to ensure that the roots of the tree are not unduly
harmed.
Certification of Performance
I. Terrence P. Flanagan, Certify:
• That a representative of Teragan and Associates, Inc, has inspected the tree(s)
and/or the property referred to in this report, and have the findings have been
accurately stated. The extent of the evaluation and appraisal is stated in the
attached report;
• That Teragan and Associates, Inc. has no current or prospective interest in the
vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report, and Teragan and
Associates, Inc. has no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties
involved;
• That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are our own and are
based on current industry procedures and facts;
• That Teragan and Associates, Inc. compensation is not contingent upon the
reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any
other party, nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated
results, or the occurrence of any subsequent events;
• That the analysis, opinions, and conclusions that were developed as part of this
report have been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural
practices;
• That a certified arborist has been utilized to oversee the gathering of data
• I further certify that I am a Board Certified Master Arborist and a certified Tree
Risk Assessor.
Conclusion
The trees that are to be retained should be far enough away from the planned construction
envelopes that they should be able to be protected from construction damage. Care will
have to be taken when the west side water line is installed and the sidewalk is installed on
the east side of the firs along 74`h avenue.
The tree protection areas will have to be established before construction as shown on the
site plan or at the direction of the project arborist.
Please call if you have any questions or concerns regarding this report.
Sincerely,
Terrence P. Flanagan
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, PN-0120 BMT
Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists
Enclosures: Appendix # 1 —Tree Protection Steps
Appendix # 2—Inventory of Trees
Appendix # 3 — Survey of site with Tree Protection Drawn on Plan
Appendix# 1
Tree Protection Steps
It is critical that the following steps be taken to ensure that the trees that are to be retained are protected.
Before Construction Begins
1. Notify all contractors of the trees protection procedures. For successful tree protection on
a construction site, ail contractors must know and understand the goals of tree protection.
It can only take one mistake with a misplaced trench or other action to destroy the future
of a tree.
a. Hold a Tree Protection meeting with all contractors to fully explain goals of tree
protection.
b. Have all sub contractors sign memoranda's of understanding regarding the goals
of tree protection. Memoranda to include penalty for violating tree protection
plan. Penalty to equal appraised value of tree(s)within the violated tree
protection zone per the current Trunk Formula Method as outline by the Council
of Tree& Landscape Appraisers current edition of the Guide for Plant
Appraisnl.
Penalty is to be paid to owner of the property.
2. Fencing
a. Establish fencing around each tree or grove of trees to be retained.
b. The fencing is to be put in place before the ground is cleared in order to protect
the trees and the soil around the trees from any disturbance at all.
c. Fencing is to be placed at the edge of the root protection zone. Root protection
zones are to be established by the project arborist based on the needs of the site
and the tree to be protected.
d. Fencing is to consist of 6-foot high steel fencing on concrete blocks or 6-foot
metal fencing secured to the ground with 8-foot metal posts to prevent it from
being moved by contractors, sag�ing or falling down. 4-foot orange plastic
fencing will be acceptable on this site as the owner of the property will be
inspecting and managing the proper location and positioning of the fence on a
dailv basis.
e. Fencing is to remain in the position that is established by the project arborist and
not to be moved without written permission from the project arborist until the
end of the project. .
4. Signage
a. All tree protection fencing should have signage as follows so that all contractors
understand the purpose of the fencing;
TREE PROTECTION ZONE
DO NOT REMOVE OR ADJUST THE APPROVED LOCATION
OF THIS TREE PROTECTION FENCING.
Please contact the project arborist or owner if alterations to the approved
location ofthe tree protection fencing are necessary.
b. Signage should be place as to be visible from all sides of a tree protection
area and spaced every 75 feet.
During Construction
1. Protection Guidelines Within the Root Protection Zone
a. No traffic shall be allowed within the root protection zone. No vehicle, heavy
equipment, or even repeated foot tra�c.
b. No storage of materials including but not limiting to soil, construction material,
or waste from the site.
i. Waste includes but is not limited to concrete wash out, gasoline, diesel,
paint, cleaner,thinners, etc.
c. Construction trailers are not to be parked/placed within the root protection zone
without written clearance from project arborist.
d. No vehicles shall be allowed to park within the root protection areas.
e. No activity shall be allowed that will cause soil compaction within the root
protection zone.
2. The trees sliall be protected from any cutting, skinning or breaking of branclies, trunks or
roots.
3. Any roots that are to be cut from existing trees that are to be retained,the project
consulting arborist shall be notified to evaluate and oversee the proper cutting of roots
with sharp cutting tools. Cut roots are to be immediately covered with soil or mulch to
prevent them from drying out.
4. No grade change should be allowed within the root protection zone.
5. Any necessary deviation ofthe root protection zone shall be cleared by the project
consulting arborist or project owner.
6. Provide water to trees during the summer months. Tree(s)that will have had root
system(s) cut back will need supplemental water to overcome the loss of abiliry to absorb
necessary moisture during the summer months.
7. Any necessary passage of utilities through the root protection zone shall be by means of
tunneling under roots by hand digging or boring.
After Construction
I. Carefully landscape in the area of the tree. Do not allow trenching within the root
protection zone. Carefully plant new plants within the root protection zone. Avoid
cutting the roots of the existing trees.
2. Do not plan for irrigation within the root protection zone of existing trees unless it is drip
irri;ation for a specific planting or cleared by the project arborist.
3. Provide for adequate drainage of the location around the retained trees.
4. Pruning of the trees should be completed as one of the last steps of the landscaping
process before the final placement of trees, shrubs, ground covers, mulch or turf.
5. Provide for inspection and treatment of insect and disease populations that are capable of
damaging the retained trees and plants.
6. Trees that are retained may need to be fertilized as called for by project arborist after final
inspection.
Appendix#2
Tree Inventory for Tax Lot 3700
74th Ave. Cedarcrest St.
Tigard, Oregon Total
Number of Tree
COMMON BOTANICAL Trees on DBH to be ProteCtion
NO. NAME NAME DBH CONDITION STRUCTURE COMMENTS Property Remove Removed Minimal
232 sue o uga 23 Fair Fair Topped 1
Douglas Fir menziesii 1 23
Psuedotsuga 29 Fair Fair 1
305 Douglas Fir 16
Alnus�ubra 14 Fair Fair 2 stems 10,10. 1
Basal inclusion.
306 Red Alder 1 14
Alnusrub�a 20 Fair Fair 2 stems 13,15. 1
Basal inclusion.
307 Red Alder 1 20
Acer 19 Fair Fair 1
macrophyllum
344 Bigleaf Maple
11
Prunusavium 15 Fair Fair 1
369 Sweet Cherry
9
599 es ern e 77�uja plicata 18 Good Good 1
Cedar
10
Psuedotsuga 16 Good Good 1
600 Douglas Fir
9
1091 Red Alder Alnus rubra 16 Fair Fair 1 1 16
Z36 su otsuga z2 Poor Poor Topped 1
Douglas Fir menziesii 13
236.1 14 Fair Poor 4 stems 1
11,5,5,6. 16'
NW of#236, 37'
NEt of NW
English Crataegus corner of house.
Hawthorne monogyna $
237 sue otsuga 23 Poor Poor Topped 1
Douglas Fir menziesii �3
Z3g ue o uga 26 Poor Poor Topped 1
Douglas Fir menziesii 14
Totals 13 4 73
Total number of trees over 12 inches diameter to be retain 9
Percentage of trees over 12 inches diameter to be retainec 0.69
Percentage of trees diameter inches to be mitigated for 50%
Number of tree diameter inches to be mitigated 36.5
Migation cost if paid into Tigard 7ree Fund($125.00x46.5) $4,562.50
Teragan Associates, Inc.
3145 Westview Circle
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
503-697-1975
PRELIMINARY
INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE CERTIF/CAT/ON
May 15, 2007
City of Tigard
CD- Development Engineering
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
503-639-4171 Fax: 503-624-0752
http://www.tigard-or.qov
Attn: Kim McMillan
RE: SW Cedarcrest Street, Cedarcrest Land Partition—
Sight Distance Certification
The access for this proposal is located at Parcel's southern property line, on SW
Cedarcrest Street. The speed limit along SW Cedarcrest Street is 25 M.P.H.,
based upon the posted speed limit, requiring 250 feet of sight distance in both
directions, in accordance with Tigard Development Code Section
18.705.030.H.1.
As required by C�de Sections 18.705.030.H.1, sight distance from the access
point on SW Cedarcrest Street was measured 250 feet to the west and to the
intersection at SW 74�h Avenue to the east. In both directions, adequate visibility
was achieved. The Code Section requires that measurements be based on an
eye height of 3.5 feet and an object height of 4.25 feet above the road; and be
assumed to be 10 feet from the near edge of pavement to the front of a stopped
vehicle, (actual measurement is taken 15 feet from pavement edge).
In conclusion, I hereby certify that the intersection sight distance at the proposed
access for the Cedarcrest Land Partition conforms to the requirements for sight
distance as set forth in the Tigard Development Code.
Steve Roper P.E.
SR Design LLC
J:1Data1PAC003\Word\INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE CERTIFICATION-cedar.doc
Blank Page 1 of 1
Michelle Miller
From: Dalby, John K. [John.Dalby@tvfr.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 3:27 PM
To: Michelle Miller
Subject: RE: Cedarcrest Land Partition
Hi Michelle,
The design is fine so far as apparatus access is concerned.
As with the other project, the hydrant has to provide adequate fire flow demand.
Other than that I don't see any issues.
John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshal II
Tualatin Vailey Fire & Rescue, North Division
14480 SW Jenkins Road
Beaverton, OR 97005-1152
503-356-4723
From: Michelle Miller [mailto:michellem@srdllc.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:34 PM
To: Dalby, John K.
Subject: Cedarcrest Land Partition
John,
Attached is the composite utility for the Cedarcrest Land Partition.
Per our discussion could you take a look at this preliminary drawing and get back to me about any fire code issues
you foresee?
Thanks,
Michelle Miller
michellem�srdllc.com
SR Design
8196 5 W Hall Blvd.
Beaverton, OR 97008
503.469.1213
Fax: 503.469.8553
2/22/2007
Jeff Caines
From: Jeff Caines
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 1:50 PM
To: 'Dalby, John K.'
Subject: One more Partition on Cedarcrest
Attachments: 20070501134942013.pdf
r,�
i
�`Fdke
2007050113494201
3.pdf(161 KB)...
Good afternoon John,
I have another partition on Cedarcrest. This time it is on the north side of the street.
The utility plan (attached) shows the location of the existing fire hydrant .
Can you please take a look and let me know if there are any issues. Tigard would like to
know that I have made contact with you prior to submittal.
Hope all is well. Have a great day.
Jeff
Jeff Caines, AICP
Land Use Planner
SR Design LLC
8196 SW Hal1 Blvd. Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
503-469-1213 - Phone
503-469-8553 - Fax
1
� �,ounty Road No. 1��. ,
On Petition of � ?i�eichta��at �
60 k 50 Feet wide
I
I2i T1Z COU�TY COURT OF L'FI� 8�4T� OF OR�GOld,
I '
^OI� Tf�: COU2;'PY OF 57,�SHINGTOli
I
In the matter o4 the Petition of
G.�d. I,eichtmen aY�d others £or layin�
out, location and establishment oY a
Co•z�it.y Road.
I TO TFL IIONO_%?tLRL� $��.RD OF COU;�TY COL.LIISSION�ilS 0'r' "nSOVP ?v'dD'f�U COZTi`TXt
We the undersi�ied Board of Ccui:ty Road Viewers� appointed by th� Honorable
I3oard to survey, view, 2ay out, alter, straighten and re-establish monuments of a County
road as pra;�ed for in t2ie petitzon of G.1�1. LeicY:tnaa and otheTS,beg to reporti
IThat pursuant to suid order we met at the be�inning I�oiat of Lhe proposed road on
the 17th da;� of gpril, 1941, at th� hour oP 3s00 o�clock, Y.Li. oY said Qay, as provided in
said order for the meeting of the undersigne� Yiewers and L.7.. MaoIZ�tyre, Couaty Surve�or�
Iappointed to survey said road, and a�ter first taking an oath before said County Surveyor
faithfliily and impartially to discharge the duties o Y our ai,pointment. we proceeded to survey�
Iview lay out, alter, strai�hten and re-est::blish monument of said road as prnyed for in said
netition.
IThe said County Surveyor, surveyed said road under our direct�on. 'Fhe beginning and
tennination af said road and the termination of each Mile and intermediate points have been
Irr�rked in the manner provided 'uy law� cas will mose fully appear by the certified return o�
the sald Surveyors of said road� wliich is hereunto attached and made a part of this report.
IWe report tPe ]anda of the fol.lowing na¢ned persons, througti whmae lands said road is
located, to be rendered less valuable by reason of the locatioa o3 said road in the amounts
IsAt oppoeite their respectiIIa names:
RO $t1L13�9S.
That in our opinion said road should be establiehed for the followir� re_sons;
IIt 3s a necessary means of ingresa and egress for t}E territor� whioh it will serve.
Dated this 25th day o�£ April, 1941.
I
r Charles Robinson ) Board of
N3Ck Sohmidt ) County RcB:d
IL.L. btaolntyra ) Viewera.
� �unty Road No.—�-�.�-- —
On Petition of_. �•�• �iahtman et al __._—.__._—�
I ____.• _.C�4,�5Q. _. ..Feet wide
I
SURV�Y02t9 FtEF'ORT biay 1, 1941
I
Beginning at a point which be;:ra N0�3d'E 30.0 feet and N89�30�W 3Q.0 feet from the
I northweat corner of Block 10. ? oi '�detzger Acre �rscte", a duly recorded aubdivfsion in
Fiashington County, Ore�n, and v�hioh point of beginning ia the terminus of County Roed Number
1223; theace on the centerline oS a 60.0 foot wide dediosted roadway in said'Tdetzger 6cre Traats„
with the following courees and dietances:
ICourse Dlstance Station Remarke
0+00.0 Point of beginning described above.
589�30'E 30.0
I 0+30.0 l�" imn pipe beara SOa3,D�W 34.0 feet.
Set 1" izon nipe IvU�30�E 30.0 feet.
600.9
6+30.9 J point on Lhe westi line of "Boulevard Hei�ta'�, a duly recorded
I subdivieion in Washington County, Oregon� from which point an
iroa pii>e at th�.. aouth west corner of Lot Ntunber 14. Traot Number
1 of said "Boulevard Fieights'� bears N0�3��k: 21.4 feeL.
Ran thence along t2a west line of said "Boulevard Heights".
I $0�33z'�G 3.6
6+34.5 A point on the aenterline of a 50.0 foot wide dedicated roadway
ia said "Boulevard Heights".
IThence along tYs ceaterline of said 50.0 Yoot wide dedicated roadway in "Boulevard Haighta".
989�21'E 966.2
16+00.7 Terminus of County Fioad Nwnber 1473 Yrom �ich point sn iron
Ipipe at the eoutheast oorner ot I,ot Number 10� 2ract Nttmber 1 of aaid 'Boulevard Heights�'
bears Y0�332'E 25.0 feet and a.n iron pipe at the northeast corner of Lot Number 16, 'Ptact
Numbex 1 of said "Boulevurd lieighte" beara 50�33$�tiV 25.0 feet.
I
I I hereby certify that the foregoing are t�e true and correct field ��otee of the survey o S
County Boad Number 1473.
I
IL.L. I.�Balntyre. Couaty Surveyor.
I
�
County Ro� ' No._ I_4I�--_
On Petition of C'M L eich r��� �t o/
_�D.�.�Q.. �. Feet wide
� _ sco�r-�..-?oo'
TI/TiHVJ
C.RF1473
. -SO!7Jf�'{Y
/O r / 2//66 /P
'•1!0
0 • �
h � v
, M
` • ••h � ___ ._—_ .
.. � � •
{i: O • _
1 0 � 0
i M ,�, �'•.ry
' ___.._ — �°� �
1 �
�-
.. � � •
A � � y
♦
� � .
��� � � q ti
�
so ssiSws.c -
-----�- - - �'--- _.___.._..._
o so ys ii iv
-----__ I - ------ ---- _ _ -
O 30
�
•� � o \
:,�.• w
.. ' W •
� ;;. o,� ^�
y..' �o q a` l.'
. , y'�° .
: ;'y
\�� .
.•• • � 9 • �
O
O
- - o COUNTY rrt,'NO nro J223
� � ti
! �
��
1i Q
u
0�
PRE-APPLICATION
�� C�NFERENCE REQUEST
CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hal181vd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297
GENERAL INFORMATION
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Applicant: SR DesiQn LLC
P�.�t1v'1- o��'j"�
Address: 8196 SW Hall Blvd. Suite 232 Phone: 503-469-1213 Case No.: �, �G-� � ?aL
City: Beaverton
Zip: 97008 Receipt No.:
Application Accepted By: ��A
Contact Person: Jeff Caines AICP Phone: 503-469-1213 Date: 4"���5��� �
Property OwnerlDeed Holder(s): Robert H. Lawrence DATE OF PRE-APP.: -s l�O�U7
Address: 6770 SW Alfred Phone: 503-975-6560 TIME OF PRE-APP.: ��
City: Tiqard Zip: 97223 F�f{-�
PRE-APP. HELD WITH: —
Property A�ldressiLocation(s): 7407 SW Cedarcrest Avenue Rev 7/5106 �:�.curplMmasters\revised\Pre-AppRequest.doc
Tiqard OR 97223
REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS
(Note: applications will not be accepted
Tax Map &Tax Lot#(s): 1 S125CA. Tax Lot 3700 without the required submittal elements)
Zoning: R-4 5 (7 500 square feet minimum lot size) [� Pre-Application Conf. Request Form
Site Size: 24 209 sauare feet(approx. 0.56 ac.) 4 COPIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING:
�' Brief Description of the Proposal and any site-
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE INFORMATION to have staffstesearch pr or to the meet ng.like
All of the information identified on this form are required to be Site Plan. The site plan must show the
submitted by the applicant and received by the Planning Division a � proposed lots and/or building layouts drawn to
minimum of one (1) week prior to officiallv schedulin a scale. Also, show the location of the subject
pre-application conference date/time to allow staff ample time to property in relation to the nearest streets; and
prepare for the meeting. the locations of driveways on the subject
property and across the street.
A pre-application conference can usually be scheduled within 1-2 Vicini Ma
weeks of the Planning Division's receipt of the request for either ' � p
Tuesdav or Thursdav morninqs. Pre-application conferences are � The Proposed Uses.
one (1) hour lon4 and are rypically held between the hours of � Topographic Information. Include Contour
9:00-11:00 AM. Lines if Possible.
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCES MUST BE SCHEDULED IN � If the Pre-�plication Conference is for a
PERSON AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER MONOP�tE project, the applicant must
FROM 8:00-4:OOIMONDAY-FRIDAY. attach � copy of the letter and proof in the
form of an affidavit of mailing, that the
IF MORE THAN 4 PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND THE collb onl 18.798 080 Iof he T ga d Commun ty
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IN YOUR GROUP, PLEASE �velo ment Code).
INFORM THE CITY IN ADVANCE SO THAT ALTERNATE ROOM P
ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE � Filing Fee $362.00
GROUP.
Apri127, 2007
Request for
Pre-Application Conference
City of Tigard
7407 SW Cedarcrest Street
Map # 1 S 1-25CA Lot # 3700
AGENT:
SR Design t,r_c
Contact: Jeff Caines, AICP
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
office (503) 469-1213
fax (503) 469-8553
GENERAL INFORMATION
Agent: SR Design LLC
Attn: Jeff Caines, AICP
8196 SW Hall Blvd., Suite 232
Beaverton, OR 97008
Tax Lot Information Map# 1N1 25CA Lot# 3700
Location: The parcel is located on the northwest of 74th Avenue and
Cedarcrest Street. The parcel has frontage on both 74`h Avenue
and Cedarcrest Avenue. Please refer to the t� map and aerial
photograph provided for the specific location.
Current Zoning: The lot is currently zoned City of Tigard R-4.5 (7,500 s.£)
minimum and a Comprehensive Plan designation of Low
Density Residential (LDR).
Proiect Area(s): Lot 3700: approximately 0.56 acres/ 24,209 sq. ft.
Pre-Application
SR Design LLC Ciry of Tigard
Apri127,2007 2
REQUEST:
The Applicant is requesting a pre-application meeting with the City to discuss the subject property and the
development of a 3-parcel partition.
SITE DESCRIPTION:
The parcel is located on the northwest of 74`h Avenue and Cedarcrest Street. The parcel has frontage on
both 74th Avenue and Cedarcrest Avenue. Please refer to the tax map and aerial photograph provided for
the specific location. The lot is cunently zoned City of Tigard R-4.5 (7,500 s.f.) minimum and a
Comprehensive Plan designation of Low Density Residential (LDR).
Pre-Application
SR Design LLC City of Tigard
Apri127,2007 3
�
QUESTIONS:
Utilities:
. What types of water line improvements will need to be required. Can the surrounding development
adequately supply the proposed development with enough water pressure for the homes and any
required fire hydrants? ��-^
• Are there other off-site improvements that are unforeseen by our review? �:-� N'
Streets:
. What streets requirements would be required for frontage improvements? (Cedarcrest Street and 74`n
Avenue) �.`,,,
. What is the appropriate street dedication for both 74`h avenue and Cedarcrest Street? What
improvements may be required? �^,�
• There are trees already planted along 74`h Avenue. It may be possible to save some of the trees and
use them as street trees. Count the improvements go around the trees and still meet the City's public
improvement requirements? � �.,� Qd J'��-,�.�.�- � �ti�� � �'�C'����sr s "�"�'�����
. What is the driveway distance spacing standard for SW 74�'Avenue and Cedarcrest Street?
pAC�,o._n-e-u� >rts.~-"�-^-�
!/r-� �i�-�---�� e`�`�
SR Design LLC Pre-Application
Apri127,2007 City of TiDard
4
,��i
• • , Z
�1 d
/� ���i
„__.�_, � '�,
f��
�
�
� ��
; , 4�$ M� F
-
, I i �um "m �
'----------'------"-------�—�--�----��–�--------`�----`---.._�.._..1 ' - �`'nc¢ �v E
'; � I � ; _ � N o ;
� ; SC.ILf.' 1�10� x 3 ..v' 3
� ' i I � � � ��
------------� I ' 0 !0 0 ?0 � a�
� �--- m �
Z � � i
W � LOT f I i , �
j � � � ��� �
W � . G � �w'�� �
� � � d=n � �
� "LAWRENCE' PARTITION" ' ' � ' g;� �
� i � a
�j I � ; � ; Q � �
� � � �
� � ; , ;
O i ; � �
� ' � � �
a �; ,s I ,s ,�SY,� ' � i
� �ut nwn sae�7'E _ r�x rum ---- -- ,— ` i ' '
� ��–r —�s.–o�– i3.o• ` ' �' – '� 1 S17E 1NFORMA110N
, _�__ _r �
cW ' ' '� ' �
� � � T.L_3 7 0 0_ �soiorr � �' ; ' mm+c: a-4s
i aeoa R/w
Z �r — — — — — — � i i— — — — — — — � i —i � � ; ; 70TAL 97E ARE.f :.56 AC�ES-z..��.�. �
O ,°•°"` I I I I I � I a. ~
� i , I �_5 � � I j �R� R .,.;, ..:-.- ,.:-i. }. O
U I � � ���I � i i ' TOTAL uR AREk 23.1�50.FL �y� � � �
i 161a1UU LOT AREk 7,533.iU.eT. W c7
I i I ' I I ' I I I I �G►�H�UN�T� 7.��.�. � o
I i�� � I I I � I I/AX DEN91Y: 4 1A15 �
�' � PARCEL 1 �� � PARCEL 2 �� � PA!�CEL 3 I � , � ����TM 3�� �o
L O T 1 1 I � 7,7 4 4 S F I I I 7,5 3 3 S F I^I I 7,9 7 5 S F ,S• � i ' I � � � � ;
"BOULEVARD H EI G H T S" � I -�I ►--a I i I �I i ; ?� � F
i � �,T Y,� �'�'I ' I I ' I I � � Q i � W V �
� �A«(,�) I I �,�,� I I I � � � � d
, I
I— - - - - - — J �- - - - - - - - J L - - -- - - - J . �' � �
� 5• -------------- --1-------------- �' �j� �
I � � r- --- , �
� �
�--r- -------- ----- ; , �
----------------��_�'1�' -� se�'°�--�--- -�-------- �� I �
.
--------------------- -- -- �
------ � �
EXTG.75 R/'N PROP.2Y R/M� i
SW CEDA�5T S'TF'i�T � a i
– – --- – – – - – -- - – – -- – – – --- – —� _. _ .� ,
�
� �
�
a
� s =
Z �
� V �
� � �
DATE i 1/18/07
DESIGNm i A VECUNA
ENGINEIIi i S ROPER
CHEp(m i
sr+�nn.e
' ;"�i.L1M. LAYOUT
SHEET NUMBER
C3
. . Z� \
�� '
��i i
W
���
P^� -' 3
�o+::rn �p :t
m�� ^Q �
p �
SC.'�E ����, = 1�(1 N �'
N �Z� �� 0 � m ��
�
§�� �
�
�'"WWag i
y 2{\ � Cl �
� �� �
Q +O W
d I � �
��`� / � .t___ __�_�'_ 1�.�" ' ' '':
I � i �' / � � �y�'�I � � I
� i i� r'"�-- J�� � � � ' '+ u � �
; � _ �-- ' � , � �� � � � LEGEND:
��. � �� _ — ——1 ( \1 ` \'� 4 �.1 j��, ; .
� � — � t \ � .��° � � � tm -amPOS�D CoNmuR(5 MmtvK) Q
II � v
� � ` ` ` ` � --sn�_ ,� � #..� `�� 7b2 -PRaP054D CON70UR(1�NTFRYAL) C'^'
;�j � j , � � ' � i� � 1; � �--, ' -
� �
� � :i� , � x x-- -vnoaosm�wo+r�+aNC �
':I ;� � / � 1 � �" - --�„__ �,^�� ; � ,.�'� � O
` 1
\� �r J
� � �� '� \ I { � `;����" ; '!� r'� —o—. o— � PROPOSED 7RfE P(tOlEC110N FfNCNG � � �
� � O , \ — � I � � I — J �►
�i� \\ �,l � � ` --� ��I_i I� I � � ) —270— — -E70511�IC CONTWR(5 WTQtYAL) � p
� � � \ ; 1 / . I� I i s
I / / � ' `� I � — _DOSING CONTOUR(1��M1EItVA) Q o
r�h---� ��--4�\.-" � -�---'ti.t-�rl -rJ �• � i� `� � �� � —262— — � <
� r. - _- ._ . = �
�� ���-- � � ��-- -- 4 - -��-- --, i \�� ,�s� t ������� -PRQECT Bd11DARY N F
� ��,I I � \ I ,� I p�� �� � .i ��� � a} ( ' ' I —------— -DasiMIC LoT 11NE � �
� � � �
i (
, I t i � i ACCES j i
�� I �. � � � � ' � � E A�
I ;
i �. 1 € ��� � ��!
10'oc�C `I I I� ,, � , �' > > � i I i ? ---------------- -E)aasR�C EDGE aF PAVEIIFTIT
EA5�1E)lT I ISI � � i j ! � r ' � t ! ',�'!�� ' I -E77S1MC IAEE TO BE R�I O V E D �� �
I�� i i I I � � �.�. � � . _ � � � �
�
I I F �' ( ' ^
I II>!' i ' I I � �, 1� � i Y
,� �I I �� � � ' f � � � � r �� � � � G
� �' �,
� � ,
I ' �
?�=�i���� PARCEL 1 ': I �`PARSEL 2 I PARCEL 3�� ���';� �-'� � ��
I� ;� � � � � ,� r 1 ti ' yA,L B�E�1FRpuY a+BtADMC PERIfT PROCESS AYE
I� `� � � �. �� :�i� �. ` NO GRADNG'�L TAKE R.A�Y(MN 1FE PotliT-OF-WAY
I�, �� � '✓�� 1 � �.,: Q„ �
� � 'a� � �+ �"�_�`� 3
' �� � J,FI� ' �` .\ 15 � ` ' -�" ,y ,,��i �! �� , ,
I I /v �I �, i � ', '^ �' � i
� �� j / +� .` I j -��,� � I � ��1 t : `� �r� i
�„ -'7 I I � r' r � , t
_ � , ,
1 =------------ --1-----•----------- � ,o ' i;'ti'1; -b/ ` �
��
I I i 63 � � `�..--�----- ---- '^;—..-� __ �'o, � ( ; ;
.
� I II � , i m �( � � i
F�� __�_________ _ �� .�.,7�ki'�L �v ,� � , :
L. \ �_ ; i
—--- ---- -- - -- ` � --� — - __ � _ __ '
_ , •
� —�•.��—- ` _r-�;z , , �, . �-- - 2 - -- ,i \ � �i`�
-_ '�� ` — - � -- - 5•^^ 67 �T..�.t ` /.t'��' \ S.�,/' �`
-_=�c� �..� — -� � '.� �f11�FNA �`� ��DPoYEIYAY a�.�, AY /- \II I i �
'-- ---- ' ""_'"�65 � * i
�- ------ -------------- -- ♦ � ;
�
_----------- - --------- ' -
-- ---- -�--=K- } �y��/�♦�+e�T�T�G�T1I �t�, ,
/_ _ �+C'J - - - � _ _ _ �`'' - _ txp� �— a7n KVrYMIG71 a71f1GG,�� 1 �,✓ I t�.
�} � �-- -! :,/ I
t � `� \ ���--�� _ � �— � �I "�'�
� �1 I �'` d
� -�-------------- � -- �' ° z
--�--------------- - �!
U �
a � �
DATE � 1/18/07
DESICNm i A VICUNA
ENpNEER i S ROPER
CHEqcm i
SHEET 11T1E
PREUM. GRADING
SHEET NUUBER
C4
�+i \ �
% �� .34UU w ..'�" "�B �, ;
. � � .5 G � �� � � � � � .
. ` 1 A � ,' ` �����5 � � � � �
� ; . � � . � ,
, : . , ��T�, � , �, �
` ; ; �4 Q �� .1�AC;; �,� �
�
C e a . O. / �� � \ /
„ . ,
x ^ „
� � , , , ,. , , , , , , , .
r .
� � � / \ i �
/� / � \ � � / \ / � \
` 0 V / oo e^ \/ \
� M � \ �\ /\ \
� ` V V VO � � v � Q� / / � / � \ \
�� \ / i
/ `�
, 2 n /l� n �� � � y,' � . � , ' � � , � ,
C ; �
320fl 33�4 � ° .33 C � � �, � � , � � , , ' � , , �
� t �oo.aa , , , ,, ,
; .s2AC �,, �,.� c , , ; , ��o, � � � . , � , , , \ � , , , , \ .
,. 11 � ,� EASEMENT ,
°° 1.64 AC � � ' � , `,�' �iS�25bB►� � � \,\ ' � � ` � . � � � ,
� oo. � 230.0 in, � 2902 , , � � . � � �
t„�, : �fl �,,� , � , ,
; : " , '` , .2� �C , ' ,
,
� ; /� ;'. T� � ��� FaR aDD1�l�NAL N1aP
r e� V�oo Q \ \ /\ \ / \ \ /
'2°r �, www.cv.wa,
r �m .48 AC � . , , , . , ,,
e ,, ,, ,� ; ,
r °
t , , , , , . ,
. r �� � / .
. r � � / \ / v � � �� \ \ / \
��r � / � / � / ✓ \ / � , � /\ / / � �\ / \ �,
� Y Y / � .� X � � �
�V.LV / � �S I L��� \ / �/ \'`/ �! , � �/ � � K �/ �.
� � � / � � � �
►� �'�� %�290� �� '� { ; %� . ,� .
; : � o , , � , � � � �� > �:� ,� �, ,, �� ,�
A ; 00 '` .� � q��� � v �� �; � �� �� �
„ y � . , , , , � , , ,, , - ,, , , ,,
� ;� � „ , , ,, � � , � � , �� �� , � � , � � - ,
' r. /� � , � �` �. n ? \ , � . ,� l�
o rry � I OV e'; � / � ',fL� � / � � \ \/
o � \ !
o � �� \ �� JC �� ��� /� � i
�� ,55AC ° � � �� , � , , � , , , ; ,,\ ;, , � � �
� � �� � ; V � . ,, y y , y
)5 � v , • ' 1.S125bA� � • � � • \ , • � \ ,
� � U � , � ! � � h �'y���� ' x���
„ � i� �� � � i / � � , ' � i
984.05 • � `". .. � � ., ' ` ' ,. ,. � � , , . �� k ..
a ; 2301 � . � � , , v X \, ,�\,",/ > , \,.�\, � ��'\,
,�. , , .•1�"� , � , , , , , , ,, . , , , � , , �
,rr x �. ,� ,� , �,
.•.r �
STRE � , . , . , , .
ET ��? o in� ;: ,23�C? ,• \ ,� ,� ,� .
�,� � � i� y �. x
< ., , � ,� � 2 Z ,� � �
� a>.+ao�e�rrsr.�. . i+O �� / \ �\/ \ �' / /� / /\�,f ��/�\�/\ ��
' �^�. w ��vv r. n oo`u r
L 1 � . 68.34 68.33 '1 E6.66' , � � � � � .
�--� �o.00 � . , �, .
1 � 238.86 � � , . � , � �
�� � � 150�. � � � % '� �
� � � � � , � � .. y T� �' ' �
�c � ,� �� ` �
.
o � . � � , � , � �� u �, � ; � �' � u
0 89�� o, ~ � � � %: ,�1�5�25�3� '� ;� ;: ���X%�f \ � %: �:�.
° �' 4000 � � � , 32 � ,. , < � T „ ,
�- � �. �o X ,, 90 ,� x .� ., „ � v ,-
� • o q � � . , � � � , � ., , �� . ,
� � � .19 AC � .- ,� �, ' �,.33 � < %:C� , , ,� , � .
� � N � � � � � � � �� x i� n i� � ;� x x
• „
, ,; I � � � �� � �� `Cj'� < ;. ,�,,y„� �� ,�, ,�,. , �.
3800 ^ � � , �� ; ,� „ , ,� „ „
128.95 r m � � � � ��� , � � � �
� 4001 `0 0 .75 AC " �'S � ' � �
� � � ,. ,
- 20 '�
.33 AC N 54.37 �'�� r ` ' `' 150.0 x
N '100.Q0 , ,� , � , � , �
a � [� nn a (� ! '0°' ' � �� ''e � �� Cancelled Taxlots For:
� �7oVV � r �V I \ � � \� � ��25D �
� °Oo � 33.� �
2 N � o,� ,<, , ,
Map Output Page 1 of 1
North Cedarcrest Street
" ' w �•„ � "� ' �, `�;P .+��� �,�.�'�� �..�'�.� '�. �-�..� �3>r: Legend
��.�� .' �,�,��' �,r��C�*� � <. � �� � � ��-r Places
".�`d 4 M ' y y{+� ` �k .
�� r��f�.k � � �e �'�* �'�c� �. .`�� :_. �¢ C�f H�tt
,... � . .
> �,�4 < r
� a , � - r � -b
� i �r������ x �� �.a�e x �`'„rAr � °�k.��� *��,' .. fitcSlalian
t'�'v`� 1 , �y � 'r� F J`t'+^ _ . �. - � �
� y�, �.. � ��a �s ,' ;�,,.� - �,c� �-��' ��- -"���*��i �, + lio���t
�"`''*�� .a.': ° �� F � ,:s& �:F ,a,+v��S��,, —�- +�.�-s`F
„ mt«
� „
+4, '� �,�-��.�� r'a`�i � ., "�! 'e�� - . . a�;',� gey Ltir�ry
, i t t at °
, `� . r
f�j T,�y�.i,.. ��',,"�r. ��-*-�,.� .,c� .. ` �S� ��?f� . �. .. � �.. ,�,�� � Sd�oa1
�y.���� .' r»'Fr A''� � .g x' �� .�:
; � r, `�� ��t� ^ '�"�" , - . � � Freeways
z'� w� � ��' � —�rr�$
�, . F��z� � � "�' x .l`-.�� ;e '� a!
* �d,:�����x '�7, ' d'� 9�. a+.� �,.�, r � $��('8615
..y n
.
.
i�, � r�r
�,.
��Ili��"�� �'e�ti"��;P� `� � �„" � ; �"�• ��,�- X' �' "�';�� Taxlols
�5i7�� c � ���'',`.'y! , ;:�,.d' f r"�t � �,,`y:<:e
� ,� � � � � ��*� k,,, �4 �. , �F'� _��'�LL� Sireams
,� r �-,� `: 5 'v-. � "G .- t �s�'a+ «�°`�"� �a� i ' Uth�n Catvwfh 6tlut�d�ry
��..��A' 6����f d •, ':.4 �. ' � .�<�F a� .. _..
,F ,;��,`�- � :* r��"�;�� ^ 2 ,� ;� . ��- �� �_ 5tream shading
Y � . t � 'h�'r`M t "'�..1::-. '-� .`°°'� ,h �,.
` ���� '2'i.6. �.�s�_�``�'�� ���"��p' '�.!'ni� "I `,� �,�!'. P2r1L5
F t '� r —A�`�f '`�* ` t . ��'� � #• � �. . 2005 aerial phota
`w� � r: . -:���,� '•'.�'`� ,
�� # � � ' .� '� ��" '�"��,�,, ��y�- � ��'�,,,,�x� - 2aning
`•,�;' ��'a.�� � 'S� . � T �c�� .sx,v'�d,� "'� ��• �k '�'`""�`^�`�_" . ....
►> ...'�" _'',��,e �.%. �'�t�i ,�:-s'�`sac �.� .r��.r '" CON
��'� � '�f .� '��'�7i�`� . r+. e N;�' �-�r5 { - :
..t �h*kt ' ' Y, d� �`' ti-. ,.� '�r � 'h �� F ,.� � !NQ
. � . x�`K� ' . . ° .. . .. ' ,� .p- Lg`��,-F .w .�}��-��,��r tab, . a .� . �
,
� _ r �.
9 '` t
. _ i� �,�`t°�` -, . _ ., .�Ew � ���s...;....:r,�ss-A�'�Rvszc�.��; '3�. ut1C
r*�' �" i„. � -ii: :a;-.°-�41M �.e't� �`.. '`` +� '�^ ,!g^�' POS
X�'�ei'�,� � . �: ��t �. 4 f.� „�4 .",e�w�a"�-.�'��:�,r.�qr, ... RUR.
�+� ���� n' s" ',� � �i�� �� � ... ., � rg� d�^ �.� <.. .. .. Sftt
ti
� � t � �
�,� i 9 ((� � k..t �x,.� 7��_� '�g $�p� � w rt .5t
.�� � �1 ".7{ 4 i�'� �� .6.�1 ����
. ,
;� ¢ � ` xsi . � 4 '�`�.4•�"��• x� . ..� �� a � � ��
� � a��_ IAvR���,.: _..
:t �, �r. .5-., .•, 8'ir*` '�� . �
' g t�ya. �.M� .. � i .� ��. �` ��h;. - - " ,%,m•M�••..�....
:a� ' . ��. ��.� ��- � ���y'� �� � � ���,�, ., �
9 �. ��.� S 1�::Y,i"t�..� t N , ��
' , � . �':� � " ` ' .
� �
;. .. „� . .�c�*��. �..� .`3 �# t
3. '
L
r v~0. ,a ... � t eg� 'F�'k 9�'� :�, ��'� %'t"-^ �' i �i. �3�:
'� �'+r�a ���'�� r- .. � 3� � �� .� 4 �
••4 �, + •� ' i , � �R r'Ir'� � +M S 'j�4. 1..�
.. .. :.� .��.���"��� 't3vilr'��i.� . � _ ,��•��\,'.'� !f$i-�ga'�T� k 1'�G'�
��� �
�, � . v1 '�� at�� m a r+^c _�� ,.-. c�_.�UI�� �i',�`G� K��'' � .� �ry'7�t���.�
.�,i
��'t'�t.3�s,i ��� '� � �ia� ��C� . .�
. �- � 'a �^s��" ,.��, ' , t,' ���+ji>�� �.
.ir� _... ,�.�t'���� 't��,�.���•t.
-_. :�. � � � �...
�resle_��� \1et�c Pafa F._.�_.�i:e�_ent_i s Nefrc�laR. n �:.�iw_��:, r �r_n.::ty �r_ . , . �'_ .. •' ...r�.
.._��" _-��t��
http://mica.metro-region.org/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=metromap�lan&ClientVersion=4.0&Form=True&Encode=False 4/24/2007
• . � .-.. . y�. Yn. , ..... a�' "�_r
• ' -s v A • r �$ � � � � � �E� � �" _
..,. .., :t .
� k ���< tj#� .
.` � s�
.. _ � _ � �.� i �s . .�.�- ' � , � ^v '
..' � y
k y�_ w �y��� '� � � r�: '� � � a� �� �`�� �$ �� �}`� - H`
�
�� � R
^ .;� �n �_.,-. .�;� � �... '�Ip;-�'4 :.-° . ,±i '�`�_ ,. . � r��'�.'"`,�`� R�'�.. ��,� � yc-d.�
� �_ '
�,tt_ .,.,, .�� �r . ,� o:�,' �,,��� .� ;�.r �- >,�. � �� ,+�_'��"°
: �
� 'wti >
� �'�a�. �, �� ,���'* �,�a'`5� ,� '��.�..'�' � *"', a :'�. ,a��1 ,
�a°',., k�,� �:. �� *� A � ,"�'.
,� - f� �! �
'"�'�`" ��;a�,� '°' :..� r� �r '��' : �� ' �� '°x�. . � . ,�,"��,.`�'��:� � . .
Pf �e , '�� # � �� �
a' - �`�' � � d �.
�t.�. '. ,a � .6� �. � � �� � ,�. ���'£'�,�,�;� ��-� �, �a��`�,,?'�$Y��_� ��' ' e;..
' "`�' �.r '�` ` 'b >
�i4 . .. �� �,. #
•3 ��. � �#' R,.,, �A .�.. �� ., S "�.` ,.�.f ^.d- z. ''�vr..i "8'� _ .`.'t..as ��
[!�'.�.. �� �`,.. � x! � � Y! . �� .. �Y. 1.. � � �'� .'� f� � � � :.
�v. Rsn Fpk� '� r µ� � � y#� ppww �� �'y
� "t�g� �' � �:. : �t`� � iV"� uw.. �. f � � ��''+
..
� � . ' .� � . �. ,
'�'�.. ,..'�F .:C� � . . < .�it�, .
� �.�� � �
�.ylY�� e "�S,p� w res "�+ �.$S" �:;�T �,R.!.x'� i .� .,,. � � .
� .
� k tk � �ta ;i � �,y t ���� `a,p .�° �, g`, i
y�� � � r �� �•j� f w «� ���d�rv�a�:, �����a' '�. ° l �� :�� ���� �� �^.
�; - � � � a�:' �e� �`��. '^j��C� .�t t d,�'t� .��a�.� `'�^�� „� � '�', �s '" � . �t s .�� � _�
�Y� � � � k � �� „��a � ,�r . . , � ,� ' . � .
„s�`.� �,�+� .�'" '��� - z t� rn,y'v'+` ,�:� �. `1.�►� .%9 m .x. ���.� � ��*�'4€ ��.�, �'+P�i
� �� � � . w - s`` � � � „�a� ar� �� m �R �
,� �. � � . �" � 3 �� �;�� ,� � . � � � � �,� Q���°
�,� � �, �,�!1�`, �� � �,� i•y��� � � �� . # �.�t� �� �
�"�`�� p �• f �� �' �t � � x;t�� �. � "���., ,��, v,' a �.� �< ,� �4 a �
��a. . �i?' � § �€ �,' r,a_.
�'�
K
�� �- .° '.�. �- � r." °, _.q a � '' � .� '. . '� � it . , . �a .
a �'i
A
�
; 3
,
�
r z w ► � � � ` � . r=� t ` y ��:� �' �. `
x°� a. I
' . .� r`- ��x '�F; - . .. � "� '�'� �S��'
. '0 ,.� '.,, I -s - '� :.,b �� � _
t, w
� k �� T
't.�' -q ».�; l��i��.�., a;�. �`' ���'a b'�'�"�'� ,iti " . d » . �F _�ID �,��� �, .ap, � � � -. , �.•�.� � �
r
„� '
� � a
�� ' f�r„'�,� � +T a r `.y. �, y,. "9" ' �t-�g r,�.r�*�� � _ *' ..�, � � �
�..�. a�,,� � q ,�7+ ' ' .. �t 9
, * w �
i ..�i- ��Ik �Y �r��, ,d . fk,r , g�, "§^��>}�� �,,, �aR ...�� .
�
.
;..� � `����9 ��i. '���t'��,^�.��.R�"`� - Y ' � `.�k'#. `� :�,n �7� a�ad# av« .px,
, .
,� es��` � � +a4 �> �i�.� �, �.�,+ #+
, . � - '� 'a
,-, �.
y •
. . ,^� �.� � - n
_� a+���' ' � � �+.,; �- ��,^ �,� �' �.
���. � �''�?!Y'�'�"`����',��5 �� �' �yp �' �, � x,p. &" °.+�� °
�° ,�'�,q�, � � '� � „�T3�F tg� °', � > `,,,� ez
i'm�^�':i.. �R��..!° .,� `� r.�, -�. �`,^.4v. F'"�: �,�"� �_�.� �' tm.�+t�,-� �s,r £�3 �x:. '�`R�R-� �y ,�r �€'�' y..�. � l
��'����,�'�" �,� �Q'.` x. 1��� Y�. � _ � �. �^�� .� ;l�ge . �� �.,� .�
"°� w�r,"� . '3� n�s �� t.r��� � ��« �`N ,�.€� � ��« 'i,. a� ,,�,' p, � :�.° . ,�.;"
«*.4*8% *s� � �' �z .,�gs. � 9°�'..'r`7 �, `,�ty'�` ��, � `��` � x? .�,e,�a �,.. .� �
.�;.w sa`�s-=t �. ��^'W"`4� `°`` `a> . `� �. � "�: . . .. �
� � �,
..��°!"�pr ro. ,�"r,� ,�'�y .s.'�*�&� �„��s�,�,t :�'+s"•a.:.�a"�},a�w�`�',�,� '� "k,��'��� .`�.• . �$.
�
e,
`
_ .. y�
���3�?� '�e ", � ` � - " �� �. , ` - � .. � r.^r`�`,� -.. . �
....:. � � �. ,�c
, t ,�� "� �:."4'��-, . a e' �a�� ' s� � ��-..<i ��,^ '� *,� g�
. -.r w s �� '3° .. .'F �� . ' ".� , w��� �' 3��� �'�. � ,b r��...� ��, 5 :�. : � $ �I� '� . ��: �".�.
�w; � � ��g�.�,,..,.,.. ,.'K-.,. . * h� ��f- „x. �5 ,� ��,.s�,�„'.. �.< :.� :�F_ �; ..s�±� +�� "+��,�R �. �'.��, �
� � '�.. "��e.,.. .���' •�� �� �rt�} � ' 4 �� �<_sr '���s� :'� �,�'�� .$ �
'+���� .g. ��.:+n t,e 1 'Ya"'s*�`sA,c� � .a . `��� 4' � .�"t�'�'�'�-,.�..# �'�� �, '�`r .�„s�l, ;ge.. � .. .. :.
� `�,F `� `G , �'.,� �� � �'4 �"�,� ��" } �� ry �, t�' _ �:
� �g
e"
� �.;.�'� " �°7` e d�i,,�. "� a. T.+�.�`Y� "`�k' `f �'�"N- &�'�� � ","`. �"�-t �6 �,,� �.s� t.
«., . � .t� �ax �'�" �:: �..'� g''�1r, z.!- .�.. �t � � , .,t�` °� ��� �
, �. s,
4,, . . ' � _t� +�+.� '" "�.:, 4'" � ..�^yN ��
� .,
��a � _ �`*:� b� '- f� �..` ".,�Y � �£ s� � � � r �
..y� .. �. � � y�. - . � �,� ":y,� � � �� �*""r: �-,v �F � �� � = .�„�'° .
� �� � ,# z*,e, s «�,' �� � .r . �yc;^g��h,�� �
g,� • � � .��,�.� ;q,s . . ,�,����y.� � �� �� ��..�� , � <i�' �. .�:>q � �'°" �i.x�r',°�, s �'�'b;"r, ,�. .
��' , . ��: � #��� � �' �� � �� ...'i�,�* .�» ..i. 3s � � �-er �.i*�,,,� '�n, ;L=",.
rs� .,�. ,..;�'�>'.Re,.':: ,�- ;y�,.y�3. .q. �. ,�,�#i���,,�e�, � 3 t>� ' �"�� w" � �� ����i. '" -�'�
$' �gg'. ±y�� .a.: d:. :t a �,��P �a�,� �� . �"'"g�,, py rt $� �+ ,2� � g�.
„ � ,„
;��, � ...,�i, zL -yt�-*� �^:�^ `x� � �,cs`, �� >�,�" � . ;,�+�.� �, '�� 4�
, �
f � �
� � �
.
-.� .-z.:.�, �''�.. ;�. . ' � `� � , �...', y . x �._�. . �
„ .,-.. .,»q�n.. ,� � ° �h.�e . o' '�a: ,$^�g+� a �°��. �a�. -_`"�' . * '''�. ��tr. s.. A..' :.��
� x� � '� �"�wa
; •� <. , ,, .'� �u Ak,x <� w ° #"�' ."�.� '�,� s+� . �`^-, ��` � � ' �'��'
�i �
�
, ,,. '�-., � . �" �e +;::,.. p,'�: "��' 's "�'£r � w �� .�, ,� �_ ,��. . fi� ��' '�3� .,
� �s '� . .�a.�' ..- � ... +�. ,4 };�`�e, � �'§'s '�• ,,,V.. A+�' A ;�$� �n , i�' ;'�� „ - ,�..
�:� .r �«- � �.�lW'x ' ::'�i� �. . .;±,. T`".,. .. _ � a�, ..��' � 'Ymai� �� _�y --��,t: � y�� � �j,: �"
.�
. "�``��a'',#�' , ° � �'���"�r � .. � ,.�-�
, .
. . . .. . ,�,� , , � _�;'. �>
..�. F�:"�' � �
,
�r : � -� � ,�, y ��� � � � ..,4�#��`� '��� �
�` -� ��� -`�.arr. . . a a :*� �,�j. ,�p iz,��, '.,� F .� ��.�� � ��:.
4 �` �u.� � � � ..'� � X�,��y,e''� '� wp�4 '" w � �#'� r #�p �F �a � ,-�,`�y
`� ���' ' �3� .� , "� " ���.�� g", � �� ;e xm. °��^� �.
' � a �
, - � .
, .,r , u
, ,;
� , � , - , ��'"" ,,-a � � �m , , , ,�.� ,r�, � t �
_: � - ,
-.., � �� 'w . �$°_ � ' *a:. �, :. t : . �.. �<� .�;"�. � ,*� � . . � � r, `''�'r
;:� .. . '� �^w;:•�<q t�` , a�� y� . . . � ., � y��"�, s k,.� ' �.,��.`� �"t' F . . �•��.�,�,'�,,:.�
y�, �`
. .'° _ W �. -� • ,-� '�; � � � ° ,a.r
« 3� r
,- .: i ,Y � �a..." s� .���'°# a,. �� , .�a�..-;. .e .e,..�,+.- '. . �.. -.,, . .� '�^� r 3`� 4 � y�, ,y'�.6�' t"� � '�
�r'�� �3 � � �
( „., t' ,�� .G�.°!� ..�,�.. $ -;a, � .. � � �, j� !ry `�:. t�R '�,'"'St. ,a� �X t 'aFi' .. ' k�a, � �'
������ .'�p` r> �,� . . *� �e�. '�: . €�. z'.�t., , g��` _. " � '� .;a�.
�k _$ �,+ "cT�"`�` ..�'��µ.`�.a.� i"�:y �� ��'� .$`, � - � �� � � .�' - °"'�` �F�s... �r. �`' ;.
`��,�"u'��� �` �� �� ��_ � 5.���„ 1„�+.+y� ,� ��r��'� � � � a �., �� "�V
� , � � .
�
�
�
, s , � � �� :_. .
��' `* ����'�.,„, , � _.,� � � "��a� w,� � � � �,� ��� �� +�
ra� �. _ „ ,�> �
` - « �. � �._- ., �' � '
:
. ,w� a�K. ,b r �he'. .a S .. . �; � .. . � . g ." t
.._. 1. . .. _ _ . �i, `C. � � ' . .
a a.
x � � w
. . , . . . . . _.�.
. � . . . .. r �. > . . .'-
. ... ' .. .. . . � . � . . '_ y ' ; .
�., " :a �. '�}
�:#:`� � '� � -..�nc '+!�'a"�._� . . , . . . . ., ,��� �. . ��"�. _,.��� "a�'. N�� � . . .:� {.
*
,w, r..:" . - ;. _ :{� ` .. �; �,� ;�,,r�..`��," w �"�� '
��, �w
t,� ��e � �,
,, � � �..�d _ ��� �� � , ' ��- ��;-" �'� �..�����
, �» . # „,,� . ;, g, •x" �"`�a���'#'� ,k�s���_,+�,� .,� ' .a �
�_§ ` �r
�;; .. �,w +� ' ��ar . 'ry � .
.:'a4 �_�.w. �� `��° & t m" :�" � .af .� " �-;�
w `�
"�" 'x"�,s �.T- � ,;�� '�.. s.�. � �� `�' R , � ;g;°'��`"��?E�a� t � �;,��,�� .��, "'" `s., �d
i � �': �*' �p ...s i�` �` " �''' � ,+" � e K�.`'",# ���' �p
� .
, g�
,
� ' . , -�. �!'�g� p.fi� `� � , ....4�'` .. '"' �'�"�,�i�,� e."�e� ,! �� .. . �,�� �..;�'��'��': M� :,e �;f ,�• ; �.� .�'�� . .�€ �k.,,.
• � .
, ._ ' ..i . = � � . '
,__ -� j �es" ' � � �� � ,�� - � " �����,�'� ���f�� �� ��"� �
.; '� . . ti
,
. � ag,. � � � . , �;: :.ti _ � *� � "�s
aY�+3 � �t .. . , . . , . ,� �y, d�. "y� ' �r� , ��'"'�c � . °� . .� � �i� ��i`�,`.,t�� ��t�, �� 4 - f�' 'T.:, �"9:�
� � », �? '� . -r
..{. �s� � '� ��^'�.� . .��. •+Y ,yM � i'����i€ .g��*�' zQ�. �� "° tt
�. "a �'" .� ; t' '�' � �'a � �.� F"%' .
��'�� �.���"+ . ' 3 ' '4 � ,Y�� � ���� � O �: ! . : ia�� "�- �� ,.:�» a s. . . � ". ���,` ��
� +*' S � � 8 . ,r-, ��t�' k' 4 da�'s��ta � ����",�'�� ,,e,+,� �`,...� �� ✓ p
,+�SF"W.. �C ,we'Y+ �� � . ' ,,,�- . � .:
�„ ` � `..;:r a ,y�.' � � x '• .. '� � � � .f�uw '` ,� y.� .s"�^" ,� �,���,,.,' �� «�
���g .�.+i.. '�. ,� '� �t�°"��� '�"i�ti*�.�. �"'�"��t�`. ,.. ..� �'-}�:� y ,t � �,��.� $��� ��'. :.1��,r r�'��.��� ..§.::�"�:�, � � ; � `�.."' + �
+ �."; -„a�+��-ry�:. :,.i. ���i;° .,w �'s,�.� �" ar ..,�.a ��:,: .�' ..:t'.Y. E --�+ " ��"€=... '��. ���-�i '�a,�.�::s � �'
.a�.� r�. �` �rt ' r :i '�• #, � . , ,.� , +� °'�, , .'�; ���� � ; �: � �`.x'y��� ��a��."' � �
�""' - '��:ai�;���,� � � � Y�_^�. � ,4� `� ��"' � � ��� �� {k"�a` " ,z�,� ",,,,, +�`�°.�s '� _r.
�r �` � ?° ,� °i� � �`. �` � ` � :
*.7 r `�.�,.:1'.� �• �� " � �� .���. � � � � 1 1 . "�`.' �°��;��' �{" �'��''.� u$�&�e�`� �a�,�����<:�
R����i 8196 SW Hall Boulevard, Suite 232
���' Beaverton, Oregon 97008 � �
�
Phone 503.469.1213 ��
APR 2 5 200% Toll free 866.469.1213
Fax 503.469.8553 "��
CITY QF��C�a�i� ,.� � � ��, �.
-�� n�,�.,��_: � -.,.__, _ www.srdllc.com „ ... =
�
Transmittal
To: City of Tigard From: Jeff Caines
Attn: Date: 4126107
Address: Job No.: PAC003 North Cedar Crest Partition
13125 SW Hall Blvd CC: File
Tigard, OR 97223
Phone:
For Your: ✓ Review&Comment ❑ As Requested ❑ Information & File
Via: ❑ Mail ✓ Messenger ❑ Fed-Ex
Number Copies Description
1 4 Pre-Application Submittals
2 1 Submittal Fee $362.00 Check# 6005
Comments:
Signed:
May 2007 June 2007
S M T W T F 3 S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5
7 2
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
13 td 15 16 17 18 19 10 it 12 13 14 15 16
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 27 22 23
27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Thursday, May 10, 2007
-Pre-Apps CD Meetings
Early
8:00 AM
I 9:00 AM
10:00 AM
11:00 AM (11:00 AMj(Pre-App SR Design Jeff Caines 503-469-1213 7407 SW Cedarcrest 3 lot MLP)
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
Late
�4
-Pre-Apps CD Meetings � 5/7/2007-2:16 PM
PRE-APPLICATI�N CONFERENCE NOTES , '
➢ ENGINEERING SECTION \ CltyAfllgard,Oregan
�bnrmunity neve(opnrent
S�ia ' A BetterCommuni
PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map[sl: 1S125CA
Tax Lot[sl: 3700
Use i�lpe: MLP
The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant
will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be
no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned
commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on
the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements
that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project.
Right-of-way dedication:
The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public:
(1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification
right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or
(2.) For the creation of new streets.
Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for:
� SW 74th Avenue to 29 feet from centerline (Neighborhood Route with Bike Lanes)
� SW Cedarcrest Street to 30 feet from centerline (will require a 10 foot dedication according to
County Surveyor, Jim Nims, 503-846-3691)
❑ SW to feet
❑ SW to feet
Street improvements:
� Half street improvements will be necessary along SW 74th Avenue, to include:
� 18 feet of pavement from centerline
� concrete curb
� storm sewers and other underground utilities
� 5-foot concrete sidewalk with 5 foot planter strip
� street trees sized and spaced per TDC
� street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee.
CITY OF TI6ARD Pr�-Applicatlan Cem�rence Metes Page 1 of 6
Epllaeerlag Uep�rtment Sectlon
� � , ❑ Other:
� Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Cedarcrest Street, to include:
� 18 feet of pavement from centerline (or as determined bv WACO)
� concrete curb
� storm sewers and other underground utilities
� 5-foot concrete sidewalk
� street trees
� street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee.
� Other:
❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include:
❑ feet of pavement
❑ concrete curb
❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities
❑ -foot concrete sidewalk
❑ street trees
❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee.
❑ Other:
❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include:
❑ feet of pavement
❑ concrete curb
❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities
❑ -foot concrete sidewalk
❑ street trees
❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee.
❑ Other:
❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include:
❑ feet of pavement
❑ concrete curb
❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities
❑ -foot concrete sidewalk
❑ street trees
CITY OF TI61lRD Pr�-Applicatlen Canference Netes Page 2 of 6
Engtoeerin!Uspartment 5eetlap
� . ❑ street signs, traffic �^ntrol devices, streetlights and a two-��-�r streetlight fee.
❑ Other:
Aqreement for Future Street Improvements:
In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently
practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval
may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee.
The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may
be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee:
(1.)
�2.)
Overhead Utility Lines:
� Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines
adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a
fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines
are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to
$ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines.
There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW 74th Avenue.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall either place these utilities
underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above.
Sanitary Sewers:
The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is located in 74t" Avenue and
in Cedarcrest Street. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is
the developer's responsibility to connect each parcel to the public sewer with a separate lateral.
Water Supply:
The Tualatin Valley Water District (Phone:(503) 642-1511) provides public water service in the area of
this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your
proposed development.
Fire Protection:
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: John Dalby, (503) 356-4723]
provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for
information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other
questions related to fire protection.
CITY OF TI6ARD Pre-Applicatlen C��eronce Notea Page 3�f 6
En9laeertog Department Sectloa
Storm Sewer Improvements:
All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed
to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm
drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure
that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed.
Must discharge roof runoff and driveway runoff to an approved public storm system.
Storm Water Quality:
The City has agreed to enforce SurFace Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the
Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of
on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus
contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The
resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-
site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not
the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious
surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary
sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development
application. It is anticipated that this project will require:
❑ Construction of an on-site water quality facility.
� Payment of the fee in-lieu.
Other Comments:
All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City
maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance
access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily
accessible.
1) Applicant will be required to work with WACO to determine extent of improvements required along
Cedarcrest Street. Preliminary discussions with the County staff indicate a floating sidewalk will be
required.
2) A WACO Facilities Permit will be required for work within Cedarcrest Street ROW.
3) Half street improvements will be required along 74th Avenue in accordance with City of Tigard
standards and based on rough proportionality analysis.
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES
In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic
Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected
impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon
the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of
the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee
CtTY OF TI6ARD Pre-ApplicaUea C�Mer�nce Netes Pag�4�f 6
Engleeerlag Oepartmeat SscUon
� � �a#egory. The TIF shall h� calculated at the time of build�� � permit issuance. In limited
circumstances, payment of th IF inay be allowed to be deferred . .i the issuance of an occupancy
permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible o� when the TIF is greater than
$5,000.00.
Pay the T1F
PERMITS
Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit:
Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering
Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City Hall.
For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or
subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for
review and approval.
The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A
deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the
permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases
where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for
any final design-related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI
permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit.
The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security.
Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer
Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public
improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows:
NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that
permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Diuision.
Building Division Permits:
The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more
detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at
503-639-4171, ext. 304.
Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial,
industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot
grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading
and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in
cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation
excavation material is not to be hauled from the site.
Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued
after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit.
CITY OF TIGARD P�-Applicatloa C��erence N�tes Pa�e 5�f 6
E�9f�nrl���ee�rtn�eet Secun
� � . • Master Permit {MST). T��s permit is issued for all single anc+ ��Iti-family buildings. It covers all
work necessary for b�. ,�g construction, including sub-tra. (excludes grading, etc.). This
permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially
complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City.
For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a
mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit.
Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing
that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information.
GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS
All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The
engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as
well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in
determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer
will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each
homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall
include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall
also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building.
PREPARED BY: ' S-l I- O
ENGINEERIN DEPARTMENT STAFF DATE
Phone: [5031639-4171
Fax: [50316240752
document5
Revised: September 2,2003
C�i110F T16ARD Pre-Applicatlen C�nferonce N�tes �age 6 ef 6
F�lt�s�d�!��Nrtaat S�ctlo�
•�'
CITY OF TIGARD
.,
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ° ��
(Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) � � �-
PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: � �
STAFF AT PRE-APP.: ����� RESI D E NTIAL
APPLICANT: 1��,;� �-�-.���C' AGENT: Lj+��� �n c-s
Phone: (�;�1 ��l5 �- �o`��C� Phone: 15u;31 ���t - I�1�3
PROPERTY LOCATION:
ADDRESS/GENERAL LO(ATION: ��l 1��� S� Ce..dar- i'�st � � ;.,�,�.�
TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): i S I S p 3 7 �p
NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: M L� - '�^'t�✓��� L�::-�� �'c�t �-1 ��r,
PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 1� ;�� �-� � ��•�- �n tz � . I��,,��,�� s I�
�2 x��s � v�:� ('t�:r�,is C'_
�.1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
MAP DESIGNATION: L��,�: �.��n�; , ��, + e;,�E-�� f-i c�. I
ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: �:,� �•S
IONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18. S i o l
MINIMUM LOT SIZE: ���{�sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: _5U ft. Max. building height: ._��ft.
Setbacks: Front �U ft. Side S ft. Rear��ft. Corner �� ft. from street.
MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: C"� % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: � %.
GARAGES:�ft.
❑ NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting NandouU
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. Meetinp is to be held prior to
submittinq your application or the application will not be accepted.
' NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans
Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9
Residential Application/Planning Division Seclion
�'NARRATIUE [Refer to Code Chaqter 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 appiication incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review
the code for applicable criteria.
�IMPACT STUDY [Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.0501
� As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE
AN IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the
development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the
transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system,
the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type
of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize
the impact of the development on the public at larg e, public facilities systems, and affected private
property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real
property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or
provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not
roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development.
,[5� ACCESS [Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.7651 �-z 1��
Minimum number of accesses: I Minimum access width: 1S �{
Minimum pavement width: I D �
❑ WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7051
Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each
residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING
AREA, COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES.
� RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7151-S�E E1iAMPLE BElO'.N.
The NET RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net
area of the developable land by the minimum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as
specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting
the following land area(s)from the gross site a�ea:
All sensitive lands areas includinq:
➢ Land within the 100-year floodplain;
➢ Slopes exceeding 25%;
� Drainageways; and
➢ Wetlands for the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts.
Public right-of-waY dedication:
➢ Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities; or
� Multi-family allocate 15% of gross acres for public facilities; or
➢ If available, the actual public facility square footage can be used for deduction.
El(AMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS:
EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE(3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE)WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS
Single-Family Multi-Family
43,560 sq.ft. of gross site area 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area
8,712 sq. ft. (20%)for public right-of-wav 6,534 sq. ft. (15%)for public riqht-of-wav
NET: 34,848 square feet NEi: 37,026 square feet
- .050 lminimum lot area) - .050 (minimum lot area)
= 11A Units Per Acre = 12.1 Units Per Acre
�The Oeuelapmem Coda requires that the net site area exlst lor the next whole dwelling un�.NO ROUNDIN6 UP IS PERMITTED.
�Minimum Proiect Oensiry is 80X of tde maxlmum allowed denstri.TO DETERMINE TNIS STANDARD,MULTIPLY TNE MAIUMUM NUMBER Of UMRS BY.8.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9
ResidenGal ApplicaGonlPlanning Division Section
❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS [Refer to 1,._e Section 18.1301
➢ STREETS: feet from the centerline of
➢ FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures.
➢ ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained
between each dwelling unit or garage.
� MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within muitiple-family
residential developments.
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less
than 2.5 acres in size. Five (5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines.
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size.
[See applicable zoning disVict for the primary sVuctures'sethack requiremenis.l
❑ fLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGNT PROVISIONS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.730]
MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 1'/z STORIES or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 2'/2 stories, or 35
feet in R-7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.C.2 are
satisfied.
.� BUFFERING AND SCREENING [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7451
In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE
OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the
CITY REQUIRES LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS along certain site perimeters. Required buffer
areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of
deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and
horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often
advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by
vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Addi:ional inrormation on required buffer area materials
and sizes may be found in the Development Code.
The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFERS applicable to vour proposal area is:
Buffer Level � along north boundary. Buffer Level � along east boundary.
Buffer Level � along north boundary. Buffer Level_ C] along east boundary.
IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING �CREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG:
r:����i CJ�-���i.0 z-�j (n,�, 1'�n l i.� �' v t� r?�1 r n rt� 1 c�r— �t �c �.,r�
� LANDSCAPING [Refer to Code Chapters 18.145,18]65 and 18.T05]
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 finro (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 MINlMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED
in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking
areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view.
❑ RECYCLING [Reter to Code Chapter 18.1551
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. Pride Disposal can be reached at (503) 625-6177.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9
Residential Application/Planning Division Section
� PARKING [Refer to Code Chap��.a 18.765 a 18.)05l
ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED.
➢ Single-family............ Requires: One 1 off-street parking space per dweliing unit; and
One �1� space per unit less than 500 square feet.
➢ Multiple-family.........Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom;
1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms; and
1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms.
Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of
guests and shall consist of 15% of the total required parking.
NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED
AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows:
➢ Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet, 6 inches.
➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet, 6 inches.
➢ Handicapped parking: All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned
disabled person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to
be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space
symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be
posted.
❑ BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Section 18.1651
BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shalf be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in
convenient locations.
❑ SENSRNE LANDS [Refer to Code Chapier 18.7151
The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR
DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL
DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON
UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-
application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, t_he responsibilitv to precisely
identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibilitv of the applicant. Areas
meetinq the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on qlans 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 Section 18.715.O70.C1
When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be
submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code
Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall
include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C.
J� CLEIINWATER SERVICES[CWSI BUFfER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulatlons-Chapter 3]
LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a
vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive
area.
Desiqn Criteria:
The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table
identifies the required widths:
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9
Residential ApplicatioNPlanniog Division Section
..tBLE 3.1 YEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS
SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANOARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION 8 ORDER 96-44
SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT� WIDTH OF VEGETATED
TO SENSITIVE AREA CORRIDOR PER SIDE
. Streams with intermittent flow draining: �25�
� 10 to <50 acres 15 feet
1 >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 ravine'
Sta�ting 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.
?1/egetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition.
3The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated comdor. The 35 feet may be reduced to
15 feet,if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be main/ained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine.
Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor:
NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals,
dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which othervvise detract
from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, excepf as provideu' for in the
USA Design and Construction Standards.
Location of Veqetated Corridor:
IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or I�ts intended
for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a
separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit.
� CWS Service Provider Letter:
PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service
Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the R8�0 96-44 sensitive
area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS
Service Provider Letter is not required.
❑ SIGNS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7801
SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of
Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or
height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a
development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for
Director's review.
.� TREE REMOYAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.190.030.CJ
A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a
certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a
development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development,
or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible.
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9
Residential ApplicationlPlanning Divisbn Section
THE TREE PLAN SHALL ,LUDE the following:
➢ Identification of the location, size, species, and condition of all existing trees greater than 6-
inch caliper.
➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in
caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according
to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code
provisions for landscaping, streets and parking 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 existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that
two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.;
. Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that
50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.;
. Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no
mitigation;
➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and
➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to
protect trees during and after construction.
TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT
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 [Refer to Code Sectlon 18.190.060.EJ
� REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines:
➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics.
➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably
available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural
resource value. �
➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would
not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance
with the following formula:
. The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the
estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the
largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be
viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more
replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property
or, with the consent of the owner, private property.
➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to
allow growth to maturity.
IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the
consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in perForming such tree
replacement.
,� CLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapier 18.1951
The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND
EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size
of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting streeYs functional classification and any
existing obstructions within the clear vision area. The applicant shall shoy�r the clear vision areas on
the site plan, and identify any obstructions in these areas. i �c�.:.�d� -�r �LC,�.
�rv�c,�:� c� �'l.J C%tr.—� `�—C J �.ai � (\
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9
Residential ApplicatioNPlanning Division Sec6on
(�] FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EI�TEh�.�N Of STREETS [Refer to Code Section 1�..,i0.030.FJ /��-�r�ss .�.�
A FUTURE STREET PLAN shail: 1ncc����
� Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The
plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the
proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall
include other parcels within 200 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division.
➢ Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and
pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site.
Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall
be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed.
� ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAI REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0601
MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process.
Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum
15-foot wide access easement.
The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2%z TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the
parcel is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district.
� BLOCKS tRefer to Code Secdon 18.810.0901 � �ss ' '� �"`�```�� " C
The perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED 1,800 FEET measured
along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography,
wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development.
When block tengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided
through the block.
CODE CHAPTERS
_ 18.330(Conditional Use) �$.620(fgard Tnangle Design Standards) _ �S.TF>O(Nonconforming Sihiations)
_ 1 H.�O(Directors Interpretation) 18.630(washington Square Regiona�Center) � 18.765(Off-Street Parking2oading Requirements)
_ 18.350{Planned Devebpment) 18.F)4O(Durham quarry Design Standards) _ �$.775(Sensitive Lands Review)
_ 18.360�s�t�oe�e�rr��t Re�ew) t 18.705(Access�9ressr�ircu�ation) _ 18.780(si9ns)
la�=�sc. �r�
.� 18.370(Variances�Adjustrnents) ��d�s� �S.7�O(Accessory Residen6al Units) _ �8.755(Temporary Use Pemuts)
_ 18.380(zoning Map/rext Amenaments) � 18.715(Densiry cor„putations) � 18.790(Tree Removaq
_ 1 H.3S5(Misce�laneous Permits) �H.7ZO(Design Compatibility Standards) � 1 a.7J5�sual Clearance Areas)
� �$.390(Deasbn Making Proceduresllmpact SWdy) 18.725(Environmenta�Performance Standards) _ 18.798(Wneless Communication Facilities)
_ �S.4�O(Lot Line AdjuslmenLs) �S.T3O(Exceptions To Devebpment Standards) X 18.51 O(Street&Utility Improvement Standards)
� 18.420(�and Partitions) 18.740{H�sto�c o�eday)
_ 18.430(Subdivisions) 18.742(Home Occupation Pertnits)
� 1 S.5�O{Residen6al Zoning Districts) L �$.�4�J(Landscaping 8 Screening Standards)
_ 18.520(Commerc�al 2oning Districts) �H.75O(ManufacNred/Mobil Home Regulations)
_ 18.530(Industria�Zoning Districts) 18.755(Mixed Solid WastelFtecyclirg Storage)
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9
Residential Applica6oNPlanning Division Section
ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENI...
1 C�!?S 1�UY� j e s �-v c�C_nP'{r L_C�-c.,,t-P G �i..e S�-i t.9-� J •
_�
�'X`s t-; t-L.e.e t C�_s �- '� -- r� _ r c�--v�e -►..* t �c- �c� d
�h ii uJV1 �t 1�rv1 . CLr S� }P C1.y� c� i.L,f� aL �z,�
i C'' �J '�' r i'.� " i�l'l� �.�.e , SQ
iC�t.0� -(.-it� �n� UZra.�l�
C:� i��...2 l✓�^V'r G Y-t �•�-4 � S f; i`P S �.1 i�I ��E' T�.' 'T'GILI +_w_ l.J i'G K L��t`.r'� -
����1�V'�'l�.l�� �S [�C i i'11', - �11 L' :e � S y1 �: (1([LL�-L�i l+t f � �CL Y�i TC:+�
Yl�t C k�c�,rL.�-d re��c �-t_l _ _ �u c �_ �tJ Z`{-H" d Ckd��'��v e J f. l-�o�.�c v-e � � s c=C
� � , ,l �
' �h2Cv 1 N- MCiI/1 t.�cc�. . (7a.a��ln.- (,.� � �" r.�Y �� �
� .f r.+� L' S �' I �'.
PROCEDUR�E -
Administrative Staff Review.
Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer.
Public hearing before the Planning Commission.
Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a
recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be
held by the City Council.
APPtICATION SUBMITTQL PROCESS
All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the
Community Development Department at Tigard Ciry Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications
submitted b mail or dro ed off at the counter without Plannin Division acce tance ma be
returne . he anninq counter closes at 5: 0 M.
Ma s submitted with an a lication shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8'/z" x 11". One 8'/2" x 11"
ma o a ro ose ro'ect s a also e su mitted or attac ment to t e sta re ort or
administrative ecision. App ications wit un o ed maps sha not be 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 8 of 9
Residential Application/Planning Division Section
The administrative decisio� , public hearing will �pically occur a�, �ximately 45 to 60 days after an
application is accepted as being complete by the lanning Division. Applications involving difficult or
protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review.
Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public
hearing A 10-day public appeal period follows all lan se decisions. An appeal on this matter
would be heard by the Tigard {-��rin ; �Ler . A basic flow chart
which illustrates the review process is available f m the Planning Division upon request.
Land use applications requi�ing a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the
applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing.
This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE
INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code
requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff
and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the
site.
SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERUQTION (County Surueyor's Office: 503-648-88841
PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard,
applicants are re uired to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington
Counry Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name.
Applications will not be accepted as complete �ntil the City receives the faxed confirmation of
approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation.
BUILDIN6 PERMITS
PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR
REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by
the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of
development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the
Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is
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 City's policy is to applv those svstem
development credits to the first buildin� permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE
DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED).
e con erence an notes canno cover a o e requirements an aspects re ate to
site planning that should ap ply to the develo p,ment of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide
information required by the Code shall not const�tute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements.
It is recommended that a prospectiye applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or
ask an questions of Ci staff relative to Code requirements prior to submittin an a lication.
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: �-V�'� t I �
LIT� OF TIGARD P NNING� YISION - STAFf PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETlNG
PHONE: 503-639-4111 FA)(: 503-684-7291 DIRECT: 503-118- 3 �t�-
EMAIL• � i ��' a�tigard-or.gov
TITLEI8(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEYELOPMENT CODE)INTERNETMDRESS: WWW.tigard-or.gOY
H:IpattylmasterslPre-App Notes Residential.doc Updated: 12-Feb-07
(Engineering section:preapp.eng)
CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9
Residen6al ApplicaGon/Planning Divisbn Sec6on
I
�
Teragan & Associates, Inc.
Terrence P. Flanagan Arboricultural Consultants
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Larry Wright
C & L Properties
9279 SW 75th Ave.
Portland, OR 97223 _�?a � � Ju. C�w�,�,� Pw�l��v�
RE: Inspection of tree protection measures at 7411 S W Cedarcrest St., Tigard, Oregon
As requested, I inspected the areas that were to be protected from construction activity at 7411
SW Cedarcrest St. Although no trees existed on the property, there were tree protection areas
from trees that were on adjoining property that extended into the rear yard of the subject
property.
On January 8, 2009 I inspected the rear yard where the tree protection areas from trees off the
property extended onto the subject property. I discovered that the tree protection fencing had
been removed on the property and a permanent wooden; privacy fence had been built along the
rear yard properiy lines. The fence had been built through two separate tree protection areas. Ten
inches of soil fill had been placed within the tree protection areas of the cherry tree (Prunus sp.)
that is located just outside of the rear yard's northwest corner. Five inches of fill had been placed
within the tree protection area of an alder (Alnus rubra) off the property's northeast corner and a
concrete patio had been installed that also encroached into the tree protection of the alder as well.
The encroachment of the patio into the tree protection area was minimal and not thought to be of
significant concern regarding the long term impact to the tree.
On January 12, 2009 I met Lowen Pankey on site to discuss the remedial work that was to be
completed to alleviate the impacts of the fill and possible impacts from the installation of a new
landscape that was being installed. I pointed out that the 10 inches of fill within the cherry's tree
protection area would have to be removed to reach the original soil surface. The area of fill
under the alder would have to be reduced by one to two inches to limit the amount of fill on the
alder roots to no more than four inches and the turf to be limited to the middle radius of the rear
patio. I also pointed out that equipment and supplies would have to access the rear yard from
outside the tree protection area as the current access point was through the tree protection area.
On January 13, I stopped in to check progress and the fill had been removed from the tree
protection area and piled outside the dripline west of the property in a vacant lot. The access to
the project continued to be through the tree protection area but was limited to foot traffic and
limited use of a stand behind power trencher/mini loader. I instructed the crew to carefully till
the soil that had been compacted within the dripline of the tree to alleviate any long term impacts
to the cherry tree's roots.
3145 Westview Circle•Lake Oswego,OR 97034
(503)697-1975•Fax(503)697-1976•E-mail:terry@teragan.com
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist,#PN-0120 BMT
Member,American Society of Consulting Arborists
�;''
,:r
Larry Wright 2/17/2009
C&L Properties Page 2 of 2
7411 SW Cedarcrest St.,Tigard,Oregon
On January 16, I completed the final inspection and found that all of the recommendations were
followed in regards to mitigating the impacts of the fill on the tree's roots that were of concern.
The lawn areas have been kept out of the areas where the tree protection was located, irrigation
has been limited to the lawn areas, and only hand digging was completed along the edge of the
patio to install an electrical line to the bubbler rocks to avoid any root damage.
I foresee no long term impacts to the trees that are located adjacent to this property from the
construction activities that occurred on this property. Tree protection measures will have to be
carefully followed when the adjoining properties are developed to insure that the protected trees
are not impacted.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this report,please call.
Sincerely,
Terrence P. Flanagan
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, #PN-0120 BMT
PNW/ISA Certified Tree Risk Assessor, #PN-0152
Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists
3145 Westview Circle•Lake Oswego,OR 97034
(503)697-1975•Fax(503)697-1976•E-mail:terry@teragan.com
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist,#PN-0120 BMT
Member,American Society of Consulting Arborists
. � �N°'hington County,Oregon �oOp-0�����
2008 10:27:51 AM °
� Cnt=1 Stn=7 K GRUNEWALD
�` 510.00 55.00 511.00-Total=S26.00
✓/
t � After Recordin� Send A Copv To:
01272949200800637270020029
Applicant or Owner: Lawrence Resources Inc. ,,R;�ha�d Hob�,�;�h�.o,�«to�o,,,,s�ssm��t a�d -
Tazation and Ex-OfRcio County Clerk for Washington
Address: 6770 SW Alfred St. Tigard, OR 97223 County,Oregon,da hereby certify that the within ,� ��;
� instrument of writing was received and retorded in the �- ��y;,�"��-�
� book of records of said cou I�"� a'r
� � � 1_P � � � ' 1— c 'c � ' r� � �Q ��'�` � -�
Flle NO.. Richard Hobernicht,Director of Assessment and
� � Taxation,Ez-ORicio County Clerk ` -
x
as �u
v �`
G
F-� Z
m > TREE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT
o � DEED RESTRICTION
� �
� Declarant is the owner of property described as Parcels 1, 2 and 3 of Partition Plat
� — No 2008-030�recorded as Document No. 2008042415.
� Declarant has preserved or retained trees over and across portions of said property
!V' as shown in "Exhibit A", in accordance with the Conditions of Approval of said plat.
�� Any such preserved or retained tree greater than 12" in diameter measured at breast
�J height, may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified
Q arborist. This deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if all trees
� preserved in accordance with this section should die or be removed as hazardous.
l
�
THIS AGREEMENT shall be deemed a Covenant running with the land and is
binding upon the owners of property described as Parcels 1, 2 and 3 of Partition Plat No.
2008-030 recorded as Document No. 2008042415
Washington County, Oregon, and their successors and assigns.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, The Declarant has executed this agreement on that date
and year set forth below.
DECLARANT: oFF�ciA�s�
D�i�LER
�' f�CTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
LAWRENCE RESOURCES INC. � COiVI^,�ISSION N0.402388
N(Y COMivll��l(l�IXPIRES MAR.28,2010
_�.�.-�` .� ,� .
Robert H. Lawrence, re � ent of Lawrence Resources Inc.
STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
This instrument was ackno ledged before me by �'� �.-������.�-��
�� <
�� �� ��
NO IC – OREGON Date My Commission Expires
�
EXHIBIT A
TREE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT
DEED RESTRICTION
INVENTORY OF TREES ON PROPERTY
DIAMETER GREATER THAN 12"
TREE# SPECIES DfAMETER
236.1 ENGLISH HAWTHORN 14"
305 DOUGLAS FIR 29"
344 BIGLEAF MAPLE l9"
369 SWEETCHERRY is' PARTITION PLATNO. 2008-030
599 W.RED CEDAR �s" RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO.2008042415
600 DOUGLAS FIR 16"
599
369 �
600
�344
236.1 �
3as PARCEL 1 PARCEL 2 PARCEL 3
�
�
.
�
• r
Teragan & Assuciates, Inc.
Terrence P.Flanagan Arboricultural Consultants
_. 7 1 d :.�(t� Ti?a!r.t t:J
Tuesday,August O5, 2008 ,�� n;�,�- �;�„R`��,
Larry Wright
C & L Properties
11755 SW Clifford
Beaverton,OR 97008
RE: Tree Protection for 7411 on SW Cedarcrest Street in Tigard,Oregon
There are no trees on the property located at 7411 SW Cedarcrest Street. However,there are two trees
located on the east and west properties off the back corner of the subject property that will need to have
tree protection fencing erected on the property at 7411 Cedarcrest Street during the construction of a new
home.
Tree# 369- 16"diameter cherry
Tree#369 has a part of its buttress roots that crosses the west property line and is located 10'6"from the
north/back property line. The tree protection fencing shall be placed at a minimum no closer than 8 feet
from the face of this tree's trunk in all directions.
Tree# 331 —23"diameter alder
Tree#331 is the farthest south and west tree in a grove of trees that is located on the properties to the
east and north of 7411 Cedarcrest Street. In order to properly protect this tree and thus the rest of the
trees in the grove,tree protection fencing will have to be erected no closer than 12 feet to the face of this
tree's trunk.
The fencing that is currently erected will have to be checked and adjusted as necessary to ensure that it is
located at least at the minimum distance as called for above.
Tree protection fencing shal) be erected o the subject property as called for at the distances from the tree
in all directions as indicated above. Tree protection fencing should also be extended onto the
neighboring properties as well at the same distances if possible with neighboring property owner's
permission.
Please call if you have any questions or concerns regarding the above information.
Sincerely,
Terrence P. Flanagan
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, #PN-0120 BMT
PNW/ISA Certified Tree Risk Assessor,#PN-0152
Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists
Enclosures—Appendix# 1 -Tree Protection Measures
Appendix # 2 - Tree Protection Plan
3145 Westview Circle•Lake Uswego,OR 97034
(503)697-1975•Faac(503)697-1976•E-mail:terry@teragan.com
ISA Boazd Certified Master Arborist,#PN-0120 BMT
Member,American Society of Consulting Arborists
� C&L Construction 8/5/2008
Larry Wright Page 2 of 4
Appendix # 1
Tree Protection Steps
It is critical that the following steps be taken to ensure that the trees that are to be retained are protected.
Before Construction Begins
1. Notify all contractors of the trees protection procedures. For successful tree protection on
a construction site, all contractors must know and understand the goals of tree protection.
It can only take one mistake with a misplaced trench or other action to destroy the future
of a tree.
a. Hold a Tree Protection meeting with all contractors to fully explain goals of tree
protection.
b. Have all sub contractors sign memoranda's of understanding regarding the goals of tree
protection. Memoranda to include penalty for violating tree protection plan. Penalty to
equal appraised value of tree(s)within the violated tree protection zone per the current
Trunk Formula Method as outline by the Council of Tree&Landscape Appraisers
current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal.
Penalty is to be paid to owner of the property.
2. Fencing
a. Establish fencing around each tree or grove of trees to be retained.
b. The fencing is to be put in place before the ground is cleared in order to protect the trees
and the soil around the trees from any disturbance at all.
c. Fencing is to be placed at the edge of the root protection zone. Root protection zones are
to be established by the project arborist based on the needs of the site and the tree to be
protected.
d. Eencing is to consist of 6-foot high steel fencing on concrete blocks or 4-foot high
orange fencing secured to the ground with 6-foot metal posts to prevent it from being
moved by contractors, sagging or falling down.
e. Fencing is to remain in the position that is established by the project arborist and not to
be moved without written perrnission from the project arborist until the end of the
project. .
3. Signage
a. All tree protection fencing should have signage as follows so that all contractors
understand the purpose of the fencing:
TREE PROTECTION ZONE
DO NOT REMOVE OR ADJUST THE APPROVED LOCATION
OF THIS TREE PROTECTION FENCING.
Please contact the project arborist or owner if alterations to the approved
location of the tree protection fencing are necessary.
Project Arborist—Teragan& Associates, Inc.
503-803-0017
� C&L Construction 8/5/2008
Larry Wright Page 3 of 4
b. Signage should be place as to be visible from all sides of a tree protection area and
spaced every 20 feet.
During Construction
l. Protection Guidelines Within the Root Protection Zone
a. No traffic shall be allowed within the root protection zone. No vehicle, heavy
equipment,or even repeated foot traffic.
b. No storage of materials including but not limiting to soil,construction material,or waste
from the site.
i. Waste includes but is not limited to concrete wash out, gasoline,diesel, paint,
cleaner,thinners, etc.
c. Construction trailers are not to be parked/placed within the root protection zone without
written clearance from project arborist.
d. No vehicles shall be allowed to park within the root protection areas.
e. No activity shall be allowed that will cause soil compaction within the root protection
zone.
2. The trees shall be protected from any cutting, skinning or breaking of branches,trunks or roots.
3. Any roots that are to be cut from existing trees that are to be retained,the project consulting
arborist shall be notified to evaluate and oversee the proper cutting of roots with sharp cutting
tools. Cut roots are to be immediately covered with soil or mulch to prevent them from drying
out.
4. No grade change should be allowed within the root protection zone.
5. Any necessary deviation of the root protection zone shall be cleared by the project consulting
arborist or project owner.
6. Provide water to trees during the summer months. Tree(s)that will have had root system(s)cut
back will need supplemental water to overcome the loss of ability to absorb necessary moisture
during the summer months.
7. Any necessary passage of utilities through the root protection zone shall be by means of
tunneling under roots by hand digging or boring.
After Construction
1. Carefully landscape in the area of the tree. Do not allow trenching within the root protection
zone. Carefully plant new plants within the root protection zone. Avoid cutting the roots of the
existing trees.
2. Do not plan for irrigation within the root protection zone of existing trees unless it is drip
irrigation for a specific planting or cleared by the project arborist.
3. Provide for adequate drainage of the location around the retained trees.
4. Pruning of the trees should be completed as one of the last steps of the landscaping process
before the final placement of trees, shrubs, ground covers, mulch or turf:
5. Provide for inspection and treatment of insect and disease populations that are capable of
damaging the retained trees and plants.
6. Trees that are retained may need to be fertilized and inoculated with mycorrhizae treatments as
called for by project arborist after final inspection.
� C&L Construction 8/5/2008
Larry Wright Page 4 of 4
Appendix #2
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
1. Any legal description provided to the consultant was assumed to be correct. The
survey provided by C&L Construction that was prepared by Mascord Collection, was
the basis of the information provided in this report. The species identification and
tree diameters were checked in the field by Teragan and Associates, Inc.
2. It is assumed that this property is not in violation of any codes, statutes, ordinances, or
other governmental regulations.
3. The consultant is not responsible for information gathered from others involved in
various activities pertaining to this project. Care has been taken to obtain information
from reliable sources.
4. Loss or alteration of any part of this delivered report invalidates the entire report.
5. Drawings and information contained in this report may not be to scale and are
intended to be used as display points of reference only.
6. The consultants' role is only to make recommendations; inaction on the part of those
receiving the report is not the responsibility of the consultant.
7. This report is to certify the trees that are on site,their condition, and outline the tree
protection steps to protect the trees to be retained on site. This report is written to
meet the requirements of the City of Tigard for tree protection on properties that are
to be developed for residential or commercial use.
` , '�"ti�'��� �' �.=�
AUG 1 120�'�
Cf�'S'G� Ti�a�tRC�
. , ,:�,;���N
Appendix # 3 - Tree Protection Plan
Fencing bcatron iwt drawn to scale
�Green fencing Indicates bcatbn on property
�� Red fencirg indicates bcaUon off property - '
�
I I
� �z trom race wtree ' �331 -23" alder
I ` Uunk �
� �
� A�� ` S B9•2J't0"E
9 I� _ _ _�_ 7�.90' _ — _ _ ,I,.
#369-16"cherry ' ��
.
� ' , ��- — - - -
� � .�
i - - - - -�' : _ , . �; ( �;
� � �
, .
8'from face oT � °�' �
tr8e Wnk ��_�.� I
�
� � MAIN FLOOR � i
wl EL.=700.0' 31
�e� o�
� olo olo ..
z� NI
I �
I I
GARAGE
I
. tL.:99S' Iq9
I � � �
� � � ' ..I
, � � i i
Y ' .-coNC. I :�= � i
� �� DRIVFWAV ��� I
.� ' �-� I3500 P.5�1 �� £�9 I �'� �
:, —_ _,.�_�___--__� �;i____�_ y
l� -----�
l9��� N 89•2)'e0•�w 05
.T �''- _-- ��- - -l9 �
7�90' \ j
� 1
��� ,
u U Y T�S6
�y�// SW CEDARCREST STREET
�O�i/25/2JOB MRR S C A l F 1 �� . 2 U � 0 '
����hs�a� CITY OF TIGARD 1150A
�,�4;�,�.�.�,�.
� � � ����°��?�'�� PARTTION PIAi NO 2J(8�030
'����a+"�s�E+Mb����� PA9CEL 2
��
«s ro�anw�rxo�mr<.�oe
euw rewwo o�iwop�na�n BY C 8 L PROPEATIES
'""'•.." �'.,'.'::�_. (7503 S0.fLJ =DR�. TODD ROBERTS
I 0/16/2007
� - �nditions Associated With 10:13:24AM
�C'C'EL" ' Case #: MLP2007-00013
Condition Status Updated
Code Title Hotd Status Changed By Tag Date By
0001 FEE FOR TREE M1�i�IGA�I�ION None NOT MET EAF: 9�1>'?007 !�1SF3
5. Prior to site work,the applicant shall submit security in the form of cash or other means acceptable to the City for the
equivalent value of tree mitigation required at$12�.00 per caliper inch. If additional mitigation trees are preserved
through the partition improvements and construction of houses,and are properly protected through these stages by the
same measures afforded to other protected trees on site,the amount of the cash assurance may be correspondingly
reduced. Any trees planted on the site or offsite in accordance with 18.790.060.D will be credited against the assurance
for t���o years following final plat approvaL After such time,the applicant shall pay the remaining value of the assurance
as a fee in-lieu of plantin�. Any planting by the applicant must be approved by the City Arborist.
0001 VISUAL CLEARANCE SITE PLAN None Met 10/16/2007 EAE l0/16/2007 EAE
6. Prior to tinal plat approval,the applicant shall revise the site plan to show a visual clearance triangle for each
proposed driveway.
OOOI NEW STREET TREE PLAN None Met 10/16/2007 EAE 10/l6/2007 EAE
7. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate new street trees on SW Cedarcrest Street
and SW 74th Avenue. The revised site plan shall indicate the species of the proposed street trees. Size and spacing of
street trees shall be as stated in Code Section 18J45.040.C.2. Proposed driveways shall be included on the site plan to
verify that tree spacing standards are met. Small-stature trees are required for SW 74th Avenue. Street trees shall be
chosen from the City's street tree list.
0001 PFI REQUIRED None NOT MET KSM 9/13/2007 MSB
8. A Public Facility Improvement(PFI)permit is required for this project to cover the public sidewalk and any other
work in the public right-of-way. Six(6)sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the
Engineering Department. NOTE:these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and
should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Faciliry Improvement(PFI)permit plans shall
conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards,which are available at City Hall and the City's web
page(www.tigard-or.gov).
0001 DESIGNATE PERMITEE ON PFI None NOT MET KSM 9/13/2007 MSB
9. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name,address and telephone number of the individual or
corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee",and who will provide the financial assurance for the public
improvements. For example,specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC,etc. Also specify the state
within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide
accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents.
0001 PF[ PHASE-ACCESS PLAN None NOT MET KSM 9/13/2007 MSB
10. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The
purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase.
0001 ACCESS PLAN-HOME BLDG PHASE None NOT MET KSM 9/14/2007 MSB
1 1. The City Engineer may determine the necessiry for,and require submittal and approval of,a construction access and
parking plan for the home building phase. If the City Engineer deems such a plan necessary,the app(icant shall provide
the plan prior to issuance of building permits.
0001 PAY ADDRESSING FEE None NOT MET KSM 9/14/2007 MSB
12. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart,
Engineering).
0001 FRONTAGE IMPROV PLAN 74TH AVE None NOT MET KSM 9/14/2007 MSB
13. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility
Improvement permit, indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 74th Avenue as
a part of this project:
A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk with 5-foot planter strip;
B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements;
C. streetlight layout by applicant's engineer,to be approved by Ciry Engineer; and
D. driveway apron(if applicable).
0001 LOT 3 ACCESS SHOWN ON PLANS None NOT MET KSM 9/14/2007 MSB
14. The applicant's plans shall show the existing access for Lot 3 to be closed and relocated to a location at least 10 feet
from the point of curvature of the radius at the intersection of Cedarcrest Street and 74th Avenue.
Page 2 Of 4 CaseConditions..rpt
1 1/19/2007
�ACCEL/� Conditions Associated With 9:04:IOAM
Case #: MLP2007-OOOl3
Condition Status Updated
Code Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By
0001 REVISED TREE PLAN None Met EAE I 1/16/2007 EAE
l. Prior to site work, the u�rr plan �hall bc re�i�ed to identifj�trees = �3G. ?37 and�3fi as u�ees to b� r�moved. An�� n�ee
protection measures concerning trees�236,237 and 238,as well as overall mitigation calculations,shall be revised
accordingly. Trees#236,237 and 238 are not subject to mitigation.
0001 REVISE SITE PLAN-NO OVERLAP TPZ None NOT MET EAE 9/13/2007 MSB
2. Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the site plan to show building footprints that do not overlap with the tree
protection fencing.
0001 PAY WTR QUAL FEES ON l, 2,&3 None NOT MET KSM 9/14/2007 MSB
27. During issuance of the building permit for Parcels 1.2 and 3,the applicant shall pay the standard water quality fees
per lot(fee amounts will be the latest approved by CWS).
0001 PAY STAND WTR QUAN FEE-1,2,3 None NOT MET KSM 9/14/2007 MSB
28. During issuance of the building permit for Parcels 1 and 2,the applicant shall pay the standard water quantiry fees
per lot(fee amounts will be the latest approved by CWS).
0001 FINAL SIGHT D[ST CERT None NOT MET KSM 9/14/2007 MSB
29. Prior to issuance of building permits,the applicant's engineer shall submit to Washington County the final
certification of adequate sight distance in accordance with Counry Code.
0001 COMPLETE RD IMPROVEMENTS/WACO A None NOT MET KSM 9/14/2007 MSB
30. Prior to issuance of building permits,the road improvements required by Washington Counry along Cedarcrest
Street shall be completed and accepted by Washington County.
0001 FINAL ARBORIST REPORTS None NOT MET EAE 9/14/2007 MSB
31. Prior to a final inspection,the Project Arborist shall submit a final certification indicating the elements of the Tree
Protection Plan were followed and that all remaining trees on the site are healthy, stable and viable in their modified
growing environment.
0001 PLANNING STAFF [NSPECTION None NOT MET EAE 9/14/2007 MSB
32. Prior to a final inspection,a member of the planning staff will visit the site to ensure that the development is in
conformance with this decision.
0001 INSTALL ALL TREE PROTECTION None Mct 11/16/2007 EAE 11/19/2007 EAE
3. Prior to any site work the applicant shall install all proposed tree protection fencing as approved by the Project
Arborist. The fencing shall be inspected and approved by the City Arborist prior to beginning any site work. The tree
protection fencing shall remain in place through the duration of all of the building construction phases, until the final
inspection has been passed. After approval from the City Arborist,the tree protection measures rnay be removed.
If the Builder is different from the developer or initial applicant:
Prior to issuance of building permits,the applicant shall submit site plan drawings indicating the location of the trees that
were preserved on the lot during site development, location of tree protection fencing,and a signature of approval from
the Project Arborist regarding the placement and construction techniques to be employed in building the structures. All
proposed protection fencing shall be installed and inspected prior to beginning construction. The fencing shall remain in
place through the duration of all of the building construction phases, until the final inspection has been passed. After
approval from the City Arborist,thc trcc protcction mcasures may bc rcmovcd.
0001 ARBORIST REPORTS EVERY 2-WKS None NOT MET EAE 9/13/2007 MSB
4. The Project Arborist shall submit written reports to the City Arborist at least once every two weeks, from initial tree
protection zone(TPZ)fencing installation through the building construction phases,as he/she monitors the construction
activities and progress. This inspection will be to evaluate the[ree protection fencing,determine ifthe fencing was
moved at any point during construction,and determine if any part of the Tree Protection Plan has been violated. These
reports must be provided to the City Arborist until the final inspection. The reports shall include any changes that
occurred to the TPZ as well as the condition and location of the tree protection fencing. If the amount of TPZ was
reduced then the Project Arborist shall justify why the fencing was moved,and shall certify that the construction
activities to the trees did not adversely impact the overall, long-term health and stability of the tree(s).
[f the reports are not submitted to the City Arborist at the scheduled intervals,and if it appears the TPZ's or the Tree
Protection Plan are not being followed by the contractor or a sub-contractor,the City can stop work on the project until
the Ciry Arborist and the Project Arborist can do an inspection.
Page 1 of 4 CaseConditions..rpt
Emily Eng
From: Dalby, John K. [John.Dalby@tvfr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:20 AM
To: Jeff Caines
Cc: Cheryl Caines; Emily Eng; bahamabob@gmail.com
Subject: RE: TVF&R Final Approval
Hi Jeff,
The layout of the parcels is approved insofar as fire apparatus access is concerned. There must be a fire hydrant within
600 feet capable of supplying the required flre flow demand.
John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshal II
Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, North Division
14480 SW Jenkins Road
Beaverton, OR 97005-1152
503-356-4723
From: Jeff Caines [mailto:jeffc@srdllc.com]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 9:22 AM
To: Dalby, John K.
Cc: Cheryl Caines; Emily Eng; bahamabob@gmail.com
Subject: NF&R Final Approval
Importance: High
Good morning John,
We are finishing up the final plat for both the North Cedar Crest and South Cedar Crest partitions. They are located west
of SW 74th & Cedar Crest. Once of the flnal conditions that need to be signed off is the NF&R approval.
I have attached a copy of the plats for your review. Can you please take a look at the layouts and let me and the City
know it meets your approval.
Hope all is well.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. We are going to mylars this week.
Jeff
Jeff Caines,AICP
Land Use Planner
SR Design LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd.Suite 232
Beaverton,OR 97008
503-469-1213-Phone
503-469-8553-Fax
�
Emily Eng
From: Jeff Caines [jeffc@srdlic.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 8:47 AM
To: Dalby, John K.
Cc: Cheryl Caines; Emily Eng; bahamabob@gmail.com; Toby Bolden; Steve Roper
Subject: RE: TVF&R Final Approval
I have confirmed with the engineers here that a fire hydrant are located within 600 feet of both developments and the
hydrant are capable of supplying the required fire low demand.
Therefore, both plats can be approved as designed for signing of the mylars.
Jeff
From: Dalby, John K. [mailto:John.Dalby@tvfr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:20 AM
To: Jeff Caines
Cc: Cheryl Caines; Emily Eng; bahamabob@gmail.com
Subject: RE; TVF&R Final Approval
Hi Jeff,
The layout of the parcels is approved insofar as fire apparatus access is concerned. There must be a fire hydrant within
600 feet capable of supplying the required fire flow demand.
John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshal II
Tualatin Valley Fire& Rescue, North Division
14480 SW Jenkins Road
Beaverton, OR 97005-1152
503-356-4723
From: Jeff Caines [mailto:jeffc@srdllc.com]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 9:22 AM
To: Dalby, John K.
Cc: Cheryl Caines; Emily Eng; bahamabob@gmail.com
Subject: TVF&R Final Approval
Importance: High
Good morning John,
We are finishing up the final plat for both the North Cedar Crest and South Cedar Crest partitions. They are located west
of SW 74th &Cedar Crest. Once of the final conditions that need to be signed off is the NF&R approval.
I have attached a copy of the plats for your review. Can you please take a look at the layouts and let me and the City
know it meets your approval.
Hope all is well.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. We are going to mylars this week.
Jeff
1
Jeff Caines, AICP
Land Use Planner
SR Design LLC
8196 SW Hall Blvd.Suite 232
Beaverton,OR 97008
503-469-1213-Phone
503-469-8553-Fax
2