Loading...
SLR1998-00001 SLR98 00001 METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE ( 1577) REHABILITATION 120 DAYS = 7/16/98 ..ICI CITY Y O OF TIGARD Community'Development Shaping A Better Community CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER a BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER Case Number(s): SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW(SLR]98-0001 Case Name(s): METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE(1571]REHABILITATION Name of Owners: Various Owners - list is available upon request. Name of Applicant: Unified Sewerage Agency/Lee Walker, Project Manager and the City of Tigard Address of Applicant: 155 N. First Street, Suite 270, MS 10 City: Hillsboro State: Oregon Zip: 97124 Address of Property: The portion of the sanitary sewer trunk line (#1577) that is located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. Tax Map & Lot No(s).: WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. Request: A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. The Hearing's Officer has APPROVED this request, subject to the conditions of approval in Section II of the Staff Report; provided, the introduction to those conditions shall read as follows: PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION,THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: [remainder unchanged]. Zones: R-4.5, R-12, C-G, C-P AND C-N. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. C-G; General Commercial. The C-G zoning district provides for the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services. C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P zoning district provides sites for groups of businesses and offices within centers. C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N zoning district provides for convenience goods and services which can be sustained by a limited trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.54, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100, 18.150 and 18.164. Action: ❑ Approval as requested © Approval with conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: CI Owners of record within the required distance ID Affected governmental agencies El The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator ID The applicant and owner(s) Final Decision: 9> DATE OF FILING: MAY 5,1998 THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MAY 15,1998 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290 (B) and Section 18.32.370, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within ten (10) days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee(s) of $1,745.00 plus transcript costs, not in excess of $500.00. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M.ON FRIDAY-MAY 15,1998. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARING'S OFFICER BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application for sensitive lands review for ) FINAL ORDER approval of landform alterations for sewer trunkline ) rehabilitation within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands area in ) SLR 98-0001 the Ash Creek corridor in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Metzger Sanitary Sewer) I. SUMMARY The applicant requests sensitive lands review approval for landform alterations and related construction work within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands areas in the Ash Creek corridor. The applicant, Unified Sewerage Agency ("USA"), proposes to replace an existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line in the same location and alignment. The project will affect eight(8) properties within the City of Tigard. The sewer line also crosses public street rights of way at SW Oak Street and SW Hall Boulevard. A duly noticed public hearing was held to review the application on April 20, 1998. City staff recommended approval. The applicant accepted the staff recommendation without objections. One area resident testified with questions about the project. The hearings officer approves the sensitive lands review as provided herein. II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE, SURROUNDINGS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES The hearings officer incorporates by reference the findings about the site and surroundings in Section III of the City of Tigard Staff Reported dated April 10, 1998 (the "Staff Report"), and the City Staff and agency comments in Sections V and VI of the Staff Report. M. APPLICABLE APPROVAL STANDARDS The hearings officer incorporates by reference the approval standards in Section IV of the Staff Report. IV. HEARINGS AND RECORD 1. Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") received testimony at the public hearing about this application on April 20, 1998. The record closed at the conclusion of the hearing. The testimony is included herein as Exhibit A (Parties of Record), Exhibit B (Taped Proceedings), and Exhibit C (Written Testimony). These exhibits are filed at the Tigard City Hall. 2. At the hearing, city planner Mark Roberts summarized the Staff Report and the applicable approval criteria. He noted that the shaded text under the"Conditions of Approval" on page 2 of the Staff Report should read "Prior to Construction, the following Conditions Shall Be Satisfied:". He noted that condition of approval 4 requires the applicant to provide a copy of the required wetlands permit from the Corps or DSL. 3. The applicant's representatives,Terry Chamberlain and Brent Davis, accepted the Staff Report without objections or corrections. The applicant plans to begin construction on July 1, 1998. 4. Area resident Hazel Lyon questioned the extent of wetlands at the northwest corner of the intersection of SW Oak Street and SW Hall Boulevard. The applicant responded that there are about 2.65 acres of wetlands. Hearings Officer Final Order SLR 98-0001 (Metzger Sanitary Sewer) Page 1 V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST City staff recommended approval of the sensitive lands review based on the findings in section IV of the Staff Report. No one disputed those findings. The hearings officer concludes the findings in section IV of the Staff Report accurately reflect the law and the facts. The hearings officer adopts and incorporates those findings as his own. VI. CONCLUSION AND DECISION 1. Based on the findings adopted and incorporated herein, the hearings officer concludes that the proposed sensitive lands review complies with the applicable criteria and standards of the Community Development Code, provided development that occurs after this decision complies with applicable local,state, and federal laws. 2. In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the Staff Report and other reports of affected public agencies and testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby approves SLR 98-0001, subject to the conditions of approval in Section II of the Staff Report;provided, the introduction to those conditions shall read as follows: PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION,THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: [remainder unchanged] DATED is 30th day of April, 1998. -.010/Ale Larry :W , • City of igard r *ngs Officer Hearings Officer Final Order SLR 98-0001 (Metzger Sanitary Sewer) Page 2 Agenda Item: 2.1 Hearing Date: April 20, 1998 7:00 PM '6-+�S!e �'i - 4 4, r '''' STAFF REPQ T ,_ f _ }: 1 HEARING'S OFFICE '' N : ,:;�,, � - 1-,. ITY OF TIOARD -_° FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREG I . ' �,, x �.k «- ter:. 120 DAYS = 7/16/98 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: FILE NAME: METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION Sensitive Lands Review SLR 98-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Sensitive Land Review approval to perform landform alterations and related construction work within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands areas in the Ash Creek Corridor in order to replace an existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line. APPLICANTS: Unified Sewerage Agency OWNERS: Various Owners Lee Walker, Project Manager (Avail. Upon Request) 155 N. First Street Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97214 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Low Density Residential; R-4.5 (1-5 dwelling units per acre) Medium Density Residential; R-12 (6-12 dwelling units per acre) General Commercial; C-G Neighborhood Commercial; C-N Commercial Professional; C-P ZONING DESIGNATIONS: R-4.5; Residential. The R-4.5 Zoning District permits standard urban, low density residential home sites and related utilities; R-12; Residential. The R-12 Zoning District permits standard medium density residential single-family attached, multiple-family residential units and related utilities; C-G; General Commercial. The C-G Zoning District permits the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services; STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USNCity of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 1 of 9 C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N Zoning District provides sites for the provision of convenience goods and services for residents within a limited trade area; and C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P Zoning District provides opportunities for employment and for business and professional services in close proximity to residential neighborhoods and major transportation facilities. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer line is located within the Ash Creek Corridor between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.164. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division .recommends that the Hearing's Officer should find that the proposed project will promote the general welfare of the City and will not be significantly detrimental nor injurious to surrounding properties provided that development which occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state and federal laws. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL subject to the following recommended conditions of approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (503) 639-4171.) 1 . Prior to construction, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the sanitary sewer work in SW Oak Street. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 2 of 9 3. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removal of any trees that are located within Sensitive Lands Areas as required by Section 18.150.030. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 4. The applicant shall provide a copy of the required permit to the City prior to construction of the replacement sewer line. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 5. Any temporary erosion control methods shall be removed upon completion of the project. Work areas on The immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to avoid potential damage to trees and vegetation. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment. During clearing operations trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees shall be undertaken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VAUDFOR EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The application did not include the speck date the current sewer line was constructed. The Metzger Area is largely developed. Within recent years, inf ill development in the area has lead to sewer system capacity constraints during periods of rainy seasons. Vicinity Information: The subject sewer line is within the Ash Creek Corridor. The eight (8) affected properties located within the City of Tigard are presently developed with a mixture of detached single-family residences and commercial uses. Within the vicinity of the City's portion of the sanitary sewer rehabilitation project, the sewer line also crosses public street right-of-ways (ROW) at SW Oak Street and SW Hall Boulevard. Site Information and Proposal Description: The sewer replacement has been proposed because of during very wet weather, the existing sewer line is presently at capacity and overflows. The project area is a narrow lineal corridor that generally parallels Ash Creek between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street in the Metzger Area. The Unified Sewerage Agency is proposing to replace the existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Underlying Zoning: The proposed sewer line replacement crosses eight (8) properties with a total of five (5) zoning designations. The affected zoning STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 3 of 9 designations are as follows R-4.5; Residential, R-12; Residential, General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (C-P), the C-N Zoning District. Within all of these zoning districts, a utility is designated as a Conditional Use Permit, however, a sanitary sewer line has not previously been defined as a utility requiring Conditional Use Permit approval. • Sensitive Lands: Section 18.84 contains regulations for lands within 100 year floodplains, wetlands and drainageways that are subject to Sensitive Lands Review. Sensitive Lands Review of proposed developments in these areas is intended to implement protection measures and to protect rivers, streams and creeks by minimizing erosion, promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, and preserving scenic quality and recreational potential. Floodplain: Section 18.84.040(A) states that the Hearings Officer shall approve or approve with conditions an application for landform alterations within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that the applicable criteria have been satisfied. The 100-year floodplain is impacted by the proposed sewer rehabilitation project as shown within the application materials. The following findings are applicable to address impacts of this proposal on the 100-year floodplain: Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. Upon completion of the project, the Unified Sewerage Agency has proposed to re-establish existing contours such that, no rise in the floodway would occur as a result of the sewer line replacement. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.42 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards. Although several of the affected properties are designated for residential use, the proposed land form alterations are not for the purpose of reclaiming current floodplain areas and replace this with other newly established floodplain areas. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood. Upon completion of this project the applicant has proposed to re-establish the current floodplain elevations through the affected properties. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearing Officer as untimely. Dedication of areas for a bicycle and pedestrian pathway does not appear appropriate because of the nature of the proposed landform alteration. Neither the Unified Sewerage Agency or the City of Tigard own the subject properties. Neither applicant has proposed to redevelop the subject property's where more intense land use activity would occur that may make dedication roughly proportional to the increased land use impact. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 4 of 9 The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. For the reason mentioned above, it does not appear appropriate to require dedication and construction of a pathway as a part of the sewer line replacement. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. Application has been made for these permits. It is recommended that a copy of the required permit be provided to the City prior to construction of the replacement sanitary sewer line. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. For the reason mentioned above, it does not appear appropriate to require dedication and construction of a pathway as a part of the sewer line replacement. Drainageway: Section 18.84.040(C) states that the appropriate authority shall approve or approve with conditions an application request for a sensitive lands permit within the drainageways. The following criteria must be satisfied: The extent and mature of the proposed land form alteration or development will not create site disturbances to the extent greater than that required for the use; The applicant has proposed to construct the replacement sewer line largely within the current alignment of the existing sewer line. For this reason, the applicant appears to be minimizing impacts to other adjoining sensitive lands areas to the extent possible. The final northerly portion of the segment to be reconstructed within the City limits would parallel SW Hall Boulevard and would minimize the need to reconstruct existing street improvements. This area was not shown to be within a wetlands area. The applicant states that the proposed work will not alter the existing land form contours and, therefore, does not meet the definition of a landform alteration and views this standard as inapplicable. The Community Development Code defines a landform alteration in part as, "any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to the following: the addition of buildings or other structures, mining quarrying, dredging, filing, grading...rect.) within an area of special flood hazard". Based on this definition, this standard applies to this proposal but is found to be met because the applicant will restore existing contour elevations. It should be noted that the purpose for reconstructing the replacement line is to minimize existing environmental impacts that presently occur during the wettest portions of the rainy season when the current facility overflows due to lack of capacity. The proposed land form alteration or development will not result in erosion, stream sedimentation, ground instability, or other adverse on-site and off-site effects of hazards to life of property; As required by the Joint Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers Permit, the applicant has proposed to conform with seasonal project timing issues and with the Unified Sewerage Agency's own Erosion Control standards. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 5 of 9 The water flow capacity of the Drainageway is not decreased; The applicant has proposed to reestablish existing water flow capacity of the drainageway to the pre-existing condition. • Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, the areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted to prevent erosion in accordance with Chapter 18.100, Landscaping and Screening; The applicant has provided a re-vegetation plan that is designed to re-establish native species. The drainageway will be replaced by a public facility of adequate size to accommodate maximum flow in accordance with the adopted 1981 Master Drainage Plan. The applicant has proposed to replace the existing sewer facility with a larger size pipe to handle increased capacity demands. The 1981 CH2M Hill Master Drainage Plan does not specify sewer facility sizing, instead this review focused on existing and needed improvements to Citywide storm drainage facilities. For this reason, this criteria is not applicable to this proposal. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. The applicant is currently in the process of obtaining the necessary permits. A Condition of Approval has been recommended requiring a copy of the permit prior to commencement of construction activity. Where landform alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. Because neither applicant owns the subject properties and the properties are not being redeveloped for more intensive land uses, requirements for dedication and construction of a pathway and bicycleway do not appear to be appropriate at this time. Wetlands: Section 18.84.040(D) states that the Director shall approve or approve with conditions an application request for sensitive lands permit within wetlands based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: The proposed landform alteration or development is neither on wetland in an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor is within 25 feet of such a wetland. The proposed landform alteration is within 25 feet of wetlands designated as significant within the City's Water Resources Overlay which designates significant wetlands within the Comprehensive Plan. However, the Water Resources Overlay provisions permit work within these areas for underground utility purposes, subject to the Sensitive Lands Review process. The extent and nature of the proposed landform alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use. The applicant has proposed to reconstruct the sewer line largely within the existing alignment. In one area along SW Hall Boulevard, the applicant has proposed to construct STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 6 of 9 the line in an alignment parallel to SW Hall Boulevard to avoid reconstruction of the street, however, this area was not shown to contain sensitive lands. For these reasons, no additional disturbance has been proposed beyond what is necessary. Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage which would adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated. Upon completion of this project the applicant has proposed to reestablish the existing 2.65 wetlands acreage that are impacted by this replacement work and to enhance an additional .68 acres of adjoining wetlands. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to landform alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.100, Landscaping and Screening. The Unified Sewerage Agency has agreed to comply with these requirements and provided a replacement planting list for areas currently delineated as wetlands. All other sensitive lands requirements of this chapter have been met. The applicable sensitive lands requirements have been addressed elsewhere within this report. The provisions of Chapter 18.150, Tree Removal, shall be met. The applicant has proposed to provide an arborist on-site periodically to work with the contractor to minimize disruption to the existing trees. The applicants narrative states that although close in several instances upon preliminary review it did not appear necessary to remove any existing trees. It is recommended that the applicant obtain a tree removal permit prior to removal of any trees that are located within Sensitive Lands Areas as required by Section 18.150.030. Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards, Floodplains and Wetlands, Natural Areas, and Parks, Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan have been satisfied. These policies are implemented by the applicable standards of the Community Development Code that are addressed elsewhere within this staff report. Water Resources Overlay: Section 18.85.070 requires the following criteria to be addressed for the proposed underground utility use because this area is designated a Water Resource Area: Alternatives Considered - This section requires the examination of upland alternatives for the proposed use, and explain why the proposed development cannot reasonably occur outside of the water resource and riparian setback area. Based on the largely developed nature of this area, relocating the sewer line within a new alignment would be difficult. Because the sewer system is largely a gravity system other alignments may not adequately serve the entire service area, therefore, other alignments do not appear feasible. Minimizing Siting Impacts - The applicant provided a site plan with sewer line alignments, profile plans and discussed the extent of the grading within the narrative report. The applicant does not believe that any existing trees will need to be removed as a result of this proposal but will closely monitor the work. The applicant also proposes to STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 7 of 9 enhance nearby wetlands areas so that the finished project should improve degraded wetlands quality. Construction Materials and Methods - Where development within the riparian area is unavoidable, construction materials or methods used within the riparian setback area shall minimize damage to water quality and native vegetation. The applicant proposes to comply with Unified Sewerage Agency construction standards and obtain all necessary agency permits which would address any required construction methods beyond those set forth in the recommended Conditions of Approval. Minimize Flood Damage - On-site flood storage shall not decrease as a result of development. The applicant has proposed to restore existing contour elevations to their previous elevations so that no net increase of fill will occur in the floodplain. Avoid Steep Slopes - The existing and proposed sewer alignment areas do not contain slopes in excess of 25%. Minimize Impacts on Existing Vegetation - To address this standard a Condition of Approval has been required so that the following construction standards are met: 1 . Any temporary erosion control methods shall be removed upon completion of the project; 2. Work areas on the immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to avoid potential damage to trees and vegetation; 3. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment; 4. During clearing operations, trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area; 5. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees shall be undertaken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place; and 6. The applicant does not believe that any existing trees will need to be removed in order to complete this project. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Engineering Department reviewed this proposal and offered the following comments: This project will cross SW Oak Street, west of SW Hall Boulevard, as a part of this project. The applicant will need to obtain a Street Opening Permit from the City for work within this street. The Building Division reviewed this proposal and offered the following comments: This project shall be constructed to Unified Sewerage Agency standards. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 8 of 9 SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Sanitary Sewer appears to be 7-10 feet below surface to the top of pipe. Normal depth of bury for district water lines is 3 feet. Therefore, conflicts with crossings are unlikely. Verify depth of water line prior to crossing with sanitary sewer. The United States Army Corps of Engineer reviewed this application and offered the following comment: A Department of the Army Permit is required and has been applied for under file number 97-1448. ,A.114 /10T-tat— April 10. 1998 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner 4 April 10, 1998 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager` I:'CUR PLMMARKR\SLR98-O 1.DEC STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 •USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunktine Rehab. Page 9 of 9 frar•1 r wrae•w aw.w + I r so i pi, -P,..11=4, Zvi • �;;' ' , _ Ill- v \ 'l am ir ' 1 i '.".• ._"pi* te; s i i/ + • Z ?AA LOT 3701 TO LOT)la! 4 h j O ,` `� 1 �r I Tu�,»o. I r ---..J X11 4 ...LOT yoo i III ) 3'7 /i :.etse`' • �,I • za'_4,e--:7,,, ':mill • ifdj a»w Rua ;!�Ate -��_. � ' � Z `` .� ♦n � ��r '—� -- SW Oak Street v 1 I I. .�—SW Oak Street ���' 7� i--� E. Z ! Z a Q I 1 '/ t I °, t Ic /I �, s... CI 4 i /.1 r i cc .-,-, ie •._4 /•I * ar.,,. igtc I 17 I .h' SW Pins Street + ,•••''........ i _ • `_ ' e i------- U ,, , 0 iis , I- •,. / i . . 1:11, I+ \,. U SW Spruce Street • SITE PLAN CASE NCO. USA/CITY OF TIGARD EXHIBIT MAP SEWER REPLACEMENT SLR 98-0001 I - I I 7/ MTH - --1 1 1 i I 111---/- Lir— ti')\---- 4--r- / LEHMANN COFtAL ST i I i -V Adi -I- I I mar - far H !_ii! i i / i milliwar( = - \L.= - CITY of TIGARD IC INFORMATION I/ VICINITY MAP SLR 98-0001 IIII Metzger Sanitary Sewer Trznk Line al I-- H "Iiiii7114. 1 1 1 Rehabilitation sioc sr Elm 1 ri i wirib:72-ml_ —____. LOCUST Anomp-w 1 Imo r . 1 r ' (8) SUBJEC (-887 or 1 il Mir l' - If! \ MAPLELEAF PARCELS Illpr Ad PA - - .,,„ wwwwiiiiiia.---2-11.1111•/ AIM III ' N I LEGEND: 06K 191111111 PF ----".".." .- 1.- mm" 14111Thi 1 0 _r. i (8)Subject Parcels Direct! Involved in Y N. . -INE_F _ the Project are Indicated ;1 41 PI E \ 11..1; I I 1 '4, I 1 with Cross-Hatch Marks SHADY LN 11111111111111111 \ I I 1 N S RUCE I —I 1111■ Al 111116 litiLL11111111 1_11 ■11111111 . 400 1_______.___ o■I 1*.504 NM BOO Fool al 111111hk 11 'wqii !1 7.11110 HU imiliS II al 11 MI Li MI R I city of Tigard rite .7 > all . 1 li 11-171 FT1174111 i ....noni...z.z...,....ody ond 13125 SW Rai Slvd TIpard,OR orn3 (503)0394171 Imm I- -- ' --r-lr-- . '' !--' I-1 nu--; 1. - ,-, — -- Pep/Amy el bawd or us Community Development. Plot date:Mar 31. 1998:anagidmagic01.apr . • - MEETING RECORDS CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER APRIL 20, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. TOWN HALL TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223 cAnyone wishing to speak on an Agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-in sheet(s). PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the meeting. Please call (503) 639-4171 , Ext. 320 (voice) or (503) 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of Tigard of your need(s) by 5:00 p.m. on the Wednesday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above if you are requesting such services. (OVER FOR HEARING AGENDA ITEM(S) CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 1 OF 2 4/20/98 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER APRIL 20,1998-7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) 98-0001 LOCATION: The sanitary sewer line is located within the Ash Creek Corridor between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Sensitive Land Review approval to perform landform alterations and related construction work within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands areas in the Ash Creek Corridor in order to replace an existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Low Density Residential, R-4.5 (1-5 dwelling units per acre); Medium Density Residential, R-12 (6-12 dwelling units per acre); General Commercial, C-G; Neighborhood Commercial, C-N; and Commercial Professional, C-P. ZONING DESIGNATIONS: R-4.5; Residential. The R-4.5 Zoning District permits standard urban, low density residential home sites and related utilities. R- 12; Residential. The R-12 Zoning District permits standard medium density residential single-family attached, multiple-family residential units and related utilities. C-G; General Commercial. The C-G Zoning District permits the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services. C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N Zoning District provides sites for the provision of convenience goods and services for residents within a limited trade area. C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P Zoning District provides opportunities for employment and for business and professional services in c:ose proximity to residential neighborhoods and major transportation facilities. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.164. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 2 OF 2 4/20/98 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA Agenda Item: 2.1 Hearing Date: April 20. 1998 7:00 PM A STAFF REPORT TO THE A HEARING'S OFFICER 11 CITY OF TIGARD FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON o Shaping 120 DAYS = 7/16/98 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: FILE NAME: METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION Sensitive Lands Review SLR 98-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Sensitive Land Review approval to perform landform alterations and related construction work within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands areas in the Ash Creek Corridor in order to replace an existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line. APPLICANTS: Unified Sewerage Agency OWNERS: Various Owners Lee Walker, Project Manager (Avail. Upon Request) 155 N. First Street Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97214 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Low Density Residential; R-4.5 (1-5 dwelling units per acre) Medium Density Residential; R-12 (6-12 dwelling units per acre) General Commercial; C-G Neighborhood Commercial; C-N Commercial Professional; C-P ZONING DESIGNATIONS: R-4.5; Residential. The R-4.5 Zoning District permits standard urban, low density residential home sites and related utilities; R-12; Residential. The R-12 Zoning District permits standard medium density residential single-family attached, multiple-family residential units and related utilities; C-G; General Commercial. The C-G Zoning District permits the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services; STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 1 of 9 C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N Zoning District provides sites for the provision of convenience goods and services for residents within a limited trade area; and C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P Zoning District provides opportunities for employment and for business and professional services in close proximity to residential neighborhoods and major transportation facilities. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer line is located within the Ash Creek Corridor between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. WCTM 1 S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1 S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.164. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division recommends that the Hearing's Officer should find that the proposed project will promote the general welfare of the City and will not be significantly detrimental nor injurious to surrounding properties provided that development which occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state and federal laws. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL subject to ' the following _recommended conditions,,of approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO=THEISSIANCE TO CONSTRUCTION,THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department(503)639-4171.) 1. Prior to construction, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the sanitary sewer work in SW Oak Street. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 2 of 9 3. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removal of any trees that are located within Sensitive Lands Areas as required by Section 18.150.030. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 4. The applicant shall provide a copy of the required permit to the City prior to construction of the replacement sewer line. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 5. Any temporary erosion control methods shall be removed upon completion of the project. Work areas on the immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to avoid potential damage to trees and vegetation. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment. During clearing operations trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees shall be undertaken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The application did not include the speck date the current sewer line was constructed. The Metzger Area is largely developed. Within recent years, inf ill development in the area has lead to sewer system capacity constraints during periods of rainy seasons. Vicinity Information: The subject sewer line is within the Ash Creek Corridor. The eight (8) affected properties located within the City of Tigard are presently developed with a mixture of detached single-family residences and commercial uses. Within the vicinity of the City's portion of the sanitary sewer rehabilitation project, the sewer line also crosses public street right-of-ways (ROW) at SW Oak Street and SW Hall Boulevard. Site Information and Proposal Description: The sewer replacement has been proposed because of during very wet weather, the existing sewer line is presently at capacity and overflows. The project area is a narrow lineal corridor that generally parallels Ash Creek between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street in the Metzger Area. The Unified Sewerage Agency is proposing to replace the existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Underlying Zoning: The proposed sewer line replacement crosses eight (8) properties with a total of five (5) zoning designations. The affected zoning STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Renab. Page 3 of 9 designations are as follows R-4.5; Residential, R-12; Residential, General Commercial (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (C-P), the C-N Zoning District. Within all of these zoning districts, a utility is designated as a Conditional Use Permit, however, a sanitary sewer line has not previously been defined as a utility requiring Conditional Use Permit approval. Sensitive Lands: Section 18.84 contains regulations for lands within 100 year floodplains, wetlands and drainageways that are subject to Sensitive Lands Review. Sensitive Lands Review of proposed developments in these areas is intended to implement protection measures and to protect rivers, streams and creeks by minimizing erosion, promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, and preserving scenic quality and recreational potential. Floodplain: Section 18.84.040(A) states that the Hearings Officer shall approve or approve with conditions an application for landform alterations within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that the applicable criteria have been satisfied. The 100-year floodplain is impacted by the proposed sewer rehabilitation project as shown within the application materials. The following findings are applicable to address impacts of this proposal on the 100-year floodplain: Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. Upon completion of the project, the Unified Sewerage Agency has proposed to re-establish existing contours such that, no rise in the floodway would occur as a result of the sewer line replacement. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.42 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards. Although several of the affected properties are designated for residential use, the proposed land form alterations are not for the purpose of reclaiming current floodplain areas and replace this with other newly established floodplain areas. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood. Upon completion of this project the applicant has proposed to re-establish the current floodplain elevations through the affected properties. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearing Officer as untimely. Dedication of areas for a bicycle and pedestrian pathway does not appear appropriate because of the nature of the proposed landform alteration. Neither the Unified Sewerage Agency or the City of Tigard own the subject properties. Neither applicant has proposed to redevelop the subject property's where more intense land use activity would occur that may make dedication roughly proportional to the increased land use impact. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 4 of 9 The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. For the reason mentioned above, it does not appear appropriate to require dedication and construction of a pathway as a part of the sewer line replacement. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. Application has been made for these permits. It is recommended that a copy of the required permit be provided to the City prior to construction of the replacement sanitary sewer line. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. For the reason mentioned above, it does not appear appropriate to require dedication and construction of a pathway as a part of the sewer line replacement. Drainageway: Section 18.84.040(C) states that the appropriate authority shall approve or approve with conditions an application request for a sensitive lands permit within the drainageways. The following criteria must be satisfied: The extent and mature of the proposed land form alteration or development will not create site disturbances to the extent greater than that required for the use; The applicant has proposed to construct the replacement sewer line largely within the current alignment of the existing sewer line. For this reason, the applicant appears to be minimizing impacts to other adjoining sensitive lands areas to the extent possible. The final northerly portion of the segment to be reconstructed within the City limits would parallel SW Hall Boulevard and would minimize the need to reconstruct existing street improvements. This area was not shown to be within a wetlands area. The applicant states that the proposed work will not alter the existing land form contours and, therefore, does not meet the definition of a landform alteration and views this standard as inapplicable. The Community Development Code defines a landform alteration in part as, "any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to the following: the addition of buildings or other structures, mining quarrying, dredging, filing, grading...(ect.) within an area of special flood hazard". Based on this definition, this standard applies to this proposal but is found to be met because the applicant will restore existing contour elevations. It should be noted that the purpose for reconstructing the replacement line is to minimize existing environmental impacts that presently occur during the wettest portions of the rainy season when the current facility overflows due to lack of capacity. The proposed land form alteration or development will not result in erosion, stream sedimentation, ground instability, or other adverse on-site and off-site effects of hazards to life of property; As required by the Joint Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers Permit, the applicant has proposed to conform with seasonal project timing issues and with the Unified Sewerage Agency's own Erosion Control standards. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 5 of 9 The water flow capacity of the Drainageway is not decreased; The applicant has proposed to reestablish existing water flow capacity of the drainageway to the pre-existing condition. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, the areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted to prevent erosion in accordance with Chapter 18.100, Landscaping and Screening; The applicant has provided a re-vegetation plan that is designed to re-establish native species. The drainageway will be replaced by a public facility of adequate size to accommodate maximum flow in accordance with the adopted 1981 Master Drainage Plan. The applicant has proposed to replace the existing sewer facility with a larger size pipe to handle increased capacity demands. The 1981 CH2M Hill Master Drainage Plan does not specify sewer facility sizing, instead this review focused on existing and needed improvements to Citywide storm drainage facilities. For this reason, this criteria is not applicable to this proposal. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. The applicant is currently in the process of obtaining the necessary permits. A Condition of Approval has been recommended requiring a copy of the permit prior to commencement of construction activity. Where landform alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. Because neither applicant owns the subject properties and the properties are not being redeveloped for more intensive land uses, requirements for dedication and construction of a pathway and bicycleway do not appear to be appropriate at this time. Wetlands: Section 18.84.040(D) states that the Director shall approve or approve with conditions an application request for sensitive lands permit within wetlands based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: The proposed landform alteration or development is neither on wetland in an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor is within 25 feet of such a wetland. The proposed landform alteration is within 25 feet of wetlands designated as significant within the City's Water Resources Overlay which designates significant wetlands within the Comprehensive Plan. However, the Water Resources Overlay provisions permit work within these areas for underground utility purposes, subject to the Sensitive Lands Review process. The extent and nature of the proposed landform alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use. The applicant has proposed to reconstruct the sewer line largely within the existing alignment. In one area along SW Hall Boulevard, the applicant has proposed to construct STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 6 of 9 the line in an alignment parallel to SW Hall Boulevard to avoid reconstruction of the street, however, this area was not shown to contain sensitive lands. For these reasons, no additional disturbance has been proposed beyond what is necessary. Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage which would adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated. Upon completion of this project the applicant has proposed to reestablish the existing 2.65 wetlands acreage that are impacted by this replacement work and to enhance an additional .68 acres of adjoining wetlands. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to Iandform alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.100, Landscaping and Screening. The Unified Sewerage Agency has agreed to comply with these requirements and provided a replacement planting list for areas currently delineated as wetlands. All other sensitive lands requirements of this chapter have been met. The applicable sensitive lands requirements have been addressed elsewhere within this report. The provisions of Chapter 18.150, Tree Removal, shall be met. The applicant has proposed to provide an arborist on-site periodically to work with the contractor to minimize disruption to the existing trees. The applicants narrative states that although close in several instances upon preliminary review it did not appear necessary to remove any existing trees. It is recommended that the applicant obtain a tree removal permit prior to removal of any trees that are located within Sensitive Lands Areas as required by Section 18.150.030. Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards, Floodplains and Wetlands, Natural Areas, and Parks, Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan have been satisfied. These policies are implemented by the applicable standards of the Community Development Code that are addressed elsewhere within this staff report. Water Resources Overlay: Section 18.85.070 requires the following criteria to be addressed for the proposed underground utility use because this area is designated a Water Resource Area: Alternatives Considered - This section requires the examination of upland alternatives for the proposed use, and explain why the proposed development cannot reasonably occur outside of the water resource and riparian setback area. Based on the largely developed nature of this area, relocating the sewer line within a new alignment would be difficult. Because the sewer system is largely a gravity system other alignments may not adequately serve the entire service area, therefore, other alignments do not appear feasible. Minimizing Siting Impacts - The applicant provided a site plan with sewer line alignments, profile plans and discussed the extent of the grading within the narrative report. The applicant does not believe that any existing trees will need to be removed as a result of this proposal but will closely monitor the work. The applicant also proposes to STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 7 of 9 enhance nearby wetlands areas so that the finished project should improve degraded wetlands quality. Construction Materials and Methods - Where development within the riparian area is unavoidable, construction materials or methods used within the riparian setback area shall minimize damage to water quality and native vegetation. The applicant proposes to comply with Unified Sewerage Agency construction standards and obtain all necessary agency permits which would address any required construction methods beyond those set forth in the recommended Conditions of Approval. Minimize Flood Damage - On-site flood storage shall not decrease as a result of development. The applicant has proposed to restore existing contour elevations to their previous elevations so that no net increase of fill will occur in the floodplain. Avoid Steep Slopes - The existing and proposed sewer alignment areas do not contain slopes in excess of 25%. Minimize Impacts on Existing Vegetation - To address this standard a Condition of Approval has been required so that the following construction standards are met: 1 . Any temporary erosion control methods shall be removed upon completion of the project; 2. Work areas on the immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to avoid potential damage to trees and vegetation; 3. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment; 4. During clearing operations, trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area; 5. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees shall be undertaken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place; and 6. The applicant does not believe that any existing trees will need to be removed in order to complete this project. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Engineering Department reviewed this proposal and offered the following comments: This project will cross SW Oak Street, west of SW Hall Boulevard, as a part of this project. The applicant will need to obtain a Street Opening Permit from the City for work within this street. The Building Division reviewed this proposal and offered the following comments: This project shall be constructed to Unified Sewerage Agency standards. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 8 of 9 SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Sanitary Sewer appears to be 7-10 feet below surface to the top of pipe. Normal depth of bury for district water lines is 3 feet. Therefore, conflicts with crossings are unlikely. Verify depth of water line prior to crossing with sanitary sewer. The United States Army Corps of Engineer reviewed this application and offered the following comment: A Department of the Army Permit is required and has been applied for under file number 97-1448. 0c April 10, 1998 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner > , 1 ') fet-j April 10. 1998 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff / DATE Planning Manager/ I:\CURPLMMARKR\SLP98-0 t.DEC STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 9 of 9 MI M 1007 v If r � +7 .r I I I z f I / IL . 1 MIA r A . 411. 11- TJi �� ? `I f \ I J . • +` �.� .4;* • rU LOT 7`07 rU LO7 3705 1. y•• .�, o •ai LOT 7500 1 ! I I'.1 i �,'��..:�!l�sS..- •- .,, > T..1113 nnm f a � �a. ,a;ill' ' fJ�1 0 4 i ®_ y`�,�� 7 ----,l ' 2-61— S W Oak Street ' SW Oak Street --� !ice, .i 1 `f i Z Z i ; Q t v 1 ) ,k t ,+s 11 I" i' : J CL 7 .'y `-!•e ms Kits elf ••.- J. +i Q 1r4 - `sW Pine Street il • - - -,---./- - * - • 79 0 7 i . * �j a + . • for V "`CS-►y j ---- / I. 4 6, , ,, i ; - , • = s ,-e 11 , .., a , , SW Spruce Street SITE PLAN CASE NCB. USA/CITY OF TIGARD EXHIBIT MAP SEWER REPLACEMENT SLR 98-0001 ja iijp$i1ii1 1 I IC IYIOAYAiIOY{i{i[Y 7 N I ST VICINITY MAP I — 1 I H 4_,I � SLR 98-00 1 0 CORAL ST ir �_ lill 111 Ai ® _� Metzger Sanitary 1 / -_ Sewer Trunk Line i Rehabilitation alisfre, sr 1 EAF_ r j al• LOCUST J Inir . ,N _ r 1 (6:1717(8) SUBJEC II (�}�, ` MAPLELEAF 111.1X4 PARCELS L11Jvi ■ �i 1 , •■ � �II \ 1' I ii LEGEND: _ . \ ■"P 111/ , or \ __ (8)Subject Parcels . a ■ )hrectl Involved in ��\\\� \ the Project are Indicated -o 'NEST P di \\`�N 1 tvE with Cross-Hatch Marks rf:------_____SHADY LN ■' _. I I A. 4, ___.... $e' �Sr l _ N II -_ IR IE 1 I 0 100 SOO Foot illhk 'NI IOU rill ill, I 1'•501 fool •• IINA E City ofTigard C1 on e. is fa�.., 4t1,1_ should a vrN{d 0401 Me Dov{lapmrr Sorokin Division �a 13125 SW HM BIyd _=_ -- ---1 1 --- �1 1(511 ._ FT �'' ifi--1/___, 50�639:;7 n i- - , - l - - „, of boardQus Community Development Plot date:Mar 31, 1998;c:Imagiclmaglc01.epr r r" Q Ttvi G�avP ctp..9 1,04-a 60t-s:if-ect 114,CI P telfrtcy" c241 YatJ2f / 10 1/.0 aG e_ a kJ s r z.,e Q,4 cr 2�l Sa )1-4 5 '"`rk 1/ w G. 7ilif *(4)- vol Nt-(14- --Iffek-- -6_ 100,+104 i Ilu�;d-so raresq(s foe . '�1�����i ;1)� C ides 1Q9u ) I1165 w tt o�� w� �O-Q- w diva Wo Bt frece . �'— of rvaro‘pd �c k,v.04- I/1.�la..� iel s rti_x-141. . 1. e, I a I co v o u s ed +a •e vt Act a ,,,al . 6 QS 0 0- 1 w ei-441A-tair 4444--- GG✓1141'.4°K.s w ovc k a voQS . •Wt 42- s j cas4 /so I•uo o i S`�0`+�t ' l P�-' Qct� 111 G6e a .■21e,V,RWeif iffevi a6311-et. footzfaal-; e-cowl t ue off �o Gotilk1-1 105 COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. 1egal P.O.BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice TT 9 0 8 3 BEAVERTON,OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd - Tigard,Oregon 97223 • 0 Duplicate Affidavit The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer on Accounts Payable • Monday,April 20,1998,at 7 P.M.,at Tigard Civic Center-Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,Oregon.Both public,oral and written testimony is invited.The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the rules of Chapter 18.32 of the Tigard Municipal Code,and rules and procedures of the Hearings Officer.Failure to raise an AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION issue in person or by letter accompanied by statements or evidence suffi- cient to allow the hearings authority and all parties to respond precludes .TATE OF OREGON, )ss an appeal, and failure to specify the criterion from the Community .OUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. Further information Kathy Snyder may be obtained from the Plannin Division at 13125 SW Hall .eing first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Boulevard,Tigard,Oregon 97223,or )irector, or his principal clerk, of the Ti garr3-Titer 1 at i n T,ir PUBLIC HEARING: g Y ailing(503)639-4171. newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 :nd 193.020; published at Ti ga rri in the SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR]98-0001 aforesaid county and state; that the >METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE#1577 REHABILITATION< S3,R 98-0001 -11atzsTe r S a n i t o ry A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an : printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line.LOCATION: ntire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and The portion of sanitary sewer trunk line#1577 that is located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW :onsecutive in the following issues: Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. There are eight(8)directly af- fected parcels that include: 1S135AA,Tax Lots 01901,02000, 02500, Apr i 1 9. 1 9 9 8 , 02600 and 03600;and WCTM IS I 35AD,Tax Lots 00900,01200 and i 01300, ZONES:R-4.5,R-12,C-G,C-P AND C-N. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre.The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low • r density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12;Multiple-Family ft ` ��� Residential, 12 Units Per Acre.The purpose of the R-12 zoning district ■ is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential development and related utilities.C- Subscribed and sworn before me this 9th day of Apr 1 1 . G; General Commercial. The C-G zoning district provides for the ' provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services.C-P; Com- mercial Professional.The C-P zoning district provides sites for groups of No,Q Pu•lic for Oregon businesses and offices within centers. C-N;Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N zoning district provides for convenience goods and services My Commission Expires: which can be sustained by a limited trade area.APPLICABLE REVIEW • CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, AFFIDAVIT 1834, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 1$.84, 18.85, 18.100, 18.150 and 18.164. ----- — �—, ,, , r-- t.-,� �� Li-i.. rII m �ntur I i �r,=!— W..4._ t � ■■ ' ' r,- I,ce i,, -J L.. I I+l+m ,`T'r �' '� �' 1ta)sue �/'' I , , � ; .: , - i 1 PAiCELS \-- ,. ,j r-� t!,, L. j_, , /./�I, ,..rte , I / r„ I 1 r-... r.r•a ; 4, L \\ 1 r ' ,,_LL.1 ~ ,I , F/--;` ,_.,� �,. +�— rzr( _" I ;I � 1 t 1✓-1 _ 1 i.�� s_•- 1 '7.,XJ.. ... . 7L.. - , air rf sw w�.. - . TT9083-Publish April 9, 1998. - CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER APRIL 20, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. TOWN HALL TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223 anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-in sheet(s). PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the meeting. Please call (503) 639-4171 , Ext. 320 (voice) or (503) 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of Tigard of your need(s) by 5:00 p.m. on the Wednesday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above if you are requesting such services. (OVER FOR HEARING AGENDA ITEM(S) CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 1 OF 2 4/20/98 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ehl r CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER APRIL 20,1998-7:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) 98-0001 LOCATION: The sanitary sewer line is located within the Ash Creek Corridor between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Sensitive Land Review approval to perform landform alterations and related construction work within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands areas in the Ash Creek Corridor in order to replace an existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Low Density Residential, R-4.5 (1-5 dwelling units per acre); Medium Density Residential, R-12 (6-12 dwelling units per acre); General Commercial, C-G; Neighborhood Commercial, C-N; and Commercial Professional, C-P. ZONING DESIGNATIONS: R-4.5; Residential. The R-4.5 Zoning District permits standard urban, low density residential home sites and related utilities. R- 12; Residential. The R-12 Zoning District permits standard medium density residential single-family attached, multiple-family residential units and related utilities. C-G; General Commercial. The C-G Zoning District permits the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services. C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N Zoning District provides sites for the provision of convenience goods and services for residents within a limited trade area. C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P Zoning District provides opportunities for employment and for business and professional services in close proximity to residential neighborhoods and major transportation facilities. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.164. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 2 OF 2 4/20/98 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA `T.1 .'" .r �I ... i_ Uzi "" " �,. ; I � ' .. ...` `e., 'y a .. al' ,...10.:,,,,ir , ..,- it ti"VIIW c s . . ' , AI . . • . � .., -^±AK A . !?. w, ., a ' .ate.. t $ gl� Z • „�".-:.-a;—– lift vim, . , '�' " . ,-.1, ., .. .. . . ,:,. : .... 421C.”'!", . ...I isfritie41-yf, 4i yy Ilk ; ; .4,it 44,0,I 8g . is . .i:.,.. . iiiialitii- !pi .:,:,....m , -...*,t, ''' ' . !, 4 I. - 1 ..-!lilt:1r- 0 ..,.., .;.; .k..... ir... . ik gyp" - _' A .1.,...,,:,.''..fi,'''.7:',-',. '.,., i , ‘,..,,.,..., ',.it;.--..:"4 7i'.',,,,,,.,.!,,:.:1 ,tit„...,,,A;14.H,...,,,,,.: .'N-....1 -..441._„, :.• t..its 1.,, no,. , sit.sir flvi .R.�' • . . *"" I jilleme •I ''::.'.. , ' ' 1 "" ' ' I Community Development CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping i4 Better Community REVISED PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE AMENDED TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION* NOTICE IS -IEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL 20,1998 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW [SLR) 98-0001 TILE TITLE: METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE REHABILITATION City of Tigard Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) of Washington Co. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Lee Walker, Project Manager Tigard, OR 97223 155 N. First Street, Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97124 .)WNERS: Various Owners - list is available upon request. REQUEST A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The portion of the sanitary sewer trunk line (#1577) that is located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. There are eight (8) directly affected parcels that include: WCTM 1 S 135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1 S 135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITEs,IA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.54, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100, 18.150 and 18.164. 'ONES: R-4.5, R-12, C-G, C-P AND C-N. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. C-G; General Commercial. The C-G zoning district provides for the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services. C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P zoning district provides sites for groups of businesses and offices within centers. C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N zoning district provides for convenience goods and services which can be sustained by a limited trade area. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. "AMENDED"NOTICE OF 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES Fr THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEr " PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER APRIL 2, 1998, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25=) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER MARK ROBERTS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. .111 IIIII711111 Id rfili..111:1" , . -.....----- -...- ....... VICNITY MA1' / I-I ill.3 _�.! � SLR 98-0001 c _ 1 ,12 111 ---4 — Metzger,+ahoy • 1m _1 / -�-! Sever Trunk lice _ ! Retubilituioa Fi -----1 , 1J --------:::-, :: �% �U I (8)SUBJE '� mli� k -- =g:F1 __ PARCELS — '- � LI -_�_ -.fie .r 1 ■il vitt Cross-Hata Marts illaj ' 7— ‘ " ,, vi. ___,..,,\ 1 1 . ..g e10: to;;;ai hrtete / / \. \\ SIT S 1 e Wy I>OA,�u \\\\\ ►roles ue h6ated a E itifEl al L.-7,_-_,-.71.______________ ,..._ r/1)-- 7-_- J I ‘-'- 7T:H __ E i I i__i f - - ,.SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. "AMENDED"NOTICE OF 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL 20,1998AT7:OOPM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW [SLR] 98-0001 FILE TITLE: METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE REHABILITATION City of Tigard Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) of Washington Co. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Lee Walker, Project Manager Tigard, OR 97223 155 N. First Street, Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97124 OWNERS: Various Owners - list is available upon request. REQUEST A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The portion of the sanitary sewer trunk line (#1577) that is located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. There are eight (8) directly affected parcels that include: WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901 . 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.54, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100, 18.150 and 18.164. ZONES: R-4.5 AND R-12. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residental developments and related utilities. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE '_T!)REHAB. NOTICE OF 4/20/98 HEARINGS OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT Wn'TTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOS') ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEAP 3. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRES rED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER MARCH 31, 1998, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25t) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (251 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER MARK ROBERTS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. / I I I II �-1'M- , r1-; f— -- : 1 Wiri] I HU :_tr_ ' ' id 1 - , /1/ I _I Fr -.-- r- . i, )Lltj ---. / LT717- - /--,.] _ _ , ______ I EH t (8) SUBJECI J PARCELS , ' . - \\ II - - --; • �� �. ►� \\\\ _ _ - ,,, I lir-q "WI IJAI .-} - - __f_ riN 1 , _ -_-_3.-if .,.. -, ,...,,_1_ „,- ____ _. , 1 f �� --- ; 1 N. - - r.-.� . F7, SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. NOTICE OF 420/18 HEARING'S OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST OR COMMENTS CI O A 41---) Community Development j jl � Q Shaping A Bett r Community IIii RECEED NDATE: March 23,1998 t MAR 2 4 1yy8 APR 2 0 1998 TO: Julia Huffman,USA/SWM Program By- CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner Phone:(503)639-4171 Fax:(503)684-7297 RE: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR] 98-0001 ➢ METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer trunk line located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. ZONE: R-4.5 and R-12. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.150. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (THURSDAY-APRIL 2, 1998). You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: a (Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: t } 01�,^ Phone Numberts): g — aes� SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNKLINE(1577)REHAB. PROPOSAUREQUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: April 6, 1998 TO: Mark Roberts, Planning Division FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer `l RE: SLR 98-0001, Metzger Sanitary Sewer Trunkline Rehab Description: This project is proposed by Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) and will replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line with a 30-inch line. The limits of the project are within the Ash Creek Corridor between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. Findings: 1. Streets: This project will cross SW Oak Street, west of SW Hall Boulevard, as a part of this project. The applicant will need to obtain a Street Opening Permit from the City for the work within this street. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION: Note: Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact for the following conditions will be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (639-4171). 1. Prior to construction, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the sanitary sewer work in SW Oak Street. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SLR 98-0001 Metzger Sanitary Sewer PAGE 1 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. i:\eng\brianr\comments\s1r98-01.bdr ENGINEERING COMMENTS SLR 98-0001 Metzger Sanitary Sewer PAGE 2 REC� ; 2 5199 �I I EQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIOARD Community Development Shaping A.Better Community DATE: March 23,1998 TO: Tualatin Valley Water District -ATTN: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner Phone:(503)639-4111 Fax:150316841291 RE: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR] 98-0001 METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION Q A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer trunk line located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. ZONE: R-4.5 and R-12. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.150. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: [THURSDAY-APRIL 2, 19981 You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written corn ents provided below:._ . �.r=1ti - z� '--P ci ip '75c.1- F 4 (.il - -! ` - " .1/g > to it. - 'E'Z l7 • .' _ -V - /rat J'�"t/ r (Please provide the foffowing information)Name of Person(sl Commenting: vthed--ri Phone Number(sl: � SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNKLINE(1577)REHAB. PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS cot 11wrim +, 4 so i I l) sN:ai s. I i 1 i4c----------1', : 111 II . w \ I i I •i ir s �: * , Ails _ a _`" s Z TAX LOT 3707 TAX LOT 3103 j. p I h i 3 m I +l 17 I f -cei ,a+ I ! Cl)/ i ,� !r — TAX LOT 7704 i `( r; /=J 1'' I 01.--I'll 5.1��5•..LOT 3000 I I I I ) t/ ,r'y~'- -:4'--014. 1 r a; 71 3703 7.1701 ♦i ,i ♦ ' . ._� ' � ! • ❑ $r b� •ss-a-✓ �. w..w r. $ ,AITAS --11 : — SW Oak Street 1 I1 SW Oak Street • —__� i��r /.:1JI\/� Z• I 41 I Q Alebi....- O. efr / '4f/,4 I n i {� . Sr �^�_ SW Pine Street • r , 1 el `' e ....-if . ?F./ d/ 1� ;, ; / 0 Imm it I 4,- 'P /�- r �- !wm oe i SW Spruce Street 1 SITE PLAN CASE Nom. USA/CITY OF TIGARD E1IIIBIT MAP SEWER REPLACEMENT SLR 98-0001 ,i r r I -- CITY of TIGARD I OO OOAAI NIC INFORMATION•P!T!Y / CORAL 1 1 1 1 j ST' 7 / I 2 _ VICINITY MAP i , I - ii 'V �3 LOCUST ST 4 SLR 98-0001 r-� It FFF��� o Metzger:________ `r > M MAPLELEAF ST > ' m— Sanitary Sewer Q MILIEU \ Trunkline (1577) ,, ,,,t" LtRCELS �) on r \ 1 Rehabilitation Wil NM _ J LEGEND: . � � � (5) Subject t Parcels � 41 PINE ST — involved in Project .__r -- are Indicated with Cross-Hatch Marks- 1- \ i ■ SHADY LN , SPRUCE ^aT' • r [ I 1 'Y 400 800 Fe( I 1 518 feet . TH RN ST t— J1' •m 4;.. c 7-j: i City of Tigard II ., ._ tnbl,N.eoll en e+•map he for ware location ol+r� a= Q�'! , 11116i76:. be willed l Development s.t .. 13125 SW Hal Blvd 111 MII7 EMI. .?7,,, lipid.OR 9/223 r- - 1 I I , - MIR 11 Plot date:Mar 19,1998;c:lmagic magic01.apr Community Development -p-•lit; REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development (2 e Shaping A Better Community RECEIVED PLANNIN DATE: March 23,1998 APR 02 TO: John Roy,Property Manager 1 1998 CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner Phone:1503)639-4111 Fax:(5031684-1291 RE: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW ISLRI 98-0001 ➢ METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION < A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer trunk line located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. ZONE: R-4.5 and R-12. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.150. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (THURSDAY-APRIL 2, 19981. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: frAl AniO -m (Please provide the following information)Name of Personfsl Commenting: I Phone Number(s): I SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNKLINE(1577)REHAB. PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS • Akk RE UEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TII Q GARD Community'Development RECEIVED PLANNING RECEIVED shaping 9t Better Community DATE: March 23,1998 MAR 31 1998 MAR 2 4 1998 TO: US Army Corps.of Engineers C1ZY OF TIGARD REGULATORY BRANCH FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner Phone:[5031539-4171 Fax:[5031684-7291 RE: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR] 98-0001 ➢ METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION Q A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer trunk line located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. ZONE: R-4.5 and R-12. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.150. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: [THURSDAY-APRIL 2, 19981. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: �I 4 (Please provide the following information)Name of Persont&ontme Phone Number[sl: SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNKLINE(1577)REHAB. PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS .t i1 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY O I CITY OF TIOARD Community'Development l-A14Nt�SFrapingA Better Community DATE: March 23,1998 J 0 1998 MAR TO: David Scott,Building Official 3 GIB O�TIGAR0 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner Phone:15031639-4171 Fax:150316841297 RE: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLRI 98-0001 METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer trunk line located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. ZONE: R-4.5 and R-12. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.150. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (THURSDAY-APRIL 2, 1998). You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: Q/( . litJA ft9 v ►, l(Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: Phone Number(s): 3 6 r� I SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNKLINE(1577)REHAB. PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MAILING RECORDS AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CRY Of TIGARD Commwtity cDevt(opment shapingA Bettor community STATE OAF OREGON ) 1\\- County of of Washington )ss. ,� City Tigard ) CYC \ I, (Patricia L. Lunsford being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (O+.a*AoPacCa.BOX(S)8 owF ❑ NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: 126/.-R 9g—vi '4-,C. - ,‘,�1- I //- .20—98' AMENDED NOTICE (File p)p./N�� (Date d Public Deng) ���!llddd��� 7 ?1Z/('#/577 '0 4'-!J ;01/ City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: -� ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Fe No/Name Reference) (Date d Public deg)) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF: FOR: ; (TypeiKno of Nonce) (Fie No/Name Reference) (Date d Public Hearing.if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICES] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked ExhIhIt"B , •n the ,- , day of arfttc,C 1998, and deposited in the United States Mail on the .._ i day of , 24J.2 1998,postage prepaid. ( - . /� �% __.1.4 .e-e,>OA- (Person that-Prepared Noti��� / 1, Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the /(0 day of 1 ./..t. , 19?F lir ♦'w OFFICIAL SEAL ���.�`�� ��' DIANE M JELDERKS ��:�� COMMISSION INO.046 O2 H ARY PUBLIC OF OREG N MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07, 1999 �� . My Commission Expires: EXHIBIT A CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community REVISED PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE * AMENDED TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION* NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL 20,1998 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLRI 98-0001 FILE TITLE: METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE REHABILITATION City of Tigard Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) of Washington Co. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Lee Walker, Project Manager Tigard, OR 97223 155 N. First Street, Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97124 OWNERS: Various Owners - list is available upon request. REQUEST : A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The portion of the sanitary sewer trunk line (#1577) that is located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. There are eight (8) directly affected parcels that include: WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901 , 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.54, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100, 18.150 and 18.164. ZONES: R-4.5, R-12, C-G, C-P AND C-N. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. C-G; General Commercial. The C-G zoning district provides for the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services. C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P zoning district provides sites for groups of businesses and offices within centers. C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N zoning district provides for convenience goods and services which can be sustained by a limited trade area. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. "AMENDED"NOTICE OF 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOr' THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEV PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER APRIL 2, 1998,ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25 ) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (251 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER MARK ROBERTS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. �j f _fI ------. -....- , / _ j - l 1 �,1. l I-L-1 _ i I I. r -.. •.Li i .....VIWNITY MAP ,t. lit'I I i �T I � StR 98-oo0t l j „` Metzger Sanitary TrA ,,,,,'•'� =�IIII- Sever Trunk Line 1 11 Retubititition ■ . ....„ O : - � 1 , f( (8)SUB EC � o l T_ �_ � (PARCELS — I .�Q�t I�ate, •!IA!! ■fJT \ — ;i •• LECEND._ -- - � ., \� � �'�� (i)Subject Parc els , .s.. ■ ! Directly Involved is Ir_imp \. Minn II 1„ tk Project are Indicted ^ , \\�I `1I "I wilt Cross-!latch Marks - 1--------- -— 1 ,\1411 =r L1-- — t - 11 : '� __ ._... SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. "AMENDED"NOTICE OF 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING ,xxr 1s13'5AA-00302 1S135AA-00305 JOHANSSON MARTIN&JOAN SILLS DONALD N ET AL 8290 SW LANDAU 10115 SW HALL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-00500 1S135AA-00590 EIDENSCHINK IRMA EIDENSCHINK IRMA 8740 SW LOCUST DRIVE 8740 SW L RIVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 ND,OR 97223 1S135AA-01400 1S135AA-01500 BESLEY PROPERTIES INC VALLASTER GARRY 9900 SW GREENBERG RD 711 SW ALDER PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97205 1S135AA-01800 1S135AA-01900 CHAVEZ HELEN W BOOTH JOICE GOSSETT 8407 SW LOCUST 10250 SW 87TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-01901 1S135AA-02000 ASCHENBRENNER STEVEN L STAATS SANDRA LYNN 5425 SW LOMBARD PO BOX 20007 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 KEIZER,OR 97307 1S135AA-02100 1S135AA-02400 NORTHLAND HOMES INC CAIN JAMES L&DARLENE L 1834 SW 58TH#202 14300 SW PACIFIC HWY PORTLAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-02500 1S135AA-02600 LYON DONALD J HAZEL J PETERSON THEODORE S AND 10440 SW 87TH AVE 8686 SW OAK PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-02700 1S135AA-02800 HARRIS ENTERPRISES INC WALL GEORGE&PAMELA J 2300 SW FIRST AVE 14237 SW TEWKESBURY DR PORTLAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97224 1S135AA-02801 1S135AA-03201 EMMERT TERRY W DAVIS MICHAEL A AND 11811 SE HWY 212 8535 SW PINE CLACKAMAS,OR 97015 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-03300 1S135AA-03400 WHEELHOUSE DAVID M DORTLAND SHERRY A 7929 SW 40TH AVE#N 10580 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-90006 1S135AA-90007 TAYLOR J EDWARD AND CONNET CARLEE SUE 10311 SW 87TH 10313 SW 87TH PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AC-04200 1S135AC-04300 ORLAND LTD ORLAND LTD 5410 SW MACADAM AVE#100 5410 SW AVE#100 PORTLAND,OR 97201 TLAND,OR 97201 1S135AC-04400 1S135AD-00300 ORLAND LTD WALKER DOUGLAS B AND 5410 SW DAM AVE #100 6880 SW 68TH AVE ND,OR 97201 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AD-00301 1S135AD-00400 TENLY PROPERTIES CORP HOGREFE OWEN&MARILYN 549 NW QUEENS CT E 13045 SW HEATHER CT HILLSBORO,OR 97124 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 1S135AD-00900 1S135AD-00901 JUVE ALICE SARAH BENNETT PATRICE D 10655 SW HALL BLVD 10675 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AD-01100 1S135AD-01101 MOON BRETT A&SHERRIE A EPLER CLIFFORD F&KAYE V 8807 SW SPRUCE 8845 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AD-01102 1S135AD-01103 BARNES MARK S DAVIS EUGENE L 8815 SW SPRUCE ST 10875 SW 89TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AD-01200 1S135AD-01300 CROUCH THELMA C ESTATE CROUCH THELMA C EST 10875 SW 89TH AVE 10875 SW 8• - • • TIGARD,OR 97223 -•,OR 97223 15135AD-01301 1S135AD-01302 OREGON STAT OF DEPT OF VETS C-1 DAVIS EUGENE L PO BOX 6446 10875 S AVE PORTLAND,OR 97228 D,OR 97223 1S135AD-01303 1 S135AD-01400 ORLAND LTD DAVIS EUGENE L&VIVIAN M 5410 SW DAM AVE#100 10875 SW 89TH AVE P LAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03500 1S135AA-03600 HILL RONALD A WRIGHT JOHN RICHARD/TRACY ILENE 10550 SW HALL BLVD 10575 SW HALL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03700 1S135AA-03701 DEMOULIN STEVE& CHRISTENSEN JACK L AND NANCY S 10455 SW 87TH AVE 8805 SW OAK ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03702 13135AA-03703 CULLINAN RANDY J AND BRANDT WALDO G&PEARL E 8775 SW OAK STREET 8835 SW OAK ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-03704 1S135 A-03705 DE MOULIN STEVE& ROMEO MERCEDES G AND 10455 SW 87TH AVE 10385 SW 87TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03707 15135AA-03800 HITCH DORIS LASHAWAY JULIE A PO BOX 35 8875 SW OAK BEAVER T ON.OR 97075 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03901 1S135AA-04000 CHEPIN JOHN DOROTHY J SMITH ROGER W 8911 SW OAK ST 8935 SW OAK ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-04300 1S135AA-04400 KINDRICK ALFRED R WOLFF TERRY LEE&LISA KAY 10565 SW 85TH AVE 10545 SW 85TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-90000 1S135AA-90001 DEODAR CONDO MS PETTY JOHN A OWNERS NITS 10301 SW 87TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-90002 1S135AA-90003 HAWLEY HAZEL M SHERWOOD SYDNEY L& 9055 SW 91ST AVE#7 10305 SW 87TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-90004 1S135AA-90005 CONSER JEAN H AND LAIRD SHAWN W&LOUISE M 10307 SW 87TH#4 10309 SW 87TH AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORT'I_1ND,OR 97223 1 S 135AD-01500 15135AD-01801 DAVIS EUGENE L : • •N M KINSLEY TOD A&JENNY J M 10875 SW :! AVE 8840 SW SPRUCE ST TI 'I,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 13135AD-01900 1S135AD-02001 ARNSBERG PAUL B MILLER LEE W JR&DORIS E 7726 SW HUNT CLUB PL 8808 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND,OR 97219 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AD-03400 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY DAVIS GENE L LEE WALKER 10875 S H AVE 150 N. FIRST STREET, SUITE 270, MS 10 D,OR 97223 HILLSBORO, OR 97124 Bbl"?+. . AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CiTYOFTIOARD • Communtty,Deveropmcnt ST,AlL. OF O oar U R l GI�v A{ ShapmgA(Better Communuy County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard I, 4Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative,Speciah t II for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check rovannfe Bads)Edon) ❑ NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: E] AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (pm of Pubic Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council D NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: C'i d g A. ' —! ( . L"^ /- ,.i I /Ao/9, ❑ AMENDED NOTICE 7:4'-'44 /14 J (File - ) (polodPtiblic ean%) ❑ ' City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council O NONCE OF. FOR: 2t i (Type/Kind of Nonce) (File No Name Reference) (Date of R.tec rbanng,t apo'cao+e) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE[S) of which is attached, marked Exbielt "A", waailed to each , d person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B",.on the ) day of /��el 1998, and deposited in the United States Mail on the '�",- day of / 1998,postage prepaid. i _ ,A#I;, — e!'-- ,... ....4=fr,./e7- _ (Person that Prepared •• ice) ( i Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the /r,'d y of � ' , 19 /�' .f''�. OFFICIAL SEAL l' DIANE M JELDERKS ±.. NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON t COMMISSION NO.046'142 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07, 1999 NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREG My Commission Expires: /7/A/ • CxHI B 120 DAYS = 1/16/98 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER a BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER Case Number(s): SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR)98-0001 Case Name(s): METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LIME[1571)REHABILITATION Name of Owners: Various Owners - list is available upon request. Name of Applicant: Unified Sewerage Agency/Lee Walker, Project Manager and the City of Tigard Address of Applicant: 155 N. First Street, Suite 270, MS 10 City: Hillsboro State: Oregon Zip: 97124 Address of Property: The portion of the sanitary sewer trunk line (#1577) that is located in the city limits of 1 Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. Tax Map & Lot No(s).: WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600: and WCTM 1 S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. 1 Request:—> A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. The Hearing's Officer has APPROVED this request, subject to the conditions of approval in Section II of the Staff Report; provided, the introduction to those conditions shall read as follows: PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: [remainder unchanged]. Imes: R-4.5, R-12, C-G, C-P AND C-N. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. C-G; General Commercial. The C-G zoning district provides for the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services. C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P zoning district provides sites for groups of businesses and offices within centers. C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N zoning district provides for convenience goods and services which can be sustained by a limited trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.54, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100, 18.150 and 18.164. Action: —> ❑ Approval as requested El Approval with conditions ❑ Denial NotiCO: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: El Owners of record within the required distance 111 Affected governmental agencies Cl The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator El The applicant and owner(s) Final Decision: rt, DATE OF FILING: MAY 5,1998 THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MAY 15,1998 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290 (B) and Section 18.32.370, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within ten (10) days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee(s) of $1,745.00 plus transcript costs, not in excess of $500.00. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M.ON FRIDAY-MAY 15,1998. OuestlNDS: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARING'S OFFICER BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER • FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application for sensitive lands review for ) FINAL ORDER approval of landform alterations for sewer trunkline ) rehabilitation within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands area in ) SLR 98-0001 the Ash Creek corridor in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Metzger Sanitary Sewer) I. SUMMARY The applicant requests sensitive lands review approval for landform alterations and related construction work within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands areas in the Ash Creek corridor. The applicant, Unified Sewerage Agency ("USA"), proposes to replace an existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line in the same location and alignment. The project will affect eight(8) properties within the City of Tigard. The sewer line also crosses public street rights of way at SW Oak Street and SW Hall Boulevard. A duly noticed public hearing was held to review the application on April 20, 1998. City staff recommended approvaL The applicant accepted the staff recommendation without objections. One area resident testified with questions about the project. The hearings officer approves the sensitive lands review as provided herein. II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE, SURROUNDINGS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES The hearings officer incorporates by reference the findings about the site and surroundings in Section III of the City of Tigard Staff Reported dated April 10, 1998 (the "Staff Report"), and the City Staff and agency comments in Sections V and VI of the Staff Report. III. APPLICABLE APPROVAL STANDARDS The hearings officer incorporates by reference the approval standards in Section IV of the Staff Report. IV. HEARINGS AND RECORD 1. Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") received testimony at the public hearing about this application on April 20, 1998. The record closed at the conclusion of the hearing. The testimony is included herein as Exhibit A (Parties of Record), Exhibit B (Taped Proceedings), and Exhibit C (Written Testimony). These exhibits are filed at the Tigard City Hall. 2. At the hearing, city planner Mark Roberts summarized the Staff Report and the applicable approval criteria. He noted that the shaded text under the "Conditions of Approval" on page 2 of the Staff Report should read "Prior to Construction, the following Conditions Shall Be Satisfied:". He noted that condition of approval 4 requires the applicant to provide a copy of the required wetlands permit from the Corps or DSL. 3. The applicant's representatives,Terry Chamberlain and Brent Davis, accepted the Staff Report without objections or corrections. The applicant plans to begin construction on July 1, 1998. 4. Area resident Hazel Lyon questioned the extent of wetlands at the northwest corner of the intersection of SW Oak Street and SW Hall Boulevard. The applicant responded that there are about 2.65 acres of wetlands. Hearings Officer Final Order SLR 98-0001 (Metzger Sanitary Sewer) Page 1 V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST City staff recommended approval of the sensitive lands review based on the findings in section IV of the Staff Report. No one disputed those findings. The hearings officer concludes the findings in section IV of the Staff Report accurately reflect the law and the facts. The hearings officer adopts and incorporates those findings as his own. VI. CONCLUSION AND DECISION 1. Based on the findings adopted and incorporated herein, the hearings officer concludes that the proposed sensitive lands review complies with the applicable criteria and standards of the Community Development Code, provided development that occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state, and federal laws. 2. In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the Staff Report and other reports of affected public agencies and testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby approves SLR 98-0001, subject to the conditions of approval in Section II of the Staff Report; provided, the introduction to those conditions shall read as follows: PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (remainder unchanged] DATED is 30th day of April, 1998. / APT�C�� Larry :. , •1 • City of igard •: 'rigs Officer Hearings Officer Final Order SLR 98-0001 (Merger Sanitary Sewer) Page 2 Agenda Item: 2.1 Hearing Date: April 20, 1998 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CITY OF TIGARD Community Development FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 7/16/98 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: FILE NAME: METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION Sensitive Lands Review SLR 98-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Sensitive Land Review approval to perform Iandform alterations and related construction work within a Sensitive Lands/Wetlands areas in the Ash Creek Corridor in order to replace an existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line. APPLICANTS: Unified Sewerage Agency OWNERS: Various Owners Lee Walker, Project Manager (Avail. Upon Request) 155 N. First Street Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97214 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Low Density Residential; R-4.5 (1-5 dwelling units per acre) Medium Density Residential; R-12 (6-12 dwelling units per acre) General Commercial; C-G Neighborhood Commercial; C-N Commercial Professional; C-P ZONING DESIGNATIONS: R-4.5; Residential. The R-4.5 Zoning District permits standard urban, low density residential home sites and related utilities; R-12; Residential. The R-12 Zoning District permits standard medium density residential single-family attached, multiple-family residential units and related utilities; C-G; General Commercial. The C-G Zoning District permits the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services; STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 1 of 9 C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N Zoning District provides sites for the provision of convenience goods and services for residents within a limited trade area; and C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P Zoning District provides opportunities for employment and for business and professional services in close proximity to residential neighborhoods and major transportation facilities. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer line is located within the Ash Creek Corridor between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.164. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division recommends that the Hearing's Officer should find that the proposed project will promote the general welfare of the City and will not be significantly detrimental nor injurious to surrounding properties provided that development which occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state and federal laws. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL subject to the following recommended conditions of approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (503)639-4171.) 1. Prior to construction, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the sanitary sewer work in SW Oak Street. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 2 of 9 3. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removal of any trees that are located within Sensitive Lands Areas as required by Section 18.150.030. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 4. The applicant shall provide a copy of the required permit to the City prior to construction of the replacement sewer line. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 5. Any temporary erosion control methods shall be removed upon completion of the project. Work areas on the immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to avoid potential damage to trees and vegetation. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment. During clearing operations trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees shall be undertaken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. -THIS/APPROVAL SHALLBEVALID-FORfEIGHTEEN (18)MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE:OF THIS DECISION, SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The application did not include the speck date the current sewer line was constructed. The Metzger Area is largely developed. Within recent years, infill development in the area has lead to sewer system capacity constraints during periods of rainy seasons. Vicinity Information: The subject sewer line is within the Ash Creek Corridor. The eight (8) affected properties located within the City of Tigard are presently developed with a mixture of detached single-family residences and commercial uses. Within the vicinity of the City's portion of the sanitary sewer rehabilitation project, the sewer line also crosses public street right-of-ways (ROW) at SW Oak Street and SW Hall Boulevard. Site Information and Proposal Description: The sewer replacement has been proposed because of during very wet weather, the existing sewer line is presently at capacity and overflows. The project area is a narrow lineal corridor that generally parallels Ash Creek between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street in the Metzger Area. The Unified Sewerage Agency is proposing to replace the existing 24-inch sewer line with a 30-inch sewer line. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Underlying Zoning: The proposed sewer line replacement crosses eight (8) properties with a total of five (5) zoning designations. The affected zoning STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 3 of 9 designations are as follows R-4.5; Residential, R-12; Residential, General Commercial • (C-G), Neighborhood Commercial (C-P), the C-N Zoning District. Within all of these zoning districts, a utility is designated as a Conditional Use Permit, however, a sanitary sewer line has not previously been defined as a utility requiring Conditional Use Permit approval. Sensitive Lands: Section 18.84 contains regulations for lands within 100 year floodplains, wetlands and drainageways that are subject to Sensitive Lands Review. Sensitive Lands Review of proposed developments in these areas is intended to implement protection measures and to protect rivers, streams and creeks by minimizing erosion, promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, and preserving scenic quality and recreational potential.' _ Floodplain: Section 18.84.040(A) states that the Hearings Officer shall approve or approve with conditions an application for landform alterations within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that the applicable criteria have been satisfied. The 100-year floodplain is impacted by the proposed sewer rehabilitation project as shown within the application materials. The following findings are applicable to address impacts of this proposal on the 100-year floodplain: Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. Upon completion of the project, the Unified Sewerage Agency has proposed to re-establish existing contours such that, no rise in the floodway would occur as a result of the sewer line replacement. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.42 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards. Although several of the affected properties are designated for residential use, the proposed land form alterations are not for the purpose of reclaiming current floodplain areas and replace this with other newly established floodplain areas. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood. Upon completion of this project the applicant has proposed to re-establish the current floodplain elevations through the affected properties. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearing Officer as untimely. Dedication of areas for a bicycle and pedestrian pathway does not appear appropriate because of the nature of the proposed landform alteration. Neither the Unified Sewerage Agency or the City of Tigard own the subject properties. Neither applicant has proposed to redevelop the subject property's where more intense land use activity would occur that may make dedication roughly proportional to the increased land use impact. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 4 of 9 The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. For the reason mentioned above, it does not appear appropriate to require dedication and construction of a pathway as a part of the sewer line replacement. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. Application has been made for these permits. It is recommended that a copy of the required permit be provided to the City prior to construction of the replacement sanitary sewer line. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. For the reason mentioned above, it does not appear appropriate to require dedication and construction of a pathway as a part of the sewer line replacement. Drainaqeway: Section 18.84.040(C) states that the appropriate authority shall approve or approve with conditions an application request for a sensitive lands permit within the drainageways. The following criteria must be satisfied: The extent and mature of the proposed land form alteration or development will not create site disturbances to the extent greater than that required for the use; The applicant has proposed to construct the replacement sewer line largely within the current alignment of the existing sewer line. For this reason, the applicant appears to be minimizing impacts to other adjoining sensitive lands areas to the extent possible. The final northerly portion of the segment to be reconstructed within the City limits would parallel SW Hall Boulevard and would minimize the need to reconstruct existing street improvements. This area was not shown to be within a wetlands area. The applicant states that the proposed work will not alter the existing land form contours and, therefore, does not meet the definition of a landform alteration and views this standard as inapplicable. The Community Development Code defines a landform alteration in part as, "any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to the following: the addition of buildings or other structures, mining quarrying, dredging, filing, grading...(ect.) within an area of special flood hazard". Based on this definition, this standard applies to this proposal but is found to be met because the applicant will restore existing contour elevations. It should be noted that the purpose for reconstructing the replacement line is to minimize existing environmental impacts that presently occur during the wettest portions of the rainy season when the current facility overflows due to lack of capacity. The proposed land form alteration or development will not result in erosion, stream sedimentation, ground instability, or other adverse on-site and off-site effects of hazards to life of property; As required by the Joint Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers Permit, the applicant has proposed to conform with seasonal project timing issues and with the Unified Sewerage Agency's own Erosion Control standards. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 5 of 9 The water flow capacity of the Drainageway is not decreased; The applicant has proposed to reestablish existing water flow capacity of the drainageway to the pre-existing condition. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, the areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted to prevent erosion in accordance with Chapter 18.100, Landscaping and Screening; The applicant has provided a re-vegetation plan that is designed to re-establish native species. The drainageway will be replaced by a public facility of adequate size to accommodate maximum flow in accordance with the adopted 1981 Master Drainage Plan. The applicant has proposed to replace the existing sewer facility with a larger size pipe to handle increased capacity demands. The 1981 CH2M Hill Master Drainage Plan does not specify sewer facility sizing, instead this review focused on existing and needed improvements to Citywide storm drainage facilities. For this reason, this criteria is not applicable to this proposal. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. The applicant is currently in the process of obtaining the necessary permits. A Condition of Approval has been recommended requiring a copy of the permit prior to commencement of construction activity. Where landform alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. Because neither applicant owns the subject properties and the properties are not being redeveloped for more intensive land uses, requirements for dedication and construction of a pathway and bicycleway do not appear to be appropriate at this time. Wetlands: Section 18.84.040(D) states that the Director shall approve or approve with conditions an application request for sensitive lands permit within wetlands based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: The proposed landform alteration or development is neither on wetland in an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor is within 25 feet of such a wetland. The proposed landform alteration is within 25 feet of wetlands designated as significant within the City's Water Resources Overlay which designates significant wetlands within the Comprehensive Plan. However, the Water Resources Overlay provisions permit work within these areas for underground utility purposes, subject to the Sensitive Lands Review process. The extent and nature of the proposed landform alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use. The applicant has proposed to reconstruct the sewer line largely within the existing alignment. In one area along SW Hall Boulevard, the applicant has proposed to construct STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 6 of 9 ' the line in an alignment parallel to SW Hall Boulevard to avoid reconstruction of the street, however, this area was not shown to contain sensitive lands. For these reasons, no . additional disturbance has been proposed beyond what is necessary. Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage which would adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated. Upon completion of this project the applicant has proposed to reestablish the existing 2.65 wetlands acreage that are impacted by this replacement work and to enhance an additional .68 acres of adjoining wetlands. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to landform alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.100, Landscaping and Screening. The Unified Sewerage Agency has agreed to comply with these requirements and provided a replacement planting list for areas currently delineated as wetlands. All other sensitive lands requirements of this chapter have been met. The applicable sensitive lands requirements have been addressed elsewhere within this report. The provisions of Chapter 18.150, Tree Removal, shall be met. The applicant has proposed to provide an arborist on-site periodically to work with the contractor to minimize disruption to the existing trees. The applicants narrative states that although close in several instances upon preliminary review it did not appear necessary to remove any existing trees. It is recommended that the applicant obtain a tree removal permit prior to removal of any trees that are located within Sensitive Lands Areas as required by Section 18.150.030. Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards, Floodplains and Wetlands, Natural Areas, and Parks, Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan have been satisfied. These policies are implemented by the applicable standards of the Community Development Code that are addressed elsewhere within this staff report. Water Resources Overlay: Section 18.85.070 requires the following criteria to be addressed for the proposed underground utility use because this area is designated a Water Resource Area: Alternatives Considered - This section requires the examination of upland alternatives for the proposed use, and explain why the proposed development cannot reasonably occur outside of the water resource and riparian setback area. Based on the largely developed nature of this area, relocating the sewer line within a new alignment would be difficult. Because the sewer system is largely a gravity system other alignments may not adequately serve the entire service area, therefore, other alignments do not appear feasible. Minimizing Siting Impacts - The applicant provided a site plan with sewer line alignments, profile plans and discussed the extent of the grading within the narrative report. The applicant does not believe that any existing trees will need to be removed as a result of this proposal but will closely monitor the work. The applicant also proposes to STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 7 of 9 enhance nearby wetlands areas so that the finished project should improve degraded wetlands quality. Construction Materials and Methods - Where development within the riparian area is unavoidable, construction materials or methods used within the riparian setback area shall minimize damage to water quality and native vegetation. The applicant proposes to comply with Unified Sewerage Agency construction standards and obtain all necessary agency permits which would address any required construction methods beyond those set forth in the recommended Conditions of Approval. Minimize Flood Damage - On-site flood storage shall not decrease as a result of development. The applicant has proposed to restore existing contour elevations to their previous elevations so that no net increase of fill will occur in the floodplain. Avoid Steep Slopes - The existing and proposed sewer alignment areas do not contain slopes in excess of 25%. Minimize Impacts on Existing Vegetation - To address this standard a Condition of Approval has been required so that the following construction standards are met: 1 . Any temporary erosion control methods shall be removed upon completion of the project; 2. Work areas on the immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to avoid potential damage to trees and vegetation; 3. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment; 4. During clearing operations, trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area; 5. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees shall be undertaken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place; and 6. The applicant does not believe that any existing trees will need to be removed in order to complete this project. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Engineering Department reviewed this proposal and offered the following comments: This project will cross SW Oak Street, west of SW Hall Boulevard, as a part of this project. The applicant will need to obtain a Street Opening Permit from the City for work within this street. The Building Division reviewed this proposal and offered the following comments: This project shall be constructed to Unified Sewerage Agency standards. STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Rehab. Page 8 of 9 SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Sanitary Sewer appears to be 7-10 feet below surface to the top of pipe. Normal depth of bury for district water lines is 3 feet. Therefore, conflicts with crossings are unlikely. Verify depth of water line prior to crossing with sanitary sewer. The United States Army Corps of Engineer reviewed this application and offered the following comment: A Department of the Army Permit is required and has been applied for under file number 97-1448. 77/4,,A April 10, 1998 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner (-71 April 10, 1998 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager/ r I:\C U RP LN\MARKR\SLR98-01.DEC STAFF REPORT FOR 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER SLR 98-0001 -USA/City of Tigard Sewer Trunkline Renab. Page 9 of 9 anw:w: • ! �� f r � t \\ . t ,• 41- I '._ P...414,117.(0- Fir . ' ,;: le, �. " 4 1f *0 4 • 6 a r , f . 1 4 • `i TAO LOT 3707 TAX LOT 7705 4 I I O a ar! Yt �� T..LO7 7704 r ;=/r 4'I - io/ 'AT LOT 7000 I I I I +�.X-7""�—at ii'" . .1 ; 4 ,It 7701 TL"a 4,�1�• •. -. / )�\. O w� dt ,_ — SW oak Street 0 v.,:..4-10.SW Oak Street -- �� Z I a 4 ° i mewl k i (*4. . �_ a, CC V ,,,,/ .�. �' , Q c f ®� ¢ i ,i• . 1......jsW � stet a _ r 0 o/. ate V 1...-• r , I 0 j ..- ii ."`" „--;"i I' ii-j J. . . ,, ....4114:1-77:(6'''s *4. •• adI 1 , t a4. 1 SW Spruce Street SITE PLAN CASE NCB. USA/CITY OF TIGARD EXHIBIT MAP SEWER REPLACEMENT SLR 98-0001 —— - �_F - � ]____'- re rxroa rrox viciNirt MAP e LEHMANN ST 0/ / I - o -_- ir -. 98 0001 z I 4—■___I--- CORAL ' [ ST I I 1 Metzger Sanitary ® Sewer Trunk Line q Rehabilitation OCUST ST / W ITT r III ...1.1MI ' LOCUST IIII m P ELEAFST � � aII 1 r .I (8) SUBJEC -��__ ri i PLELEAF PARCELS ri,,x,�� ,II LEGEND:__ \ = � �\ \\ I � Odic.li� \ . (8) Subject Parcels ��` • \ Directly Involved in \` • I I I the Project are Indicated • PINE ST I.1 •Piri -I � _PI ME with Cross-Hatch Marks Elm � I 1 SHADY LN ' —. ■* I I A, I '' EST -_ r SRRUCE A .6 I iiii° IA& ;11....11 I 1 0 TWO B00 Feel L—_JJ I 'w1411 ailal 41. Nom Mil 1111. ,•=504 feet lra-d , r ,,I City of Tigard Monnellon on Ois map Is for general locatlan oriy and sass - �_ ♦ >•.- ■ •• ' should be varMed with this Development Services DMSbn. 1= MI-. III —_ ' 13125 SW HM Blvd Tigard OR 97223 lI _I'■_ _1111 r.--- ----- -- ---- - --- --- --1-.r1_f_._.11. 1111 _ ------- - . ____---_ 11_11_ .- nlro/nxw�x.a eyare.ar.u: Community Development Plot date:Mar 31, 1999;c:lmagiclmagic01.apr EXHIBIT NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARING'S OFFICER h:\patty\docs\s1r98-01.Ibs SLR 98-0001 5-May-98 METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE REHABILITATION (Page 1 of 1) 1S135AA-03600 BRENT DAVIS JOHN R AND TRACY I WRIGHT KURAHASHI &ASSOCIATES, INC. 10575 SW HALL BOULEVARD 12600 SW 72ND AVENUE, SUITE 100 TIGARD OR 97223 TIGARD OR 97223 1 S135AA-01901 TERRY CHAMBERLAIN c/o BRENT DAVIS STEVEN L ASCHENBRENNER KURAHASHI &ASSOCIATES, INC. 5425 SW LOMBARD 12600 SW 72ND AVENUE, SUITE 100 BEAVERTON OR 97005 TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA-02000 LEE WALKER, PROJECT MANAGER SANDRA LYNN STAATS UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WA. COUNTY PO BOX 20007 155 N. FIRST STREET, SUITE 270, MS 10 KEIZER OR 97307 HILLSBORO OR 97124 1 S135AD-01200 THELMA CROUCH ESTATE c/o EUGENE L DAVIS 10875 SW 89TH AVENUE TIGARD OR 97223 1 S135AD-01300 THELMA CROUCH ESTATE c/o EUGENE L DAVIS 10875 SW 89TH AVENUE TIGARD OR 97223 1 S135AD-00900 ALICE S JUVE 10655 SW HALL BOULEVARD PORTLAND OR 97223 1 S 135AA-02500 DONALD J AND HAZEL J LYON 10440 SW 87TH AVENUE PORTLAND OR 97223 1 S135AA-02600 THEODORE S PETERSON AND VIRGINIA J DEAN 8686 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CRY •441k OPtIGARD Community(Development ShapingA Better Community srlL OREGON- ) At— 0‘1\G\ County of Washington )ss. City o 'Tigard ) I, (Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: )Q,PP,Mr„r.�_)B) ❑ NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No Name Refererce) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director kui NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: iii SLk -6 / /i �r S. I j/-- C"—Qt- AMENDED NOTICE ale No Rd�reikey /%C !F 5 7 11 JCll ,u/ ( aai,alcr+ ,$) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: i-7 ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Fie No Name Reference) Date of P bhc Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF, FOR: I (Type/Kind of Ncbce) (File No Name Reference) Date of Ponc neann g..t a DPcaok) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICES] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each Alerned person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"8", on the sr day of 1Crrp lL 1998, and deposited in the United States Mail on the a - r day of 4,,e,/,, 1998,postage prepaid. 1 A d W� , (Person That P , eared Noti Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 1�� day of �L_ , 19L /77 oOFFICIAL N COMMISSION INO.0461042 �i`^�\ .MV COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07,1999 NOTARY PUBLIC OF ORE ON • My Commission Expires: ?./7/9 f EXHIBIT A CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL 20,1998 AT 1:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLRI 98-0001 FILE TITLE: METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE REHABILITATION City of Tigard Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) of Washington Co. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Lee Walker, Project Manager Tigard, OR 97223 155 N. First Street, Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97124 OWNERS: Various Owners - list is available upon request. REQUEST A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The portion of the sanitary sewer trunk line (#1577) that is located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. There are eight (8) directly affected parcels that include: WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.54, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100, 18.150 and 18.164. ZONES: R-4.5 AND R-12. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. NOTICE OF 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT W" TTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSr) ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEA .. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRE: —ED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF rsEPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER MARCH 31, 1998, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE—NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY—FIVE CENTS (250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY—FIVE CENTS (25c ) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER MARK ROBERTS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. I It1i lilt f1ii1i .. :. is imr 1 INV MI - " ' 111//e - - I� [ - _ -_H ,. . ::1: :�` :iui rc : cj$ (r ��Ilr Iii I IiIIi L _ ■_ 4r 11� \N r ' ` L- _—,—I 7- I 41-; � ������7 \\ E-- .111• If il klAbbh I.--. [I 12 MI TA FM flair—lij/ t ■ . , E- . i �. , rte_ . . �� SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. NOTICE OF 4/20/98 HEARINGS OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING �r E91.HIBIT B 1s135AA-00302 1S135AA-00305 JOHANSSON MARTIN&JOAN SILLS DONALD N ET AL 8290 SW LANDAU 10115 SW HALL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-00500 1S135AA-00590 EIDENSCHINK IRMA EIDENSCHINK IRMA 8740 SW LOCUST DRIVE 8740 SW L RIVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 AND,OR 97223 1S135AA-01400 1S135AA-01500 BESLEY PROPERTIES INC VALLASTER GARRY 9900 SW GREENBERG RD 711 SW ALDER PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97205 1S135AA-01800 1S135AA-01900 CHAVEZ HELEN W BOOTH JOICE GOSSETT 8407 SW LOCUST 10250 SW 87TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-01901 1S135AA-02000 ASCHENBRENNER STEVEN L STAATS SANDRA LYNN 5425 SW LOMBARD PO BOX 20007 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 KEIZER,OR 97307 1S135AA-02100 1S135AA-02400 NORTHLAND HOMES INC CAIN JAMES L&DARLENE L 1834 SW 58TH#202 14300 SW PACIFIC HWY PORTLAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-02500 1S135AA-02600 LYON DONALD J HAZEL J PETERSON THEODORE S AND 10440 SW 87TH AVE 8686 SW OAK PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-02700 1S135AA-02800 HARRIS ENTERPRISES INC WALL GEORGE&PAMELA J 2300 SW FIRST AVE 14237 SW TEWKESBURY DR PORTLAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97224 1S135AA-02801 15135AA-03201 EMMERT TERRY W DAVIS MICHAEL A AND 11811 SE HWY 212 8535 SW PINE CLACKAMAS,OR 97015 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-03300 1S135AA-03400 WHEELHOUSE DAVID M DORTLAND SHERRY A 7929 SW 40TH AVE#N 10580 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 1S135AA-03500 1S135AA-03600 HILL RONALD A WRIGHT JOHN RICHARD/TRACY ILENE 10550 SW HALL BLVD 10575 SW HALL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03700 1S135AA-03701 DEMOULIN STEVE& CHRISTENSEN JACK L AND NANCY S 10455 SW 87TH AVE 8805 SW OAK ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03702 1S135AA-03703 CULLINAN RANDY J AND BRANDT WALDO G&PEARL E 8775 SW OAK STREET 8835 SW OAK ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-03704 1S135AA-03705 DE MOULIN STEVE& ROMERO MERCEDES G AND 10455 SW 87TH AVE 10385 SW 87TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03707 1S135AA-03800 HITCH DORIS LASHAWAY JULIE A PO BOX 35 8875 SW OAK BEAVERTON,OR 97075 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-03901 1S135AA-04000 CHEPIN JOHN DOROTHY J SMITH ROGER W 8911 SW OAK ST 8935 SW OAK ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-04300 1S135AA-04400 KINDRICK ALFRED R WOLFF TERRY LEE&LISA KAY 10565 SW 85TH AVE 10545 SW 85TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-90000 1S135AA-90001 DEODAR CONDO MS PETTY JOHN A OWNERS NITS 10301 SW 87TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-90002 1S135AA-90003 HAWLEY HAZEL M SHERWOOD SYDNEY L& 9055 SW 91ST AVE#7 10305 SW 87TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AA-90004 1S135AA-90005 CONSER JEAN H AND LAIRD SHAWN W&LOUISE M 10307 SW 87TH#4 10309 SW 87TH AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AA-90006 1S135AA-90007 TAYLOR J EDWARD AND CONNET CARLEE SUE 10311 SW 87TH 10313 SW 87TH PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AC-04200 1S135AC-04300 ORLAND LTD ORLAND LTD 5410 SW MACADAM AVE#100 5410 SW AVE#100 PORTLAND,OR 97201 TLAND,OR 97201 1S135AC-04400 1S135AD-00300 ORLAND LTD WALKER DOUGLAS B AND 5410 SW DAM AVE#100 6880 SW 68TH AVE P AND,OR 97201 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AD-00301 1S135AD-00400 TENLY PROPERTIES CORP HOGREFE OWEN&MARILYN 549 NW QUEENS CT E 13045 SW HEATHER CT HILLSBORO,OR 97124 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 1S135AD-00900 1S135AD-00901 JUVE ALICE SARAH BENNETT PATRICE D 10655 SW HALL BLVD 10675 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AD-01100 1S135AD-01101 MOON BRETT A&SHERRIE A EPLER CLIFFORD F&KAYE V 8807 SW SPRUCE 8845 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AD-01102 1S135AD-01103 BARNES MARK S DAVIS EUGENE L 8815 SW SPRUCE ST 10875 SW 89TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AD-01200 1S135AD-01300 CROUCH THELMA C ESTATE CROUCH THELMA C EST 10875 SW 89TH AVE 10875 SW 8 TIGARD,OR 97223 ,OR 97223 1S135AD-01301 1S135AD-01302 OREGON STAT OF DEPT OF VETS C-1 DAVIS EUGENE PO BOX 6446 10875 S AVE PORTLAND,OR 97228 D,OR 97223 1S135AD-01303 1S135AD-01400 ORLAND LTD may DAVIS EUGENE L&VIVIAN M 5410 SW�b DAM AVE#100 10875 SW 89TH AVE P LAND,OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135AD-01500 1S135AD-01801 DAVIS EUGENE L 8 N M KINSLEY TOD A&JENNY J M 10875 SW AVE 8840 SW SPRUCE ST TI D,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 15135AD-01900 1S135AD-02001 ARNSBERG PAUL B MILLER LEE W JR&DORIS E 7726 SW HUNT CLUB PL 8808 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND,OR 97219 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AD-03400 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY DAVIS GENE L LEE WALKER 10875 5 H AVE 150 N. FIRST STREET, SUITE 270, MS 10 D,OR 97223 HILLSBORO, OR 97124 ,..,OIL ID - IS,S O�' CDS, SAD 4 #4e4. I r-I - 4P 94. I :, S4. t E, t . .I::10 "1 I:-.-.L. •P—Via,...t..,_,-," rivit , :: ..1: ., 3 .,,,0 ,.., 41 0 Id I O •r t 1A' ' 1 l b Z ■ 1 10.1 i e TAX LOT 3707 TAX LOT 3707 4 [_ I,� xfr•3 r3 O [14', _ �!, rAx LOT no. y l III 'I� r 1 '�.l �� r�TAx Lor Seoo I S • I:. 4 ! � n 370.7 n 370, 4 �° =., IVI . CD d •OI- '� — SW Oak Street 0 �r 141401111111 I --- - --- . / : H . SW Oak Street ----` i#40/ / Z r Z I 444 +0 4 — 49 I J it, -I li ie it —u �,) ®_ S • Ci L 4' a. • '� J L.L. d dad ,�`� d+� 0 ----------- ---/- 1 R. t Sod o,– SW Pi7u Street i , 0 I . ye)i ♦ � _, , I lo k sv, r'd i ,.. 0 S '�s—� -'V✓ � i to S4 ,,t. ,r / '" �• ....' i 1 ° Cfl9+e ----4 t s. SW Spruce Street , CASE NCO. SITE PLAN '; USA/CITY OF TIGARD El(HIB1T MAP SEWER REPLACEMENT SLR 98-0001 TCITY of TIGARD 7�2�� GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM LEHMANN V1C1N1TY MAP I ST o� SLR 98-0001 ll / a - CORAL / I I ST I Metzger Sanitary i I I I /(., E Sewer Trunk Line II Rehabilitation LOCUST ST W di ��17 W LOCUST \ •r '� ir J ill /MAPLELEAFST w ` (8) ary / 1 iik. - opir lo�n `+ I MAPLELEAF PARCELS -MAIM L. — 1____ _ Ii . LEGEND: --7. Alt E � '. T 0�41C II1Ijj� � (8) Subject Parcels \ I Directly Involved in 1 the Project are Indicated-__\ • PINE ST I I ��\\`� I I , 9IVE with Cross—Hatch Marks A, SHADY LN ■' -. UU 'C EST ■ L SRRUCE ) ■�- I 0 400 800 Feet MI LI.N11 ill. Ull .____. V r. ;■■R _J � 1'=504 feet r City of Tigard 1 > VE Q Information on this map is for general location only and - r ' should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd ?71 I Tigard,OR 97223 � I II I (503)639-4171 1_1__J L___ —,--1 f-- (`1 I--� , http://www.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Mar 31,1998;c:\magic\magic0l.apr • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS c.CITY TIIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: March 23,1998 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner Phone:(5031639.4171 Fax:(50316841291 RE: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR] 98-0001 METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNKLINE REHABILITATION < A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer trunk line located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. ZONE: R-4.5 and R-12. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100 and 18.150. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (THURSDAY - APRIL 2, 19981. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: V (Please provide the fodowing information)Name of Persons]Commenting: I Phone Numberfsl: I SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNKLINE(1577)REHAB. PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE&COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CIT Area: (Cl (El IS) MI CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS i i Place for review In Ubrary CR Bookls) FILE NO[SJ.: ;� ��o�O FILE NAME[S]: US -Tvr�ti�C L%if _, teed Pi CITY OFFICES k- / &ISe Se, p) is au� 14gvva /a,Qs t eac ✓ aPra-fM,-1 7e,ic/ G✓)4 V /',C Ci,1. ADVANCED PLANNING/Nadine Smith, P4nn,ngsuP.na.w COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./cm,Svcs Tecnn.an. _POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,c„n,.P..VM„eno„K« _'-BUILDING DIV.'David Scott,BwimngoHkia∎ I--ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,Xlornnt.Review Engin.« _WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,o,««w,,.■.n..,., _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,co R..... "-OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,P,o,MyMan.q.r _OTHER SPECIAL DISTRICTS —TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.*_TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE * frl'UALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT * '-UNIFIED SWRGE.AGENCY * Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Julia HuffmaniSWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N.First Street Beaverton,OR 97006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS _CITY OF BEAVERTON * —CITY OF TUALATIN * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE t/OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue 775 Summer Street, NE _Mike Matteucci,Ne.gnoma copra PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem,OR 97310-1337 PO Box 4755 Tualatin, OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Beaverton, OR 97076 _OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. _METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street, NE _CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland, OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 CUS ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _Paulette Allen,Growth Managemenrcooramaror _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. 333 SW First Avenue _Mel Huie,oreensoane.cnorninarnrIcPA'rizoAsi 1175 Court Street, NE PO Box 2946 —CITY OF KING CITY #f Salem,OR 97310-0590 Portland,OR 97208-2946 City Manager _METRO AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION 15300 SW 116th Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street _OREGON DEPT.OF TRANS.(ODOT) J, *ASHINGTON COUNTY * King City,OR 97224 Building#16,Suite 540 Aeronautics Division Dept.of Land Use&Trans. Portland,OR 97232-2109 Tom Highland,Pamnq 155 N. First Avenue —CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director _OR. DEPT.OF ENERGY Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Bonneville Power Administration Lake Oswego.OR 97034 Routing TTRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera _ODOT,REGION 1 O _ Brent Curtis,'CPA's) PO Box 3621 Sonya Kazen,c.o.,*Rev coon] _ Scott King(CPA's) _CITY OF PORTLAND Portland, OR 97208-3621 123 NW Flanders _ Mike Borreson,Enq�neer, David Knowles,Planning Bureau Dr Portland.OR 97209-4037 _ Jim Tice ia. i Portland Building 106, Rm. 1002 _OREGON. DEPT.OF ENVIRON. QUALITY _ Tom Harry(Current PI Am., 1120 SW Fifth Avenue 811 SW Sixth Avenue _000T,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A * 1_,.-Phil Healy(current P v A t Portland,OR 97204 Portland,OR 97204 Jane Estes,'err Spenai _ Sr. CartographerrcPNzoA.M314i PO Box 25412 Portland,OR 97298-0412 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _BURLINGTON NORTHERN/ SANTA FE R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS —PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _ICI CABLEVISION OF OR. Reed Fay, Division Superintendent Jason Hewitt Bnan Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Linda Peterson 1313 W. 11th Street Twin Oaks Technology Center 9480 SW Boeckman Road 3500 SW Bond Street Vancouver,WA 98660-3000 1815 NW 169th Place, S-6020 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97201 Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 —COLUMBIA CABLE COMPANY _PORTLAND WESTERN R/R _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Craig Eyestone _NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY Steve Myhr, Region Manager Michael Kiser,Protect Planner 14200 SW Bngadoon Court Scott Palmer Catellus Property Management 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97005 220 NW Second Avenue 999 Third Avenue,Suite 2120 Portland,OR 97232 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Seattle,WA 98104-4037 —GENERAL TELEPHONE Paul Koft,Engineering _OREGON ELECTRIC R/R _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO. R/R _US WEST COMMUNICATION MC: OR030546 (8(/R(7M4TCN NORTHERN/SANTA IF R/R PREDASSOR) Clifford C.Cabe.Construction Engineer Pete Nelson Tigard,OR 97281-3416 Reed Fay, Division Superintendent 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard 421 SW Oak Street 1313 W. 11th Street Portland,OR 97232 Portland,OR 97204 Vancouver,WA 98660-3000 * - INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IF WITHIN Z%O' OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR AMY/ALL Cllr PROJECTS. (PROISCT PLAMMLR 1$ag1POMf/us FOR/MDICATIMC'warns TO MOTIFVJ h.pattyvnastersvtcnorce.mst I6-Jan-98 NW AM N — - J CITY of TIGARD CORAL --- GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM ST LARCH ST LARCH ( 1111171 Ii III ((ii..1 — < < �, I I AREA NOTIFIED [250'buffer) LOCUST ST / w — y a I I ri LOCUST � — � t ArMIIIIIE>o'l I SLR 98-0001 PLELEAF ST w < _ I Metzger Sanitary Sewer _ 9 ryS e . I I Trunkline[15771 Rehab. (�, t MAPLELEAF ■m Arr.iw ilia r F I ST � , � � . II W:.�j ►��r■ ll [ 1 �� OAK ST ' IF __ N. I I -�A = II / \ PINE ST �. I I IPINE ST I .. •:UCE ST SRRUCE I ST ..1 .r �ag�L/11111111/�.1 mug 1116 M NW MN L.milmiiii T ni mi mg" 41" ANN • �, F. -rE--=/III�s ijim N ■� null. -- "� � 0 IW 800 Feet 1 __ 1--— I- -I Iii_r-_Q- ■ 1'=521 feet I \ w - g Mir 11111111 w �_Mil Ihk � _.- City of Tigard Q "um _■ ral1.7,1011-1 .=:,,,,„,„;,.,,,e;,,7,B,7,,s.,,,e-Di,sion.map is for general IOC T-rC only and -_ pment Services Division. ■ )gar, 9l Blvd-i.• PFAFFLE Tigard,OR 91223 -.� (503)639-4171 �__ _____ __ ' http://s w.v.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Mar 19, 1998;camagiclmagic0l.apr • ,. 1 S 135AA-02400 Tigard, Oregon 97223 James L. and Darlene L. Cain 14300 SW Pacific Hwy. 1 S 126DD-01991 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Suresh C. Paranjpe 5625 Summit Drive 1S135AA-02500 (I r West Linn, Oregon 970 8 /4\Donald J. and Hazel J. Lyon _/ / 14 ' 10440 SW 87th Avenue V 1 S 135AA-01901 Portland, Oregon 97223 Steven L. Aschenbrenner 5425 S.W. Lombard V/72 1 S 135AA-02600 1..' Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Theodore S. Peterson and Virginia J. Dean r" $686 SW Oak ef\ Tigard, Oregon 97223 ii,t\)`' pc/ 1S135AA-03600 r j John R. and Tracy I. Wright p�( 10575 SW Hall Blvd. '�� Tigard, Oregon 97223 1 S 135AD-01200 In Thelma Crouch Estate do Eugene L. Davis j 10875 SW 89th Avenue .rQC9 Tigard, Oregon 97223 15�'9.)3 1 S 135AD-01300 I ,� Thelma Crouch Estate do Eugene L. Davis 1 S 35AD-00900 f Alice S. Juve 10655 SW Hall Blvd. Portland, Oregon 97223 1S135AD-01130 Eugene L. Davis 10875 SW 89th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 1 S 135AD-01101 Clifford and Kay Epler 8845 SW Spruce Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 1 S 135AD-01400 Eugene L. and Vivian M. Davis 10875 SW 89th Avenue 1S1 25CC-01302 1 S 1 35 AA-01601 Northwest Retirement Housing Income Walt and Cindy Walp Fund III 10207 S.W. 85th Avenue 8445 SW Hemlock Street Portland, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97223 1S1 35AA-01600 1S 1 25CC-01303 Patricia S. Fries Susan K. Peterson 10225 S.W. 85th Avenue 8400 SW Elmwood Tigard, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97223 1S1 35AA-01602 1S1 25CC-02600 Richard Taylor Washington County Facilities Mgmt. 10245 S.W. 85th Avenue 111 SE Washington Street, MS-42 Portland, Oregon 97223 Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 1 S 135AA-01701 1S1 26DD-01600 Laszlo and Iren Szalvay James and Richard Craytor 14950 SW 144th Avenue 16997 S.E. Blanton Tigard, Oregon 97224 Milwaukie, Oregon 97267 1S135AA-01702 1S1 26DD-01700 Szalvay Suresh C. Paranjpe 5625 Summit Drive 1 S 135AA-01800 West Linn, Oregon 97068 Helen Chavez 8407 SW Locust Metzger Park Condos by F.H. Portland, Oregon 97223 SchrieverM8959 SW Barbur BlvdePortland, Oregon 97219tMr. Schrieverz 1 S 1 26DD- is 135AA-02100 90000ger Park Condos Nortland Homes, Inc. 1834 SW 58th#202 1S1 35AA-00102 Portland, Oregon 97201 Leon Laptook, Metzger Park Apts. Inc. • 1001 S.W. Baseline 1 S 135AA-02000 Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 Sandra Lynn Staats P.O. Box 20007 1S1 35AA-00200 Keizer, Oregon 97307 Kenneth and Margaret Johannes 10120 S.W. Hall Blvd., Suite 104 1S135AA-02001 Portland, Oregon 97223 Oregon Dept. of Transporation 417 Transporation Bldg. 1S1 35AA-01500 Salem, Oregon 97310 Garry Vallaster 711 S.W. Alder Portland, Oregon 97205 SEN ITIVE LANDS A LICATION .111 l 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 CITY OF TIGARD GENERAL INFORMATION Julia Hajduk PRE-APP. HELD WITH: DATE OF PRE-APP.: July .31, 1997 Property Address/Location: Ash Creek Corridor between Flail and Spruce Streets FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map &Tax Lot#(s): See attached Case No.(s): '° Site Size: 630 G.F. Other Case No.(s): Receipt No.: i,Z1ID`-) P 4 Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: See attached Application Accepted By:gc r�A Address: Phone: Date: ) - -SID City: Zip: Applicant*: Unified Sewerage Agency attn: Lee Walker Date Deter fined- o Be Complete: Address: 155 N. First St. Ste.270 phone: 648-8678 �� Comp Plan/Zone .esi ati City: Hillsboro Zip: 97124 tDt� ki L441 a # 5 ` �' �- r2 "When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant 1/14- r ' must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written CIT Area: C' -4,/ _Q authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) Rev.8/31/96 i:\curpinvnasterstsia.doc must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY REQUIRED SUBMITTAL EL.MENTS The owners of record of the subject property request a Sensitive Lands Permit to allow (please be specific): ✓ Application Elements Submitted: The upsizing of the existing 24" Metzger sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30" line. The project will ® Application Form relieve existing deficiencies and provide for future ® Owner's Signature/Written Authorization expansion of service. ® Title Transfer Instrument or Deed Site/Plot Plan (8'/2"x 11") (#of copies based on pre-app check list) ® Applicant's Statement (#of copies based on pre-app check list) p Filing Fee (Administrative) $ 745.00 (Hearing's Officer) ,240.0 1 • List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: Sanitary sewer through wetlands and 100—year flood plain, possible tree removal. APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the "Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. • If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All of the above statements and the statements in the plat plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this /t 711 day of /1 fl r- k , 19 `7 tJ 2 s §ignaturepw �,it v f 715%1 eci Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 I ':DETACH THIS PORTION FOR`YO1 R>ECOR UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY } Vendor No. 108731 Check No. 574492 DATE PO NUMBER INVOICE NUMBER AMOUNT MEMO 02/06/98 W81857 2/98 1 , 240 . 00 '4, — r"1itT3cs44. Tour► k TOTAL $ 1 , 240 . 00 An Equal Opportunity I Affirmative Action Eiepjeyer Committed to Diversity yfrA4 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY January 28, 1998 Jim Hendrix, Planning Director Greg Berry, Engineer City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Jim and Greg: Subject: USA's Metzger Sewer Trunk Replacement At our preapplication meeting last summer we discussed the requirement for a Sensitive Lands and Tree Removal Permits for the above project. At that meeting we went over the submittal requirements. I have enclosed a copy of the purchase request for the Sensitive Lands Permit in the amount of$745. I do not remember however if we discussed the question of ownership of property. One of the City's submittal requirements is for the property owner's written authorization. I have not completed the easement acquisition process for all of the properties in the City, however USA will acquire easements for all areas of work either through negotiation and purchase,or, as a last resort, eminent domain process. I would like to be allowed to make the submittal with the above statement in lieu of signatures. USA has contracted with Kurahashi and Associates to make the permit submittals to the City of Tigard, as well as DSL and Washington County. The County application has been made, and the City of Tigard and DSL applications are being made this week. I have directed Kurahashi and Associates to proceed with the submittal based upon the above assumptions. If I am in error please contact me as soon as possible and I will remedy any omissions. Sincerely, 6„ %'Lee Walker Project Manager /ebn Enclosure 155 North First Avenue, Suite 270,MS 10 Phone:503/648-8621 Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 FAX:503/640-3525 Request number 982367 Requested on 28-JAN-98 at By WALKERL Reference service request # Priority 3 Delivery needed by Suggested Vendor 108731 TIGARD, CITY OF 13125 SW HALL BLVD TIGARRD, OR 97223 ACCOUNTING INFO 312-8612-52323-4779- - ITEM # STOCK NUMBER QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST EXTENDED COST 1 1 . ea 745 . 00 745. 00 Sensitive Lands Permit Fee • TOTAL PURCHASE REQUEST 745 . 00 • O F O� ; ,�, ; JOINT te• US Army Corps PERMIT APPLICATION FORM N *. = 2 of Engineers THIS APPLICATION WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF BOTH AGENCIES •. 9 .. Portland District '8 5 9 AGENCIES WILL ASSIGN NUMBERS Corps Action ID Number Oregon Division of State Lands Number SEND ONE SIGNED COPY OF YOUR APPLICATION TO EACH AGENCY District Engineer State of Oregon ATTN: CENPP-OP-GP Division of State Lands P 0 Box 2946 775 Summer Street NE Portland, OR 97208-2946 Salem OR 97310 503-326-7730 503-378-3805 business phone# 648-8678 0 ApplicantName Unified Sewerage Agency p and Address attn: Lee Walker home phone# 155N. 1st St. Suite 270, Hillsboro OR 97124 FAX# 640-3525 O Co-Applicant Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. business phone# 968-1605 Cat Authorized Agent 12600 SW 72nd Ave. Suite 100 O Contractor Tigard OR 97223 home phone# Name and Address Attn: Brent Davis FAX# 968-1105 Property Owner business phone# (if different than applicant) See attached list home phone# Name and Address FAX# Q2 PROJECT LOCATION Street, Road or other descriptive location Legal Description Ash Creek corridor from SW Taylor's Ferry Quarter sw Section 25 Township Range Road and SW Spruce Street NE 35 1S 1W NW 36 In or Near(City or Town) County Tax Map# Tax Lot# Metzger/Tigard Washington See attached list Waterway River Mile Latitude Longitude Ash Creek Is consent to enter property granted to the Corps and the Division of State Lands? 0 Yes 0 No 0 PROPOSED PROJECT INFORMATION Activity Type: ® Fill ® Excavation(removal) 0 In-Water Structure 0 Maintain/Repair an Existing Structure Brief Description: Sanitary Sewer Replacement Fill will involve cubic yards annually and/or 7,000 cubic yards for the total project 3,500 cubic yards in a wetland or below the ordinary high water or high tide line Fill will be 0 Riprap 0 Rock 0 Gravel 0 Sand 0 Silt 0 Clay 0 Organics 0 Other Native Soil Fill Impact Area is 0.28 Acres; 2970' length; 2 to 4' width; 6' to 13' depth Removal will involve cubic yards annually and/or 7,000 cubic yards for the total project 55 cubic yards below the ordinary high water or high tide line Removal will be 0 Riprap 0 Rock 0 Gravel 0 Sand 0 Silt 0 Clay 0 Organics Other Native Soil Removal Impact Area is Acres; 40' length; 2' to 4' width; 6' to 9' depth Is the Disposal area: Upland? El Yes 0 No Wetland/Waterway? 0 Yes 0 No Are you aware of any Endangered Species on the project site? 0 Yes © No If Yes, please explain in the project Are you aware of any Cultural Resources on the project site? 0 Yes Ci No description(on page 2, block 4). Is the project site near a Wild and Scenic River? 0 Yes 3 No ® PROPOSED PROJECT PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION Project Purpose and Need: See attached Project Description: See attached How many project drawing sheets are included with this application? 19 NOTE: A complete application must include drawings and a location map submitted on separate 8'/2X 11 sheets. Will any material, construction debris, runoff, etc. enter a wetland or waterway? 0 Yes 0 No If yes, describe the type of discharge(above)and show the discharge location on the site plan. Estimated Start Date May 1998 Estimated Completion Date October 1998 05 PROJECT IMPACTS AND ALTERNATIVES Describe alternative sites and project designs that were considered to avoid impacts to the waterway or wetland. See attached Describe what measures you will use(before and after construction)to minimize impacts to the waterway or wetland. See attached NOTE: If necessary, use additional sheets. © ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Adjoining Property Owners and Their Addresses and Phone Numbers See attached list Has the proposed activity or any related activity received the attention of the Corps of Engineers or the State of Oregon in the past, e.g., wetland delineation, violation, permit, lease request, etc.? ® YES 0 NO If yes, what identification number(s) were assigned by the respective agencies: Corps# State of Oregon# DETA 97-0450 IQ wows s REI+VCE a if SID.cone a GUTTER Q REMOTE s RD:SAM TO 4 5'-RICE SKWNI( '4/- (O 10, Scale 1,l /00 0i7ar'AL35256.4•IPLUO�.] SM.salts r we w Y to aeew Oe2C `\ NIIQ fISIMC YY OM r VA 14*M•' `` " rr ee ri MN OS eew REPLACE ocsew K YMNpE e 4 ,�¢I T\ V EaS1eG a�t�I \STA 0+43 4 \ s `' STA EDZ ' �. -'-'° i on 9H5 O / 1 '� :`�\ w"°uauu°ot„"° - "�\ a `m :77, / �' G-Vil W WI IEIF aa6lwlcTICY Wrs- Al ♦ 1��• I t 1/4"),..,,,\ 1 -_ N� /' • 5' \r � ,I �� olnTe¢Y1E rte\ to 1111 I , ..;' \--:liriNIM ;SAO \ �i-�I'/` RUG COST.SM.RE 1,11,� / w1 1f4•l7 OM 17.74.4 t wee \.�3, IS wee M 6.... x1° +�'� i Ix WU Ceww 100e MI SI JO I, ``w IM sew 6� wlwY \1.C 3 is 111e la Unified Sew Agency a 1/6 Ye K •wd Uf(a ® .•,+°e° I METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION I PLAN VIEW '!-.Z!" 144014 EA 14.10.4 IN NM R V• Scale 1' < STA IS4 1.x10 STA ♦ K%54 COONS ..S3 :.Rae Dose s./.same (0.04401 13 SEA 21.37.4 II171/42E OU040 01 010 Q R•PE•11V10$2 II SID OMB•WIMP ID ROOK•40.0$40 Si•-•••WEIRS • some•non=044.4110 IM max • Far a OM.840 00111/01 4.(0 • 8001•84RA01 O.E.SID woo saw 2.140011 IS STA 37.303 R-co0(0ET FINCH 2224..411 214.411 SW HaU Blvd. l• 24SIA 4-1101 4.42.114 AT M VA MIOLE]14 AVM 0 0 00-400140 LAWS STA 24.24 115-40060 IAIEIDA STA 2014 ROC 442[ if I�j ;,.. *1+104 E"rsi 1 ~ 1t.1 re/ epo VIED- -,k9111 i� I. .11/? OS 10i SW 85th Avenue_ 81-04••01 UMW su 2..O..s IN MCC R10N B a SIA 23.42 MWOK 9 WAWA I. SSA 10.401 (00'10212 INSTALL M .a••rM1. R1(0 oar wL 4441 AA as MEWL 4(0141 II P 4-1101 01122 R-041•a.T MWL ISA 437411 44..5SLI 4-8041 100043 414401 12 1R`101 0100(0 1430 RUA MST PIK MIDI 444 STA QTR U1PA 3.1 _It E SIR urn Unified Sneered.Aga pay GER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION PLAN VIEW X a— o 101000 WAKE 10 U 51D.CUM O 00.001•RERKC'.0 SE S'_1LE 100000 Scale 1' = • Ll ROAM a RLPLIn MST.no.10100 mw `) RC•(T4 0 KR,.Can 0060.Sn•00&I.G OS 000O`h 1 REPLACE•LI SID.C1160 O REI.O.0•RER..LE 40 n 3-a1DE Meru t 1.00100E IS / na 33•30.6 Lim ATFPUCI EX050aiO ee3e / t51 MCC `` • TL.300 u 4 + = 6j gg lit \'\ @Q \/ Rsr°o1O'*1ca1000011 701010 STA 35.79.3 �. 1 11,' fy, c] wwt v(DRDR)OM TA 11131.0a COSTING 0.01 6602 Co SU 46444.0 l�r fET. ��■(r' I�_ ./ I �O mt.. v P m SWUM' STA 41,6.5 a1.' ���3ji.t{ i%.�o� _ ��,.Iief✓ -..�_'_ / ♦ COST WN. Rai.AMA W ``/' Pl• St w '� Ie.— iE� i I� t1s ©� -7-7'..41 R- uiEw 1 .Vl+ fi �'� '' . 4_ 7,7�4— -- , 69 So_0 690 ��1% ��' ' A _,,,eliWii 1. � 1 m teas !/414.8 A .n xtc �� _ -.. � ��� 1 ..i`..`�ys' /�, v 1 1.L.swa �i n _ is MCC ] TL asos _,'W • 'a M TL MI `��, � a C!0. n� �TAM. 030.100E 07 � 69+= .l iiR.� nn 30.141 La illIllHillIlli ';vi `: _/ _� - .j ���..4. •' ?e, '''.-1 11 Ee MC �r �I` .�.;':• _ 30.4• ,': 1��j�ll. 13+ 1111 4637 I I 1+ fi MO �1` �r '.' ......1. N-i��117.0 `1 1 I 010 1441,3 s,MCI 1 ti.,.,l``' • / TL t.1D0 TL t20/ 1L.E■ 1.II 1 `��� ?LIT taDa 10100 R .t:•7, it '1 rz t4et 6 `, 1 rvNpC LI - /. OOa L e.�� 1t su 41.4x. Iliili 'N, r�'t'� _!'s f 82nd n riyr ©II VIA ®°y a". _ .teoc, METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILPfATION PLAN VIEW IWI • \A:131. 0 ,ENO.E.REPIKC!TS 59 CURB © RENO.E REINA.b Sr 5'-.DE SOENAU( mAN OE2 i IoROVI K e% iNSTUt 09E9 �S PC ExSTNC SANNARY WNIO a•2{ /' \c ♦ lA.9+JS 5 IK KM <VI! 1,14tlif \\ E S MN 6500 Alltk:/Air ir , Zil �� N.NNaE r{ Scale 1" fif-xl.v E%611�ii0 MK• PLUG COSTIMS PPE 94 N I Vas' *\°:1:\IIIIIII aw• � *" �" , ,( \a w /�v �\ n wDoe ...7": �•. 1-awcn -- i m® ` ,ti♦ w,NA, ,., - 4::. . '",...7.27 -7, 111111-,..,_.,,‘. '''''' - .14 . to,, 7L NM \ . ,„ .,57„,,,,,... ..:„.......;-,,,,,mmook,__, .........' '''''..4-7,..,,,,,,-----:. .----411141,3 .. '111$,Z,., or41",.;-- ?t\„,„*".4,6->5.,,,,,-,,,c- I F \ \ s. i°S,S77 TO n . ls .. v�, • � ,,, sr,s'ua+oz�e h4.47940LE 30 & . \\ �Use � '%��\ 8 \`\ oe 04 •\ Pp. ,sr sue y • RE V CR u E'°"o.Nm ` r:%` RE-<UwEC w ERN wir�� \\ �rA to�iw�OSG S6:UEn ` SEA sr+ro ,C, - ru wa Em1 sunwn ir tANNOLE 29 '\ 1 \ P/ Cr UTOWS i0 NEr NwNOtE NE EASTERLY WOW \ \ Qk�, 11RN{s afro As swam \ 9 \ Syi/. /. / /� Z. VIA ii "�«"°E`^`°"'Er METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION PLAN VIEW • 160 160 175 ReMovf•TZ••ce sMrrMr sfern",0 smr -- _ 175 170 ... .. .. 170 165 .. .... �i 165 160 (: .. .. .. ... • 20].7 Er Of PC1 6YM„ 7E05 o .9 w19 1" -223 tf 31.1.00 010.00211 :: j jn.e✓]�In w.omY nae✓3C X00032 1925✓30•_ecv 00.00» - It [r w•mcv eo.roza - 150 114010119 ......... ... 150 .. .. .. -. milieu] -.. ge/INS/E] STA 54+7.3 }i•x.5 E a STA 5+6 6 �f 71A'�1 _ ON C..109.03 fi 45 -150.26(([w w-NE) : Mr M-15x s1 EW x•NE w Mart teal ,w OUT.1]5.65 -+5700 MOST II E) ON 0111.9xn w M.,saw Tim?a•Nw ON »•M 1�[f�ee011ED . reef = Iry an-156.10(NEW]o•70 Mo M-,w.10 tErm e•sw• .. .WNNIXL 1 66.ON 57.61(NEW b•5) 5TA 0400 1140914) ... ISE.]x((NEW JO- I µP 167 155 x0(IX51 1C IN i3e.16(1!fW b My ON. 5,.11 tarn 30•to 59 r0(EAy O. Mr ON./56 16(NEW 30• O O O O O O 0 O O O. O p O+ ..... p p + GG } i N +c7 0 + } m + ti .4i N Ox t` .. 180 Rd'YO,f f 6f➢GCI RAMS a AO.=]1MpM] smelt'd any • 180 • • 175 • 175 • I 170 ']TA I0430. �i ....... 190 ■ 165 1 • 1 632911111111 665 v n 9cv awaw]1 TOY✓' �poD'160 01.9 If i7'IC.e0-0m. 176.6 u z+•ncv 000033 • ltud6t]t V • ]r`z,0111 • 155 . .. 156 1uNll0lt t Er9IME wl*latl II W,ela[u - .. .. ...... .... ...... a . . 1NNMG16F t� o .. 57 7 MANHOLE 02 P6 io iAo9 .. 14129 Ee51 6•E NM ON.160.60 my M.16100 ,041 Cl 57 rn ON N.e9 150 ••..t 916 ON.1562] 940 M. M. 6,07 1IN ON.161.69 190 ON 1H.]7 IXtn 11.5.TO K.YMO01IED 150 • IN ON 159.0] MST 1.•a TO K 6WOdiD OUT 160.56 NEW b•W) Se 15.1•.1 IN9„.163.66 070';',..7) ' • 4.1% INV 401.,63.56(NE.17"5) O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O + ♦+ + + + + 4- + + N m Q 0 02 M N N {. O p N N N N N � m o °a Unified&merge Atene7 5 5 jirr4 ..40.60.-c-t, METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION PROFILE / °; 'vo ..r 1e„o, ® ,01,.,6...... N.,...,� „6� STA 0+00 TO STA 20+04.2 eL on WINGS SANITARY•11•!»Y 185 105 180 • __ -...."''' 180•• • • • 175 i 176• • I . IIIIIIIIIIIIIII • 170 I I I 0R16PR _ _ .. 1 r 270 a 27.60.00]1 155 I 166 RANK E 19 : - 1 5i�s..I.r _W'wnli 20 M'IN. W 1]�tq 31' � NCR 71 NE • •160 4W«IXE 18 •11,ow.167213 oft or q NM M N tM]o E�3•![ NNVV N IY390 MST S. , . s) NN 61 1111611�a�Epta WNNO E 17 N.1 .2 NEW 2s• IN CUT .121..4 plM 7V•. .lrl AR Ina(«[M.II•. 180• !�■.I� o'NM OUT.167.42(NON 2Y CAf!t•L R NYEd® My oVr 155.09 f .. .. ........00�...... .. .. N N 0 M DI CD 03 CO Cl) S 02 03 AC'S 0 V V WW1 or•r ar •Q • Jr • 180 _. . . . .. .. ..... . __ _. ....... _...... ...... 100 • 186 i 186 NSA V WOWS 180. ® � 180 IVD 1i 21•00.61063 ... MANHOLE 27 �!t 1 t75 P . 0 lell.m «n 2i'Iq 6M{i ar:Iq.l6 ]m,it�,•sa.Dels .. . CIA 49.35 11 23 w'art':16100 E(ry 2�$ 178 3200)I 1161 161.69 DEW 21•NE) wANNOLE 76 3$1f y 9� 9 NV N-1 NT 121.1 0(OAT Y 1 Nv w- 60.]5 ... . .. - ION our-iiN is(SE) 1 «EV 21 Sw1 wv our ITo.is STA 41+8195 ... . 3.»( m q b v 21•10.0Oso . • IN O.In.43 taw 6•wo.NV our.1n.4!CO M'21•MO •.. arrysauuuar VI NW RANKLE 23('6131 DROP) • .... My M.iei.i --r . •9u1 as COST IC EAST 21•S) 195 moos 21 6Ni :yr27:ToeTin.W. A NV OUr-li]oe(16100 n•awA 190 11 II • g. 0 o 88 185 I -� 2-'' '� ... • O N V ' 1133 V tl'p.6060 1151615.!21 11000.121 12 _.. 180 w1rMa9 21 IEt mw1.s s5.somas . - 1M M. .i MV M-1' MV M-1616.06[M91 1 ! ........ w M.W NY OUT.161]61 V Ort.1 61M:IM00 [PR:•g NNT our-11211(KW 21•I) • 56+00 57+00 58+00 KS p .d Vf�4 flamed = n�' METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION PROFILE °�6 ,� �„• STA 28+04.2 TO STA 58+74.5 #�3;= KEY J ro R.MrrHO rove ted w.t Wetland Meadow ,/' °° awt Meadow !�t' 60'N Upland �111+1sd °o;Pots Rpavi °.°.GuttJnP Wt s�Ysceasnt Ill 51nb/scrib t11111.*3‘ Y. 040 Wri,!! -- . \ 4■V• ,,-*". °aa a ° * / °tea : a°_ a° \* p °aa a as � GN ''� /i=_ 91�t aka ' //`—! .�.=�� l` *► \ \ �/� _� \ 1 N 1 rr \ r .1111bil p,1ery. = BARASHI , m . � 1�� `r.Q it wM� � MN er,ge Agency METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION E-001 PRELIMINARY as kin®un;r;ea se. - m„„„„,„on„,,nnr PLANTING PLAN E" uo ,�w ,� ah �,�, ,,,..,,�.,.„. „„,„,,,,,, WETLAND MITIGATION yen ICEY TO PLANTING ZONES E Zerte sted Wet Meadow --"--. SW 87th AV.". ffi Upland Ei Meadow ....... 1 111 Pole I jiir.?■-4,-".'"'--- El Riper hal Cuttings 1 Scale 1. ..50. I :14e,Wed I 1-11isplecasseet ---', ---•-1 1 ,=„:\ ...-- ,--- _ ,..,.., sr Hall Di'yd. • 's: \ ••11.1■---- ---- -------- - .----__ - --L •,. .--) -.-...--.-. ........_._.___._....., Hall 1314—/T--- — \ — ‘ --- --- — ---- se .......::.......\.......,,,,..................„„ ' I % t 1 \ ,• ■ • -‘-% .___. ., ) _ -,_. -— I 41.----7---"' .- ,- L._._.._..._•._.j -••-•"--- -:— _.-- VAINISIA.1 0„ ,...-- \ • ___ .,i \ , / 1-,i--- ____________i „..... _______ _ A - ..3 7'150' • '_\;-)-• • -- .--- - '•'",' 1,5,4's,,' '. /// - )=--:- ''-'-•--- ---./':,' I . 1 . .., sw . Awn,__ _ 1, :\ I Phlill 18T4t. ILLTRAFIASHI a ABOOCIAT1.11.Ott. .... 1/4ARRIri Alio__ PRELIMINARY ...._•._ Leh 0 ' `:,";.„s,',",:,.:.,"',_',,'„":""- METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION E-002 PLANTING PLAN ow ON WAN NW Am M -PA, OW NOM. so / PLAKTIVII ZONES w w. I c d o.M '0' °o.►�' : t I` ►w■u ,, ------,______ _ ______— ,,,rn>.,,, .„ ,,..t.,.. . \ t .. ':. A 411111".---,_ .--- ___ --- i I 117,....... .,..21Alliiftir'_ _ tea"- �� - �_y_��.. $.: i w1'alit ' *• �� -• / rr�ijJ m41..1cM ii ",a1c,, ,,,,Ng MCIt., e,-/// St%.,:"7^.---...w.;.* --,..•° 't,-.1,°.•-•'..•ttbe,°°• r . 4 ti..........__..4fo,„,, 7-fv...,T470:944-Nb„... .i. _ __ 162**„p_:".\,40 , kl., �� A 4i : ....„?....•,,, , . . ,:. ,. Al A --- - I: +' 0� ' .-\ \\\,‘ I IMO ...E.- ..... _______•- 1 ! __------ I 1 1 1 SURAHAS . 2 ••••001•TM.010. ,Kiii,:i PRELIMINARY .-,--•-- V Unthrd Sewerage,e. Y D NiaTSAANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION PLANTING PLAN �3 ttoA 7 ' 7' ► � , �� t % N • - N,.., . - ti t, , \\ 4 .k.,-,:i . - ' .,, i, , , ,, s ,•-t.. .,4 j*. ;,/e 1 .. v . ‘: \ ,... ,. --, vki L,, , i\ ,, . .•,,,,-, ...,. ,rI� ll . .• it .. , ..„. , ws, oilirw on , ,, 1 X1..4 ifo.v. • • , 4. 111v, ef 0 fr I #\r V ., itfr. ' ji di, , o0 1 ►�� a . 7 z- 1),,a f.• , .... \k c v # ! ItIIh. / / Ifr, \\F.1s . I 4 �VA i.\To. l,t,' r -' . \`.A Lt \rs ��ti0 I f J "_,,i,5 bil 2 \< 4eri ( i i / , gi fl fl ff If 11 8 t4 A. 1\tt411/ 1,„ , A.4 4, oe..._ x El DOD E N't " "15 11 I' II I' 1 3 •iis. ,' ,-. 404 'c' • Z,4z - \ 11, iii Y \ ON a /6 Eg 111 /II IIiIA ■ .1�I 11t x , i i I I I i I i 1 ` z 11 i eg u II it in . 11a':in. ;1:2' . t� i::ss. ire! . 111 . >t a a a a a . a a I- lrrrir• Mr■rrrr. areas. I a.... ammo. I . _ i R 1 R x ... .■ :,.. a■ • g t...-! 1----s L...s .....s 2 ...I 2 z a. I �� boor hei If I E hill ill:: hill 1111 11111 all i aa in I L... 1... II z i# ` 1111 41 hill el I ii g : 1 NN i1 Si h ; td i "I 1 111 i ,k 1 Phi ii iiiiii� a E I N ■ 1 1 I xi- 1 Ott; Id i1}i t; ii + i ■ l 1i; i ;ki d:1 W1 11111:1 illi1111 Illh 3111 111 !E .�: 1 lib $11111111 9 c b A I Y , :A 1 3 o i O B" - 4 g ��� p b iS 6 v s £w;1 ii9 g 5 is O. a % 1 - 1 iI :gill i \ g 6 _ill ii8 k 0 I l Z >> ,. nts e rc m O a � a d mmim o - 0 o 0 .i0 wxn m y N W 4 r , / > = _ __ � - Native —_____r_ — Soil Undisturbed _/ . Soil ��-- - — 11— - — I 1-.0; a o �_ 11—_ _ Gravel (21" mm) = 30" RCP ci- itt, 4 1—i Pipe Bedding -1 I O'� —1 I (21" min) ' I—Ill 2' min / 4' max / SCALE: 1 /2" = 1 ' METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION Project No. 1577 Trench Backfill Section (Typical) Jan. 1998 111111111M Unified Sewerage Agency KT T of Washington County lJ RAHASHI & ASSOCIATES, INC. 155 N. First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon x X''''' NOT TO SCALE N \raMPGRA ,�{` \ WETLAND too ( \\ /• \, PERMANE tJ� � % c I►ErLAND IMPACT \ /' ; orAP ri 100-YEAR • ---i �r 1 PLAIN l �� • LUSTING SANITARY V/ ....*....3"... % 41‘11* • .., 7,1 .....‘ , \ , i ' vit;114b 4..... I -. ,,, is . ■..-— :-------t".0,s, - *,..,1,,,, , ._„,,______. ,,, .c, ,=_-_-, ,, N -..:;de. fr.... / \ -- *.,.,/\41,4" ... \ ..:. P -":5 "••,. \\ I .... ,....:".....„,:k......3,.‘:•■ ‘ / - • '1 ---.-..-4 \ ALIGNMENT -: — .. . Vr r PROPOSED SANITARY�p ALIGNMENT NMI r KURAHASHI MO PIP-10. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION / ° ,° "'°`�,°`Y METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION I-001 ...41 he_MR' M� P1 w..ram. .w, 11SPI.AND MITIGATION Wetland Impact Summary ' - PROPOSED SANITARY ALIGNMENT EXISTING SANITARY ALIGNMENT SW 87th Ave'n'ue _ i ✓Ir — 1 NOT TO SCALE • I 1 I 1 \ fllAlli :,*_____ TEMPORARY . _ SIP Hall Blvd. WETrAND IMPACT _�=tom — — — PERMANENT ,� �= � 1 WETLAND IMPACT I\ _.,... 4 1 1 I Sip ` .� 4 r _ i .r�� .,� 1���� 11� 11 `�M - � _ A�` ��J _yr_MO 1 FLOOD PLAIN �� I j r.�� — _,,,-� --"-- : 1 . 1 — J „, sw 85th Avenue 5'I i CI 2I I MINIM EURAHASHI NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION a ^ ° fed�""°"""°°' METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION I-002 ten �.wa,��«�+nr Wetland Impact Summary b„,w� ...o.. ,n WC ,,,, ,,,,......,., µ,».,,,„.,,. WETLAND MITIGATION ,e. / ..ArT4 NOT TO SCALE ilairi TEMPORARY IETLIND IMPACT • / r .1,4"- ` .,.- r IETLAND IMPACT a I \ ' EXISTING SANITARY _ _ nr _ l YArEeR ALIGNMENT a ,-ice._•_ r, /► ,,. ."3.,, --=',—. \. .A.' r _ _ _ f, E'': / N�'I``�' ,_�_�-+►,., I/� % 1 PROPOSED SANITARY �. �- /� //i ..,,rte�_ a pmt/= ,i,f \ �\ ALIGNMENT Vitt\ irliwpw...._ingliatisti' --/ ,. 611 ..1 .■,,-'7'N!.._ ..... .. .....11•N. V \ FLOOD PLAIN YEAR y .� \ ...,.,\__ \ t %t- .*:. _ 1 ' /OA/t?.' �t‘...,.:N 1/41v..ti ... „0011111111111,......... - ---- -7-.101 \- \fst - Vt.a.....-- siii;...........„..... .....,„ t ‘ ■V414''' ''' .."11111. \ \ 14,,, , ■, .:\ '411111) ..,-; V.,\., - at 7a. i .,. . ._ 101" 1 SW 82� �i ,,�--��� ; i\1 ■-1 1 _ _ -- \ l MINIM zASffi •AMOCfAL1.oro. Y4.:wia 1.1w _•MD �, r a EE A:: METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION I-003 all NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION V _�•..Nyrm —M, Wetland Impact Summary wiw WETLAND MITIGATION Min RTPORA lYPAGT / , PERMANENT WETLAND TLAND IMPACT ZX MOT 10 MU \ .' \\TN --- 1 \ ,`,. . : CP IL "4:"./.. Ile# rile," \\ , , , '.''N — left \\*‘•..___ ...,_...... ,..,:„..., __„._.__, .., \\ .....,\ „,„, . _____....,...„,,,,,, \\ ... .. s, , A • : \ / ! \\ \ , ALlCNYE SANITARY \ // -_r `� r �r'.`\` ML (it,* . 1" /\ \\ , _ / \ \ /���,, V. \ PROPOSED SANITARY _ 1 /' ' \ \ .rF 7.' J�.. ALIGNMENT N' "ti--- ‘1"111104110V ,/� \ \; A ----' I .4. \ •2:1.,t..1,1 -- \.-``ft--W. --.s -}.'ffP# 4ki \ 1.fl •\ \\>""1 ' \ °r 4p o7 tV \ sae \ / le — / !1111, /7 KURAHASHI / w MI NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION . f1d 5e""°""°`"`'' METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION I 004 .ea V�� ..ww����M, Wetland Impact Summary T err on NE . WI. .� e. ,, lIE1I AND MITIGATION • a im '5 '5 5 - '"-:i 5 5 5 5 g" :"'Ir3 -•--, :-. 2_7 CP 0 CJ1 0 C71 0 CJ1 o Cr 0 CJI 0 CJI Ca t i d 15+00 0+00 t., P/• 11 t." ,...r 0/ " 18+00 1+00 A .;&■ •-< 17+00 \ 2+00 18+00 3+00 r\>;/ W 19+00 4+00 ( 20+00 h 5+00 Ds I 21+00 8+00 , a ... i 1 f g: 22+00 7+00 ; i% J t.r i ! . \/ ' • 11 23+00 8+00 .". c ri / C'6 o \ t.1 10i 2,..‘ \/ 11 En /■\7 24+00 9+00 • . 1 C/3 25+00 ' • 10+00 xi 26+00 0 . 7. q 11+00 .-3 o z 27+00 . 7LN 12+00 tark428+00 13+00 - 'Tl 0 p5 A +0 III IP r il ..„, . 1 , 4 29+00 14+00 il hi • 0 \ NK\ 30+00 ./.- • .!• /K\-------- 15+00 r i _ . 1 . I- _ •—• I—. ■—• 1—• ■—• I—. O.) —.2 -2 03 03 CO CO 0 i i 99 ii° 'n t.,73. . 0 9 ,.n 0 0 0 1 44+00 0 V/ 30+00 .7 : t...i OY i• • \ . • . t... 0> J\\ 1 _______ • , . . • 45+00 .*.. .. 31+00 61 ye 4. ti ..< \ \( 7 : \, >./ 46+00 11 32+00 / s■ 7-- i 47+00 .\ .\ k; $ r 33+00 n I 1:\ : ifi • /\ HI -1.* 48+00 ■ ' . a . x. 34+00 t-Sr.- 1111 2 • 49+00 i _/ , 35+00 NM t/ P \ D 11. f 0 i 50+00 i F. ; i i[ 51+00 Viz\:,K; 11 37+00 1 ,1; 1 1. \ . \iv\ 52+00 38+00 K Pi V • En h' 53+00 39+00 c n V> 54+00 40+00 xi 1 A■ / t 55+00 41+00 m w iilis>_ lq :.. i ,-3 Z 58+00 j n 42+00 ilk tv\i/ g 57+00 1 : 43+00 CO C•2;13 P r` To 11 niiiir s Nil g 58+00 44+00 1 i II 0 I , 0 59+00 46+00 --i 0 I- 0 ! ' Metzger Property Owners 1S1 25CB-02100 1S1 25CB-01000 Mark Meyers and Melanie Closs Bradley Robert and Renee Janel Hille 8408 SW Cedarcrest Drive 9045 S.W. 80th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97223 1S1 25CB-02200 1S1 25CA-01102 Marjorie Flaman Catherine E. Sowa 9365 SW 82nd Avenue 7970 SW Taylors Ferry Road Portland, Oregon 97223 Tigard, Oregon 97223 1 S 1 25CB-02201 1 S 1 25CA-01200 Michael J. and Linda Flaman William K and Nancy A. Nash 8280 SW Cedarcrest 9060 SW 80th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97223 1S1 25CB-02300 1S1 25CA-01301 Larry B. Greisel Richard E. and Frances J. O'Neal 318 17th Avenue 9100 SW 80th Avenue Seattle, Washington 97122 Tigard, Oregon 97223 1 S 1 25CB-02400 1S1 25CA-01300 Darrell W. and Debbie J. Donner William R. Strong, Trust 9425 SW 82nd Avenue 9130 SW 80th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97223 1S1 25CB-02402 1S1 25CB-00900 Luther G. and Patricia H. Gray Eugene L. and Nora G. Ray, Trust 8275 SW Chestnut Street 9090 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97223 1 S 1 25CC-01000 1S1 25CB-01400 Leonard J. and Marilyn L. Freeman Warren T. and Patricia S. Forsyth 8322 SW Chestnut Street 2450 Paradise Drive Portland, Oregon 97223 Tiburon, California 94920 1S1 25CC-01300 1S1 35CB-01500 Hall 33 Ltd. Partnership, Dalton Company Olson Development Co., Inc. 8465A SW Hemlock 13141 SW Teufel Hill Road Tigard, Oregon 97223 Beaverton, Oregon 97007 1S1 25CC-01301 1S1 35CB-01000 Arden L. Warrington Gustava and Lois Anderson 8405 SW Elmwood Street 9135 SW 80th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Portland, Orgon 97223 1S1 25CC-01302 is! 35AA-01601 Northwest Retirement Housing Income Walt and Cindy Walp Fund III 10207 S.W. 85th Avenue 8445 SW Hemlock Street Portland, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97223 1S1 35AA-01600 1S1 25CC-01303 Patricia S. Fries Susan K. Peterson 10225 S.W. 85th Avenue 8400 SW Elmwood Tigard, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97223 1S1 35AA-01602 1S1 25CC-02600 Richard Taylor Washington County Facilities Mgmt. 10245 S.W. 85th Avenue 111 SE Washington Street, MS-42 Portland, Oregon 97223 Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 1 S 135AA-01701 1S1 26DD-01600 Laszlo and Iren Szalvay James and Richard Craytor 14950 SW 144th Avenue 16997 S.E. Blanton Tigard, Oregon 97224 Milwaukie, Oregon 97267 1 S 135AA-01702 1S1 26DD-01700 Szalvay Suresh C. Paranjpe 5625 Summit Drive 1 S 135AA-01800 West Linn, Oregon 97068 Helen Chavez 8407 SW Locust Metzger Park Condos by F.H. Portland, Oregon 97223 SchrieverM8959 SW Barbur BlvdePortland, Oregon 97219tMr. Schrieverz 1 S 1 26DD- 1 S 135AA-02100 90000ger Park Condos Nortland Homes, Inc. 1834 SW 58th#202 1S1 35AA-00102 Portland, Oregon 97201 Leon Laptook, Metzger Park Apts. Inc. 1001 S.W. Baseline 1S135AA-02000 V Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 71 Sandra Lynn Staats P.O. Box 20007 151 35AA-00200 Keizer, Oregon 97307 Kenneth and Margaret Johannes 10120 S.W. Hall Blvd., Suite 104 1S135AA-02001 Portland, Oregon 97223 Oregon Dept. of Transporation 417 Transporation Bldg. 1S1 35AA-01500 Salem, Oregon 97310 Garry Vallaster 711 S.W. Alder Portland, Oregon 97205 • 1S135AA-02400 Tigard, Oregon 97223 James L. and Darlene L. Cain 14300 SW Pacific Hwy. 1 S 126DD-01991 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Suresh C. Paranjpe 5625 Summit Drive 1 S 135AA-02500 West Linn, Oregon 97068 T\Donald J. and Hazel J. Lyon 10440 SW 87th Avenue 1S135AA-01901 Portland, Oregon 97223 T) Steven L. Aschenbrenner 5425 S.W. Lombard 1 S 135AA-02600 U Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Theodore S. Peterson and Virginia J. Dean $686 SW Oak Tigard, Oregon 97223 -r) 1 S 135AA-03600 John R. and Tracy I. Wright 10575 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 1 S 135AD-01200 7 Thelma Crouch Estate do Eugene L. Davis 10875 SW 89th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 T1 1 S 135AD-01300 ,/ Thelma Crouch Estate do Eugene L. Davis 1 S 135 AD-00900 Alice S. Juve 10655 SW Hall Blvd. Portland, Oregon 97223 1 S 135AD-01130 Eugene L. Davis 10875 SW 89th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 1S135AD-01101 Clifford and Kay Epler 8845 SW Spruce Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 1 S 135AD-01400 Eugene L. and Vivian M. Davis 10875 SW 89th Avenue Q7 CITY / COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AFFIDAVIT (to be completed by local planning official) ()This project is not regulated by the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. 0This project has been reviewed and is consistent with the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordina ce. 1 C 1_L�� 1� 0 ad-ec � 1 VYt r r1Cc,/ / `r3 I Q,rPi I{f/ I (77�I e-01 Q6 C� OThis project has been reviewed and is not`consistent with the I Iomprehensive Ia and zoning ordinance. ()Consistency of this project with the local planning ordinance cannot be determined until the following local approval(s) are obtained: ()Conditional Use Approval 0 Development Permit 0 Plan Amendment OZone Change 0 Other An ap•licatio 0 has •f has not been made for local approvals checked above. ,e•A , Si• ature(of local plan ing o icial) Title City Arirr7 Date 1110 COASTAL ZONE CERTIFICATION If the pr•:• ed activity described in your permit application is within the Oregon coastal zone,the following c-•.' ation is required before your application c.- .e processed. A public notice will be issued with the certification statement which wil •- orwarded to the Oregon Department of Land Conserv. •- •nd Development(DLCD)for its concurrence or objection. For a••' '•nal information on the Oregon Coastal Zone Management Program, c• • t the department at 1175 Court Street NE,Salem, • •on 97310 or call 503-373-0050. • (CATION STAT I certify that,to the best of my knowledge and belief,the pr..-.. ed activity described in this application complies with the approved Oregon Coastal Zone Management Program and will be c• •eted in a m.-•-r consistent with the program. Print/Type Name Title e:•'cant Signature Date �9 SIGNATURE FOR JOINT APPLICATION (REQUIRED) Application is hereby made for the activities described herein. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application,and,to the best of my knowledge and belief,this information is true,complete,and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority including the necessary requisite property interests to undertake the proposed activities. I understand that the granting of other permits by local, county, state or federal agencies does not release me from the requirement of obtaining the permits requested before commencing the project. I understand that local permits may be required before the state removal-fill permit is issued. I understand that payment of the required state processing fee does not guarantee permit issuance. p / /742T/1 L w.4_ic.€ f°,P.6Te� h�--4.4r Print/Type Name (coapplicant) Title � 4V/ / P ph Signature (coapplicont) Date 7--98 I certify that I may act as the duly authorized agent of the applicant. Print/Type Name Title Authorized Agent Signature Date SUPPLEMENTAL WETLAND IMPACT INFORMATION* (FOR WETLAND FILLS ONLY) Site Conditions of impact area Impact area is 0 Ocean 0 Estuary 0 River 0 Lake 0 Stream Q Freshwater Wetland Note: Estuarian Resource Replacement is required by state law for projects involving intertidal or tidal marsh alterations. A separate Wetlands Resource Compensation Plan may be appended to the application. Has a wetland delineation been completed for this site? © Yes 0 No If yes, by whom: Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. Describe the existing Physical and biological character of the wetland/waterway site by area and type of resource(use separate sheets and photos, if necessary) See attached stream assessment & wetland report Resource Replacement Mitigation Describe measures to be taken to replace unavoidably impacted wetland resources See attached compensitory mitigation form and wetland mitigation plans & narrative. Because this information is not necessary for a complete application, you may submit this sheet and other environmental information after submitting your application. 0 C, COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AFFIDA (to be completed by local planning official) ()This project is not regulated by the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. ()This project has been reviewed and is consistent with the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. ()This project has been reviewed and is not consistent with the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. Consistency of this project with the local planning ordinance cannot be determined until the following local approval(s) are obtained: ()Conditional Use Approval 0 Development Permit ,O Plan Amendment / _ / 0 Zone Change Other 5p-;h'iG L 'ds RVif.IN An application 1'J has 0 has not been made for local approvals checked above. dJhd/41tAs ' P/q��� �,� o ,^ /-3o-5727 nature(of local pl ning official) Title Ci County Date t COASTAL ZONE CERTIFICATION If the proposed activity described in your permit application is within the Oregon coastal zone,the following certification is r=.uired before y• r application can be processed. A public notice will be issued with the certification statement which will be forwarded tot. Oregon Departmen •f Land Conservation and Development(DLCD)for its concurrence or objection. For additional information o e Oregon Coastal Zone •nagement Program, contact the department at 1175 Court Street NE,Salem, Oregon 97310 or call 503- -0050. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT I certify that,to th- •est of my knowledge and belief,the proposed activity described in this application••mplies with the approved Oregon Coastal Zone Manag-• ent Program and will be completed in a manner consistent with the progr. . Print/Type Name Title • Applicant Signature Date OO SIGNATU• FOR JOINT A•• !CATION • QUIRE P Application is hereby made for the activities described h- . I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application, and,to the best of my knowledge and belief,this info •• . is true,complete,and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority including the necessary requisite property interests to dertake e proposed activities. I understand that the granting of other permits by local, county, state or federal agencies does no -lease me fro the requirement of obtaining the permits requested before commencing the project. I understand that local permit ay be required be • - the state removal-fill permit is issued. I understand that payment of the required state processing fee does no •uarantee permit issuance. Print/Type Name (=applicant) Title Applicant Signature (coapplicanf) Date I certify that ay act as the duly authorized agent of the applicant. Print• pe Name Title Authored Agent Signature Date JOINT PERMIT APPLICATION ATTACHMENTS Applicant: Unified Sewerage Agency Project Name: Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Authorized Agent: Kurahashi& Associates, Inc. 4. PROPOSED PROJECT PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION Project Purpose and Need: The existing Metzger sanitary sewer trunk line has been determined by the Unified Sewerage Agency to be significantly undersized between SW Taylor's Ferry Road and SW Spruce Street. The Unified Sewerage Agency proposes to replace the existing 24"gravity line with a 30"gravity line. The improvement of this sewer line will alleviate existing back-up problems and accommodate future development. Project Description: The replacement will occur predominantly along the existing alignment with some modifications, intended to reduce impact to existing roadways and natural features. The project will cover a linear temporary construction easement,varying between 60 and 40 feet in width,with a permanent easement of 15 feet for maintenance of the sewer line. The alignment generally follows Ash Creek and thus will be placed within wetland and floodplain areas. The proposed alignment crosses Ash Creek in three locations. The proposed alignment and profile are shown in the attached plans. No alteration of existing grades is proposed. The sewer will be constructed to Unified Sewerage Agency General and Technical Specifications. 5. PROJECT IMPACTS AND ALTERNATIVES Describe atlernative sites and project designs that were considered to avoid impacts to the water or wetland. An on-site pre-application meeting was held on October 14. This meeting was attended by: Bill Parks, DSL Lee Walker,USA Jan Stuart, USACOE Terry Chamberlin, USA Holly Michael,ODFW Brent Davis, Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. Based on comments and recommendations from the agency staff,the alignment was modified in a few locations to minimize impact to Ash Creek and associated wetlands. The construction easement was reduced to 40' in all wetlands throughout the corridor to minimize the area of temporary impact and restoration. Describe what measures you will use (before and after construction) to minimize impacts to the waterway or wetland. Bentonite barriers located on the downstream side of creek crossings will be used to eliminate capture of stream flow into the trench Kurahashi&Associates,Inc 01/22/98 S1 Unified Sewerage Agency Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation During construction,the contractor will be limited to a 40 foot easement within wetlands and all staging of equipment and materials will occur outside of identified wetlands. Trench excavation will be limited to 4 feet maximum width. Excavation in the vicinity of trees will be supervised by a professional arborist to ensure that adverse impacts to trees will be minimized during construction. Where the proposed alignment differs from the existing alignment the existing 24" pipe will be abandoned and sealed rather than excavated and removed. RESOURCE REPLACEMENT MITIGATION Based on the wetland delineation and proposed alignment 2.65 acres of wetland will be unavoidable impacted by the project. 2.37 acres of this will be temporary impact resulting from the contractor's use of the 40' construction easement. The remaining 0.28 acres will be permanently altered by trench excavation. The existing grade will be restored during trench backfill, but the disturbance to the soil may significantly alter the characteristics of the trench area. The wetland mitigation plan to restore and replace damaged wetlands has three major components: 1) Restoration of wetlands temporarily impacted by construction(2.37 ac.). 2) Re-vegetation of wetlands permanently impacted by trench excavation(0.28 ac). 3) Enhancement of wetlands and riparian areas in public ownership and outside of the 40 foot construction easement(0.68 ac.). The attached wetland mitigation plan shows planting zones based on plant community type. In some cases the plan will restore existing conditions, in other cases it will return meadow or lawn areas to riparian shrub/scrub and/or forest. Proposed plant species are listed by zone and quantity on the following page. Individual trees unavoidably impacted by trench excavation or inadvertently damaged during construction will be replaced"in-kind"with plantings small stock(e.g. <5 gal container)of the same species. Young stock will be used based on the applicant's experience with poor survivability of larger stock(e.g. > 1" caliper balled and burlap). Kurahashi &Associates,Inc 01/22/98 S2 Division of State Lands w DSL E Compensatory Mitigation Form (revised 5/4/96) If the permit involves multiple compensatory mitigation projects at different locations then use a separate sheet for each location. Please be sure to complete Item#1 and the grand total acreages for impacts and mitigation, Items #2 and#3. Give breakdowns by Cowardin class only if known. If using a wetland mitigation bank, please provide written proof of use from the bank operator and check the mitigation bank box below. Complete only Item#1 if using a mitigation bank. 1. Unified Sewerage Agency (Applicant) Permit No. (if known) MITIGATION SITE LOCATION Mitigation Site # 1 Adjacent Waterway Ash Creek County Washington Section 36'26,35Township 1S Range 1W Tax Lot(s) See attached L.,.G.S. Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) No. F r Basin Name Mitigation Bank To Be Utilized WETLAND IMPACTS 2. What wetland type or types will be filled or converted by your removal-fill project? (Not the compensatory mitigation project.) List all of the types. Where "wetland types" are requested on this form, the Division uses the Cowardinl wetland classification codes found on National Wetland Inventory Maps. Below are the most common wetland types. If your wetland type is not listed, use one of the blank spaces and fill in the appropriate code. Also, indicate the acreage involved for each wetland type you list. Acreages should be listed to the 1/100 of an acre if possible. (F=Fill, R=Remove, C=Convert) Acres Acres Acres Acres F R C F R C F R C F R C ❑PEM .14 1.19 ❑R3RB ❑E2EM ❑ ❑PSS ❑ R3UB ❑E2SS ❑ di PFO .14 1.18 ❑ R4SB ❑ E2F0 ❑ Grand Total of Wetland Impacts . 2.65 Acres t MPENSATORY MITIGATION 3. List all of the wetland types (on the reverse side) that will result from your proposed compensatory mitigation project by mitigation kind and wetland type. Indicate the acreage RESTORATION Acres Acres Acres Acres ❑ PEM 1.33 ❑ R3RB ❑ E2EM ❑ SS ❑ R3UB ❑ E2SS ❑ ❑ PF0 1.32 ❑ R4SB ❑ E2FO ❑ Restoration Total 2.65 Acres ENHANCEMENT Acres Acres Acres Acres ❑ PEM 0.28 ❑ R3RB ❑ E2EM ❑ ❑ PSS 0.40 ❑ R3UB ❑ E2SS ❑ ❑ PFO ❑ R4SB ❑ E2F0 ❑ Enhancement Total 0.68 Acres CREATION Acres Acres Acres Acres ❑ PEM ❑ R3RB ❑ E2EM ❑ ❑ PSS ❑ R3UB ❑ E2SS ❑ TO ❑ R4SB ❑ E2FO ❑ Creation Total Acres Grand Total of Wetland Mitigation 3.33 Acres' 4. Is part or all of the compensatory mitigation project site a prior converted cropland, a farmed wetland or a former wetland that is now upland? If known, state which type below: 5. If an upland buffer is proposed, please give average width and type: Width (ft.) Acres Forested Scrub/Shrub Herbs/Grasses Buffer Total Acres 6 worm completed by Brent Davis (Signature) (Printed Name) (Date) I Cowardin,Classification of Wetlands and Deenwater Habitats of the United States, 1979. Oregon Division of State Lands.Wetland Inventory User's Guide, 1990. fomiefrm.doe Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Wetland Mitigation Plant Schedule Forested Wetland Zone Area(ft2) 42736 Plot Size 10' x 10' 427.4 Common Name Botanical Name Form #Per Plot Qty Size Notes Oregon Ash Fraxinus latifolia bareroot 1 428 3-4' Pacific Ninebark Physocarpus capitatus container 1 428 2 gal Slough Sedge Carex obnupta bareroot 10 4274 Pole Cuttings 2 855 Grass Mix 2 0.05 22 lb 0.5 lb/1000 ft2 Upland Forest Zone Area(ft2) 25113 Plot Size 10' x 10' 251.1 Common Name Botanical Name Form #Per Plot Qty Size Notes Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii container 1 252 2 gal Western Red Cedar Thuja plicata container 1 252 2 gal Red Alder Alnus rubra container 2 503 2 gal Sword Fern Polystichum munitum root cutting 2 503 4"x 6" Dull Oregon Grape Mahonia nervosa root cutting 2 503 4"x 6" Grass Mix 2 0.05 13 lb 0.5 lb/1000 ft2 Wetland Riparian Zone Area(ft2) 23918 Plot Size 10' x 10' 239.2 Common Name Botanical Name Form #Per Plot Qty Size Notes Black Hawthorn Crataegus douglasii container 1 240 2 gal Black Cottonwood Populus balsamifera bareroot 2 479 2-3' Clustered Rose Rosa pisocarpa container 2 479 1 gal Pole Cuttings 3 718 Grass Mix 1 0.05 12 lb 0.5 lb/1000 ft2 Upland Riparian Zone Area(ft2) 12789 Plot Size 10' x 10' 127.9 Common Name Botanical Name Form #Per Plot Qty Size Notes Red Alder Alnus rubra container 2 256 2 gal Western Red Cedar Thuja plicata container 1 128 2 gal Saskatoon Serviceberry Amelanchier alnifolia container 2 256 2 gal Osoberry Oemleria cerasiformis container 2 256 2 gal Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus container 2 256 1 gal Grass Mix 2 0.05 7 lb 0.5 lb/1000 ft2 Kurahashi &Associates, inc. P1 Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Wetland Mitigation Plant Schedule Shrub/Scrub Wetland Zone Area(ft2) 8324 Plot Size 10' x 10' 83.2 Common Name Botanical Name Form #Per Plot Qty Size Notes Douglas Spiraea Spraea douglasii bareroot 3 250 2-3' Clustered Rose Rosa pisocarpa container 3 250 1 gal Serviceberry Amelanchier alnifolia container 2 167 2 gal Pole Cuttings 3 250 Grass Mix 1 0.05 5 lb 0.5 lb/1000 ft2 Wet Meadow Zone Area(ft2) 39142 Plot Size 10' x 10' 391.4 Common Name Botanical Name Form #Per Plot Qty Size Notes Sawbeak Sedge Carex stipata bareroot 3 1175 Grass Mix 1 0.1 40 lb 1 lb/1000 ft2 Upland Meadow Zone Area 14995 Common Name #Per 1000 ft2 Qty Size Notes Grass Mix 2 1 15 lb Pole Cuttings Zone Area(ft2) 6815 Plot Size 10' x 10' 68.2 Common Name #Per Plot Qty Notes Pole Cuttings 5 341 Lawn Replacement Zone Area(ft2) 12685 Turf grasses per owner specification Grass Mix 1 Common Name Botanical Name Size Form % by wt. Notes Western Manna Grass Glyceria occidentalis lb PLS 20 Native Red Fescue Festuca rubra lb PLS 30 Blue Wildrye Elymus glaucus lb PLS 30 Meadow Barley Hordeum brachyantherum lb PLS 20 Grass Mix 2 Common Name Botanical Name Size Form % by wt. Notes Blue Wildrye Elymus glaucus lb PLS 30 Native Red Fescue Festuca rubra lb PLS 30 California Brome Bromus carinatus lb PLS 20 Kurahashi &Associates, inc. P2 Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Wetland Mitigation Plant Schedule Pole Cuttings Common Name Botanical Name Size Form Qty Notes Willows consisting of two or more of the following: 3-4' cutting 70% Pacific Willow Salix lasiandra Scouler's Willow Salix scoulerana Hooker's Willow Salix hookerana Sitka Willow Salix sitchensis Northwest Willow Salix sessilifolia Red-Osier Dogwood Comus stolonifera 3-4' cutting 30% Kurahashi &Associates, inc. P3 1 ! I I 11 ) , 1 , 1 mai _ 1 , - - '- i ff., /1 Sr , 7-7,-; - 1 lb A %WA.. '"..-:41t ) / 1 2, Adili / .,, riA �C�� 1 P TAY c -wpm=ii ` lNN I rte_ �M�Cm '� . ,M.I'l 1 ; � k0 el r � ��ti�1 . al \N,,mr,,..,,&"16.iJilin r .,_ :-,e Ash IMPCIEMBIIIIIIMMIEMpir \. T I C � s r N I / ■4114 Mr- 466H...7.., W��� f A IMP4 4jr, f111 \ 4( 1-I 1 , / .r.. . 7 II I 1:24000 0.5 0 0.5 1 Miles /V Street AI Major Arterial //•lf/ Stream EXHIBIT A mass! Vicinity Map Metzger Trunk (1577) KLTRAHA S HI Unified Sewerage Agency Ce ASSCD CGIAMES, INC_ August 1997 METZGER SANITARY = P SEWER REHABILITATION 1 wi iiiir‘ i. r'''''3C7 Need A i - t Oswego SHEET 4 OF 6 VICINITY MAP �/ Not to Scale Air JSO 0� LEGEND j 't �� A s M. SHEET 3 OP 6 r . --siocw 1 %■ . = ?Trf f Olt. - pa on..me........on.:, • "....".. era e.t.a ma WA NA I? PAN NOY hi WM ga. ANN OM SMUT 2 OP 6 `•*' � !III1U�_II iltit ScoI i' = aoo' SHEET INDEX � � COVER SHEET '_G t 1 1. PLAN SHEET ETA 0+00 TO STA 17+19.4 SHEET1OF6 4r. 2. PLAN SHEET STA 17+19.4 TO STA 30+74.2 .. �~ 3. PLAN VIEW STA 30+74.2 TO STA 45+64.9 4. PLAN VIEW STA 45+64.9 TO STA 58+86.2 MrII .rl� 5. PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 28+04.2 6. PROFILE STA 28+04.2 TO STA 58+86.2 ea re. ()allied 4 .on METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION COVER SHEET NO •e .5 Wool _ .. .._ �.. Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Tigard, Oregon For The Unified Sewerage Agency 155 N First Street, Suite 270 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Prepared By: PhIUu II KIJR_A I S HI cc:e ASSOCIATES, 1NC. DECEMBER 1997 5a /f-moi Fact Sheet Summary Applicant Unified Sewerage Agency 155 N First Street, Suite 270 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Attn: Lee Walker (503)648-8621 Authorized Agent Kurahashi& Associates, Inc. 12600 SW 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard,OR 97223 (503)968-1605 Contact: Brent Davis, Environmental Scientist Project Area Ash Creek Corridor SW Taylor's Ferry Road to SW Spruce Street Request Sensitive Lands Approval Proposed Use Sanitary Sewer Trunk Line Upgrade Table of Contents 1.00 SUMMARY 1 2.00 CONCLUSION 1 3.00 APPLICABLE APPLICATION REVIEW CRITERIA 1 3.10 CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE FRAMEWORK PLAN 1 3.20 CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE 1 3.21 CHAPTER II, PROCEDURES AND DECISION MAKING 1 3.22 CHAPTER IV, OVERLAY DISTRICTS 1 3.23 CHAPTER V, SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS 1 3.24 CHAPTER VI, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 1 3.25 CHAPTER VII, DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION 1 4.00 AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS 2 4.10 DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 2 4.20 WATERWAYS AND WETLANDS 2 4.30 ROADS AND STREETS 2 5.00 INTRODUCTION 2 6.00 SITE ANALYSIS 2 6.10 ON-SITE ANALYSIS 2 6.20 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS 6 7.00 THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 6 7.10 SANITARY SEWER CONSTRUCTION 6 7.20 WETLAND MITIGATION 6 8.00 COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE APPLICATION REVIEW CRITERIA 6 8.10 CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 6 8.20 CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE 7 8.21 CHAPTER II, PROCEDURES FOR DECISION MAKING 7 8.22 CHAPTER IV, OVERLAY DISTRICTS 7 8.23 CHAPTER V, SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS 8 8.24 CHAPTER VI, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 9 8.25 CHAPTER VII, DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION 9 EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A VICINITY MAP 3 EXHIBIT B AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 5 EXHIBIT C LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY SUMMARY SHEET 4 EXHIBIT D WETLAND IMPACT MAP 11 TABLES TABLE I WETLAND MITIGATION PLANT LIST 10 APPENDIX APPENDIX A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES APPENDIX B NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING DOCUMENTATION APPENDIX C RAPID STREAM ASSESSMENT APPENDIX D WETLAND REPORT APPENDIX E FLOODPLAIN CERTIFICATION ATTACHMENTS PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION PLANS Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Unified Sewerage Agency 1.00 Summary The existing Metzger sanitary sewer trunk line has been determined by the Unified Sewerage Agency to be significantly undersized between SW Taylor's Ferry Road and SW Spruce Street. The Unified Sewerage Agency proposes to replace the existing 24"gravity line with a 30"gravity line. The replacement will occur predominantly along the existing alignment with some modifications, intended to reduce impact to existing roadways and natural features. The project will cover a linear temporary construction easement, varying between 60 and 40 feet in width, with a permanent easement of 15 feet for maintenance of the sewer line. The alignment generally follows Ash Creek and thus will be placed within Significant Natural Resource and floodplain areas. Due to the possible presence of significant trees and the locatio and floodplain,the development proposal will be subject to Sensitive Lands and Tree Removal review criteria. The project area was subject to a Rapid Stream Assessment(RSAT)and wetland delineation,both conducted by Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. in the summer of 1997. The field investigations looked at the . Sensitive Lands noted in the Meztger/Progress Community Plan. 2.00 Conclusion Based on the analysis of the Sensitive Lands and Tree Removal issues,The City of Tigard's development goals, and the applicant's objective,this proposal is in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and statewide planning goals. 3.00 Applicable Application Review Criteria 3.10 City of Tigard Comprehensive Framework Plan 3.20 City of Tigard Community Development Code 3.21 Chapter II, Procedures and Decision Making Section 18.32 Quasi-Jurisdictional 3.22 Chapter IV, Overlay Districts Section 18.84 Sensitive Lands 3.23 Chapter V, Supplemental Provisions Section 18.100 Landscaping and Screening 3.24 Chapter VI, Site Development Review Section 18.120 Site Development Review 3.25 Chapter VII, Development and Administration Section 18.150 Tree Removal Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. November 20, 1997 1 Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Unified Sewerage Agency 4.00 Affected Jurisdictions The Applicant is working with the following Jurisdictions to obtain Local, State and Federal permits for the proposed development. 4.10 Development Permits 1. Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation 2. City of Tigard Planning Department 4.20 Waterways and Wetlands 1. Oregon Division of State Lands 2. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 3. US Army Corps of Engineers 4.30 Roads and Streets 1. Oregon Department of Transportation 2. Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation 3. City of Tigard 5.00 Introduction The project area is a narrow linear corridor that generally parallels Ash Creek between SW Taylor's Ferry Road and SW Spruce Street in the Metzger area(see Vicinity Map, Exhibit A). This area is approximately 6,200 feet in length and spans the jurisdictional limits of the City of Tigard and Washington County. The corridor crosses Ash Creek in three locations as well as numerous public and private properties. The applicant has conducted several neighborhood meetings and is in the process of negotiating easements with all effected property owners. A portion of the project area is located within the City of Tigard's Sensitive Lands Overlay. The application requests development approval for the upgrade of the existing sanitary sewer trunk line. 6.00 Site Analysis 6.10 On-Site Analysis Refer to the provided preliminary construction plans,Appendix C, Rapid Stream Assessment(RSAT)of Ash Creek, and Appendix D, Wetland Delineation. The RSAT describes the existing condition of the reach of Ash Creek that coincides with the project area. The wetland report locates jurisdictional wetland boundaries and describes soil and vegetation conditions within the project area. The topography was generated by ground survey in the spring of 1997. Contours area mapped at 1 foot intervals. The project area generally follows the gradient of Ash Creek. Current Use of the project area is mixed residential, commercial,open space,and public road right-of-way. Significant Natural Resources are generally located in open space tracts in the project area. The wetland delineation report identifies 2.65 acres of wetland within the project area, 0.47 acres of this are within the City of Tigard. Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. November 20, 1997 2 lr� + ! , I I 1 ip L„. ,. J. i, ,„„ I *. , , : r ipme --- - ,-1 t Whib41-40,A ; �i t 11 I& , I 11 PPM • ■ � �� ' • „ 1�Iy:1 milir ,\ •• it 1m it a1 1 ,, A l 1y�111 Mr EAF in . 411 11� am -�J As4 INCIFIENE31111111M1111111PAIN lit ,_. obi" =mai N ec° ° IN , _a V fit/ i- cll - _ ,/ i %Nil \•' Ns, _ tip. , -AL \,. ,, I. - ■III A 4,# Ok 1 IIIIII:04 -1 1 7:',N.r.. . \ . . III I 1:24000 0.5 0 0.5 1 Mles // Street /\/ Major Arterial i• / Stream EXHIBIT A maim Vicinity Map Metzger Trunk (1571) KURAHA S HI Unified Sewerage Agency ce AS SCJC i r- s, 1.T.,c2. Auger 1997 Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory - Offsite Option WETLAND SUMMARY SHEET UNIT: 2 WETLAND: B-6, 7 Wetland Acreage: 9.5 Field Verified Date: 8/29/94 (8ac PEM, l.5ac POW) Location: SW of Hall Blvd./Oak St. Beaverton Quadrangle T1S R1W Sec. 35 Tax Map: 15135 AC, AD Zoning: R-4.5 Aerial: NE NWI Classification: R, POW, PEM WWHA Score: 54 Mapped Soils: 13 Cove SCL Hydrologic Basin: Fanno Creek Sub-basin: Ash Creek Hydrologic Source/Comments: precipitation; Ash Creek Dominant Vegetation: Trees Shrubs Herbs/Emergents Frarinus latifolia Sala sp. grass (grazed) Populus trichocarpa Rosa nurkana Juncus effusus Craraegus douglasi Boundary Information: Topographic break -> (fill); vegetation changes to snowberry, white oak Buffer Information: Standard 25ft min. Comments: Ash Creek, perennial stream, pond, agricultural wetlands; disturbed by till. Diverse group of raptors (merlin, RT, kestrel, sharp-shinned) observed by SRI; adjacent woodland. North of noisy Highway 217. Fishman Environmental Services Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Unified Sewerage Agency Soils in the project area are mapped had hydric soil types in the SCS Washington County Soil Survey(see soils map in the wetland report,Appendix D). 6.20 Off-site Analysis Refer to the provided preliminary construction plans and grayscale aerial photo(Exhibit B). These show the relationship of the project area to the Ash Creek corridor and surrounding uses. The aerial photograph shows the vegetative cover in the creek corridor and indicates the extent of riparian coverage of the creek and associated significant natural resource areas. Exhibit C is the Wetland Summary Sheet for Wetlands B6 and B7 of Unit 2 in Tigard's Local Wetland Inventory(1994)that describes the wetlands along Ash creek at the downstream end of the project area. 7.00 The Development Proposal Refer to the provided preliminary construction plans. 7.10 Sanitary Sewer Construction The replacement sewer line will follow the alignment and profile shown in the plans. No alteration of existing grades is proposed. The sewer will be constructed to Unified Sewerage Agency General and Technical Specifications and will include bentonite barriers at the downstream side of creek crossings to eliminate capture of stream flow into the trench. Additional barriers may be placed in wetlands to reduce the potential for the loss of wetland hydrology. The construction corridor will be revegetated either with native grasses and forbs, "in-kind"of landscaping per owner request, "in-kind"replacement of significant trees that cannot be avoided during construction, or according to the attached Wetland Mitigation Plan. 7.20 Wetland Mitigation The wetland mitigation is designed to restore all wetland impacted by construction with"in-kind" replacement of vegetation lost(2.65 acre). The plan will also enhance degraded wetlands and riparian areas outside the construction limits(0.68 acre) in order to meet mitigation requirements set by the Division of State Lands(DSL). No grading outside of the sewer line trench excavation and backfill will be required to complete the proposed wetland mitigation. The proposed plan is based on a site meeting with representatives from DSL,the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,and the US army Corps of Engineers. However, The Joint 404/DSL Removal/Fill Permit application for the project will be subject to DSL review,thus the proposed mitigation plan may have to be modified to address reviewer comments. Changes will be limited to the enhancement of additional wetlands within the immediate vicinity of the project area and will not include excavation to create new wetlands. 8.00 Compliance with Applicable Application Review Criteria 8.10 City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan The Community Development Code states that: "All provisions of this title shall be construed in conformity with the adopted comprehensive plan,"therefore, it is not necessary to address specific policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. November 20, 1997 6 Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Unified Sewerage Agency 8.20 City of Tigard Community Development Code 8.21 Chapter II, Procedures for Decision Making Section 18.32 Procedures for Decision Making: Quasi-Jurisdictional 18.32.040 Preapplication Conference Required The applicant attended a preapplication conference on July 31, 1997. Preapplication notes are included in Appendix A. 1832.050 Application Submittal Requirements This application includes the required forms,a list of names and addresses of all surrounding property owners,and addresses all of the criteria identified in the preapplication notes. 8.22 Chapter IV, Overlay Districts Section 18.84 Sensitive Lands 18.84.015 Applicability of Uses The applicant acknowledges that the City Engineer will review the installation of the proposed sanitary sewer. The applicant acknowledges that a Joint 404\DSL Removal Fill Permit will be required to perform the proposed work within jurisdictional wetlands. The proposed wetland mitigation plan was developed to address concerns identified by the Corps, DSL, and ODFW at an on-site preapplication meeting. An application for the permit will be submitted to the appropriate agencies concurrent with this application. 18.84.026 General Provisions for Floodplain Areas The proposed sanitary sewer has been designed to minimize infiltration of and discharge to floodwaters per Unified Sewerage Agency General and Technical Specifications. 18.84.028 General Provisions for Wetlands See the Wetland Report(Appendix D)for the location of jurisdictional wetland boundaries. 18.84.040 Approval Standards A. Floodplain Findings: 1) Since the replacement of the sanitary sewer will not alter existing grade,the project does not constitute a landform alteration. floodplain storage function will therefore be preserved. 2) The proposed sanitary sewer is a utility use,and thus is allowed within the 100-year floodplain. 3) No change from existing grade is proposed. Therefore no change in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood is anticipated. 4) Not applicable 5) Not applicable 6) As mentioned previously,a Joint 404 DSL Removal/Fill permit application will be submitted. 7) Not applicable Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. November 20, 1997 7 Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Unified Sewerage Agency B. No slopes 25%or greater are within the proposed project area. C. No work is proposed within drainageways. D. Wetlands Findings: 1) Since the replacement of the sanitary sewer will not alter existing grade,the project does not constitute a landform alteration. Furthermore development of wetlands identified as sensitive lands is proposed. 2) Permanent disturbance of wetlands will be limited to a 15' wide permanent sanitary sewer easement within a 40' wide construction easement. The existing topography will not be altered, but the excavation may alter soils and hydrology. DSL will require mitigation for the wetlands impacted by the excavation. 3) There will be no alteration of existing on-site or ofd site drainage. 4) During construction,all applicable erosion control standards will be met or exceeded. Vegetation within disturbed wetlands will be restored according the proposed Wetland • Mitigation Plan. 5) All applicable sensitive land requirements have been met. 6) Tree Removal conditions will be met as described in Section 8.25 of this document. 7) Per Section 18.84.010, Item D of the Community Development Code,this proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 18.84.050 Application Submission Requirements The required maps and plans have been attached A list of names and addresses of all surrounding property owners within 250 feet has been provided. 18.84.070 Site Conditions If requested site conditions are not indicated on the attached Site Analysis Drawings,they have not been observed to exist within the project area. 18.84.080 The Site Plan If required site elements not indicated on the attached Site Plan,they do not apply to this proposal. 18.84.090 Grading Plan If required grading elements are not indicated on the attached Grading Plan,they do not apply to this proposal. 18.84.100 Landscape Plan If required landscape elements are not indicated on the attached Landscape Plan,they do not apply to this proposal. 8.23 Chapter V, Supplemental Provisions Section 18.100 Landscaping and Screening 18.100.120 Revegetation All area's disturbed by construction will be revegetated either as specified in the wetland mitigation plan,a mix of native grasses and forbs for erosion control,or per land owner specification(e.g. Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. November 20, 1997 8 Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Unified Sewerage Agency replacement of lawn or turf grasses). Significant trees unavoidably removed will be replaced"in- kind"per the Tree Plan provided. 8.24 Chapter VI, Site Development Review Section 18.120 Site Development Review Requirements of this section have been satisfied as outlined in Section 8.22 of this application. 8.25 Chapter VII, Development and Administration Section 18.150 Tree Removal Refer to the attached Tree Plan for tree locations and general notes on removal. No trees greater than 6"diameter are proposed to be removed at this time. Nine trees between 7"and 18" in diameter are close to the excavation limits and may be damaged by trench excavation. A professional arborist will be on site when excavation adjacent to these trees commences. The arborist will determine whether or not lethal impact can be avoided and what steps are necessary to preserve the trees. No lethal impact to existing trees greater than 6"diameter is anticipated. Any trees that are removed will be replaced"in-kind"with an appropriate quantity of replacement trees per Section 18.150.070D of Tigard's Community Development Code. The use of smaller stock (bareroot or container no larger than 5 gallon size) is proposed for replacement trees due to the nature of the project area and the difficulty anticipated in providing the irrigation and maintenance required to ensure the survival of larger trees. Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. November 20, 1997 9 Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Unified Sewerage Agency Wetland Mitigation Plant List (see Planting Plan for zone locations and quantities) Forested Wetland Zone Grass Mix 1 Oregon Ash Western Manna Grass Pacific Ninebark Native Red Fescue Slough Sedge Blue Wildrye Grass Mix 1 Meadow Barley Pole Cuttings Grass Mix 2 Upland Forest Zone Blue Wildrye Douglas Fir Native Red Fescue Western Red Cedar California Brome Red Alder Sword Fern Pole Cuttings Dull Oregon Grape 70%Willows consisting of two or more of the following: Pacific Willow Wetland Riparian Zone Scouler's Willow Black Hawthorn Hooker's Willow Black Cottonwood Sitka Willow Clustered Rose Northwest Willow Pole Cuttings 30%Red Osier Dogwood Grass Mix 1 Upland Riparian Zone Red Alder Western Red Cedar Serviceberry Osoberry Snowberry Grass Mix 2 Shrub/Scrub Wetland Zone Pole Cuttings Douglas Spiraea Clustered Rose Serviceberry Grass Mix 1 Wet Meadow Zone Sawbeak Sedge Grass Mix 1 Upland Meadow Zone Grass Mix 2 Pole Cuttings Zone Pole Cuttings Lawn Replacement Zone Turf grasses per owner specification Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. November 20, 1997 10 JM NOT TO SCALE \ N \ �Pe \ 4 t \\ \ ^\; II WETLAND art��y \ '� / / \+ \ '/ PERMANENT `• \ / l %WETLAND IMPACT 5� /'� \ ,q, APPROX. 100-)EAR `; 0 �� � �= \ / , FLOOD PLAIN "� �� � o�. \ 424 ,'s, ,. / P ''IIIIIIIIIA 441,0, . 7 ' -- .01....fite: 71L, t. 110‘77 77..._-.- � ,, ' 9 dS� f r y ., \\ v, f �! \ sae +• --, . -----,,,„ , ,/,' 4r--,-- \ \ \*.'N.\\ - ‘ ---- - re r- 4$ ...r,Ni---5.....------. 1,./.."./C-1.---.\--): \ --:::---17 \ \ � = J to -4 %`� =-216 'n. . a — ` '0 ALIGNMENT SANITARY el -tb to� Nei -- PROPOSED -l.\' T.4 R}- ALIGNMENT Iulkm i" KURAHASHI at ASSOCIATES. INC. C NIL 1:.v1:-®::c fl C.wZ: Lua Cn=.uicxrtccru ?JAN G ?i A.r.'Rir. :M...IS rsm..._.x Site :ay.PM-iecc --E=BHP unified Sewerage Agenc} METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION 1-00 1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION M°-. UJ - wbHtil tw, c�L1 Wetland Impact Summary = „O, 1997_ -=°'"'- N ,,, ;,„ WETLAND MITIGATION 137 Appendix A Pre-Application Meeting Notes CITY OFTIGARD . PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES Aer r:✓mmuentty NON-RESIDENTIAL mar .7L3/ ;aFF LJ.//% Nark 6re 3. J J .PPLICANT: (15/9 AGENT: __One:[ 1 Phone: ( l OPERTY LOCATION: I� ; ADDRESS: wcc.- ?..v(0. / Ty/ / . Gtirs.•oc T,v%✓r/sKlp ,,., /I1 ic9!• TAX MAP/TAX LOT: no w� :ECESSARY APPLICATION(S1: .,5'Ive L9/?0/5 Pj4, ROPOSALDESCRIPTION: k e MPREHENSIVE IAN DESIGNATION: P 5'5 4-Lc/OF us[ING DESIGNATION: K '/. 4,1./ C-P IZEN INVOLVEMENT Qsf FACILITATOR: _cc- znM AREA PHONE [5031 NG DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size: sq. ft. Average lot width: ft. Max'.. -- ..• •ing height: ft. _backs: Front ft. Side ft. Rear Corner ft. from street. Maximum site coverage: % 11" andscaped or natural vegetation area: [Refer to - ] T10NAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet unless lot is created thrcJgh the minor land partiti.. - . essT Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of front.• . ave a minimum 15 foot wide access easement. The depth of all lots shall not exceed - - e average width, unless the parcel is less than 1 times the ••••• . -- - o e applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.060-lots] Y OF T16ARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page l of 8 .eoUel eeellciUo./►Ia..1.1 Dennison Sectiee .CIAL SETBACKS Streets: feet from the centerline of • Established areas: feet from Lower intensity zones: , a ong the site's boundary. . Flag lot: 10-foot -yard setback. [Referto oC de Section and 18.961 3 DIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS Building Height Exceptions - Buildings located in a non-residential zone - •- o a height of 75 feet provided that: • A maximum building floor ar- _ • ite area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; - All actual buildinett5acks will be at least half (1/2) of the building's height: and . The stcue etcrr will not abut a residential zoned district. _iifteferto Code Section 18.98.0201 KING AND ACCESS Required parking for this type of use: Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): ; V Secondary use required parking: 7 Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): �/ of No more than 4 0 •o o required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. Parking Stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: - Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 8 inches x feet. Compact parking space dimensions: 8 feet x 15 felt. [Refer to Code Section 18.106.0201 7 Handicapped Parking: All parking areas shall provide approp tely 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 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon reouest. A handicapped parking space symool shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall beposted. i Bicycle racks are required for multi-family, commercial and industrial developments. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the..basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. / Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: Minimum pavement width: All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: [Refer to Code Section 18.106 and 18.1081 1 Ty nFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 • tls.Uil ntlllaUsUFtamst Dnartaiot SWAB I LKWAY REQUIREMENTS Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor la ••- • of stairs. ramps. or elevators of all commercial, institutional. and industrial uses, to the - - which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient •• - -c ions between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial com•l- . -•. finless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and nei.•..nng developments. [Refer to Code Section 18.1 "DING AREA REQUIN TS Every mmercial or industrial building in excess of 10,000 square feet shall be provided with a loading s .(. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. (Refer to Code Section 18.106.010-090) ;LIAR VISION AREA The City requires that clear vision areas be maintained •-■• -- ree and eight feet in height at road/driveway, road/railroad, and roa•i • -- - -c ions. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the -•- -• • reet's functional classification. [• o Code Section 18.102) 'OFFERING AND SCREENING In order to increase privacy and to either reduce or eliminate adverse noise or visual impacts between adjacent developments. especially between different and uses, the City requires landscaped b ; -r areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in term • width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shr - -nd must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscurin• eens or fences may also be required: these are often advisable even if not required by the C . The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities. and walkwa .dditional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Developm ode. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.100) The required buffer widt ich are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: ,f, long north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. In addition. sight obscuring screening is required along 1NLISCAPING Street trees are required for all developments fronting on a public or private street as well as dri •ays which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public k-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees • . ave a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grad.- - -et trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the .r.:. ed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be •e - ned from the Planning Division. A minimum of one (1) tree for every seve• parking spaces must be planted in and around all parking areas in order to provide a ve•,. - • e canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which -•- ively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the us;E -t-andscaped berms. decorative walls. and raised planters. For detailed information on design regutrsments for parking areas and accesses. [Refer to Code Chapters 18.100,18.106 and 18.108) TY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 laaetlal applIcatlea/naaolal Onartner SectJea IGNS Sign permits must be obtained prior to installation of any sign in the City of Tigard. A " . • -s for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. A••• •••- - = • -.• •-yond Code standards may be pr rmitted if the si•n • •••-- -viewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Ex -• ion application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. ----Refer to Code Section 18.114) EHSITIVE LANDS The Code provides regulations for lands which are potentially unsuitable for development due to areas within the 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas, on slopes in excess of 25 percent, or on unstable ground. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive lands areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. .esidential development is prohibited within floodplains. _ Refsr to-Co e�ectian 1 : STEEP SLOPES 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 18.84.040.B. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of 18.84.040.B.2 and 18.84.040.B.3. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY[USA)BUFFER STANDARDS,R&0 96-44 Purpose: 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. Design Criteria: The vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet wide, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. 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 otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A gravel walkway or bike path, not exceeding 8 feet in width. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than 10 feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetation; and Water quality facilities may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of 10 feet with the approval of the Agency or City. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 DM-Resldentlel eppllntlon/p ignIng Depertmept Section Location of Vegetated Corridor: In any residential development which creates multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership. such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. . [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Desi'n for S Ml E REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS A tree pan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be p rovided for any lot. parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, I major partition, site development review. planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. The tree plan shall include the following: Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as I significant by the City; 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 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: Retainage of less than 25 percent 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 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that! two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D: Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D: Retainage of 75 percent 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 18.150.070.D. [Refer to Code Section 18.150.0251 MITIGATION 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. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 k A11lerrtl11 sedlatlee/PIa.Ie1 Dnrrt!•rrt Seetler 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. [Refer to Code Section 18.150.070[01 ;DIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION Prior to submitting a Subdivision land use application with the City of Tigard, applic_. '. _ - required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washingto Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. ations will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confiru- • approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. . • rveyor's Office: 648-8884) THAT! The applicant shall submit a narrative which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application I incomplete and delay review of the proposal. [Refer to Code Section 18.32) '"9E SECTIONS _ 18.80 _ 18.92 _ 18.100 _ 18.108 _ 18.120 18.150 18.84 _ 18.96 _ 18.102 _ 18.114 _ 18.130 18.160 18.88 18.98 _ 18.106 18.116 _ 18.134 18.162 18.164 'MPACT STUDY As a part of the application submittal requirements, applicants are required to include impact sty with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the develcmeqit on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum. the transpo lion system. includinc bikeways, the drainage system. the parks system, the water sy _r , he sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility s - and type of impact. the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City sta •- is. and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large. public facilities - -ms, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Develo .•- Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either sp- ally concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the_c_o_natution that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projeeenmpacts of the development. [Refer to Code er 18.32.Section.050) Wher condition of approval requires transfer to the public of an interest in real property. the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32,Section.250) 3HBORHOOD MEETING The applicant shall notify all property owners within 250 feet and the appropriate CIT Facilitator and the, members of any land use subcommittee(s) of their proposal. A minimum of 2 weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site postinc and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout] J t"" OF 116ARD Pre-Anplicat]on Conference Motes Page 6 al 8 .:terrtlu anlIcitlesRtiuuta Deurtsrrt Srctlu WING PERMITS Plans for building and other related permits will not be accepted for review until a land use appro . as been issued. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted • there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. "�YCUN6 Applicant should contact franchise hauler for r- = and approval of site servicing compatibility with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTAC - • : Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. [Refer to Cod• : i t :.1161 IITIONAI CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: 0,2/7 a o ;,c✓e � %∎27- S rce.-f n ( rr:red 6 / • - 10EDURE 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. .PPl1CATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (11, 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report of administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. 7rT"OF T16ARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 + aslduUsIlOpll ciUn/PlaiilgOspartmsutSsc!UC The Planning Division and Engineering Division will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10, to 20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard t✓r COO/V:1 . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. 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. PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. An additional pre-application fee and conference will be required if an application pertaining to this pre-application conference is submitted after a period of more than six (6) months following this conference lunless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: ,j(1 CITY OF TIGABD PLANNING DIVISION PHONE [503)639-4171 FAX: [5031 684-7297 I■Vratniunast■n4rmi-crost Sectlaa:sasttrslor■arr{.aq] 1-Mar-91 3ITY OFT1GAR0 Pre--Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 + astanmi arrncanaa/►taular 1■rart•■rt S■cna■ CITY OF TIGARD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT A.. APPLICATION CHECKLIST CITY OF TIGARD The items on the checklist below are required for the succesful completion of your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be returned and submitted with all other applicable materials at the time you submit your and use application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. Staff: ■ 6 Date: —7/3 r l9' 7 APPLICATION & RELATED DOCUMENTS) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE / MARKED ITEMS A) Application form (1 copy) ¢' B) Owner's signature/written authorization tt�/ C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed D) Applicant's statement No. of Copies �--O E) Filing Fee S (2.- SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ./ MARKED ITEMS 1 A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies 1 . Vicinity map 2. Site size & dimensions 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10°0) 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: (a) Floodplain areas r� (b) Slopes in excess of 25°0 ¢/ (c) Unstable ground (d) Areas with high seasonal water table (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils e✓( 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: (a) Wildlife habitats (b) Wetlands 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings t (b) Trees with 6" -- caliper measured 4 feet from ground level 8. Location of existing structures and their uses 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources 10. Location of existing utilities and easements 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways LAND '.;SE APPLICATION J LUST PAC; t OF B) Site Development Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . The proposed site and surrounding properties 2. Contour line intervals 3. The location, dimensions and names of all: (a) Existing & platted streets & other public ways and easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site p (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension ❑ 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site ❑ (b) Parking and circulation areas ❑ (c) Loading and services area (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation ❑ (e) Outdoor common areas (f) Above ground utilities ❑ 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site ❑ (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ 7. Sanitary sewer facilities C 8. The location areas to be landscaped 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques ❑ 10. The location of mailboxes ❑ 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements C) Grading Plan indicating: No. of Copies %-JD The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: 1 . The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating: (a) General contour lines (b) Slope ratios (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals ❑ (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION J LIST pAct: 0; 5 D) Architectural Drawings indicating: No. of Copies - The site development plan proposal shall include: 1 . Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures proposed for use on-site 2. Typical elevation drawings of each structure E) Landscape Plan Indicating: No. of Copies The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate: 1 . Description of the irrigation system where applicable ❑ 2. Location and height of fences, buffers and screenings ❑ 3. Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials ❑ 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions ¢/ (b) Erosion control measures that will be used �✓ F) Sign Drawings: Sign drawings shall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 of the Code as part of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: H) Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Map Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . The owner of the subject parcel ❑ 2. The owner's authorized agent ❑, 3. The map scale (20,50,100 or 200 feet- 1) inch north arrow a . date ❑ 4. Description of parcel location and boundaries ❑ 5. Location, width and names of streets, easements and • er public ways within and adjacent to the parcel 6. Location of all permanent buildings on and in 25 feet of all property lines 7. Location and width of all water co -s c 8. Location of any trees within 6" - greater caliper at 4 feet above ground level 9. All slopes greater than D 10. Location of existin: tilities and utility easements ❑ 11 . For major land •-rtition which creates a public street: (a) The pr..osed right-of-way location and width (b) A s . ed cross-section of the proposed street plus any reserve strip 12. Any ap•licable deed restrictions ❑ 13. Evi• -nce that land partition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable c LAND USE APPLIGTION I LIST PAGE 3 01 5 I) Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map and Data Indicating: No. of Copies 1. Scale equaling 30,50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet - �❑ 2. The proposed name of the subdivision ,/c 3. Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets O 4. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer engineer, surveyer and designer (as applicable) c 5. Date of application ❑ 6. Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided c 7. Names of adjacent subdivision or names of recorded owner of adjoining parcels of un-subdivided land c S. Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at -foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater than 10% c 9. The purpose, location, type and size of all the follow' g (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): (a) Public and private right-of-ways and easem- is c (b) Public and private sanitary and storm sew-r lines 0 (c) Domestic water mains including fire hy. ants _ c (d) Major power telephone transmission ii es (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses c (f) Deed reservations for parks, open •aces, pathways and other land encumbrances c 10. Approximate plan and profiles of pr.•osed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicat- • on the plans ❑ 11. Plan of the proposed water distri• tion system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire h drants 12. Approximate centerline profit: showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions 1. a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision c 13. Scaled cross sections of • oposed street right-of-way(s) c 14. The location of all are. subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ 15. Location, width & dir- ion of flow of all water courses & drainage-ways ❑ 16. The proposed lot co figurations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Wher- lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall •e indicated upon such lots. c 17. The location of . I trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above gr.und level, and the location of proposed tree plantings 18. The existing _es of the property, including the location of all structures and the preesnt uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to rem n after platting 19. Supplemental information including: (a) Prpposed deed restrictions (if any) to (b) P,toof of property ownership ❑ (c) A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements ❑ 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, wetlands & marsh areas ❑ 21 . If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application ,-, LAND USE APPLICATION/LIST PACE 4Ot.5 J) Solar Access Calculations: K) Other Information No. of Copies 2 �✓ / o ye4/ (-/tea c! %in L/�/�QliH'er,. / 5,e5-- ce:iebti-&ityr --__Ccer <-414.15 h AUogmlpattylmutersll.dcksi.mst May 23. 1995 LAND USE APPLICATION I LIST PAGES OF 5 Appendix B Neighborhood Meeting Documentation k UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY Public Meeting Proposed Sanitary Sewer Upgrade in Metzger 7 p.m. Wednesday, July 23, 1997 Metzger Park Hall 8400 SW Hemlock The Unified Sewerage Agency is planning to upgrade the sanitary sewer system in your area, along Ash Creek from Taylors Ferry Road at 80th Avenue to Spruce Avenue near SW 89th Avenue. The system needs to be upgraded because it is at capacity and overflows during very wet weather. Last February, we held a public meeting to introduce the project to property owners. Now that the surveying, preliminary design, and environmental assessment of the project area are completed, it is time for another public meeting. At the meeting, USA staff will discuss the design and how the project will affect the neighborhood, and will ask for your comments and suggestions. We hope you can attend the meeting. If you are unable to attend, but have questions or comments, please feel free to call Project Manager Lee Walker or Public Involvement Coordinator Sheri Wantland at 648-8621 . This project will be funded as a sanitary sewer capital improvement project. Property owners will not be assessed for the project. The actual construction of the new sewer would begin in summer of 1998 or 1999. The Agency is aware there have also been storm sewer and drainage problems in the area, but the funding for the proposed project is for sanitary sewer construction only. 155 North First Avenue, Suite 270, MS 10 Phone:503/648-8621 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 FAX:503/640-3525 Iu Unified Sewerage Agency SIGN-IN SHEET MEETING: M - 1�Jr4,►�- Up3rd a � DATE: 2 q7 Nam e I Address Phone ,64 )2°/GvrL l c7J/d$,(J 107 Ceiv, - 2 i P A/i_ C'Z3J I p� � ' " ,4'� y S 0,„)A 7y 70 5�) 7� Cs Pc-e i-T > > L-+cz c c 8 8 9 /)1L35- sW north 441f- qV3 �e vt� NI o(a ' q D`t.6 w QS 2 z 45-t-� l 5 l.- rP ,� Sys SG) S rw eQ s,i .3 yG, -syc� X16- 'P' Y SUi C1' `-Kz_ i ZcS I- I I I I. I I • ......-pm5 Metzger Trunkline Upgrade Public Meeting #2 July 23, 1997 Staff attending: Terry Chamberlin, Lee Walker, Sheri Wantland Neighbors: Marjorie Flaman, Cathy Sowa, Gus Anderson, Gene and Nora Ray, Cliff Epler, Mark Meyers, and Jeanette Carter of Metzger Park staff 1. Introductions, project overview--Sheri 2. Preliminary design, permits, easements, schedule--Terry 3. Specific concerns--Lee All had attended previous meetings or talked with staff about the project. There were few concerns other than wanting to preserve landscaping and significant trees. The meeting was congenial, with attendees expressing strong support for the project and how USA staff was approaching it. Several requested watertight manhole lids, and were concerned about the elevation of manholes. (It was commented that Dr. Davis was at the Tigard city council the night before trying to get an amendment on a landuse issue.) Specific concerns: Gus Anderson 9153 SW 80th--bridge, mature landscaping Cliff Epler 8845 SW Spruce--fish pond, dam (he said the water was worse this year than it's ever been; has had several fish kills, might just "stop" the fish until after the project) Gene and Nora Ray 9090 SW 82nd--huge oak tree Marjorie Flaman 9365 SW 82nd--her son owns adjacent property and planted a tree on the easement, concerned about access. Mark Meyers 8408 SW Cedar Crest Drive--wants notice before workers on property, found dumped concrete on the property; is in process of developing. Lee spoke individually with all and will visit their property to see each concern. r ies: L. Mattila Catherine E. Sowa William K. Nash ! 35 SW 80 Avenue 7970 SW Taylors Ferry Rd. Nancy A. Nash Portland OR 97223 Tigard OR 97223 9060 SW 80 Avenue 1 25CB 01000 1S1 25CA 01102 Portland OR 97223 1S1 25CA 01200 Richard E. O'Neal William R. Strong Trust Eugene L Ray I tnces J. O'Neal 9130 SW 80 Avenue Nora G. Ray JO SW 80 Avenue Portland OR 97223 9090 SW 82 Avenue Tigard OR 97223 1S1 25CA 01300 Portland OR 97223 1 25CA 01301 1S1 25CB 00900 l. arren T. Forsyth Olson Development Co. Inc. Gustava Anderson Patricia S. Forsyth 13141 SW Tuefel Hill Rd. Lois Anderson 30 Paradise Dr Beaverton OR 97007 9135 SW 80 Avenue .,,uron CA 94920 1S1 25CB 01500 Portland OR 97223 " 1 25CB 01400 1S1 25CB 01000 IF rk Meyers Marjorie Flaman Michael J Flaman Melanie Closs 9365 SW 82 Avenue Linda Flaman F "")E3 SW Cedar Crest Dr. Portland OR 97223 8280 SW Cedarcrest St. I hand OR 97223 1S1 25CB 02200 Portland OR 97223 1S1 25CB 02100 1S1 25CB 02201 I. ry B. Greisel Darrell W. Donner Luther G. Gray 3 17 Avenue Debbie J. Donner Patricia H. Gray Seattle WA 98122 9425 SW 82 Avenue 8275 SW Chestnut St. 1 25CB 02300 Tigard OR 97223 Tigard OR 97223 1S1 25CB 02400 1S1 25 CB 02402 Leonard J. Freeman Hall 33 Ltd. Partnership Arden L. Warrington 1' rilyn L. Freeman Dalton Company 8405 Sw Elmwood St. I-22 SW Chestnut St. 8465A SW Hemlock Tigard OR 97223 Portland OR 97223 Tigard OR 97223 1S1 25CC 01301 1 1 25CC 01000 1S1 25CC 01300 Northwest Retirement Susan K. Peterson Chris Wayland I-' " sing Income Fund III 8400 SW Elmwood Washington County E 15 SW Hemlock St. Portland OR 97223 Facilities Management-Admin. Portland OR 97223 1S1 25CC 01303 111 SE Washington St. MS 4 1- 1 25CC 01302 Hillsboro OR 97123 James Craytor Joseph C. Carnig Richard Craytor Gerald G. Mock 16997 SE Blanton 8900 SW Hall Blvd. Milwaukie OR 97267 Portland OR 97223 1S1 26DD 01600 1S1 26DD 01700 E 1rd of Directors Metzger Park Apartments, Inc. Kenneth Johannes f\ _ :zger Park Condos Leon Laptook Margaret Johannes P O. Box 6469 1001 SW Baseline 10120 SW Hall Blvd. Ste 104 F tland OR 97228 Hillsboro OR 97123 Portland OR 97223 1_ . 26DD 90000 1S1 35AA 00102 1S1 35AA 00200 M.-ray Pepper Walt Walp Patricia S. Fries J ies Pepper Cindy Walp 10225 SW 85 Avenue By Bank of America 10207 SW 85 Avenue Tigard OR 97223 F- rtland OR 97228 Portland OR 97223 _ 1S1 35AA 01600 1 35AA 01.500 . . • 1S1 35AA (1601 • `lichai J Taylor Laszlo Szalvay Helen Chavez 0245 SW 85 Avenue Iren Szalvay 8407 SW Locust Portland OR 97223 14950 SW 144 Avenue Portland OR 97223 S1 35AA 01602 Tigard OR 97224 1S1 35AA 01800 1S1 35AA 01701 Northland Homes Inc. Gary Kaufman State of Oregon 834 SW 58th #202 1295 Baxter Rd SE Dept. of Transportation ortland OR 97201 Salem OR 97036 417 Transportation Bldg. 1S1 35AA 02100 1S1 35AA 02000 Salem OR 97310 1S1 35AA 02001 _ames L. Cain Donald J. Lyon Theodore S. Peterson Darlene L. Cain Hazel J. Lyon Virginia J. Dean 4300 SW Pacific Hwy. 10440 SW 87 Avenue 8686 SW Oak igard OR 97223 Portland OR 97223 Tigard OR 97223 1S1 35AA 02400A1 1S1 35AA 02500 1S1 35AA 02600 )hn R. Wright Thelma Crouch Estate Thelma Crouch Estate racy I. Wright do Eugene L. Davis do Eugene L. Davis '0575 SW Hall 10875 SW 89 Avenue 10875 SW 89 Avenue igard OR 97223 Tigard OR 97223 Tigard OR 97223 i S1 35AA 03600 1S1 35AD 01200 1S1 35AD 01300 lice S. Juve Eugene L. Davis Clifford Epler 3655 SW Hall Blvd. 10875 SW 89 Avenue Kay Epler Portland OR 97223 Tigard OR 97223 8845 SW Spruce St. 31 35AD 00900 1S1 35AD 01130 Tigard OR 97223 1S1 35AD 01101 Eugene L. Davis Metzger Park Board of Directors ivian M. Davis do Jeanette Carter Larry Eisenberg 3875 SW 89 Avenue 8400 SW Hemlock Wash. Co. Facilities Maint. Tigard OR 97223 Portland OR 97223 Mailstop 29 31 35AD 01400 Adjacent Property Owners Theodore Peterson Virginia Dean 8686 SW Oak Tigard OR 97223 Steve Aschenbrenner Edgar Stebbins Vincent Bernabei 125 SW Lombard 8003 SW Taylors Ferry Rd 8120 SW Cedarcrest eaverton OR 97005 Portland OR 97223 Portland OR 97223 'anda Weber, Trustee John and Susan Weber Reynold and Patricia Meyer 8040 SW Taylors Ferry Rd 8009 SW Taylors Ferry Rd 8980 SW 80th Ave Drtland OR 97223 Portland OR 97223 Portland OR 97223 !chard Williams Mark Barnes ud50 SW 80th Ave 8815 SW Spruce St "ortland OR 97223 .Tigard OR 97223 • 1 Other Interested Parties Brian Selman 8667 Sw Florence Tigard OR 97223 at Whiting Pat McCarthy Frank Portwood _PO 4M 7860 SW Elmwood • 7930 SW Elmwood R122 SW Spruce Portland OR 97223 Portland OR 97223 gard OR 97223 c.igene Shirley 330 SW Greenwood Dr Sire Sk &/ y rortland OR 97223 )-( 52/ .n/A y `U. �,,7,, ✓/Z • • Appendix C Rapid Stream Assessment / METZGER TRUNK PROJECT Rapid Stream Assessment of Ash Creek Taylor's Ferry Road to Spruce Street Prepared for: Unified Sewerage Agency Washington County, Oregon Prepared by: KURAHASHI E. ASSULIATES. DRAFT METZGER TRUNK PROJECT Rapid Stream Assessment of Ash Creek Taylor's Ferry Road to Spruce Street INTRODUCTION The Unified Sewerage Agency(USA) is planning to replace the trunk line that more or less paralells Ash Creek through the Metzger area. As part of the preliminary analysis for the Metzger Trunk Project, approximately 6,200 linear feet of Ash Creek located between Taylor's Ferry Road and Spruce Street(the"Metzger Reach")has been assessed for channel stability and general stream health using an adaptation of the Rapid Stream Assessment Technique(RSAT)developed by John Galli (1996). This technical memorandum documents the methodology, data,and results of the RSAT and provides a discussion of the general condition of the study reach based on the observations and results of the assessment. The remainder of this document is organized into the following sections: Summary of Results Adaptation of the RSAT Methodology Study Reach Map RSAT Data Forms Detailed Results References Appendix: Photographic Record RSAT Source Paper(Galli, 1996) SUMMARY OF RESULTS Nine transects at approximately 750 L.F. intervals were sampled for 24 physical parameters. Evaluation Categories and a summary of the scoring are indicated below. Specific information regarding major scoring parameters are provided in the Detailed Results section. TABLE I: RSAT Category Scores for the Metzger Reach of Ash Creek Catagory Excellent Good Fair Poor Score Bank Stability 9-11 6-8 3-5 0-2 8 Channel Scouring/Deposition 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 5 Physical Instream Habitat 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 4 Water Quality 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 4 Riparian Habitat Conditions 6-7 4-5 2-3 0-1 1 Biological Indicators 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 3 This adds up to a total score of 25 out of a possible 50, an overall verbal rating of"fair". Metzger Trunk Project I RSAT of Ash Creek ADAPTATION OF THE RSAT METHODOLOGY Evaluation Categories All categories identified by Galli were used. Modifications to Galli's methodology are discussed below. Evaluation Intervals The evaluation interval was approximately. 750 L.F. as indicated on the Study Reach Map. Nine transects were used over the study reach. Transects were generally taken at riffles, Riffles nearest to pre-selected areas were used, however, Transect 2 was not at a riffle because no riffles were present within several hundred feet of the pre-selected transect location. Photographic Record The photographic record shows upstream and downstream conditions at each transect. The photos also show major outfalls, in-creek structures, and wetland areas observed during field sampling. The Photo Log included in the RSAT Data Form describes the photos provided by photo number. Reference Reach No appropriate reference reach was available for this study. All of the tributaries of the Tualatin River that are headwatered in the West Hills of Portland are heavily urbanized and are in similar condition to the study reach. Methodology Methodology will follow Galli except as follows: Water Quality Physical/Chemical Parameters-existing USA data collected at the Locust St. monitoring site were used for the entire study area. Clarity and Odor-observations will be noted at riffle transects. Fouling-per Galli with 5 to 7 samples per transect. Biological Indicators Kick Samples-a 6"dipnet was used. ScoringlRanking Tables l and 2 in Galli, including weighting of Channel Stability and Riparian Habitat Conditions to reflect the urban nature of the stream,will be used to score assessment parameters(see Appendix B). Data forms Separate transect and assessment summary forms were adaptred from examples in Galli to accommodate collection of the field and research data required to complete the assessment. The forms and data collected for this study are provided in the Data Forms section. Metzger Trunk Project 1. ... 120' i \ 'bi \RSAT TRANSECT ..---'.* "---.... . i4.---.-./." V .. \.,......„ *47- ---- % \ APPROX. 100-YEAR �� � 46. - 4 o"..\. \VIVe 4) FLOOD PLAIN / V VP r x-.'\ ,,. ''.2 ■-- \ zi4,— , s <-0, , -;,,,, re ..-, ...., ■ ••■ \Vw.77-'�\ �i f _— '� � m �//�� �/�.44 4:'''''' 0 4,,,,,,, ,.., , L „...,... _____ __ ___... ..... , \ _ 44--___ . -N ,. .. 4, ... di ., ,,..,:s •. __, 9J \ y rte- Vii' ®1� � ,� / ��' N v‘s . . -jt ra --\'''_,' ��, ...•....:''' de\ e rC- �4 '4��- t1'� -----="°`. 060 IA Ilk p EXISTING SANITARY C \\N� kt ALIGNMENT C \`" v'. \ PROPOSED SANITARY �0 ALIGNMENT c r !Ii! KURAHASHI aI ASSOCIATES. INC. LIm6GAL.xCD7SC:N411 P.AxR. 1 a,m KINDMINS 7m.mot VW C tam:a."-,am °V VD I>iliea Sewera @een�, METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION R-001 c NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION . : urn of..s.beweorr:rya RSAT TRANSECT LOCATIONS ;,;,,a,1997 — ,,,,,,,k ,,,,,,,a �„� RAPID STREAM ASSESSMENT R ...[ w MO r DATC ( ANSON " 1577 U C C I PROPOSED SANITARY ALIGNMENT EXISTING SANITARY SW 87th Avenue ALIGNMENT It 1 'w I 1• = izo 10\, ■A i WIL .__! _u — -- — — SW gall Blvd RSAT TRANSECT LOCATION 1/ Hats Blvd — \- �v� — 111 — 1 i . ______ Ar�lw �K.:` �4. \g, is----- 1 \ a4\ \ I \ \ \■ ,W \ ■ l. ono I S _1 ____ ____ M, ���� ��,-/. 1I4F/ \\` . 1 \ \ { f;m 16:4-140. . 14.°) tn, \ -11\ ' `—APPROX. 100-YEAR / \� ` —4T� :::Adrin-- - �� ti FLOOD PLAIN r/ v ; 0 ' _'� -' ! r � " ~ ;Y SW 85th Avenue — L R Of! 7= L cv CD MIME KURAHASHI r• 1 ASSOCIATES. INC. ,.y 1.017211. ..,a MOMS pm Bo unified Sewerage Agency NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 of Q METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION R-002 a` a.. RAPID STREAM ASSESSMENT RSAT TRANSECT LOCATIONS �rrc ow n;. DATE REV4a, - iss w c i•.«r. w.e..o o..00^ .,-NOW 1997 X un / 1- = 120' / RSAT TRANSECT LOCATION / / / illb \fit � `I• i ,,,... :o., ---"7----- Vic' -law - ��`__i� 'tii (G�,I y�_ / �_,"� EXISTING SANITARY P ----\- -� 1 Y om, '1 ..10-4;15.21 . ' \_ ALIGNMENT n 0 _ "� \ �� �� �, _ V PROPOSED SANITARY ±..44.V, ' % ;L oi_jr'+s tat: �7.;�` i —�"1r - I \ \ ` i ALIGNMENT Mb Qt \ N ' /tv /P/ // --— ,. .rr :cam * `; ` �^ ` c0 „, APPROX. 100-YEAR ill �� \ ,k0 :1\� } • � 1 • /4. � FLOOD PLAIN ���, � I f At- 19%''.' 'VIlib-1'1,\I ,.', -,*41_ ,r0 •;':' 4g' 4:or„ L: 7---...----* .- :' -t-ii: , \\• ;.* ■ii- ' -_ I ! 1M All \ \ , \ \ IS Ili L�\ \1' it 1 i1 0.11.,. t . . 11r` c\ alli G t t � — ��SW g2- �� ' f � , .3).s 1 ` MOS KURAHASHI .e ASSOCIATES. INC. -T_ . •.,o WeeSUR al ,rtfl 1,1ItI1C14 SUIPITITZ i.[,•fa fa11..•D (ORII Y!-iW °.. E - L'rified Sewerage agency METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION R-003 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION p” "° �J7 f(4 � •_••� ••c•�=r RSAT TRANSECT LOCATIONS ,,.�NOV,�, n. "' RAPID STREAM ASSESSMENT c.. w we DATE a[visq.+ x. (...••. .w.e..c.oe.w. AG 1577 I 1) 4111SO\\:V 7\ \ e. F`c' r \ S.li �� le/•3�\P r- ,20' / \111111111111100taw- .---At- \�, RSAT TRANSECT LOCATION'' \ #...iiiiiiiiiiiii....e) 4":"'ir \\ \ 1 . at tA \.s, lee \ i itiN t14 \L tt.ti* , EXISTING SANITARY \ �� � I I . t ,I 11'4" 181116, N.. 4 '' 44,\ 41L.:h--- . <- ;,-;-:.-----------,-:-___-Z.----- :'..; .,... ,. .„___ ;VI I r I r',4-0:t .404 0 \1 Z> 2 </'/\ o,/ \ \�TM ALIGNMENT \ /6144 E • ~R \ /' r ❑ ��Alt�� ,t � lt PROPOSED SANITARY _ A ` \ ALIGNMENT x T_ f .. 6y� `�� \\6.- P is \ \ 1áii —'+�_ _ �7 \\ 1agf� •� 4 y \4 / J• A Nr ti � �\�/ p� vfir T Nr• \ 'aez r \ Pae�" ' !Ii! KURAHASHI & ASSOCIATES. INC. am monsoon.wan RAMC w:re-vae °E _ Unified Sewernge Agency R-004 Me NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION UfA of,,.Sewer„ce.Z METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION RSAT TRANSECT LOCATIONS .PPL PIN , NO I WO „�, ,s�„.F,...... ,,.„,,, o,.,,, RAPID STREAM ASSESSMENT F.757797 RSAT Data Form General Basin Ash Creek Drainage Area 2,740 ac. (4.28 sq. mi.) Reach Taylors Ferry to Spruce Reach Length 6,200 L.F. Gradient 0.40% Investigator(s) Brent Davis Field Dates 6/24 to 6/25, 1997 Estimated EIA 17% (Fanno Study) Last Precipitation Event 6/22 Baseflow(cfs) 2.0 cfs DS, 0.6 cfs US Weather Notes 6/24 - Sunny, 72 F at 9:15 AM, 80 F after 12:00 PM 6/25 - Overcast, 73 F at 10:30 AM Accessibility Notes Transect 1 located on Davis Property (See Map) Photo Log Exposure(s) Description 1,2 US/DS at T1 3,4 US/DS at T2 5,6 US/DS at T3 7,8 US/DS at T4 9 6" outfall near T5 10,11 US/DS at T5 12 Tributary Crossing US of Hemlock 13,14 US/DS at T6 15-18 In-stream pond behind retirement complex 19,20 US/DS at T7 21-26 Forested wetland near T7 (right bank) 27,28 US/DS at T8 29 Outfall near T8 30,31 Mixed wetland and upland meadow near T8 32,33 US/DS at T9 34 Large outfall near T9 35 Small outfall near T9 36 Retaining wall on left bank near T9 37 Riprap DS t9 (left bank) Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. RSAT Data Form Channel Total Tree Falls: Total 8 Recent Tree Falls: Total 1 Trash and Dumping: Misc. trash scattered throughout reach (tires, bottles, various metallic objects, kitty litter, etc.) Yard Debris: Grass and leaves near T2(left bank) Fish Barriers: Partial: Total 4 Total: Total 1 Exposed Sewer Lines: Total 0 Riffles Total 18 Pools Total 27 Ratio 67% Channel Modification/Stom Drain Outfalls Bank Location Dim. Bank Location Dim. Gabions R, L T4 5'h x 15'1 Rip-rap Bioenginnering Revegetation Concrete R, L T1 2'h wier Other wood R US T4 4'h x 40'I R US T5 6'h x 100'1 Outfalls R T4 15" L T9 12" R T5 6" L T8 8" L T9 24" Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. RSAT Data Form Transect,Sheet 1 Stream: Ash Creek Date: 6/24 (T1-6), 6/25 (T7-9) Project: Metzger Trunk Project#: 1577 Investigator: Brent Davis Sheet 1 of 2 Top Bottom Riffle Reach Wetted Substrate Channel Channel Avg Riffle Avg Bank a Bank Material Substrate Embedded- Riparian Buffer Width Transect Length Parameter Bank Stability(/o) Fouling Pool Habitat (fl) Width Width (fl) Depth(in) Height(ft) Type Material ness(°/n) (%) Vegetation (ft.) (ft) (Ii) Composition R L R I Ave R 1. R I. R L Max Depth(ft) Qual 1 50 19 8 6 5 6 6 65 95 80 C C G,C,CONC 10 40 TS SH 20 0 1.5 F 2 50 14 10 10 - 4 8 85 70 78 SCL SCL S,sL 100 - TS TS 20 5 2 F 3 50 14 8 8 5 6 5 60 60 60 SCL SCL G,S.SL.W 30 20 TS TS 50 50 1.5 P 4 50 20 10 6 4 6 4 90 75 83 SCL SCL G,CO.S,SL 20 20 S H 10 0 1.5 F 5 50 18 11 5 3 4 5 60 90 75 SCL SCL B,G,CO,SL 10 10 TS TS 25 50 2 F 6 50 25 6 3 6 9 5 70 80 75 SCL SCL B,CO,SL,G 40 30 H TH 20 20 1 F 7 50 15 14 3 3 1 3 75 75 75 SCL SCL G,sL,s.0 30 30 TS TS 100 20 1 F 8 50 12 6 4 4 4 4 75 50 63 SCL SCL G,SL.S,C 80 30 TH TS 100 15 0.5 GO g 50 10 7 4 2 4 6 80 100 90 SCL SCL G.CO.SL.S 20 30 TH - 2 0 0.75 GO Avg. 50 16 9 5 4 5 5 73 77 75 SCL SCL G,SL,S,C,CO 38 26 TS TS 39 18 1 F Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. RSAT Data Form Transect,Sheet 2 Stream: Ash Creek Date: 6/24 (T1-6), 6/25 (T7-9) Project: Metzger Trunk Project#: 1577 Investigator: Brent Davis Sheet 2 of 2 Canopy Coverage Transect Time Odor Color Clarity Temp(°F) (%) Notes lice Shrub 1 9:15 N Slight YG Slight 57 10 30 Clarity is normal for basin 2 10:15 N Slight YG Slight 57 40 40 No riffle in vicinity due to wier at T1 3 11:00 N N Slight 56 30 40 Tires, bicycle, pipe, and woody debris in riffle 4 1:40 N N Slight 60 0 10 Algea on top of cobbles 5 2:10 N Slight GR Slight 61 50 10 Algea in sunny spots 6 2:40 N N Slight 66 20 0 Algea, nutria in US pool 7 10:30 N N Slight 58 40 80 Gravel point bar in transect 8 11:10 N N Slight 58 40 10 Deep, slower riffle 9 11:30 N N Slight 61 20 0 Sackcrete wall supports 82nd Ave(left bank) Avg. - N N Slight 59 28 24 Kurahashi& Associates, Inc. RSAT Data Form Biological and Misc. Macro Invertebrates Transect Notes: Stoneflies T1 - Snails highly visible on clay surfaces Mayflies T1 -Water striders present Caddisflies Dragonflies T2 -Water striders common on pool surface Damselflies T2 - Unidentified minnows present Dobsonflies Black Flies T3 - `Other worms include unidentified tiny worm Darners approx. 3-4 mm in length. Whirligig Beetles T3 - Nutria observed in pool DS of Hall Blvd. crossing Diving Beetles 5,6,8 Midges T6 - Nutria in US pool Mosquitos 8 Snails 1.3,4.5,6,8,9 Crayfish 1.3,4,5,6,9 Leeches Earthworms 4.5.7.9 Other worms 3.4,5,6,7,9 Sculpin 1,3,4,5,6,8,9 Ponds, Wetlands. etc: Pond on Davis property to be investigated when permission is granted by owner. In-stream pond at retirement home lacks vegetation and is degraded (see photos). T3 -Ash forest between creek and Hall Blvd. may contain forested wetland. T7 -Ash/Sedge forested wetland within floodplain (mainly on right bank). T8 - Floodplain contains wetland/upland mosaic of meadow and includes a wetland swale (dominated by Reed Canarygrass). Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. RSAT Data Form Notes Base Flow Data DS end (T1): 7' in 5.5 s 5.5 (s) /7 (ft) x 6 (ft) x [5 (in)/ 12 (in/ft)] = 2 cfs US end (T9): 8' in 9.5 s 9.5 (s) / 8 (ft) x 4 (ft) x [2 (in)/ 12 (in/ft)] = 0.6 cfs Landmarks for transect locations See map for approximate transect locations T1 - No iron, located between foot bridge (US) and steel beam (DS) on Davis property T2 - Iron set near property corner on left bank T3 - Iron set under large Douglas Fir on left bank T4 - No iron, located directly US from Locust St. crossing T5 - Iron set on left bank across from property corner on right bank T6 - Iron set on left bank at the base of an Ash T7 - Iron set on right bank under tree fort (tree crosses from the left bank) T8 - Iron set under solitary Oak on left bank T9 - No iron, located approximately 40' DS from Taylor's Ferry crossing Abbreviations C = clay; SL = silt; S = sand; G = gravel, CO = cobble; R = rubble; B = boulder; T = tree; S = shrub; H = herbaceous: * = highly erodable bank material present; BR = bed rock; CONC = concrete; GAB = gabion; US = upstream; DS = downstream; N = none; P = poor; F = fair; GO = good; E = excellent; SCL = silty clay loam, YG = yellow-green; GR = gray Additional Water Quality Data Existing TDS Data collected by USA at the Locust St. crossing was used to assess water quality. Data was collected throught the summer of 1991. TDS values consistently exceeded 150 mg/I throught the sampling period, thus a rating of poor(1 out of 8) was used for this parameter. Kurahashi 8 Associates, Inc. RSAT Data Form Score Sheet Catagory Excellent Good Fair Poor Score Bank Stability 9-11 6-8 3-5 0-2 8 Channel Scouring/Deposition 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 5 Physical Instream Habitat 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 4 Water Quality 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 4 Riparian Habitat Conditions 6-7 4-5 2-3 0-1 1 Biological Indicators 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 3 Total Points Rating Total Score: 25 42-50 Excellent 30-41 Good 16-29 Fair <16 Poor Verbal Rating: Fair Note: See appendix for criteria used to evaluate catagory scores Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. RSAT of Ash Creek DETAILED RESULTS General The Metzger Reach of Ash Creek(between Taylor's Ferry Road and Spruce Street) scored 25 points out of a possible of 50. This translates to an overall verbal rating of"fair". Results are based on cross- referencing recorded transect data averages for 24 measured parameters (see the data forms)with ratings in Table 2 of Galli. Scores were assigned to each sub-category in Table 2 and averaged to derive a score for each category. Category scores are shown on the Score Sheet in the RSAT data form. Specific results for each Evaluation Category are discussed below. Channel Stability Channel stability scored 8 out of a possible of 11, a verbal rating of"good". The bank material is generally erosion resistant silty clay loam with an estimated average stability of 75%. Minor sloughing was observed in some areas, but was not common. New root exposure was observed to be limited to older roots and shallow rooted vines and shrubs. Only one recent tree fall was observed in the study reach. Cross-sections were generally U-shaped. Channel Scouring/Deposition Channel scouring and deposition scored 5 out of a possible of 8, a verbal rating of"good". The embededness of the riffles was 38%. The study reach has a low number of deep pools with the typical pool substrate being predominantly silt. Few point bars and fresh sand deposits in the stream or the overbank. Point bars were generally stable and vegetated. Physical Instream habitat Physical instream habitat scored 4 out of a possible of 8, a verbal rating of"fair". The wetted parameter(the width of the water)averages 56%of the bottom channel width. The sreach is dominated by runs with few pools present with the stream generally having slow velocity and shallow depths. Pools tend to be small and shallow. The riffle to pool ratio is greater than 1.51. Riffle substrate composition is predominantly gravel and small cobble. At some transects the cobbles are asphalt fragments. The average riffle depth is approximately 5 inches. The afternoon temperature averaged 60 degrees Fahrenheit during the study. Water Quality Water Quality scored 4 out of a possible of 8, a verbal rating of"fair". Total dissolved solids (TDS) data from the USA data point located at Locust Street were used in the evaluation. This data was most recently collected in 1991, however,there have been no major changes in impervious surface or implementation of new best management practices in the upstream basin area since that time. TDS values averaged greater that 150 mg/L over the entire summer of 1991. Additional data was collected at each transect with no notable observations of odor or discoloration. Turbidity was generally slight with visibility between 1.5 to 3 feet. Substrate fouling varied from slight to moderate and averaged 26%. Algae was frequently observed in the upper half of the Metzger Reach. Riparian Habitat Conditions Riparian Habitat Conditions scored 1 out of a possible of 7,a verbal rating of"poor". The riparian area consists of a mix of narrow ash forest zones, blackberry mats, open meadow, lawn, and structures. There are a few large woody areas on undeveloped parcels as indicated in the transect notes. Tree and shrub canopy coverage averages 23% shading. Metzger Trunk Project RSAT of Ash Creek Biological Indicators Biological indicators scored 3 out of a possible of 8,a verbal rating of"fair". The macroinvertebrate community has low diversity. Snails, crayfish, and worms were abundant in kick samples, but very few insect larvae and nymphs were observed. Sculpin were also abundant in kick samples Adult water- striders and mosquitoes were present at most transect locations. A small number of adult dragonflies were observed throughout the Metzger Reach. REFERENCES Galli,John Sr., 1996,Appendix A Final Technical Memorandum: Rapid Stream Assessment Technique (RSAT) Field Methods, Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection Division of Water Resources Management,Montgomery County,MD. Miline,Lorus and Margery Miline, 1980,National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Insects and Spiders, Alfered A. Knopf, Inc.,New York, 988 pp. Metzger Trunk Project Appendix A. PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD B. RSAT SOURCE PAPER (GALLI, 1996) Metzger Trunk Project .. t� t •.� , r...' l 7 ri.,.„ ... ...,... s‘i. ,. .*:: • • . • •J:7";.a .... ,...„.i:;••._,, 7 :t.,.,:74_.:.,... ,.. .?:,.., _ ( . .. .vii.,..i... ...a. , ,,f7i,'4'..'.,... .. . "'. ,-‘--,.• /. ' '. .'. 11E170..4 „• 1'.. ' '' • '� '. f ���!..j� s. '). 1.�7 r• .. +„ , 1'.'- .t-H _.._ t• er.-•.. 1 a " e ry • `N ..S • rt' 1 1 I'S' !�� s f� 14 r f • • ',`• ' •�S_� •. •:44. : .‘: e .,,,4 '''.'.. — J.'-.1.'Airopic ,. i ? i ;• All.":4.., �f r x r J . j/t • } _ _ II r • 1►a eit#1110 401414 . 7611111 1411�1-A �` ��•--_ ,4 $ : .�i T raj . •,�. ►_ j� r, � •r",.„. .___ ...... .....„ . ..• ., . . 7 1'his/ W 4C 17 �l • w• mil• Y _ .T .M.-imin„,...„........ Of •mot' �, r4, r { (r j '� _' c_r-,•,,s; �`;` ' `•w✓•,fir I II ; Orpir.,,,ikkli,,,,:i. S '{qr `. - fY} - Ilir•W 44 ., jilt fir, :14i'le 41 k ..,...... , ,. ., :: : . e ...2:44,-, i t . .... \ ;It ... ...,.. • _A, . •;:flik 1.:._ k_._,_ ..\,..4. . i:iii,,tzw-.1v...,-.e;:cirp,;:_,,,......ik ...: ,- .., .:7-:-!„-•.- ..,---.- ',,. . -' • : .....„- -,- 4.. - • *.p.':1;1' ''.A''''. ' .' 4'1401,:i:44.'..01. r,vz,..!..;..i.r.4.0,r;:ry..'la,: ' r%f iLlii.- Viiitlic 471. Illriblib.IIPP-""P"sai (.4..) t ,5*.%=- _AI,'t.• iaVki . . 7- .... . . ' _. ■.0'W.... . 10':-_---•i-44145.,.-..,.4-.4-.P 4-.0-•-0.--....-'..a-.-.l.•l.-p.-.....-*....g."r"i,.--.7.. -..-.''-.•.*, -.,'.4'.•-".••30..'1;.-4.1..- ::. -•i.,4 .4t 9.....•,1,.•.as‘o 1...,....,4.1%....'y• ‘..t„s'...,.:2 i,.:.,,;.1.4;;-N-I-,-I.,1 i.-%1•:,-4-1-.-•,s'‘*..l Il:i1}.N s1 *•i. ,A.-'•,f',i.‘,7'.$NA..Ni' 4'.i'..*o•• .1*14*4,',,A14 t•1:•-...':.'-;-'t,'4'4'0 .1'*4 t'a't,4e;.t•C4•,•;‘.'3..4..: I'.,X..1,-:•:s•:.:i,•...'.f-.ZT.`7•.3' .....■•:3-,;''''--,:., 7‘.,/1...",...•.r".,..*e,t 4\. - „ .,•''•,„t'-••1•e,•a-,.*.'.-4-..7,%.'--;-:-.-7-';'.l 1 b-'',i-''',f:•• -g_:i-_b ,„.".o04.4 4 1.rw,0 . ,... P,.7 ,, - 4 • , -.. N 1,k r. VN:,., ... '.41.$ a:. , ...,,k....,,,,, , ..,... .,:„ . , 4 ,ul. ->.. . ; C. •• .1 ..,4kte 4..,,, ... Vw .i'•.`t'',.. :• , ' 't`l••• •• • N.--•-.-..?Pk.?‘-• . . .•!• - * •V . '.. "• ' . , {.• 4. „a- "it'•' '-'. ..- -,,.• -I,' t • •t ._-A•'., . 4' '■t. A„ ili' 41.) ''...7- , ••-•,, . 1,,..• •44 4.,. . .1. li'de 1 .. •t• ''\ti :::1.1 •.. ....4. -"‘ 1,1,36 .', -,k . J4....* ,,,,,Ak ,w ' '4..4•.4?, i. •, ,s, _,.4,' .,•*:,1414,-.•..Nws ., ,:. I:. .4%;•■0.44 ' i'1 . .,• , '. ..I't)1:1,,'=4 '•.f•b . .1-7 * -.11(, ... ,Fil.,..1- „, - ,.4. ..( , ,.. ',... :.1 t . • 1, ---_ . . •1 -- , , , . , „L r• ' .' j* , '. .t . •' '.•s 0 X iii4' • " . -''',1..r A , .. ..,„ . - , -.441-e - - ' " f e ■ • -.' • • , • ' ,L , •,„ Ale. ,. ,,,,, ,e. "..i.A. ,,,,f'-Vie • . ...4, Y . , -z - c:...I",.....1. . p. (i.i . • . N. ••• I . ^Ir . ■•„ . '....4,.. ..,...,, -•„1, , x ....0, ,4J.-,9, , \ t • • .. •- • •-•- gs*-' - - .-± . • --....,•:.% v•-',•••4 4-.' tl;'• •*1 1-14- ' - -4. .e.t■ t %-v.lf, k... :'''''',, \ . , _-.-------------" 1.1 fa •.S . At ..?-, • . • al' - • ',it ,A7 • • ".••• 4%-i•^:-.•- - .4:: ' ••`-' \ ,••---_•!. 4. ' ‘‘.: t•- •.::. .:,... ,, „. , ••, „,' '''41 ' .,c• '. ••'-`‘.- ii"-- . ;•-• , • _ . ..,. ,,_ . ._ii , - avf.,..-""."‘ --- '..-.-------,---•11. , ' • 1°.1•■56: '•• v•--,14u . • . . , . , ,,, ..... • . *. _ . v IV ,0,i‘ . . . ir..- . t --1'.., '4,. .. • , • - . . -"- •' ,,. .„, , .... .;; ".....1 =- - -.•, AL• ' :. ..,: - . ' ,.1... . .. ., • .lbli,".0," .. . '' 4I .4. .,•‘ --4.''"x' ''','M >2.. -,..7.'..•>. -. '' , Jr, •4:.-v....it., ••••••. •' 1 ct.4.,'••" ' • /..44,. r • • 7- . • '• I • •:t 441.1.1" ell••• ., 11. ' . 2 AV '.''. ' ..., '‘V.N' '4i ''' ;■ 1474, fti;'" . ,‘`.. . • .../' iov ' ,'.''' ' ' , .,t,;..,f: . 2:4::: 1'1' ,, .. - .• • leti', , ft• .‘f." '-'51,t,:e1). . " .4.-. . _ • ol■A • i• •. -.•;".. , . • . . .4 ...4 • 't #4, • • - . '' .0. . .. • •• •,,,...1.•%.1.. :.•lele.'n.. ' % ''• • .-''' • 1t 1. ••••■ ' • 1 .." ,1 . uiritirodi,. •0 .,• .1„.7.,!pot . t... ,' :'4... • .• '.! F4,.. , , Itilkt' - .4 . ,., _ -,-.$ 4., v. . . - .• . 'V ...._,.....- V • i IF- • ,, - "1 '. r . . - •-• '4-.4:...re' i• , . 0. - . . . #, , ■•••••••.. . ' 1 1.f.'TA , • ' kr) k , .• • . A , , , , '% ‹.") 4 '■ . . k • ' .' ,.. % . 1 • 'a I • . ' -It° ' ' . • • , Ise . , .F • . 1 1 ,. %* ' ,. ...- ..,„,,,. ;,.•- „fir 1 . it i - ,.•. -0 . . A - -. # r • , • ,.• • a . , '‘,.....,':... . 1 „ . ' .f - v ."..' . (i.i.. • • .-.. ' ' to - ..'•1•4L ,,, " ...,)4 ,•:. . t•-• ' t.. .r.lkl ','..Y\ 4.‘, • . . 4,_ ..•-:yy•- -- • - „.. , ' 110/ . , 4 w.....- ,16.4 . •, `4.f. • . .- 11/4 ,ti, , . , •,, , 0 1 ' ''kik• •' 1. : •'. ‘1. "•. „ .-.41•:€:. •-•• 4' . .••,1 • .-el .1 " • ,L , , . . s • • *- • in.-5.:' .."' .• i , ,.,.171;4 ?i I t , ' . -, -, ..• 1,- '4'. .- ' , . '.• •.' • • • •40.1rN • . i LV. . .4, ,. .. le‘ , . . . ...- ,.. -. •n, P .... -• . S.. •,- . .. ..• ...it: . ,,.? .. •......, . . . 'if • .- I. , . ' - .r. .. 4f -1'• 41* '' . -.• - 4.1 a.. • a .s. • I! ` - , - j: ,, •: :.. It•' .. t•.J.;'■'fa. '.At ' • • .• ' • • i• - • ' - .‘. ." • • • • • ' ''' - • A ' '1 I . t :. -i. •1 i?- IF .., • • ,,,,, -.. • ,./ ' ., 1 P , -....., .. ,..4 , P. . , II r, ' '' "'- • r ''' . -. ' ,4•_kg...,:-• ,,g • ,, . ,.. , , 1, '3., d Ail ii 4 :-:•:',1121• •• .. .7 . .•' ... ,*t• .:0' '..., - P ".,IMIPApe /--• • 1M...i. •- .,4,., . 1.,,, a• 15; -,,„, ,r0. 1 '''." •*-. •"Ci , 41 '4.41. •■•111relle:.,P-. •• f.• se 11 ' - ''.--t•-.• -8t, 4' . . 4.iA.-° c ' '',11.1,.• , '. -44•'.;'-' , 3. •• 0 It N.- . .... •Y ". ..."'‘t• ' . *.".41...,4t‘ ". -" - "''%'' ` '' ' ,•slt- ' .. ;,'4*. 4) ., 11. ''r* • 4..., ." ..IR it? .. ui • ,t' r*... , 4 2- •, ' 7:-:" INV.vNiv....,'. ilir • .; 40511tC-1•1.'- ', - - . 1 • .v Or rii; 4C2. . ----!•1 ., .''' • ' '. ■ .- • . ‘.0, 101.1•2••'.. " . -" •••.0 44 . •. -4:.t.*...firrtii4iplips...1%.1.-•r'. * t 1. .. .. ..„ ' 1' 1, .., 4 •.11, , f' ni,••k 4 V 1.-1t.1 ,•t. 1 ',V • 4111, .,: 'ik •',II oik. :'...1. .i.11,440„,t'4S./0;411t. • .4. . 7_,- ti„. ,4, ... J •• v. • . - , '14 - , • ,, . -,,,, • ....i„,, , . •. , . - • t. -,,,4.e. , -N. -' - ,4 , •.. • ;, •.- ..-,t-•••, ".-.. il - • ' ..., : , , • ,1,',4,- " IP' ' r;.• . '7 '; . •..&.,a • . ••tr SOF(` ' ..."--- . ,-Tr. .• ''... ''Ili . ' •If,`/,/7-.4" ' .. .', • '• " ',1 144 • 6 I .. ; 12. •iii4 • ,-1,,. 1 .. .• . . • 117; , ..) ,- * 1...' • s: - . .. ,,,,.. .r.,... -Iwo,. -...,.....• s: - • ."or., ,..‘ .. . •- i- ..app?. , .:_. • 1••• - • Iv 11. •‘,V . . .4 ,. ' .'. ''?41,„ 411‘•. .• • .• • 0.:. , . , , !. + •4 \— f c f ,i. --/, IMO • � S V mar- . C i' 7 � .4,. 'fi r et `IA f.. t 4, .,. ,4j . ,.` 'S • yyt w • ■ V • 147 .• ' . f 1, \II\ ■ if-0,/` Ail 0 1,'1: It . • . 4, +-. ,,+* 4,,41 t i ''4"•-� 4 ,v• 111r, ;y4, �• • + .�• t.`. _� 4,o' ■• �, 'r 1 • (---,t''t ..' ' 1 - • ''° 0, * � `, . ,. .,...- .c'-- -... 1 m-..: . Isk" •' .. - ‘1.-7 `', , ". .. . I f • j ,- • f"' � t't j : -. w y tL ' ti ,` fit ,�.'.714 '_•. ' '• y •, ,-!., _,•'4'. ':''_ t , , it.. � ` . .... .c'{ ' Zi '" / y •r.7 �i 1 j - ♦ ` ' -•••.1** ,/ j,ei• . l *t s^_* ;,- A f .rX; ;4I• , ., `4 N. •• ,,•'1•i 14� ! • ' t r 4 _ �.o=.. :" t �• ;S f.. may' �`� �. I. �r ?�"I , i y y k',,. ,'4' R ,, , , uq t,t_• �" 5. it r^"_ n• '.. yy , ..' 4 ∎IL•.Z •i N i �l" ♦ •<' `_ I• K td • p.• 4 ! ` 4.-�a Zy, 4 7. s :G ' tv' �f ;••j'. *. •• 1• , � 'W;'," ,'1 •f /.c • ■. fir., "r. i .?1;-'..'' '4 � r ., f J 'J :Vet' .Y ' ,s: t • ' - µL '1"+ r .. "r ~ 4 :'nj 'J s• • ...A-..4', ,,:..•••'4,._ t • I • f.4,t! � � � I`} i* y .ti lit " ,... • • ', , ( N• • 1%• • .a t,, - �/ 9tr r w . -a-.1 J!� .. A • r 1,, 7J 'R. .'. •''• : ••• `L. "" t• xr .',N, - I / ..- J •1� r e. $t V L4 » ,l 1, RwI-;. �.• `IBS- �s I tf�. y y."y�.�'• .+i M�� !\1,,�`. „•,,-- S 4..„- - I Jr + '• ° )�°'�j •• sti ate+ } .- t 4 .' • _, � I n v tom. - i'!I « Yr t- ,;,it It • .f , w� ":1'41,;:• .4 • t •_. 'at I - �. .' . ....-..'",.,A (4)7 .....- ... . , ''.- 't• r •/4. -. F. - 00 • . ..- 1 , , .. . i•—•-( l',...,‘ • ..t.. •..• . .., ' e .. . ‘,•/..L''' . • - •••. ,• . i t'.. :.'.----.-' '••• .4- . II 1 . . ., . . . ' -• ' .0. ':444t,-,IN., ... ----..•4 5....7.-..!. V g.4'.- . ,- 4, 4" .• i ' - i ,- le. ', 3400•4. 9r:-. - ,,,4 ‘• - ' .--• .' . 1 ,L. . 4- ..._ , - .• . - . • _ i• --::7• -- - . 4,-, 1, ;... — _ • -- _, t - —'--ri , -...— _ 7-- ''''"•-•- -••••■• ... - '' , 3 lif 4iii4 • ___, , --E-wie iitk.,5,, -. .-.',..- . • _ 0 ..,. • ...... --.- • ,....__ - -- -. -.. _... -„„_ .. t ____ ,..L.,..,., --pt.- ...1 -- R _ - i ..„.... _... ' I".. _. slid , ., --in - Iv r ith mi 1 .t. ..,.. ,..y... „., - ..gp.- , , _ , •_ ,.. ,. ... '., ...... .. . I Alloastiat.L...4 a i LIE . , -.....,,„„le. .,.. ,- • - ' ,..., .... ,.,: - t ,-:t, .-.4,...,zi.-...: . J1,--A gumE a , , : • -- ,,-, • •••- ---,• •••:- ,. •,ie...k; ,:•.,..6,,,„." -:Al..... - .0. _ '&...-lev- : : • 1. •,i•r".-7 '' ' 'VP1. ' --.....,' : ' :`•*...4.,,_"•it-4,7 -. - - . r■r.i4/1$ -,A ..•-,-. ... ...A. ,...,..rs-,4 .- .... tc • ,- '.•"j,..Y.-...,;„:... ^--, - k ...-.. •\ , , '- • * o , -: ./, \ --.1'-, • - - 't ", •. -0'1'. ; .. 1.: !:<Allr„ ;;Litir.'. .,..'7 " -..f." 1 t -' ''' i •• r,„.-.!, --,...,11:;,4,, .4 , . k. zigie...,-,, ,:.. ....7...•. -. - - ' ' .. ' :-, • :7;1 Z - '''' ....4;Y-105..'' -.--.`-' , ' ' -' - • n., It. ...0. ,-,,, :•-,.-:. :..F,. ..,..„., .-,.-,.....„.. .. . --,i,..,..,...4104. *' '-.7, ',.., r! ,V• •4" ' ' •.'i ' ' '-.e,. : . s?,,,',-,,'.• -,...-4 l'..0'.:-..'.;.-..:',.,....r.'.. .. .. . il, • .at-7-,. . .(z v. . ,,.„ v.. ...- ..". 440,1 , 0,.L.rarti..... .. .". (/ 4..-..tt..... ......:7.,..-.4.■. • . . ..., . --...:.--., - , *---- -. - - - a e ••w•-•• 1 - --$ ,Yr• • . .7. '44. •' ' . '-' tO•" . ',s-1.•'‘t.:11.4i:'--..... 'd% ,„,. ...... . . '- II:NP.. •, „,.. /■.....1 .;• :•-"*. ..-44. - -N,."....:t. . ••:. ,,,,:- . ' 't •4•• .- "'"` ..._ .,, I .- ''i 1.•:.-' -- • ,, ..., ... . ....0'. 1.. ..- . 1 v , • . 'r :, '''', ,, .. y . , .1 - ' - %,,, ;-1,'..•. .4,NI.- - 4ii,ix , , 1 „i.•...ti..,0,„ .... ■ 4. - .-''iii;' 7"111°...". 11111.1010e"44°4 -P. ' r f - •:, . - " 5- .. . .:•,.. --•1411#f"tritr- - ,t r.-0.1,40011110111141411* - ''" . v•-: 4A 'f- . -u:4.. -, -— .7, • ■ .... . 4..- . .7,k _ .,.... . ..._ s, _........... .... ... . .. . ,... .0. + 7it .... ',..-- ' '..1"I'' -7:i'' ' x I 1^-- ' ' ' , . - 3, — i ,. ... --.■....,_„,____.. ... - '4"." . ' '.-. -. ''II'',. •..' - In 77 -4. '1 al liladilltill , ,, •,44 • --' . - .; . ',,...71-111 .,...yar • . ',;.4'..'1•■■■ .4.1" 7: .•:4.041,''- ;it'•A • .'. . '' • II II 6 ' l'•* ..-.4.. '"Zig...,- -„:4;.1:-.7%"' '' Ist'71t2411--‘., `•::: ' :4 4. • - ' • ,..,b_,.•4' • .4a-- -' ,..-'''. ':JVKI -r'../.‘• .- -; s • 641111111111111.Ell ''' 1? ' .''.4E 40-4?' 7, •-Z-V. ' - ‘'. It - . . '- .,‘•••Ao' , -•_,frof --., - , .-,.: .• -. -..I.*,, • ,. -.4...-...i.... .: •,-, ... _- , .,,, . . ,C.--- - -- ---• ..'7.4'-.' `.t7.'-'t-' ', .N4,_ -. OW .' '......." - . . -.r.":30:1---. .!tV, --4-A" 'tikl?. ‘ '4•Z' •••"'..-: -;.... . - - _ .. . . '...,.•.44',1 —9'.,„e4i., ..., ... . "*" -. • 44\ ".. VT 4 ": . _ ,.. ' ... I "k ''Vt. klli, ,,, . - .. ... . '`: ihr e. .-46. • • ••••-• . • .10. . : \ t •-• . '• ' ---' -.C.ip 1# . : . 4t,:::. •"" t.. . .;....,,,z0.----- .4,,...;' •,.„. , ,0.. e 0 ., t., 1,64 ..,„ ) '..-,-,...i.... . ,,,.. :. .,',P 4, .-..i: .. - , .• , . . . , ... . 0..... ,I, . . . ,,,,,,,, •-•f..-41.41r44100":7-: --:- . 6,..-,,,a.:•;" It* ' 1 e 4. .- 'fr• •- i-..-:13. . --lerri •*• tv'-'-' -4r...7,--, . _ ......„ :, ... t i tygoi•0. .A. • - ,i, ..;.. _ .: r . ,. _ ..r.A . . , „ . _ ... - Y. '• ""- • of•■ ;/ ''" . . V IN ,.-. .1 ..- - S. - • - • -.. ..1'. .. .,-4.- • ...-.'"..: -,. -•- .--'•'ki""'"'".`..7' ' . . ' ; ''''..../'4. -.- •I" •' i ,i.1'1 '.- •i' ..- _, - •■ ' '''‘ •:-. , - _ ,........•-•„•„. - :-.„ '' -4:- • ..-,,--.:-..._. r ,.,,,,' , • t, . _ ' • _ , . i ,...-,..,,•,.r' .;:17'- * --• -ono .- ;'? ,...-,,i ..„„. - • ) ---„ • '4... ,•, ': ,•,,, As,. 1..., ‘1 • ••••••••' .-...- ii-....-r - . - -, - -'- - . It'„,..--_„.-- • -5" ._ 1 "1 - • 4 4‹. •e tt '.• • ..„ )itelk„ .•■••• 4 .- - • . ••• ... - •"' :. , p.,,-7,:i .. • .• .- - i •) IN i 4 , - - -..-- -_ 4. , .-•2‘-, • ...- . . .:" Ivi'--- . , . . • # f.,e,..••.• e. • ' , .4, ■ 0-0...'.'t , , :. 4 „ - .,. .,":'11,,,, :.. ---' ''",..:'' 44111 - , 0,1 • A •-•"1 .■• ' . .:••.„ . ..,-, , S';•. .., - • " .• ' , • ,/. c • • .- ! . \ •...-- -,•,-,i .,' - . . -, - -,.. - . . ,.,- ,., , ., ,,,. . ..,,,,, , -N91-- -- ... _ _,-.%-_.,_ . ... -. _ .• - - ' ifi,111.-4 . . 1 -•, , z,-. L," N, '10 - '7s, , . . . __ 4- ..,.,:"r .4,,,;• _.r. Ad ,.{, i ' •r . ........ .,,,, . . . . ., . . , .... ,k, e ?!. , 'cialk, . . ...i- .., \ .... t . ,,,. • • - 0 • ‘7fir 1 1.4 (-;:' ". .'1-5.'ri; ,•;.•": - ••t‘' ** "1-'''. ' •N' '-'1.: .• •. i • ' IA. ' '• • e ' r - (-.:‘,.L.%. ..1 - t, e 1. .,,., r , ,, „N., a. .•-, s ' ' •- ... , ,- -‘-..•,.; Iii,• :" .. \.7-'''.'..;:AV,'-IN v? .: -1 47' •Aily -.4.1,Z. ..-',4 s. - isf li ' I ( '''• e• .. ... 41111111111004.4;;:-.',%;::„ -,,-• ,,,.,,, lb?. ,:,,,m.'.; , ., .. .:.; ..,,,... ... Ift,:;„; .,.....T.R., .... ''‘ , 'tar• ■ ' 40" i4 IVIIN- -a Ns - '0.0'4 - ---, . ' t „VI ,' ' . -- drib-- ;,2„,' ,...." ......:•,",,„,„eriN, ---,:k. ,: ii. --"A''' -4...-(41., • '....1.i ' .. , INIVIMPIIIM ,,. .* . -•.,, f . , ,,digii) T. ..,,„•:',It‘. :t4.,„,,,, 1,;.,, .. .,,,:`01111kIker ... X. : . 'f,'. irW4( 0- •,%., -.... ,.6,\1/4," ,e,,,. • -'44pir ',. ,.,,...... , . , . , . . - 4 C) i.e. '''. '- 1- ''P.1.1‘' ' a t -"' ' N - • , \ P. a 4,11 li, .•-•-- A. 1 . ." ." " at t':• ' .■ Au: .• ., & ...Ae-4,1104 .., • • . , .. . • . jigger A t ...114 .; li. IV • • '•..4... •"• . 141rlikr •'''• , 1. , ' ;,,- '. 4.1.•....- .'"' 1 . \ '•■ .. .. - •., r in 7 1/4... ■ _ 'V.-;;,3ile .'" •:. , . ..... 4:‘ ' f • , " 1• 2'-' " . .4.. '..f;. , -?110' 40.4'''4.. -' • 31 r! •,t, -, - - •- - .. 11.)-- • . P--,. . . ,, .,. 4*• :,. -'' ' • -.?" . ... •_. - `' .., ,..., 1 a. - ,.•-•'-- , . - - ....- a, •'..•-• . - /,..:•:, , ,. ..1 j,• ..0. ........ 4.1,, r •-..4. ., .0,..,..,3,0•-•. ;-..: --!.. • ....--ON - -•'' . . ,-' ,-.... e .•-e. . •‘. , ..••. c,,,..., 1 ...-. . ' •r•,'" ,.....:.- . .. 4. • r= % .. ---" -- r..I ' • •I '''- • ,... -. . • ._ i• ge ‘ ■-••• , • . ' Or ''' ..7•4 -Qs 4.40t_.: '''''' .- - ' ''..... "••?4r. .,•‘ .pill - . ' : - •.,_ ,, , .;, tt- ''''' ''' ; ''..-•"-. ., or • ."..• • ? ' , ...... - -.. 7•k"";'•77-- ' ' - W.- fe•'''" 7 •-fiii,"! I , c, .- AYVei. ,.' . ..1 ( . '.'• •'''' ..,.. I II I- • - - - -11,1, .. .. . - .--':-.---- '. .. -- -• ,,,,, , "l'a-d*-Niii, -,,,f • :. ,...‘ • -... V'.10 •,-.,-..,,-..7.).., f , 4 't -4 .- J ---',. ' ' ./._ t ..4 • 4 '44'4 -1 . .F -4--.44' ...i..- , . '-- -- V ': •: -* • ... . •-.I '-4 ,.. L., • -- ? • - -It,i , _, .... „ i: :. 1 „ . .. _ , • . •10 `1,. . "-. i- •-, -1.!1+ 7, .• 6+. - 4--.414'1' .••• . - .• i 2rT - , -I.,: :4;:.-".,-;.,'" ''■.,;***;. .- . ,r. _ ..... - ..• .6,... voiiii!ft- -:.1 . ., . Ne• ■-' •• „ . . . •-•faie• ,-- ._ . • -•-• -" P.'1 l'I • " :_,,.• 0.. , d'...tipc.....- ••• ...,_....Zile'-- .. . •..., Or,- . ..-'7,--." .7ait„,..... -.-;_ ii.„.r.,_ • 4■11101.4 4, 1 ••• 4 r i...--FL...-. •, '„N.,..,:- . il ,,pti., . ,, ,, , ., r"" ..)..=;,,,‘ • .1 ......Plre.44 . - , ....- :. ..+, • - .... 7---"b-A- '•-•.' ''3''4'!'f!e°1417 4.30r -...... 'T'•'fi-1.""binr• ' -;)" '' '....46. ...""-'43)* .- 4 -s' ''- * .„, - ' ' '' -PArr 1-" " '''' •.4:-. ,riot . ■ r P• ' :P."140 '1, 11- ' •\ - . -- _ . „I. ,.', ..• . . - • ••• -, ' 4eraff.X. ,,t , .s....th-irit,1 „ _0--z- - ..k IN. - --,-,_.- .,• .--;.- :-...,. ,•• - ',,,. ,7;:w. _- ,;',,.,-..- • •,.,--•,..,,-: .- • -1'. ••• 4,-; ,,t, . .... 'N. ... '• " •-• a: .':' . . • ,4, . ,'4 '' „.-1..., 1-2,„ ...,• *.to< ,(ft - _ i d- .. _ , 4"p.a.,, . ..,,-44, •...,,,,r ..,zzr-441,-. .4. 4 ..• - : • •.:• A. , • -.,• ,- .. -I- ,I re •fA": : fr., 5, . • A ‘ it-i 1 - 5'. •••• ;. , ."4 r" 31- _or ? .1• , "V‘ e • 1, .e.'• - , -_ •.•-1.- _.,i• •. e- L.:04.- - , -7e....' _.: 4-"- -. rt":::-.::..'" , ..:'- - ‘,...,-,,:iil •2`!: \..-7N'. ,. .•-4 - # t trif,)11•411,004.._,, „,1,.:, •,1,!:::',7iO4.1-, :. i: :i ;) •ilr4.111P•!•,. i' - '•• i.• ' - • •--•4 • 4(1704.•; 1' N - ••: • • •'° .:.,.•• 1.••r" - ASC I. • c••••' ‘4:-•;• '(. ,.`r.' ..„: ,,,,, ,,," '. •,.... .10. ' ' -''' •• r . A ; -- .-'0.- -= I. i _ ler- e • 4"ti-: 7.ort , ... •.• •• - t.,,..14":-•'-' ;,,, 0......'i.)./, ',..,, , • \,..1 1 41100P , •.).:';', .•'., i• . 1 , ... ,)),4r. ., / I ',›' ,Z ,, 1 '' •, - - - . ;• , 1 ti 1 i',-*‘, . • " 1 . TO..4411,, -I/tt.4 : ....-1 ' ' - i . ( • ' , .#. .,- . , - .-'• 11*, ... ....... . .. i ' ......., .„r ! Art; :‘......-Ae. it_ , , \ • P ..t: - ,•,.:45 7,, 4 . ..., ••,. .1 .• - • , I , ,••1,...r.'IC - , ; ,.. •• I '' ''' • - . - 4 A - - - ..........-e.---, .. - ,... . ..,,,, .... .: •.76,0, • 4 -,Iiiiii, ,�. /4i • ...j- •�-.". '• 1"9- A - 7��s 4 fir_ x ' l iii �, ii • alp►-"sw.`. +��,�4. .._ ', �.` ' . ~s. R , ,. '� .. 1•:fir ` ... A . 1 ,iz„alotsit... li,41, ,,:.,,,11.. r•kl- .t-y<'. „ _ #1; (j5.. r . 'tir • t r-t '`'j� .' •, 777 ` 4 . .:.::::::,.., _,..r.i.„.___.. ii, i . ,..,.-4,..,. .,.k- 231 .� . , 25 Z '0141111/4. '4,4' - ''' 0- g1M.r _ '� - ' ce • - , �.- cf►�r ,1'i', -+� tti . .. • _ ' t le , r. 1 fi1`4F.7.., .iF ,,;.-{�,.t J jam'' � � • .. uY. 'r. • t,tj. •16 : • ;x' 24 26 , • .,. . SA , . Vh4116d 4, . 't, •• . - 14.- Al lb I :.I. •‘,..• . a .. :11101 .,'"'S ,g . '-....0' U. - . r • 4:711p. _ . . ,. 'iL• ,,..1■.' ...I .. _ ,• 7.411:%. Zk•- '.1 ...lk , 4 ••-b, __ ,... , „let ...r -•V a • -..,,t,` -'- -' i*,•-_1.:11 . . . L. '_e-1.--et- .. '-11, e - ,„, _ • •.- -4,•'y.,,: -74110.-*. :. -1, .•k , Wit ''-.119P 4' 'N'-'1U•• Z • et .- •"*"''-''Or j-. ..54.7';'•' ; • _tt ikr.4P,;.: ,..' L 1..: 10• . • ' - - e- '--•• • , ...4, . :.. ., .1,2•44.4%-: ;-* .i 'NIL - ‘ ....r ...T. /14er " -- "1 ,••,- ..- .• . It; — . . ,. .., I. \-1‘;titt,1/4 '4*- • 4 ' 1. .-' ' -'411'*; 'i-Olt . . •---t . . - 410 ,...411, •;,' -,+it ., .., -__.t..r. . . 1 . . . , ' • ‘‘' , ' ' 1 444. -'4 -•••••44:4 44- 4 • lb . . ..- 1,-441 *.lr.4 ir- -•- wit.40-01_1:` /-:-.: Al .... ...1/..,,,. r..' i '. '•• ' ; -.14; . ' •...e . i _Jot. -,_,.• -- 44, iliti .14ttf,:$%.■6 N•.1.'.''.' '1.... •.): -i . 8 , ..,, E A .1,....v.0)::,-.2.-- •—... . • 4 ' -' :fz----- ---.-•-..• . , ,..,, .: ',rid.,11, -... - .. ... , v .,i Alitt, . -, , - ..• e• , - -.1 (.... N 4iak . ..... ,. .\ ,..., .p, . , ' := . ,, • • . ... . . ;;:-- ,, ,1,740 ',...V4', .!g :I.:-,:. i;. . " , • 'i IP 4/f 4 ale,'1' /'1-, • .4* ') • - ' 7,.tt ‘.4.. -.'' . ; ). ) .. k."' v; •- -... '' - ' ' Pt - L...,,,, ,A ,•,,, ... '";,,' i :.4 -.,,.4 Ato , ,.,si ..i.i.,-il--. ..:.• . , - __..= .,.. 4. .,- ,ii, -‘-- •T , Alp ,it,' - a r-•. 1 ' ' ' 44 , • t, „ . •. .. „F,..., 4 - 1V-, '.L. • 1....... ".1: - \ ' ,- •• ,... 1 \\ - 's S. t$ : 4'.- • `'cf 2"Ao-•••-- "6..,•. 4. iii - 1 ,....e.\.. t b i • •L'. ,... ,, ,,,, . , b , -,..74. ,.,-;-,.„,u. . .....'• • - "i•if;. --- /tir ••$-:' . , ,. , , . . •,te • ..-1:''' .11.,'!,,,A - -'••• ' tt '• 4.1 .4."-I.P's- ,'• • ' WI . . .... .... ......• illit -ft,• ' ' , • .1 1 ?),: -, '•••• \4 - A# :„"-7- .•-• ' . ''.i.'*sir;I• -.... ' i e • ' -• - • tit It ' ! ' , .- . .. ..--.44-..t.44.:r',;..,..•,I,•,A.-,4i;l,: w4r,tr....;1.1„...7 - .-.. S . Vii \..1.11111 1\lk .'l • — • • , 2 7 ; 1,Alaltl‘. V 4 ■ , '4 '•I.6 . .• -' ik.,120$ ; - ,,t•-; ..■ ,.:ill,c,..i. . ,7,..4 4•. ;..,- ,,,,--_,-4.:._.ii, f.4,' ... 7 ,, ---•_,Ll• : • : . ,,, .yi4,./-,j . ••-I- . . ''- '7'f.:.3/. 44s . ■•fiil': • tr.;"."..y,i, y rAt ! PV, 0 -• . • • AVr 4. „4%.."--B- ...r.• , '3t„1 ill„.t...„-p. , : •-•- '-'' 4. • 4,- ',-- .!, .1. -, . ,,,,, .. . ,.: • ..if,--. . . . •' "d'`.!L'-.2.4.: 7 a i : "`) e • . - - Ali - 1, - '' - 4 . a-i,•4?-. .•t-'' . : ie.",.I•1 . ' • 'a'-•- ' • ' . i .'! .1.: ' . 44?. 7''-cl : -, ,, . . , ' iirPr*r.:1-..7„,,,• .. •.- ,._ rti . t.• - "9"..10., ,i . "1".... ''' '.'Y''.. ' i 4,7, , ,,- '-*,i. l'-'•!,'" .--2. ,,, ir, .••••lk ;„ '100 ,. - •..'.-.• ' -.4/' -:'"'`' / ,14 r /' • ••• . 0 I-A"' 'F 11 • . 4 - • e--4• . •1. 4.t:;:x;, ,if1.1),lif ...,- • ef' •;1 '..44'. c' • ... .... A•4., • . :_. . • .1 . . ... . . „.. , -. • -, _..1 , ...... ... '1•1.,,', 4■• _ b...11,;;' .• -, • - ,A. '' • . 1, . --,V•;.-; - • ,Lriva-W%; •4..,-"1 '-%-•.-i"f--SKOA1,... * -•:. *%,:, .'*:11.1,4,7 .„... , • ^, "I'41c,- 1,. 4 _ ..- .... 2 8 ,, .......:..,.4.m _ .:‘.., - ,,,, .. __. ... • ' ••• ' ‘":„.'at,.1. ..,.1....,Ws■ ... -k-4 41 2.74 ,,,, '...',:....,:.••I 1'4'c., f(s;t.,..-• • 1?.::: ii'f t'":111.1,,ii,..'# ,; _ _ "lc: IV I ' itr T."*Oli'r k r i Ni .,,..k. .-, 4e..;Nr-,.,r•..,-:;%Iti..:-, . ,,,. r. , • ',.-: ?•' .., .•;,; . ,t.1' • ., :-',. 74tet •41' .' • ",..'s..' .' -.. / -74 rni ' - ..,' ‘.... s, .. %. ;.'ib.,..,- t•- ••• , ,,, t..G. .._ ....Aaa 1.-..Ia..: ,•-• eV4 -4t1/4.. ...-4 .; ; ..•.-.. ,, .,.. .„ 4•:*:.::•",.., 7.:, ,,,t, , hti A., -..- .:.e. -.•:,' 2 - r \ ---,--44..,:, •., - - .,,,-,. • . ...4. ,., .1,„... ..„.... , , ,. • i _• - 40149kt- . , • ..../ .. . , rr) : .• ..•,,..- . ::• 4-:. ;N. i''' --- „ Cr) . c -.,..•-;:.,•-.-• • • .- • 1 . .....4, :. .v ' '-, f. '''.. 4..', -^•t'l. .2,-'4'-ii-stil‘N-041S');.... -'' - ' ' -1 ie ''. , , 1 s'Ir.'41/8114,i: .1."--: •"'alt'lk -.%.. 2 ' - -.' .' ...' It'44 ' •• 4 i• i-... '. :*.V2441[1 •'1 _P ..,.o, N• - .‘,• ' 11.,. ./i its sq.' • ' •-• .. ' ....... .. A.' ••••;ylar..." `•_V ‘.,' J-'''''...,..'-.•)'-...,-.. ' 114`rt- • ..`.---7' 2,N14411, .:•t•4;-.... .i:-.'.1'.=c't4z..-7' P ( /.:. !laps )ir.0;4..Jo' . •. • 7 N A '• •••• ' * 4, .1,„, ?" . ..r,,..1z 0,... .‘..,......i.,,. - , -.t:.,: ; ,/...- - +A ' ' . % % , -1.-.'• • • '..-.,.s,x;+ '0 111; • (' •.., _.-- . . ' jr ''''t . • "' ''-■ . II.' L' • ... • •'•• •'.■''A ‘,' i'.,s ' .14.10‘141 , ' . 141,,,tcv• ,i , i A‘lirift';*4 . y.:. ... #..r.,....4,,, . .•: ‘. 4...* ,. ... .• . 4.• . . . . .• , , turP, \. Ik: 4' _ . ____-. ,' '-,4, f, , ' , ."; • - ),I it,' • 1:if: t '.-, , : P ,''P. • 'i ' 17.PI .1,. „.r.`,1,..' , „4. ' ' ---‘''.•..,1 . .,i' ,"'''' . I '.. 4)7010 T,77 ' :rf....;:, ' :, e,,, . f • 7 4 :11, . ' it• - • ,., 4 .:,;`•‘••'' „. 'if , .41,47 ••■k ' - • t. ' .. - ' . . . ', i e"), .444:!•.' ''-'4'.. , .*: k „. . ......L.,- • ...-- .., -.•:.,:4, •'. , ,•, ....t -, .....,,,,,,, • •, • s, ...,,,4-,4... . .c.• , '.,.-,--2.., ,Iv..,.: .,, _ — . . . .: .. 1-._N't''',f-4-,.'tit4.?„,.,..4,°,,1,4_:.i".p"'..•,-:%,•—""%•,7y, 1 ,b f A 4 ,1,14'„,r'Tol_4,•0,...:.i,,.>:'":-_",• , CZ) - : .‘P 17 '•,*, ” . ' 0 .•.;•.": -. . , 14, ..„ • ,' - , ••,. :. :A .A, , . •• F.,., co!. ;.• ,,.;4 ',.',' ,, i'''',. rn rn -‘.. , .,,,, '4,,4., ' '-• • ,. , ' ; . ' rt,.' .* .:11.. A t..., : • ,• ..• . ....., . , .•. •. • - - , ''1,g .*.„.t ',,'„:.1. " :".1.4*..: ", . )* ... .'". ' .'••'. • "11,• '. t14- , . ' ' •••••'4!..'-1 .. ,.- -,, ' ','..- —.i. •.,, • .. - ..•', P', ..1.'i. '.'•' , . , Att41/.:'1, i'' "..,.Y...-"K"''Z'N-1*, ' ', ''''.-%.-:-''".' . ' • 4 - .'7.'r ,* ' '' • - ' 4' '• s ',. ,,..t.'. #. ' .. 14. . •• '4*.e, '..•';,,a 0 L.., • ,-.M4SotitAikoaigat..w... • • ,..-14" ,., ..t.k.e. L. ., .••• ...-!--44.4:,4%, .:.!,.. , . , ....s.-..,, •,. .-......7. A .4.:*,..*:.. •-- -:.-7, 4.. :--..•- ','4 ' . * •.. . - • , . , ... -VL:'431;:* . ,. 4%. '. ',...4 ' 4 . ''It. .It..,' ?'. '41 • '.."....- " . . .`41'' - -• . - .•:•-:'... • ...". 0- ., - --: • . s,. a . ---V s ..!,. 4". "„ .. ......".. , . -. - ..e.--ifisir. -•-• '.. l'fr.—toi ' ' ilr• ....--:.!. '•,:,- . P..c,.-1.., •h. ' •. .1.4 . .,• N '. Or . ' • ••••••' .• .. .t.• . ' .1.1. i • ■ . .‘4'...;..,';'•. 'in-' •••r;• -f. *- - l **I ep.• , .. ., A• . . -•• ., _•: •• , .. ..•.. , ,• Oir ,...• --. • . . , .. ,. ,.,... . • , • -. -• --•• N.40-7.-e - - ;,•,:lces •4 '':' -- ,. . ... . ,... •..4.`',' .i. ,r''' .....' ,,,. ... •",*' .13:". -.. k.;,i,".. .,.. 4i1,..:,.,44_. '.1. . - - 4;.• ''''••4 •• ,,• * " .- .4.4 7 • •, • • - • .• .. .. • ..- . • -;.7 A + VO' ■ I 1 1 , ■ .."2 II.ir • , i „•'; '• I ,. , 1102' ' .,‘4'4-10, • 0 A cd :11.,.. ,'• - , . 1! • t . • t , - I ' • • • 11.e 1 Alt-41-4t, ' .4 .. . ., -•-.. ''' ■ .. • . i17-, •• ' . .. . - , ... •., • . .4."i•A4 • , VI. • 4••• y •. V • \ ? i ' - 4 .* 4- -....L.• ,• .i 5 . 01/4/ -t • 't .. :, .,, hi - .....g.. • ; ,-,.; I tt,;•#..„..:-• , ..... %,- _ _ ..-. . . 0 • 7-0.1:•• ' IX ' ' . 1,I., ....r. - • -,el.k , ' ,r %■■ Yr:• •.-..11_xt; . • .,..6 '.$ !, 1. - . - 11/0114 4: it 11• . r-•i--,,, 'i • - 1r4':A7i. • 4. . 41111111, 1 .. i.- r) . t .' . . • -1 • ,,,,,i; ' 7? ' : , .„. • ..* . * •-'111t:' . ''•l' - . %'''. _ I 4111111111fr .... - _ •• ••'')ft -%•-• ! ,. . • , , . •,,,IAr„ t .. - -,... _ ;.4. . ... ., ..- 41k.,..4'i, - -- - Vtlk . .. r • -.k ill .. ..., 11111t, , /00. • . ..•, . ,- • •4 • '' . . 7 ar ... ' ■ • 11 , .41: ._ . A ' 1 •• 4 . 1:1; " . . , . . • . \ ' .. , r1, 11 ...-. IN ,,• •.„•• , 7-4..••. s- . .1... 4 . "._.•..- '., - 0 1 ,_ . . . 41Irt. - , - ... '. s --4' .• .." ,.. ,• ....- ., - ', 'Illt, )Ir, '.4 . , .,_ 'Nab:-i'-• .: . •-" ' .t.,:i ., .-.ist ... ..,?,.... 4 - \-- . '• ...,4 - •- .0440-• s., / '.•N. .. ... . - ../"'s ir,,, \ ''.. . ...„•11 1 . _3....4" . 1 I .,..N -f- • :;•11-... .N ------- • __ . . '' .."k_....,. -.- 1. t ,,_.. „,-••ir i t W•••••. .. -•- !---"-' --- • . . ... iltru-111., . , 7. , 1 .1 ,,-,4.. ,....,■..--1.1.1 :., -•• _ . . ,.. • ..,.--. -1,. . : • i A •••• 'Irth:gio• .... \i. ....-- ..... . . • , -44 ..... . .• .46 „„. , .. .,*-cl;‘,. ... • t ,-.. -....,, I Ilit ' 34 ir _.., ....... ........ ._,... -. ' • r, • 1444' .... 1 . ..4 • ) .- • ,.,.; ..') . ' ..„... „c ... .... • e 1 , 1,,," 44.' 1 • - , ...,_ ' •,... ' 'it , -.. ?", ;b. ,,, ., . .• .. -,.., ot„, . •••• ,j,, •., is • ' ‘ • ,e.. :kt,' ', . 1.'_0 ., --- . _ • ... ,X 4• 41 . be -. r • . -.. - • -• --."r '4 . . . . 4 '..4.'-‘,, : - • ... - ,:- 4‘. . 4, •>,L; ■ 'A ' .k._ ,V)-■ it • . . - - .' , 'St. .!! -• • , • • . ..tr. ''' ' At ,7,,fwg.;: - .:t ,,-- ,- 4-'• z . --.''' • ' .' , ' ;; . t. • . . •• i,,„ -.". .. .' ,` '' ,i ',. . ' , VP . • - s. A • . , . . ,• , ., .... •I . b. . u . # • .': -.1 , e41• .' 1 '\ 1 ■ ,r.1.:51, • A ■ A - •# , 1 , 7 ••••• , 'Pc. •,.4.0 '''i,,' ,• . ' ' • . r! . . l'; -44 ' *- 'I- ' ' '' .,"?•. • Lir $. ,•14 t,t4t,.. Ilt fir _ ,"• 4I . • o, • . ''' 0 .. , I ' ' L'' • 4 k..• :I'. ,,,,4,k./:"." r 1 1^'-' •'' io. ' '' ' -:',- - - ,. ,, it. •..' I 4... ! f.1 .1. ■. '' J • . 1 -,4; A .7-:.e.: ' . " "1, '.,' .1 I,t • is,. _ •-i le. • . '' 1. ■ i • .44 , e: . . i 11 l■ijirr• ', 0 - r - ,i, ....`''' , • ,• Ss,. '-- ' 1 ri rf I' 7 1 • .A'y.1‘, ' va •- : 74.. 1 . 4 • ..., . 4: of ', - ;Aim., .-. 1 ' • ./' -I N 4.'„../. '....' ,.., \ .: • . t,.;:•67.1re - .,. •" • =.' e` ' 1 f - . - ,441'„,iirpor._ , I,'•_ ' 1-.'''''.S'• 4V.;r-.-:- i'...•*.... •.4.,f1 i f +.A.Z7.-• iN i q _-.,1'I4 1/4 l t-.*. • •.••. , ....‘.. .•', iv,.,-••y, . . \ " .. .'40e.4..ft,!,r•"..i rt'•, .0.k.!.-g'1- k• -•• • .•. . •• • , - - -••'■-.3.4-4rx 16 s'f ' '' .,.-•11 - '• , ■ # ' ' ,, :. ' ; lir •,.. , , • 40 • - v -,-.-. '''..• -' -*Ab• • .- -• t 4 (- ' - -._. -:•.:...-•. , 0., #. - ... - • .., •,;,„, .•,, (.‘ ....,.. ... •• .• , . tp,.-• .- -4. • ,-, .•.,,,74 . . -i,,, kr • . . .,. 0 .......... It ...c., ,- .-12: . ...••!It AL •N.,-.1.;•.,, .. ' •"""fre 1.* . ,,,.T. ,, .• .••• _ ... . .....,.. ,_ : 4 , , • . i '' i - • .1' , ly. ' '.. I'I !',i.ok '..11 Is l or• .' -- ' -: If' •'.• Or* •11 . AL; ...• •."••'.• - /....at ..: • ,-..' .. - ' .. "D •• rr • ; • •, 4 0 i ... r „14.-' • ' .?•04 :L1V: ' 4 . . iti, • . .1 I „4 .. . ....,...4-,.....• ..., . • , . k I- • • - - : . .. •- 1.1„, `F p ) s. :fi, . ..„. ..i .,, ' 11$411V0.1 - 1 - " :.:1-\ , .s. , . ,,,,, . ,.. - -• 1. --t. -- :.. : I, _ .• . rro i - -• - .%.' 4A 7 :1 , •„..•"- t . 'i • 4. 14,- , 1 ' ...j&'.2"• 41,' ...• ... i ,: '') 7 r, ,,,, . 3116 AIt1Wr .1- t;..'.:,■4 .( ..) / . .. ,-.70. , .x. V%lc: Appendix A Final Technical Memorandum: Rapid Stream Assessment Technique (RSAT) Field Methods Prepared For: Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection Division of Water Resources Management - Montgomery County, Maryland Prepared By: John Galli, Sr. Environmental Engineer = Department of Environmental Programs Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments 777 North Capitol St, NE Washington, DC 20002 July, 1996 Table of Contents Page Acknowledgements Listof Figures i Listof Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Introduction 1 1. RSAT Evaluation Factors and Scoring System 2 II. RSAT Field Protocols 10 Background 10 1. Pre-Stream Survey Map Preparation and Planning 13 2. Stream Channel Cross-Sectional Characterization 13 3. Channel Stability 16 A. Bank/Lateral Stability 16 B. Channel Downcutting/Degradation 17 C. Bank Material Type (Soil Sampling) 17 4. Channel Scouring/Sediment Deposition 19 A. Embeddedness 19 B. Point Bars 21 C. Streambed Sediment Deposits and Streak Marks 21 5. Physical Instream Habitat - 21 A. Riffle Substrate Material Size Distribution 21 B. Riffle/Pool Ratio 22 C. Pool Quality 22 D. Baseflow Discharge 22 6. Water Quality 23 A. Substrate Fouling 23 B. Water Quality Meter Readings, Clarity, Color and Odor 24 7. Riparian Habitat Conditions 27 A. Canopy Coverage '-7 B. Vegetation Type 27 C. Buffer Width 27 Table of Contents (cont'd.) • • Page 8. Biological Condition - Benthic Macroinvertebrate Biosurvey 27 A. Macroinvertebrate Sampling 28 III. General Remedial Measures Guide and Restoration Project Prioritization 2g 1. General Remedial Measures Guide 28 2. Project Prioritization 29 References 33 • List of Figures Page Figure 1. Riffle Transect Spacing and Numbering System 14 • Figure 2. Riffle Transect: Channel Cross-Sectional Measurements 15 Figure 3. Relative Levels of Riffle Substrate Embeddedness 20 Figure 4. Representative Substrate Fouling Levels 25 Figure 5. General Remedial Measures Guide 30 • • List of Tables Page Table 1. Example of RSAT Scoring for Brooke Manor Country Club Branch • 2 Table 2. RSAT Evaluation Method - Representative Stream Characteristics 3 Table 3. Example RSAT Stream Survey Form 11 Table 4. Soil Texture Classification by Feel 18 Table 5. General RSAT Substrate Size Classes 22 Table 6. List of RSAT Water Clarity and Color Terms 26 Table 7. List of RSAT Odor Terms 27 Table 8. Project Prioritization (Dawson Farm Creek) 31 • Acknowledgements The author would like to thank a number of individuals whose support, cooperation and patience were instrumental to the completion of this document. In particular, the input and patience of Mr. Daniel Harper (DEP Project Manager), Mr. Cameron Wiegand and Mr. Stan Wong (all DEP) was appreciated. The author would also like to extend his appreciation to Mr.James Shell and Mr. Stuart Freudberg(both COG) for their support. Last, the author wishes to extend his many thanks to Ms. Kathy Corish and Ms. Earline Simons (both COG) for their assistance in the preparation of this document. • • Introduction Recognizing a growing need to both quickly identify existing channel erosion problem areas and systematically evaluate general stream quality conditions on a watershed-wide scale, the Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) contracted the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) to develop a set of rapid stream assessment protocols. In response, the Rapid Stream Assessment Technique (RSAT) was developed for Montgomery County, Maryland by COG in 1992. RSAT has been intentionally designed to provide a simple, rapid reconnaissance-level assessment of stream quality conditions. The RSAT system represents a synthesis of US Environmental Protection Agency's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (Plafkin, et.al. 1989), the Izaak Walton League and Save Our Streams stream survey techniques (Kellog, 1992), US Department of Agriculture, Water Quality Indicators Guide: Surface Waters (Terrell and Perfetti, 1989), together with COG staffs many years of local stream survey experience. Presently, the intended use and applicability of RSAT is limited to non- limestone Piedmont streams with drainage areas less than approximately 100-150 square miles. RSAT employs both a reference stream and an integrated numerical scoring and verbal ranking approach.' Major abiotic and biotic factors which influence overall stream quality have been streamlined, weighed and placed into the six following general RSAT evaluation categories: 1. Channel Stability; - 2. Channel Scouring/Sediment Deposition; 3. Physical Instream Habitat; 4. Water Quality; 5. Riparian Habitat Conditions; and 6. Biological Indicators (macroinvertebrates). In order to provide a quantitative measurement of the six preceding evaluation factors, the RSAT system employs a rigorous field evaluation protocol in which over 30 physical, chemical and biological parameters are measured at approximately 400 foot intervals along the stream (typically, 12-13 riffle transects per stream mile for smaller streams). Data is first recorded via field survey sheets and later transferred into a spreadsheet data base. Transect locations, the presence of storm drain outfalls, fish barriers,stream channel erosion problem areas and other noteworthy observations are additionally mapped onto topographic maps (preferably 1"=200'horizontal scale or larger). Last, photographic information (35mm color slide format) is catalogued so as to provide a permanent historical reference for stream areas surveyed. Upper Rock Creek downstream of Fieldcrest Road was used as the RSAT reference site for stream areas <10 mi'. Portions of the Gunpowder Falls, Patapsco and Patuxent Rivers were used to help characterize large mainstem reference conditions. 1 RSAT employs a riffle transect-based assessment approach for two main reasons: 1.) in Piedmont stream systems riffles are the principal macroinvertebrate-producing areas and 2.) riffles are both prominent and relatively permanent geomorphological features of a stream; thereby facilitating repeatable and comparable future stream-assessment studies. I. RSAT Evaluation Factors and Scoring System An example of the 0-50 point RSAT scoring system, as applied in Montgomery County, Maryland to the Brooke Manor Country Club Branch of Rock Creek has been included as Table 1. As seen in Table 1, the channel stability evaluation category is weighed slightly more heavily than the other five categories. This was intentionally done to reflect the major influence which the stream flow regime exerts on all six evaluation categories. Table 1. Example of RSAT Scoring for Brooke Manor Country Club Branch RSAT General Verbal Rating Categories and Associated Point Range . Evaluation Category Excellent Good Fair Poor Points , 1. Channel Stability 9-11 6-8 3-5 0-2 7 • 2. Channel Scouring/Deposition 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 4 • 3. Physical Instream Habitat 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 6 • 4. Water Quality 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 6 5. Riparian Habitat Conditions 6-7 4-5 2-3 0-2 5 6. Biological Indicators 7-8 5-6 • 3-4 0-2 8 Total Points Verbal Ranking Good 'Total Score 36 42-50 Excellent ` 30-41 Good. 16-29 Fair <16 Poor A brief description of representative stream characteristics for each of the six preceding evaluation categories has been provided in Table 2. As seen in Table 2, necessary reference condition descriptor adjustments have been made in an attempt to account for differences associated with increased stream/catchment area size. While considerable variation often exists, large mainstem- type stream conditions generally become self-evident when drainage basin size approaches 10-15 square miles. These changes include but are not limited to the following: increased baseflow discharge, lower average stream gradient, wider channel widths and wetted perimeters, taller bank Table 2. RSAT Evaluation method - Representative Stream Characteristics' Evaluation Relative Category Significance Excellent Good Fair Poor 1. Channel • Indicative of hydrologic/ •> 80%of bank •71-80% of •50-70% of bank •<50% of bank Stability flow regime alteration network stable. no bank network network stable. network stable. and general condition of evidence of bank stable. infrequent recent signs of bank recent bank physical aquatic • sloughing, signs of bank sloughing, sloughing, slumping --� �ti habitat. slumping or failure; sloughing, slumping or failure or failure frequently • . slumping or failure; fairly common; observed ; .1 ra , 16. •Provides insight into •stream bend areas ■stream bend areas •stream bend areas •stream bend areas past, present and are very stable. stable. outer bank unstable. outer • highly unstable. possible future changes outerbank height<2 height 2-3 ft. above bank height 3-4 ft. outer bank height in channel ft. above stream(<4 stream bank (4-5 ft. above stream(5-7 >4 ft. above stream. -� morphometry. ft. above stream above stream ft. above stream (>7 ft. above for large mainstem bank for large for large stream for large areas). bank mainstem areas). mainstem areas). mainstem areas). W overhang<2 ft.; overhang 2-2.5 ft.; bank overhang 2.5- overhang>3 ft.; 3 ft.; •exposed tree roots •exposed tree roots •young exposed •young exposed old, large,and predominantly old tree roots common. tree roots abundant. woody. generally 0- and large, smaller 4-5 recent (large) >6 recent large 1 recent (large)tree young roots scarce. tree falls/stream tree falls/stream falls/stream mile; 2-3 recent (large) mile; mile.; tree falls/ • stream mile; •bottom 1/3 of bank •bottom 1/3 of •bottom 1/3 of hank •bottom 1/3 of is generally highly bank is generally is generally highly bank is highly resistant plant/soil highly resistant erodible material; erodible material; matrix or material; plant/soil matrix or plant/soil matrix plant/soil matrix material; compromised; severely • compromised; • • RSAT Evaluation Method - Representative Stream Characteristics (cont'd.) . • Evaluation Relative Category Significance Excellent Good Fair Poor 1. Channel *channel x-sect. is *channel x-sect. is *channel x-sect. is *channel x-sect. is Stability generally V or U- generally V or generally generally (cont'd.) shaped. U-shaped. trapezoidally- trapezoidally- shaped. shaped. . Point Range 9-11 6-8 3-5 0-2 2. Channel •Relates to level of •riffle embeddness •25-49% embedded •50-75% embedded •>75%embedded Scouring/ uncontrolled stormwater <25% sand/silt (35-59% embedded (60-85% embedded (>85% embedded Sediment runoff, sediment load (<35% for large for large mainstem for large mainstem for large mainstem .1. Deposition and transport and mainstem areas); areas); areas); areas); degradation of instream habitat. ritiv •high number of •moderate number •low-moderate •few, if any,deep deep pools >24" of deep pools. number of deep pools. pool (>48" for large pool substrate pools. pool substrate >81% mainstem areas). 30-59% sand/ substrate 60-80% sand/silt; >�� , , pool substrate <30% silt; sand/silt; ' I composed of o sand/silt; • • • •", •streambed streak •streak marks and/or •streak marks and/or •streak marks and/or °• marks and/or "banana" deposits "banana" deposits "banana" deposits banana-shaped uncommon; common; common; sediment deposits J , absent; RSAT Evaluation Method - Representative Stream Characteristics (cont'd.) Evaluation Relative Category Significance Excellent Good Fair Pour 2. Channel •fresh, large sand • fresh, large sand •fresh, large sand :fresh, large sand Scouring/ deposits in channel deposits in deposits in channel deposits v. common Sediment rare-absent. no channel uncommon. common. small in channel. moderate- Deposition evidence of fresh small localized areas localized areas of heavy sand (cont'd.) sediment :reposition of fresh sand fresh sand deposits deposition along on overbank; deposits along along top of low major portion of top of low banks; banks; over-bank area v, common; •point bars few, •point bars small •point bars •point bars small and stable, and stable, well moderate-large moderate-large well vegetated and/ vegetated and/or and unstable with and unstable with or armored with armored with little high amount of high amount of ui little or no fresh or no fresh sand. fresh sand common. fresh sand present at sand. most stream bends. Point Range 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 RSAT Evaluation Method - Representative Stream Characteristics (cont'd.) . Evaluation Relative Category Significance Excellent . Good Fair Poor 3. Physical •Relates to the ability of a •wetted perimeter •wetted perimeter •wetted perimeter •wetted perimeter Instream stream to meet basic >85%of bottom 61-85% of bottom 40-60% of bottom <40% of bottom Habitat physical requirements channel width width (66-90% for width (45-65% for width (<45% for necessary for the (>90% for large large mainstem large mainstem large mainstem ° : support of a well- mainstem areas); areas); areas); areas); ° N ,+' balanced aquatic community (e.g. depth - L �� of flow, water-velocity, •riffles, runs, and •good mix between •few pools present, •dominated by one \s, water temperature, pool habitat present, riffles, runs and riffles and runs habitat type substrate type and diverse velocity and pools,relatively dominant, velocity/ (usually runs)and v ` quality,etc.) depth of flow diverse velocity/ depth generally by one velocity/ \N. • present(i.e., slow, depth of flow; slow-shallow (for depth condition - fast,shallow and large mainstem (slow-shallow)(for deep water); areas runs and large mainstem pools dominant, areas few riffles velocity/depth present,runs and diversity pools dominant, intermediate); velocity/depth diversity low); •riffle substrate •riffle substrate •riffle substrate •riffle substrate composition - composition has composition composition ' • cobble, gravel, good mix of gravel, predominantly predominantly rubble, boulder cobble and rubble small cobble, gravel gravel with high mix with l°ttle sand, material and sand percentage of sand •(Z50% cobble); •(25-49%cobble); •(5-24%cobble); •(<5% cobble); •riffle depth > 8" . •riffle depth 6-7.9" •riffle depth 4-5.9" •riffle depth <4" for • for large for large for large large mainstem mainstem areas; mainstem area; mainstem area; area; RSAT Evaluation Method - Representative Stream Characteristics (cont'd.) • Evaluation Relative Category Significance Excellent Good Fair Poor 3. Physical • large pools •large pools • large pools •large pools Instream generally >24 in. generally 18-24 in. generally 12-18 in. generally<12 in. Habitat deep(>48 in. for deep(36-48 in. for deep(24-36 in. for deep(<24 in. for (cont'd.) large mainstem large mainstem large mainstem large mainstem areas) with good areas) with some areas) with little or areas)and devoid overhead cover! cover/structure; no cover/structure; of cover/structure; structure; •no channel •slight increase in •moderate increase •extensive channel alteration or point bar formation/ in points bars and/or alteration nr point significant point enlargement or in amount of bar formation/ bar formation or slight amount of channel enlargement; enlargement; channel modification; modification; * riffle/pool ratio- * riffle/pool ratio- * riffle/pool ratio- * riffle/pool ratio- " 0.9-1.1:1 0.7-0.89:1; 0.5-0.69:1; 0.49:1 S; 1.l1-1.3:1 1.31-1.5:1 Z 1.51:1 * summer afternoon * summer afternoon . * summer afternoon * summer afternoon H2O temp<68°F. 1120 temp 68-75°F. 1120 temp 75-80°F. 1120 temp>80°F. Point Range 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 RSA'I' Evaluation Method - Representative Stream Characteristics (cont'd.) Evaluation Relative Category Significance Excellent Good Fair Poor 4. Water • Indicative of: •substrate fouling' •substrate fouling •substrate fouling • substrate fouling Quality watershed level 0-10% (rock level - very light- level - moderate(21- level - high perturbations/ underside). light(11-20%). 50%). (>50%). >t���� �p general level of ''� jam' human activity, • •TDS3: <50 mg/L; •TDS: 50-1(H) mg/L; •TDS: 101-150 mg/L; •TDS: >150 mg/L; L point and nonpoint • source loads, and • , - aquatic habitat •clear water- objects •objects visible •objects visible • objects visible to " 11'i1 :j conditions. >3 ft.deep visible; clown 1.5-3.0 ft.; down 0.5-1.5 ft.; depth <0.5 ft.; .:III 1i�0!CUrrrs ,"' •no odor; • slight organic odor; •slight-moderate odor; • moderate-strong organic odor; Point Range 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 co 5. Riparian •Provides insight •wide (>200') •forested buffer •riparian area •riparian area mostly Habitat into change(s) in mature forested generally more than predominantly non-woody Conditions stream energetics, buffer along both 100 ft. wide along wooded but with vegetation, narrow- temperature regime, banks; major portion of major localized gaps; width riparian area; 14. "4;1;11 and both aquatic both banks; and terrestrial sl r I.I ! habitat conditions. i•canopy coverage; •canopy coverage; •canopy coverage; •canopy coverage; 80%shading 60-79% shading 50-60% shading <50% shading (>60% for large (45-59% for large (30-44% for large (<30% for large j •J.'s mainstem areas). mainstem areas). mainstem areas). mainstem areas). Point Range 6-7 4-5 2-3 0-I RSAT Evaluation Method - Representative Stream Characteristics (cont'd.) Evaluation Relative • Category Significance Excellent Good Fair Poor 6. Biological • Best overall •diverse •mayflies and •pollution-tolerant •poor diversity Indicators indication of macroinvertebrate caddisflies present caddisflies, snails, generally stream health and community present, (stoneflies absent), midgeflies, aquatic dominated by level of watershed dominated by flat- good overall • worms dominant; midgeflies, aquatic )1 perturbation. head mayflies, diversity; worms and snails; - stoneflies and �J „5, cased caddisflies, very few snails, and/or leeches present; l •moderate-high • moderate-high •low-moderate •depauperate 1/4.0 number individuals. number individuals. number individuals. population - low number individuals. Point Range 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 Score Verbal Stream Quality Ranking TOTAL SCORE: 42-50 Excellent Condition 30-41 Good Condition 16-30 Fair Condition , , < 16 Poor Condition ' Bolded characteristics pertain to drainage areas generally >approx. 10-15 mil. 1 Substrate fouling =percentage of underside surface area of a cobble-sized stone(or larger), lying free on the streambed, which is coated with a biological film or growth. TDS =total dissolved solids. Note,natural background TDS level may sometimes he >50 mg/L due to geologic composition of water bearing strata. • • heights, deeper riffles and pools, a general increase in instream large woody debris, a gradual reduction in canopy coverage, increased numbers of macroinvertebrate filter feeders such as clams, increased fish diversity, etc. Under the RSAT system, the stream, including its channel network, is surveyed in its entirety in an upstream-downstream fashion. As implied by its name, RSAT is designed to provide a quick yet accurate assessment of stream conditions. For example,an experienced two-person monitoring team can under normal field conditions, generally survey 1.0 - 1.25 stream miles per day (roughly equivalent to 12-15 transects). Although a two-person team approach is strongly recommended, the RSAT survey can be performed satisfactorily by a single investigator. An example of a completed RSAT stream survey form has been included as Table 3. As seen in Table 3, upon survey completion stream parameters/conditions are averaged over the entire stream segment.length surveyed. These averaged results together with the general stream descriptors presented in Table 2 and the investigator's professional experience and judgement are used in assigning a summary condition score for each of the six RSAT evaluation categories. Within the point range of each of the four verbal rating/assessment categories (i.e., excellent, good, fair and/or poor) discretion is used to add or subtract points based on representative stream conditions, taking into account stream segments observed between transect station locations. Upon completion of RSAT survey work, stream areas may be further evaluated from a potential stream bank stabilization/stormwater management project need perspective. A companion Project Prioritization evaluation system which examines and weights: a.) overall site accessibility, b.) proximity of residences/buildings to stream areas experiencing moderate to severe channel erosion, c.) the overall environmental sensitivity of the site, d.) level of existing or programmed SWM controls within the watershed and e.) stream problem level has been included in Section III of this document. II. RSAT Field Protocols Background The protocols described herein represent an attempt to provide both general guidance and . standardized procedures for "reading" the stream for tell-tale signs of overall quality/level of impairment. In addition to calibrating and properly maintaining.water quality meters and other field equipment, it is important that RSAT survey team members calibrate their eyes, and sense of smell and touch with one another.2 Furthermore, while RSAT has already been applied to over 140 Piedmont stream miles, the methods presented in this document will continue to be evaluated, updated and where deemed necessary revised. Last, where more quantitative or intensive data is 2 As with most rapid stream bioassessment methods, it is recommended that RSAT survey work be performed by either a professional biologist or RSAT-trained individual. 10 Table 3. Example RSAT Stream Survey Form Montgomery County Su-earn Survey Study Watershed rock cep( ::..t. MC Scree:Map BookCoocdinams .»• 4! k-e. J-h.°4.1 Tributary Nan e and Number Ra.kc.!Yto,,,., C.C• Tr lb,J ,I7 ' tit taa T. 1qs DA. (ac) 4-c4R Watershed Imperviousness (%) `7 Stream Gradient (%) 1.q •• Tam Gk stri. MDE Grass -11L Date 12-12491. Time C?co tit'5 Investigators J.iit■, r P.-7"i Current Weather Conditions cli, lc Cots ■A h("7 50..1 4 c,,%t Pm Last Precpitatioa Event 121 19192 Survey Reach EFIC Gam. Con Nrt>, L. Gtr i Survey Length (ft.) s.7.0 Riffle/Pool Ratio b221.1 0.83•. 1 , . Baseilow (cfs) 1.03@ x-sc . 1 . General Accessibility ,s,,,,Af gM=• /Por (4.ic-. :.1.-a7L Photo No.s 1° ,tsv"--l.ic\7'ix I,.;•( .M4...,.>>2.111-7_ ‘.:..z,Qfreric p..14 T.. 1. '~tees}•12 Avi.raoopy C.Krtse 4%i 11°! 0`i s,75.1°'30 u 10,t10,40,"75 .4A s) Taal No.of Tree al•• 2 +� r J . No.of Rrrct Tree F.as• O Relative At oanc of Trutt P7=ertt- �� .- v "4". No.of Cbucxti Fstt 3arre=s . Pu_aA. 0 - e�mase=• t Ce 1a."-G.c-13.) 0 No.of 5z;esed Sc-..--firs:- t Awl. ' Somme I.e.l.trj 11. 1/S/ {....rd t1•1. ♦.,•.y... versa W Fall 14440. t� TM. C7..r ■••.d I rri. 7.,.,.w Lev*, !Teal ^Y 7 (( _ Mry it../../..4. T W 1n.�N 1 MU• �� An. rd 6M t I 6 I l 1 I. I Ms- t i• Compor ••••(V Low,CU e 1 1. I t. 4,141. Or- 1 16p I 10.0 `La t0 t. 1.0 1.0 1 10011001100 'c I ia-1X.SQo-.51 -s I zS I F F 2.011100 I PO'. - :'-70 1.5 •-OI •4,0 I IS !2.12.0 9‘1ro 90 1 1.- n- 46'ar,4 loo 1 . ! F • JOI (MK I , 5o 11.0 1.a 1 4.0 I 1.17 Iz.53t. -lo l$si 79 r -Is IRgtrsal S5 25 IF Ir log 12c1!1-7 Ia4, 4 SD `j5 b.0 SS 1•S "t.S 12.0 122 190 1 4S is I+5/t_ICG.Cr,>!,s,Sl ba I IS Off- F -7S 125 120 IV.�a., t 5a 10.o. 1 ES 9.0 2-0 •1.S It5 I Se I'tol 90 Icts 1 1. let CS 1 I00 3-z F ,F I3D 1150 1 2.Z less., . sa tt.o an 9.:3 z.1 -3A IEa•1 901 o 19D /�1S 3LI It 4 .6.5 I So SA F IC Paoa1 Loo i 11 1 C.,. ✓ ( So 12.. II.0 6S '- 2.0 I(.S 19c lg•1 goiSL ",C.I Cz.t.64.1I 20 gs F Irfb I1so Ise I I+ I Fbr- a so 1°0 ms Ia.% 3.5 2S 201-70 1st 1'60 WC 4c.10110,6,51 e .f 0 le6ip-' I.30 Its 1 2. , t2.4,• so tz b 6•e 4.0 25�2a ' 1 1 ISO 1 3 0 1 c C !qE aks c I,.t 55 a r s I F 1 F p--,-.71 a.+ N,trend 1 5 0 140 1t,s I. i.d 2.s Tr TS ao 17St 53I c S IE,cl�rs,s1 2:o s. 1 F 1 F x r1.01 14 I r.•r• 11 I sb 1�.%I 1,.s s.s 3.S 1201,1.o 1$6 1s)I bs Is/c sI�u .s„sI 35 ro I F F t?c Ins,1 I-4- 160-d 1x I 5o I 14,n 1t.o -7.0 1.s -2�l 2_o 185(-JS 1 8b 7 st- s A-1 CCIA.s 61 I to 1 I>= 2i)!1501 z9 Iv,m4 u I so \\.5 CO 7.5 >r.o t.013.D 19s 5 95TsiLl4hL r,b, ,45 GO 5 F >rrrYto 1 21 N.;iyrJ I1I � I I i u 1 I f 1 1 vas. I j 12.9 1o.s _6-s C61:4 2-6 L,o{z.o 4 1 Irrst I I I 61.5 1 91. 1 ! laaylt.aol 11.051 K.+.Abb..+..•,:one C.Car.St.eat.S-sari C•g+•d Ck-nibble.R.rubble.1•kuktm.F•loree.Cr•rasa.••bll�tr=s.'_bank aua■rW preset A..e..,.aan<C•coalr+law.SU•scams.!ta.ran, II fat use , S.. • UP....,C•• • G■ • ,Cab • cr 11 Table 3. Example RSAT Stream Survey Form (cont'd.) WATE.::i OUAUT''CCNCrTICNS - Transact Time Tomo ' 00 pM TOS Cana Turn w Our ' No. (nr) ("C) (mC1U (mQry I(mYCn,) I(NTU) ca1ar - air watt( + 110 4. 11.0 C.0 1 ro•bz I 7.521 '70 I o.:16 I 6 I GAF" I Ivor►e. 1 1 I ISOb IB•u 6.4- I 11.S I. •"7.131 '70 I C,0-'e 1 'Z 1 e -I N.10 Mb 1 I t I I I I I I 1 L I I I I I 1 i I" Mir- 1s!a_-acs Corgi'�:s -Teseeaii.,s c• '(-1- SO ,24.= 410 1x-z=•e ,x-5. 60 , t-4=^o • J otc :?!Ccr._='crs; scnn.c.v, e):e 3 ~ rnd+.»r CLserci: � I __ - S norisnar.. . u•sul c.a. . _ C x 2-t�"`� • 4• s � i x 7.na�1wY* ' - d Veede- �k:.�_,) aga = rs § 4 li Aa : LI , 3 ` ", vi i / { Iii v� �be ✓l .r k►...C.,.,,L,. r 1 Diaszliar..,Ls C C.-. i:it s- ) siOnIS;►e.,f••, :its C�a,l as �n�n.On/QbW,t..1' @.all x-sczias2> Mar,;,,,, l�tbra}t aw" 7 Sr.=,v 'aced". v 4-r i\ln fYbC.re∎&V al..1r1� .....s L. 3 It1 Co[b.w tiGCea1L, yy1.r+1c4L M.:R• a0n0 0044 IYtutJ S.fri*1 FSr • -.inlo.ki.r.e.+,,.;+, •• I4,..(4. 1.4.14- a' Stre.. Ca.2..'rt Mc .,".r/5>�t=.pr:••,. "Cc s: . ,-sit uc 11._ft Cabfcrs_ R4-7.Ap_ C1:.31._ . L_ft — _ — Stye=:Ort::.Ce:aa'?Cs). '�-r�Cr+P @ S7c0.•arc 1.►• . •RSAT 5t:esm Evz1 i a=S'--e'-" -Stag C`aa . cws.rr rs iris Grad :w leer- ( it& I. Taste.lriabr !dL 44 34 64 '7 Z m+msr 73 S4 3.4 04 I . ,,. l psi La-Sayan 74 54 34 . 44 6 4. wurgalarT 74 34 34 04 - b I. =pada Kaiiaa K 44 is 04 5 cabalism • • . *;d oslat fadtasae 1 74 34 34 04 16 Tact Pains aCCI 29T.LLSC6L 36 47,4.1.isc464as vrsAZ YAM= 3a.4t.Cord 47.13.Fair a t$ .Parr 12 needed for study purposes (e.g., pebble count for enumerating substrate particle size) RSAT may be modified to accept the needed accommodation(s). 1. Pre-Stream Survey Map Preparation and Planning Before heading out to the stream the following preparatory map work and planning is recommended: 1. Using a US Geological Survey 7.5 minute series quadrangle topographic map or equivalent, delineate the drainage area at the furthest downstream point to be surveyed. Then using either a planimeter, dot grid, or geographical information system (GIS) calculate the associated drainage area; 2. Determine the general watershed land use(s)and approximate overall imperviousness level for the survey area using, whenever available, recent county/state zoning and • land use maps; 3. Pencil-in and number the proposed RSAT riffle transect station locations onto a suitable topographic base map. Transect map spacing is best done using a map wheel. As seen in Figure 1, transects should generally be spaced approximately 400 feet apart and numbered in an upstream-downstream order. Also, at this point the intended length of stream to be surveyed per day should be determined; and 4. For general stream reconnaissance purposes, the average stream gradient for the proposed survey segment may be determined directly from the topographic base map(s). Gradient is calculated by dividing the elevation difference between the starting and end points by the total stream segment length to be surveyed. 2. Stream Channel Cross-Sectional Characterization As seen in Figure 2, five different parameters are measured at each riffle transect. Because the associated data provides the requisite baseline foi.both planning-level analyses of general channel morphology and hydrologic conditions and for transformation into cross-sectional plots, it is imperative that a representative transect location be selected within the riffle area. A brief description of how each of the preceding five parameters are measured and their general relevance is provided in the following section. Note, all five parameters are measured to the nearest tenth of a foot. 13 Figure 1. Riffle Transect Spacing and Numbering System • 034.3 ' 5. 1♦ ' if 7,,,,j.,...,,,,, ,,,X , mildrelLte-r-mtt 1.%\° & ;,--i- ...-1 ' fgr • ■ i PG //Oa r*° • 4A.' ' . V, 9 !!1 C) / X O� rZ LLS ```%/ O�Q • ♦ 0 •' f . .!■■ X 4 ° I : • .� I ♦ X 3 /... ,, 1-t-. • t.. L........: . 0.G,..9<„ , „.. . I 0Y 0 44,0.1�. `O ' ♦ . .8 14 1 I. N I fr. 0/4. ( / _ 3 ■-.„,,,iii* / / - - 4. I! -44 .- 7 0 s•--4.0 ./,,,ee./ .7 .2 / • .41■-•c-' "--; — ., .°1452-fis* ..": (L.....' - 77 / / < / ---,-*c,i. .,. +. • • ` rR� , , N - :4.4 Q //>' T -di .. .4 cglc:1"=zoo' V , .i t / /X AIV:Iit q a list „ . = rs • 14 • Figure 2. Riffle Tra-sect: Channel Cross-Sectional Measurements' iii pl, I ,• Q Top Channel Width i i .\, y ,�,1 1rr • t`�A 1 �2 Bottom Channel Width --- fl yrYIO II r tfl 4a Bank Height C Wetted Perimeter 4h Bank=Height NIL I SQ Riffle Depth Left Bank Right Bank ' I.ett and right denote looking in a downstream direction. Top Channel Width: Measured from top of bank to top of bank along the transect. In order to minimize potential measuring error the tape measure is both held level and pulled taut. Top channel width provides insight into the relative volume of discharge associated with large bankfull storm events (i.e., approx. 1.1- 1.5-year frequency storm). Bottom Channel Width: Measured from toe of bank to toe of bank along the transect. Generally marked by a noticeable break in the slope of the bank, lack of vegetation or both. Includes part or all of the active channel area. Provides insight into the relative volume of discharge from smaller, more frequent storm events (i.e., generally < 1-year frequency storm). Wetted Perimeter: Portion of riffle which contains flowing water. Measured from water edge to water edge along the transect. When compared against bottom channel width provides insight into both level of stream channel widening and existing physical aquatic habitat. Bank Height: Measured from stream water surface to the top of each bank. Note, the mean of three measured heights is recorded for each bank. Provides insight into the approximate extent of stream • channel downcutting. Riffle Depth: The mean of 10 riffle depth measurements, with each taken at a representative location within the riffle, is recorded. Provides insight into both baseflow discharge and general aquatic habitat conditions present. 3. Channel Stability A. Bank/Lateral Stability At each riffle transect, either a 50- or 100-foot long channel reach is selected and carefully • examined for signs of bank instability.' Typically, the length of channel to be examined is divided into equal halves by the transect. Within the designated 50- or 100-foot long channel reach both right and left banks are examined. Signs of instability such as bank sloughing/slumping, recently exposed non- • 3 A 50-foot long stream reach is employed for streams with drainage areas<10 mi2; whereas, a 100-foot long reach is used when the drainage area is>10 mi3. 16 woody tree roots (e.g., fine hair-like roots and or smaller lateral roots measuring less than 0.5 inches in diameter), the general absence of any vegetation within the bottom one-third portion of the bank, recent tree falls, etc. are noted. After the total length of stable area for each bank has been determined it is converted into a percentage and recorded along with the average percent stability for the entire section surveyed. In addition, general bank stability conditions between transect stations are visually rated and mapped. The following six verbal bank stability rating categories are employed by RSAT: • Stable - Over 90 percent of bank network is stable. No signs of major lateral bank erosion problems present. • Slight - 81-90 percent of bank network is stable. Signs of major • lateral bank erosion problems are rarely observed. • Slight/Moderate - 71-80 percent of bank network is stable. Signs of major lateral bank erosion problems are uncommon-common. • Moderate - 61-70 percent of bank network is stable. Signs of lateral bank erosion problems are common. • Moderate/Severe - 50-60 percent of bank network is stable. Signs of lateral bank erosion problems are very common. • Severe.- Less than 50 percent of bank network is stable. Major • portions of banks are unraveling. B. Channel Downcutting/Degradation As the stream channel is walked particularly close attention is paid for evidence of major channel downcutting or degradation. Again, average bank heights provide a good approximate indication for most streams. For example,bank heights which average five feet for a small headwater stream would suggest that downcutting on the order of two to three feet has probably occurred. Other reliable indicators include the presence of nickpoints and exposed concrete footers for retaining walls, weirs, culverts and other man-made instream structures. In urban streams, the presence of exposed sewer lines provide yet another good measure of channel degradation.; Note, the number'of exposed sewer lines or other normally buried utility lines observed is recorded on the stream.survey form. Bank Material Type (Soil Sampling) At each riffle transect area, the general soil texture of material located in the lower one-third • of each bank is classified by feel in accordance with the textural characteristics described in Table 4. De-pending on the degree of homogeneity of the bank material, 1-3, two- to three- 4 Where a sewer line crossing of a stream is required,the pipe is normally laid three to four feet below the bottom of the streambed. Knowing the approximate age of the sewer system provides additional insight into the general rate of downcutting over time. 17 I inch deep samples per bank are taken from an exposed soil area with a short soil sampling tube, small hand trowel or equivalent. The dominant textural class is then recorded for each bank on the survey form. Table 4. Soil Texture Classification by Feel (modified from Northcote, 1979) Texture Class and RSAT Behavior of Moist Bolus of Soil Abbreviation Sand (S) Crumbles readily; cannot be molded; single sand grains adhere to fingers Loamy Sand (L/S) Slight coherence; can be sheared between thumb and forefinger to give minimal ribbon of about 0.25 inches; discolors fingers with dark organic stain Sandy Loam (S/L) Bolus just coherent but very sandy to touch; will form a short ribbon; dominant sand grains can be seen, felt or heard Sandy Clay Loam Strongly coherent bolus, sandy to touch; medium size sand grains (SC/L) visible in finer matrix; will form a longer ribbon than sandy loam Loam(L) Coherent and rather spongy bolus; smooth feel when manipulated but with no obvious sandiness or "silkiness"; will form a short ribbon <1.0 inches long Silt Loam (SL/L) Coherent bolus, very smooth to silky when manipulated; may form short ribbon Silt (SL) Pure silt will have a smooth, floury or silky feel; bolus can be manipulated without breaking; ribbons 0.25 inches or more Silty Clay Loam Coherent smooth bolus; plastic and silky to the touch; will form (SLC/L) longer ribbon than loam .Clay Loam (C/L) Coherent plastic bolus; smooth to manipulate; will form ribbon similar to silty clay loam • Sandy Clay (S/C) Plastic bolus; fine to medium sands can be seen, felt or heard in clayey matrix; will form a thin ribbon over 1.0 inches which breaks easily Silty Clay (SL/C) Plastic bolus; smooth and silky to manipulate; will form long ribbon Clay (C) Handles like plasticine, plastic and sticky; will form a long, ribbon of 2.0 inches or more 18 The preceding soil textural information is used for: 1.) quick screening of the relative potential erodibility of the stream bank network and 2.) providing insight into both potential in-channel sources of sandy material and possible future susceptibility to high embeddedness levels. In general, the relative erodibility potential of non-vegetated or poorly vegetated stream banks is as follows: High - lower 1/3 of stream banks is predominantly silt-textured soil material; Moderate - lower 1/3 of stream banks feature non-silt or clay dominant soil textures; and Low - lower 1/3 of stream banks are predominantly clay-textured soils, bedrock, saprolite, rip-rap, or other hard impermeable material. 4. Channel Scouring/Sediment Deposition A. Embeddedness Embeddedness is generally defined as the degree to which sand and silt (fines) surround or • cover the larger gravel, cobble and boulder-sized material and is expressed as a percentage. Under the RSAT system, the percentage of fines occupying the interstitial spaces between cobble, gravel, rubble and boulder-sized material is visually estimated with the aid of a viewing tube. Figure 3 has been included to illustrate the four general percent embeddedness • ranges/categories used by RSAT. The imaginary quadrants depicted in Figure 3 may be used as a handy reference aid in first gauging the general embeddedness range. Next, and only after closer examination, the level of embedd�dness is estimated to the nearest 5 percent. At each riffle transect area 10 viewing tube readings are taken at representative riffle depth/velocity locations. The 10 embeddedness subsamples are averaged and the mean recorded on the stream survey form. In order to avoid both undesirable clouding of the water and potential substrate disturbance, it is recommended that measurements begin at the downstream end of the riffle and proceed in both a lateral and upstream direction (e.g., z-like pattern). • Two sizes of viewing tubes, each with a white surfaced interior are recommended: a.) for shallow riffles measuring less than six inches deep - a minimum 10-inch long tube with a six-inch internal diameter, and b.) for riffles over six inches deep - a standard, white five- gallon plastic bucket with both the bottom-end cut out and a small siphoning notch cut into the bottom edge.5 5 Note,a good alternative low-cost viewing tube for shallow riffles can be constructed by simply cutting out the bottom-end of a white, one gallon cylindrical, Rubbermaid plastic juice container. For turbid streams the employment of a large steel shovel instead of a viewing tube is alternatively recommended. 19 Figure 3. Relative Levels of Riffle Substrate Embeddednessl Frame 1 Frame 2 / 1 4 ;ir0 ... , A .aft B / A 1dB• • S 1:S , 4011$1167 div,-; . # s' Mtn ,: '<�' ,/. * / ,, il,...h.-.\." • . -10% -30% Excellent(0-25%) Good(25-50%) Frame 3 Frame 4 . , �' 'o; Pit, .��•A a` B \4 :Q � '.1.,::* .., z,r)::.V y 4 ..V. 1./• Q.:• .,,,d,,.\,.....a.,,,,......i.....: ::::::..7::::.".:.., ,,,-:;.:::. ...,..,.....i.;:::-, D / -60% -90% Fair(50-75%) Poor(>75%) " = sand/silt-sized material (tines) • ' Bolded number below each frame is areal percentage of fines surrounding larger bed materials; imaginary quadrants labelled A. B.C. D used as handy reference aid. 20 B. Point Bars The number, size, material composition and extent of vegetational colonization/stability of point bars is noted as the stream channel is walked. C. Streambed Sediment Deposits and Streak Marks An approximation of the relative sediment load and level of channel scouring is made as the stream channel is walked. Signs of high sediment loadings and low stream competency include sandy ripples or banana-shaped deposits in run areas, sand-filled pools, and high numbers of sandy point bars. Large, extensive, fresh deposits of sand on overbank areas are also another general indicator of a high sandy sediment load. With regard to channel scouring, the presence of parallel streak marks in run areas, flattened or uprooted vegetation and armoring of point bars by large gravel and cobble-sized material, etc. are indicative of high levels of channel scouring and bed load movement. 5. Physical Instream Habitat A. Riffle Substrate Material Size Distribution At each transect station the entire riffle area is surveyed and the general riffle substrate material size distribution is visually determined. Substrate materials are recorded on the survey form, in descending order of areal coverage, using both the particle size classes and abbreviations presented in Table 5. From an aquatic habitat standpoint, the ideal riffle substrate composition is (in descending order) a cobble, gravel, rubble, boulder mix with little sand. In general, as the amount of sand increases habitat conditions for both macroinvertebrates and for fish spawning and incubation decline. Note, fair to poor conditions are generally present when sandy material appears in one of the first three particle size slots recorded on the stream survey form. • 21 Table 5. General RSAT Substrate Size Classes (modified from Wentworth, 1962) RSAT Particle Size Range' Class Abbreviation MM inches 1. Boulder B >305 >12 2. Rubble2 R 256-305 10-12 3. Cobble Cb 64-256 2.5-10 4. Gravel G 2-64 0.1-2.5 5. Sand S 0.062-2 <0.1 6, Clay C Measured along intermediate axis. 2 Includes part of size class commonly referred to as small boulder. B. Riffle/Pool Ratio As the stream is walked the number of riffles and pools present are counted using hand-held tally counters. The ratio, provides a relative measure as to the general mix of instream fish habitat present. C. Pool Quality At each transect station the closest pool within 100 feet of the transect is examined. Five habitat quality factors are evaluated: • size and maximum depth of the pool; . • substrate composition; • amount and type of overhead cover • amount and type of submerged cover; and • proximity to the nearest upstream riffle area. Based on the investigator's experience and judgement pool quality is verbally rated according to one of the five following categories - excellent, very good, good, fair and poor. D. Baseflow Discharge Under the RSAT system baseflow discharge is estimated in the vicinity of the most downstream transect station using the Embody Float Method (Embody, 1929). Selection of a stream area which has relatively uniform cross-section,bed material size and velocity/depth characteristics is critical to achieving consistent results. Field measurements of both velocity and rate of flow are made as follows: 22 Velocity 1. First locate two points four feet apart (or any convenient distance) and mark both the upstream and downstream ends with a rock or some other convenient object; 2. Using a small, round cork float record the time it takes for the float to drift between the two points. Repeat this three times, making sure that representative velocity areas are floated. Record the average time; and 3. Calculate the number of feet traveled per second by dividing the average time in seconds into the distance travelled. Volume of Flow/Discharge • The following formula is used to calculate discharge: R = WDaj, • T where: R = volume of flow in cubic feet per second (cfs); W = average wetted perimeter of stream in feet; D = average depth in feet; a = roughness coefficient - smooth sandy bottom = 0.9, rough rocky bottom = 0.8; L= length of stream floated; and T = time in seconds for float to travel the measured distance. When properly applied the preceding method does yield consistent results. However, a word of caution is warranted. Flows generated by the Embody Float Method are generally consistently higher than those obtained from either a flow meter or a V- notch or broad-crested weir. 6. Water Quality A. Substrate Fouling For RSAT survey purposes, substrate fouling is defined as the percentage of the underside surface area of a cobble-sized stone (or larger) lying free on the streambed, which is coated with a biological film or growth.' Substrate fouling level is determined at every riffle 6 Owing to their larger size, hence reduced likelihood of frequent abrasion/movement along the streambed. only cobble-sized stones or larger are normally examined. 23 transect by turning over and visually examining the underside of 10 appropriately sized - rocks. The recommended procedure is to first visually divide the underside surface of each stone into four equal 25 percent portions or quadrants. Within each quadrant the observer mentally notes the areal extent of biofilm coverage to the nearest 5 percent. Each quadrant is examined in similar fashion, with the sum percentage of the four used to assign an average overall substrate level percentage to the individual rock. The same procedure is then repeated for each of the 10 stones. After all 10 rocks have been examined the mean substrate fouling level (for the 10 subsamples) is recorded. Representative substrate fouling levels as determined by the preceding method are illustrated in Figure 4. Substrate fouling provides a qualitative indirect measure of chronic nutrient (primarily nitrogen) and organic carbon loadings in a stream. In relatively clean streams substrate fouling levels are normally on the order of 10 percent or less (Galli, 1995). B. Water Quality Meter Readings, Clarity, Color and Odor The following nine parameters are measured at every fourth or fifth transect station area along the stream: air temperature, water temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), p1-1, conductivity, turbidity, total dissolved solids (TDS), water color and odor. Water quality readings are taken in an undisturbed pool area and recorded on the survey form. Water clarity,color and odor are described according to the general terminology presented in Tables 6 and 7. . 24 Figure 4. Representative Substrate Fouling Levelsi Frame 1 Frame 2 A ,' A B \ / •� C D C . D -5% • -15% Excellent(0-10%) Good (11-20%) • Frame 3 Frame 4 / / A B -r _.E.- arrl r - -35% -70% Fair(2T-50%) Poor(>50%) = biofilm area(i.e., coating on underside of stone associated with growth of bacteria, fungi, slime molds or combinations thereof). I Bolded number below each frame is percent substrate fouling; imaginary quadrants labelled A. B. C. D used as . handy reference aid. 25 Table 6. List of RSAT Water Clarity and Color Terms (modified from P.G. County Health Dept., 1993) Clarity/Color General Description 1. Clear Smaller objects lying on streambed in deeper pool areas (i.e., >3 feet deep) are clearly visible. 2. Slightly Off-Color Water has slight yellow,brown or greenish hue. Visibility of smaller objects lying,on stream- bed in deeper pool areas are partially obscured. Larger objects still visible. 3. Off-Color/Turbid Visibility into water column is nil. Generally attributable to high levels of light scattering/reflecting particles in water column such as clays, algae,etc. 4. Tea or Coffee Self-describing. Generally associated with tannic and fulvic acids from decomposition of leaves or other organic material. More common during fall-winter seasons. May sometimes be associated with seasonal growths of certain algae on streambed. 5. Bright Green Most likely source is antifreeze. Note,uranine dye is(bright green)an additive in antifreeze. 6. Green Fibrous, slime layers with visible air bubbles may indicate an algae bloom brought on by excess nutrients. The most frequent cause is improper fertilizer or manure storage and/or application. 7. Yellow-Brown,Sudsy Suds normally observed in slower eddy areas. Origins may be tree resins, gums and/or pollen. 8. Red-Orange Filmy deposits along the edge of the stream and bed often associated with greasy rainbow appearance of iron-oxidizing bacteria(which are generally naturally occurring). 9. White,Cloudy If the-e are no identifiable solids or odor,it is likely that this problem is run-off from cement cutting or washing activities associated with roadway construction. 10.White;Sudsy Usually associated with home car washing,or other detergent discharge. Most car washes recycle their wash water and have discharge permits with established limits. Note,car wash discharges will normally have waxy smell. 11.Light to Dark Gray Strong fetid odor indicates possible sewage overflow or exfiltration. Sewer trunk lines and manholes follow stream valleys to treatment plants and may occasionally leak or overflow • with time or during certain large stormflow conditions. Note,sewage fungus growth on rocks in stream provides additional evidence. 12. Brown Probable discharge of sediment-laden water. 13.Yellow-Brown Greasy petroleum smelling material that clumps together is likely to be Number 2 fuel oil. 14. Rainbow Sheen Oils which coalesce together when disturbed indicate a petroleum discharge. • 26 • • Table 7. List of RSAT Odor Terms` Term 1. - None 2. Organic 3. Chlorinated 4. Petroleum 5. Antifreeze (sickly sweet) 6. Sulfurous 7. Sewage 8. Other ' Modifiers-slight, moderate,strong 7. Riparian Habitat Conditions A. Canopy Coverage Percent canopy coverage at each riffle transect station area is visually estimated via the employment of either a spherical densiometer or a hand-held, 50 square plexiglass grid or equivalent. Canopy coverage is recorded on the survey form to the nearest 5 percent. Note, an eyeball method may be substituted after having calibrated one's eyes with one of the preceding instruments. Also, it is recognized that canopy coverage estimates made during late fall, winter and early spring are less accurate and require considerably more effort. During these periods, particularly close attention to riparian vegetation species composition, height, branching patterns and density, etc. is essential to making reasonable estimates. B. Vegetation Type The general dominant vegetation present along each bank is noted at each riffle transect station and recorded on the survey form using one of the following abbreviations: forest(F), shrub (Sh) and grass (G). - C. Buffer Width At each transect station the riparian buffer width along each bank is determined in one of two ways: 1.) scaled directly off the topographic base map (if tree-line area shown) or 2.) visually estimated. Buffer widths are recorded onto the survey form to the nearest 5 feet. 8. Biological Condition - Benthic Macroinvertebrate Biosurvey Macroinvertebrates are generally defined as animals without backbones that are large enough to be retained on a U.S. standard No. 30 sieve, 0.595 mm openings. Benthic 27 macroinvertebrates have long been used for biological monitoring purposes because they are a ubiquitous diverse group of sedentary and relatively long-lived species, which often respond predictably to human watershed perturbations. Importantly, a stream's biological community normally responds to and is reflective of prevailing water quality and physical habitat conditions. As part of the RSAT evaluation, a screening level biosurvey of the stream's riffle macroinvertebrate community is performed. The primary purpose of the biosurvey is to characterize macroinvertebrate community composition and relative abundance of major representative taxonomic groups, so as to shed additional light on overall stream quality/level of impairment. A. Macroinvertebrate Sampling The standard RSAT macroinvertebrate sampling protocol involves both turning over 10 cobble-size stones (or larger), as well as, taking a minimum of 3 one-square-foot, 30-second kick samples per riffle. Kick sampling of smaller streams can be adequately performed using a six-inch wide, fine-meshed dip net. For larger streams a 12-inch wide D-net is recommended. Note, dip nets and/or D-nets are employed so as to allow sampling to be performed by one individual. Macroinvertebrate identification is done at each riffle transect site via visual examination. Individuals are identified to taxonomic order and, whenever possible, to either the family or genus level. Observed taxa are recorded on the survey form. In addition, representative individuals are placed into a voucher collection for either further identification or future reference. Macroinvertebrate relative abundance categories used in the biosurvey are comparable to EPA's RBP level I and are as follows: absent/no group found, scarce, scarce/common, common/abundant and abundant. Relative abundance ratings are made based on the investigator's experience and knowledge. Note, major pollution tolerance for major taxonomic groups is per Bode et al., 1991 and Lenat, 1993. Last, in addition to noting the macroinvertebrates present, the RSAT survey form includes check-off blocks for recording fish species visually observed during the'survey. III. General Remedial Measures Guide and Restoration Project Prioritization 1. General Remedial Measures Guide The Geneial Remedial Measures Guide was developed as an optional planning-level screening tool for providing assistance to non-aquatic biologists in identifying appropriate generic-type solutions for observed stream problems. As seen in Figure 5, the Guide factors both stream size (i.e., its baseflow in cubic feet per second) and stream/riparian corridor problem-level into a restoration matrix. To use the Guide one must first determine both the 28 • stream size and the existing problem level for the general restoration objective subcategory. For example, if the subject stream has a baseflow of 0.6 cfs and the existing riffle and pool habitat is severely degraded, physical instream habitat restoration efforts would be deemed appropriate. Conversely, if riffle and pool habitat were only slightly degraded then major habitat enhancement/restoration efforts would be considered inappropriate. 2. Project Prioritization The Project Prioritization method is employed for systematically prioritizing stream channel stabilization and/or stormwater management retrofit project needs for RSAT survey stream segments. Five general evaluation factors are employed by the system. These factors are: 1.) overall site accessibility, 2.) proximity of moderate/severe and/or severe channel erosion areas to nearby residences/buildings,3.)environmental site sensitivity/expected tree removal, 4.) level of existing or programmed upstream SWM controls within the subwatershed and 5.) the relative stream problem level,taking stream size into account. An example completed • Project Prioritization form, Table 7, (Dawson Farm Creek) is included. As seen in Table 7 the stream received a total score of 29, placing it into a moderate (Level II) project priority category. • • • 29 Figure 5. General Remedial Measures Guide' Stream/Riparian Corridor Problem Level 2 m 9 t m m L m m Ca G s os s o— 0 U7 N cn cn h 2 cn Restoration Objective(s) I. Bank Stabilization/Aquatic Habitat Restoration Major Stream Bank Stabilization 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 0111 • Baseflow Channel Restoration O Q Q O Q • O Q • Pool/Riffle Sequence Restoration Q 0 0 O Q • O ,- • Overhead Cover/Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 : 010 II. Fisheries Restoration/Management I Forage Fish (non•sensitive) 0 • • 0 • • 0 • • Resident Game and/or Sensitive Fish 0 0 0 Q ® Q Q Q ;tg Put and Take O O O Q ® Q Q Q l 4 III. Riparian Restoration I I I Canopy Coverage 0 0 . 0 0 • © 0 0 Wetlands QQQQ QQQ 0 Wildlife 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 Native Plant Communities 0 Q • 0 0 • 0 0 I• IV. Aesthetic • Trash Reduction/Removal • • • • -• • • • • Landscape ss 0 Q Q © QQQ Q Stream 0.01 - 0.5 cfs • Sizez 0.51• S.Ocfs (cfs) > 5.0cfs LEGEND • Appropriate Q Case - by - Case O Not Appropriate 'Consultation with appropriate resource management experts recommended prior to concept restoration plan development. =Stream size=normal baseflow discharge in cubic feet/second(cfs). 30 • • Table 8. Project Prioritization' (Dawson Farm Creek) . Ranking Category Evaluation Factor - — Low Moderate 1-ligh Points 1. Overall Site Accessibility 0-3 4-6 7-9 (Poor) (Fair-Good) (V.Good-Excellent) 7 2. Proximity of Moderate-Severe/Severe Channel Erosion Area to 0-3 4-6 7-9 Nearby Residences/Buildings Cat. Nn.of Residences Distance(ft) Points A. 0 <50,50-100,>i00 0 B. 1-2 <50,50-100,>100 7,9,1 . C. 3-5 <50,50-100,>l00 8,5,2 • 2 D. Z6 <50,50-100,>100 9,6,3 . — 3. Environmental Sensitivity/Tree Removal 7-9 4-6 0-3 CaL Predominant Condi ion Est.Disturbance Points A. Mature Forest and/or Wetland Low,M'. t., High 3,2,1/0 B. Young Forest Low, Mc 1.,High 6,5,4 7 C. Mixed and/or Other Low,Mod., High 9,0,7 4. Level of Existing or Programmed SWM 7-9 4-6 0-3 Centrol(s)Within Watershed 7 S. Stream Problem Level2 0-3 4-6 7-9 Cat Paceflow(cfs) 5Fvere Erosion(LF) (Pints) A. 0-05 50-2b0,201 -900,>900 1,4,7 B. 0.51-1.0 50-200,201-900-,>900 2,5,8 C. >1.1 50-200,201-900>900 3,6,9 6 D. All <50 0 Total Piaui, rwicardualltimi Total Score 29 k.30 High(Level I) 20-29 =. Moderate(Level II) s19 = Low(Level uq Priority ii Level Only perlornted if total RSAT score is<29 or bank stability score is<5. • 'Note.point scones may be modelled by I-5 points to reflect poor water quality and/or problem conditions. References Beschta, R.L. and W.S. Platts, 1986. Morphological Features of Small Streams: Significance and Function. Water Resources Bulletin 22(3):369-79. Bode, R.W., 1991. Quality Assurance Work Plan for Biological Stream Monitoring in New York State. Stream Monitoring Unit, Bureau of Monitoring and Assessment, Div. of Water, NYS Dept. of Environ. Cons., Albany, NY. Bode, R.W., M.A. Novak, and L.E. Abele, 1991. Methods for Rapid Biological Assessment of Streams. NYS Dept. of Environ. Cons., Albany, NY. Booth, D.B., 1990. Stream Channel Incision Following Drainage Basin Urbanization. Water Resources Bulletin 26(3):407-417. Brusven, M.A. and K.V. Prather, 1974. Influence of Stream Sediments on Distribution of Macrobenthos. J. of Entomol. Soc. British Columbia 71:25-32. Davis, R.M., 1974. Key to the Freshwater Fishes of Maryland. Maryland Dept. of Nat. Res., •Annapolis, MD. Embody, G.C., 1929. An Outline of Stream Study and the Development of a Stocking Policy. Contr. Aquic. Lab., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY. 22 pp. Fraley, J.J., 1979. Effects of Elevated Stream Temperatures Below a Shallow Reservoir on a Cold Water Macroinvertebrate Fauna. Pages 247-272 in J.V. Ward and J.A. Stanford, (eds.), The Ecology of Regulated Streams. Plenum Press, NY. 398 pp. Frost, S., A. Huni, and W.E. Kershaw, 1971. Evaluation of a Kicking Technique for Sampling Stream Bottom Fauna. Can. J. Zool. 49:167-173. Galli, F.J., 1995. Water Quality Grab Sampling of Streams in Montgomery and Prince George's County, Maryland- Unpublished Notes. Metropolitan Washington Council of Govts., Wash. DC. Galli, F.J., 1990. Thermal Impacts Associated with Urbanization and Stormwater Management Best Management Practices. Metropolitan Washington Council of Govts., Wash. DC. Gordon, N.D.,T.A. McMahon and B.L. Finlayson, 1992. Stream Hydrology - An Introduction for Ecologists. John Wiley Sons, West Sussex, England. 520 pp. Gougeon, C., 1996. Personal Communication. Maryland Dept. of Nat. Res. Coldwater Fisheries Biologist. 33 References (cont'd.) Hannon, P., 1996. Personal Communication. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. Sanitary Engineer. Howarth, R.W. and S.G. Fisher, 1976. Carbon, Nitrogen, and Phosphorous Dynamics During Leaf Decay in Nutrient-Enriched Microecosystems. Freshwater Biol. 6:221-228. Jenkins, R.E. and N.M. Burkhead, 1993. Freshwater Fishes of Virginia. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD. 1079 pp. Jones, R.C. and C.C. Clark, 1987. Impact of Watershed Urbanization on Stream Insect Communities. Water Resources Bulletin 23(6):1047-55. Kellog, L.L., 1992. Save Our Streams - Monitor's Guide to Aquatic hfacroinvertebrates. Izaak • Walton League of America, Arlington, VA. 46 pp. Klein, R.D., 1979. Urbanization and Stream Quality Impairment. Water Resources Bulletin 15(4):948-963. Kondratieff, P.F. , R.A. Matthews and A.L. Buikema,Jr., 1984. A Stressed Stream Ecosystem: Macroinvertebrate Community Integrity and Microbial Trophic Response. Hydrobiologia 111:81-91. Lemly, A.D., 1982. Modification of Benthic Insect Communities in Polluted Streams: Combined Effects of Sedimentation and Nutrient Enrichment. Hydrobiologia 87:229-245. Lenat, D.R., 1993. A Biotic Index for the Southeastern United States: Derivation and List of Tolerance Values, with Criteria for Assigning Water-Quality Ratings. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 12:279-290. Lock, M.A., 1993. Attached Microbial Communities in Rivers. Pages 113.138 in T.E. Ford, (ed.), Aquatic Microbiology - An Ecological Approach. Blackwell Scientific Publ., Cambridge, MA. 518 pp. Luedkte, R.J. and M.A. Brusven, 1976. Effects of Sand Sedimentation on Colonization of Stream • Insects. J. Fish. Res. Coord. Can. 33(9):1881-1886. McCafferty, W.P.;-1981. Aquatic Entomology -The Fishermen's and Ecologist's Illustrated Guide to Insects and Their Relatives. Science Books Int. Boston; MA. 448 pp. McCaw, W•J., 1974. Water Quality of Montgomery County Streams and Sewage Treatment • Plant Effluents, Dec. 1969-74. Mont. Co. Md. Dept. of Environ. Prot. 67 pp. 34 References (cont'd.) Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins, 1984. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America. 2nd Ed. Kendall/Hunt Publ., Dubuque. IO. 722 pp. Minshall, G.W., 1984. Aquatic Insect-Substratum Relationships. Chapter 12: pages 358400 in V.H. Resh and D.M. Rosenburg, (eds.), The Ecology of Aquatic Insects. Prager Scientific Publ., New York, NY. 625 pp. Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection, 1981. Water Quality of Streams in Montgomery County, Md.: January - December, 1980. Water Res. Sect. Div. of Pollution Control. Northcote, K.H., 1979. A Factual Key for the Recognition of Australian Soils. Rellin Technical Publications, Adelaide, Australia. Oswood, M.W., 1979. Abundance Patterns of Filter-Feeding Caddisflies (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) and Seston in a Montana(USA) Lake Outlet. Hydrobiol. 63(2):177-183. Otton, E.G. and J.T. Hilleary, 1985. Maryland Springs - Their Physical, Thermal, and Chemical Characteristics. Md. Geol. Survey. Report No. 42. Baltimore, MD. 151 pp. - Palmer,T., 1991 (ed.). Better Trout Habitat - A Guide to Stream Restoration and Management. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 320 pp. Pennak, R.W., 1978. Freshwater Invertebrates of the United States. 2nd Ed. John Wiley and Sons. 803 pp. Plafkin, J.L., M.T. Barbour, K.D. Porter, S.K. Gross and R.M. Hughes, 1989. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish. U.S. EPA, Off. of Water. EPA/444(440)/4-39-001, Wash. DC. Prince George's County Health Department, 1993. Stream Complaints. Landover, Maryland. 1 pp. • Reice, S.R., 1980. The Role of Substratum in Benthic Macroinvertebrate Microdistribution and Litter Decomposition in a Woodland Stream. 61(3):580-590. Stewart, K.W. and B.P. Stark, 1993. Nymphs of North American Stonefly Genera (Plecoptera). Univ. of Texas Press, Denton,TX. 460 pp. Terrell, C.R. and P.B. Perfetti, 1989. Water Quality Indicators Guide: Surface Waters. USDA - Soil Cons. Serv. SCS-TP-161. Wash. DC. 129 pp. 35 References (cont'd.) U.S. EPA, 1986. Quality Criteria for Water. U.S.-EPA, Off..of Water. EPA 440/5-86-001, Wash. D.C. Vannote, R.L., G.W. Minshall, K.W. Cummins, J.R. SedelI, and C.E. Cushing, 1980. The River Continuum Concept. Can. J. of Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37:130-137. Washington Suburban Sanitary'Commission, 1995. Patuxent and Potomac Water Filtration Plants 1994 Tap Water Analysis. WSSC, Laurel, MD. 2 pp. Wentworth, 1962. A Scale of Grade and Class Terms fcr Clastic Sediments. Jour. of Geology 30:377-92. Wiggins, G.B., 1978. Larvae of the North American Caddisfly Genera(Trichoptera). Univ. of Toronto Press. 401 pp. Yorke, T.H. and W.J. Herb, 1978. Effects of Urbanization on Streamflow and Sediment Transport in the Rock Creek and Anacostia River Basins, Montgomery County, Maryland, 1962-74. U.S.Geological Survey Prof. Paper 1003. Wash. DC. 71 pp. • • • 36 Appendix D Wetland Report WETLAND REPORT METZGER TRUNK REPLACEMENT Washington County, OR Project No. 1577 Prepared For: The Unified Sewerage Agency IIIII MIN KURAHA S HI ASSOCIATES, INC_ Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 FAX 503 968.11105 October 9, 1997 ��." regon Divisaa 775 Summer Street NE Salem,OR 97310-1337 John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.,Governor (503)378-3805 FAX(503)378-4844 TTY(503)378-4615 October 30, 1997 State Land Board N � 1, John A.Kitzhaber OV Y 0 ,J 1997 Governor Brent Davis EJ / Phi]Keisling Kurahashi &Associates, Inc. ---- _ - Secretary of State Jim Hill 12600 SW 72nd Ave., Ste. 100 State Treasurer Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Wetland Delineation Report for Metzger Trunk Replacement TOTS RO1W S26 & 35; City of Tigard and Washington County Tigard LWI Units B-6, B-7, C-1 - C-6 & C-14 (DSL Det. #97-0450) Dear Mr. Davis: I have reviewed your wetland delineation report for the above referenced project. Based on the information provided, I concur with your findings as mapped in Sheets 1 to 5 of the report. The wetland areas, Ash Creek, the tributary to Ash Creek are jurisdictional and subject to the permit requirements of the state Removal-Fill Law. A state Removal-Fill permit is required for fill or removal of 50 cubic yards or more of material in these areas. Federal and local regulations may also apply. Your contact person for a Removal-Fill permit is Bill Parks, who can be reached at extension 234. If you or your client have any questions, please feel free to call me at extension 246. Thank you for your report. Sincerely, Mary Pakenham-Walsh Wetlands Technician cc: Jim Goudzwaard, Corps of Engineers Jan Stuart, Corps of Engineers Bill Parks,DSL Washington County Planning Department City of Tigard Planning Department \\Saleml\pp\Wetlands\Mary pw\Letters\97-450.doc WETLAND REPORT SUMMARY SHEET GENERAL Client: Unified Sewerage Agency Project No.: 1577 Attention: Lee Walker Project Name: Metzger Trunk Street: 155 N First Street, Ste 270 Investigator: Brent Davis City/State: Hillsboro,OR 97124 Date: September 25, 1997 SITE LOCATION County: Washington Township: IS 1 Range: 1W I I City: Tigard/Metzger Sections: S 1/2 OF 26 AND N 1/2 OF 35 Waterway: Ash Creek Tax Lot(s): Multiple(Sanitary Sewer Easement) LAND USE Zoning: mixed Parcel Size: 6200 L.F. ®Flood Plain Public Agricultural Private Park DCrop Land 0AD-1026 Certified Undeveloped [Greenway/space ®Pasture/Hayland DOther(remarks) [JEasment/Dedication [JOpenspace ['Abandoned ['Other(remarks) MOther(remarks) []Converted WETLAND INVENTORIES MNWI Map Name(s): Beaverton [JLWI ID(s): [JAll ❑All Partial [JPartial Previous/Related Determinations: METHODOLOGY MCOE 1987 MANUAL []FSA MAUNUAL [JCOMPREHENSIVE ROUTINE DON-SITE DOFF-SITE Typical Situation Small Site [JProblem Area MOn-site ['FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT Atypical Situation [JOff--site [JFSA MANUAL ['OTHER: [JAbnormal Environmental Conditions ['OREGON METHOD WETLAND TYPES MPEM MPFO 0R3RB JR4SB [JE2SS []Other: MPSS [JPWM [JR3UB [JE2EM [JE2FO ►�W [JFW [JFWP []PC [JAW REMARKS Linear project within a sanitary sewer easement that paralells Ash Creek. Some locations required Atypical Methodology and others required the use of Interem Operating Procedures for Agricultural Lands(8/12/97) As noted on individual data forms. rub . 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 KURAHA S HI 503.968.1 605 ■!..? ASSOCIATES, iv C: FAX 503.968.1105 METZGER TRUNK WETLAND REPORT UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 WETLAND DEFINITION & PROJECT METHODOLOGY 3.0 SITE LOCATION & GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS 4.0 WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS 5.0 LIMITATIONS 6.0 REFERENCES FIGURES AND MAPS FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2: NWI MAP FIGURE 3: SCS SOIL SURVEY AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WETLAND LOCATIONS MAP APPENDIX I: WETLAND DELINEATION CRITERA APPENDIX II: DATA FORMS Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency 1.0 INTRODUCTION Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. (KAI) has completed a site analysis of approximately 6200 linear feet of Ash Creek and the adjacent sanitary sewer easement in the Metzger area for the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA). USA intends to replace the sanitary trunk line located within this easement in the 1998 construction season. KAI has conducted a Rapid Stream Assessment (RSAT) for the creek and wetland delineation within the existing sewer easement. The following document presents the results of an on- site wetland determination. Field data was collected on two occasions, July 10, 1997 and August 13, 1997. 2.0 WETLAND DEFINITION & PROJECT METHODOLOGY Wetlands are formally defined as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, the prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." (Federal Register, 1980, 1982). Federal, state, and local regulations governing activities located in or near wetlands and streams include: • Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) are administered through the Army Corps of Engineers. • The "Swampbuster" provision of the Food Security Act (FSA) of 1985, administered through the Natural Resource Conservation Service. • Oregon's Removal-Fill Law (ORS 196.800 - .990), Oregon's Wetland Inventory and Wetland Conservation Plans, Standards, and Guidelines(ORS 196.668 - .692)which are administered through the Division of State Lands. • Washington County's Comprehensive Plan,Article IV, Sections 422 and 423. • The Metzger-Progress Community Plan The 1987 Corps of Engineers Manual routine on-site methodology(summarized in Appendix I)was used to delineate wetlands within the sanitary sewer easement on non-agricultural lands. The downstream segment of the study reach on Ash Creek is active pasture therefore, wetlands were delineated according to the Interim Operating Procedure for Completing Wetlands Determinations on Agricultural Lands (effective as of 8/12/97). Two portions of the study reach required Atypical Situation Methodology since wetlands have been encroached upon by either apartment buildings or a concrete pathway surrounded by manicured turf lawns. 3.0 SITE LOCATION & GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS The study area is 6200 linear feet of a 15 foot wide sanitary sewer easement (Figure 1) located approximately adjacent to Ash Creek between the end of Spruce Street and the crossing at Taylor's Ferry Road in the general area of Metzger, Or. The lower segment, below Hall Boulevard, is within the City of Tigard, OR. The sewer easement crosses both private (agricultural, commercial, residential uses) and public properties (several street right-of-ways and Metzger Park). The study area has been divided into three segments for the purpose of description (segment limits are indicated on the aerial photo): Pasture Segment This segment, currently used as pasture, is located between the downstream portion of the study area at the dead end of Spruce Street and the crossing of Oak Street. The owner is not a Federal program Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 1 Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency participant, but the use qualifies for treatment as agricultural land for the purpose of delineating wetlands. The easement does not cross the creek in this segment. Middle Segment This segment is located between the crossings of Oak Street and Cedarcrest Street. A large portion of to asegment is a fragmented remnant riparian forested wetland. Upland portions include street right-of-way and existing development that encroaches on Ash Creek. Two locations within the segment requre the use of Atypical Situation Methodology due to severe encroachment on the creek that included both structures and landscaping. The easement crosses a tributary of Ash Creek and the creek itself once each within the middle segment. Upper Segment The Upper Segment is located between the crossing of Cedarcrest Street and the crossing of Taylor's Ferry Road. This segment contains shrub/scrub and open meadow wetland. Uplands include some residential mowed field and lawns as well as the 80th Ave. right-of-way. Atypical Situaltion Methodology was required for one turf lawn area near the creek (determined to be upland). The easement crosses the creek twice in this segment. 4.0 WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS 4.1 NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY Most of the proposed wetlands, are not identified in the National Wetland Inventory, however Ash Creek is identified as Permanent Saturated Palustrine Emergent Wetland (PEM1Y)on the Beaverton quad. 4.2 ON-SITE INVESTIGATION Eighteen (18 data plots)were used to locate eight(8)wetland, fragments within the study area. Data Plot and Fragment locations are shown on the Wetland Locations Map. Field dates, data plot numbers, and fragment labels for each segment are as follows: Pasture Segment 7/10/97 Data Plots 1-6 Fragments A and B Fragment A is on the upper rim of a large streamside depression that contains a man made pond (permanently ponded) postdating the original sewer line installation. The sewer easement runs along the southern and eastern edges of the pond (generally between the pond and Ash Creek). Fragment B is a narrow linear depression (seasonally ponded or saturated), located directly over the sewer line, that has no noticeable inlet or outlet. It appears to be an area where the existing sewer line backfill has subsided. Middle Segment 8/13/97 Data Plots 7-13 Fragments C,D,E and F All of these fragments are part of a formerly contiguous forested wetland, (seasonally flooded and/or saturated). Fragments E and F are pieces of the same wetland separated by a topographic feature that appears to be fill postdating the original sewer line installation but predating wetland protection under the CWA. Fragments C, D, and E have been disconnected by road crossings. Portions of C and E have been encroached upon by development (C, apartments and lawn at the south end; E, a concrete pathway and lawn at the south end). Fragment D is a crossing of a tributary of Ash Creek. Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 2 Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency Upper Segment 8/13/97 Data Plots 14-18 Fragments G and H Fragment G contains riparian shrub/scrub and emergent meadow wetland, (seasonally flooded and/or saturated)directly adjacent to Ash Creek. Fragment H is crossing of Ash Creek. Field data collected are summarized below by segment for the three delineation criteria. Hydrology Pasture Segment According to the Interim Operating Procedure, NFSAM Hydrology Criteria (Appendix I) were used for this segment. The Pasture Segment is located almost entirely within the 100-year floodplain of Ash Creek. The hydrology of Fragment A is dominated by the pond and adjacent creek. The hydrology of Fragment B is dominated by topographic conditions (a clear drainage pattern) and poorly drained soils. Oxidized root channels and/or rhizomes were observed at most wetland data plots. One "other" indicator observed in Fragment A was dried deep hoof prints (from cattle) suggesting that the surface had been saturated or inundated earlier in the season. One region of the field adjacent to the study area contains several small perched depressions (location is indicted on the Wetland Locations Map) with no discernable drainage pattern. Though oxidized root channels and/or rhizomes were observed to be present in some upland areas between these depressions and within the study area, no other secondary indicators of saturation during the growing season were observed. Middle Segment The hydrology in the most of the Middle Segment fragments (C, E, and F) is dominated by Ash Creek. In areas where the banks are less than three (3) feet high the floodplain area was, based on secondary indicators, determined to be frequently flooded and/or seasonally saturated. The portion of Fragment E that is a maintained turf lawn may be irrigated, however no evidence of a permanently installed sprinkler system was observed. The hydrology of Fragment D is dominated by a tributary of Ash Creek. Oxidized root channels and/or rhizomes were observed at most wetland data plots. The upland riparian areas generally have higher creek banks and an absence of primary or secondary wetland hydrology indicators. Upper Segment The hydrology in the Upper Segment is dominated by the both the creek and a small tributary seep. The seep was observed to be a shallow swale that was inundated with a few inches of water at the time of the field visit. Th seep appears to maintain wetland hydrology in a wet meadow (The upper portion of Fragment G, infrequently flooded and/or seasonally saturated) that would otherwise be elevated too far above the creek to be wetland. Hydrology in the shrub/scrub area just upstream from the Cedarcrest crossing (the lower portion of Fragment G, frequently flooded and/ or seasonally saturated) is confined by the road fill (approximately eight (8) vertical feet) and is dominated by the creek. The hydrology of Fragment H is dominated by Ash Creek. Oxidized root channels and/or rhizomes were observed at most wetland data plots. Soils Pasture Segment The SCS Soil Survey maps Verboort silty clay loam throughout the Pasture Segment. Verboort is a poorly drained soil formed in stratified, moderately fine textures and fine textured alluvium on Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 3 Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency bottom lands. . The mapped soil type could not be confirmed based on the soil data collected for this study At a depth of ten (10) inches, soils were observed to be dark grayish brown to very dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2-3/2, 2.5Y 4/2) silty clay loam with course, distinct, and common mottles of varying color. Soils at upland data plots (3 and 4) displayed hydric characteristics, but hydrology and vegetation criteria were not met at these locations. Middle Segment The SCS Soil Survey maps Verboort silty clay loam at the northern and southern ends of the Middle Segment, the rest of the segment is mapped as Wapato silty clay loam. Verboort is a poorly drained soil formed in stratified, moderately fine textures and fine textured alluvium on bottomlands. Wapato is a poorly drained soil formed in recent alluvium on floodplains. The wetland fragments proposed in the Middle Segment fall entirely within the area mapped as Wapato. The mapped soil type could not be confirmed based on the soil data collected for this study. At a depth of ten (10) inches, soils were observed to be dark grayish brown to very dark gray (10YR 4/2-3/1) silty clay loam with course, distinct, and common mottles of varying color in wetland soils. Some wetland soils had an equally mixed matrix of 10YR 3/1 and 10YR 4/2 (Data Plots 10 and 12). Upland soils(Data Plot 7 only)were not mottled. Upper Segment The SCS Soil Survey maps Verboort silty clay loam throughout the Upper Segment. Verboort is a poorly drained soil formed in stratified, moderately fine textures and fine textured alluvium on bottom lands. . The mapped soil type could not be confirmed based on the soil data collected for this study At a depth of ten (10) inches, soils were observed to be dark grayish brown to very dark gray (10YR 4/2-3/1) silty clay loam with course, distinct, and common mottles of varying color in wetland soils. Upland soils(Data Plots 17 and 18)were not mottled. Vegetation Wetland plant communities were generally consistent within each of the three study segments with the exception of disturbed areas such as the lawns in the Middle Segment. Due to a lack of natural vegetation in the three lawn areas sampled (Data Plots 8,11, and 18), vegetation at adjacent plots (9, 12, and 17 respectively) were used under Atypical Methodology to determine vegetation criteria at the disturbed locations. Variations in the relative mix of species within each community are shown on the data forms in Appendix II. A summary of observed and dominant vegetation by study segment is provided in the following table: TABLE 1: Vegetation Observed at Data Plots BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME INDICATOR STATUS PASTURE WETLAND Agrostis alba Redtop FAC* Agrostis stoloniferat Spreading Bentgrass FAC* Agrostis tenuist Colonial Bentgrass FAC Alopecurus pratensist Meadow Foxtail FACW Calocedrus decurrens Incense Cedar UPL Carex densat Dense Sedge OBL Crataegus monogyna One-Seed Hawthorn FACU+* Daucus carota Queen Anne's Lance UPL Epilobium ciliatum Hairy Willow-Herb FACW- Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 4 Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME INDICATOR STATUS Equisetum arvenset Field Horsetail FAC Festuca arundinacea Kentucky Fescue FAC- Festuca rubrat Red Fescue FAC+ Fraxinus latifolia Oregon Ash FACW Holcus lanatus Common Velvet Grass FAC Juncus effusus Soft Rush FACW Juncus patens Spreading Rush FACW Leucanthemum vulgare f Oxeye Daisy UPL Lolium perenne Perennial Ryegrass FACU Lotus corniculatus Birds-Foot Trefoil FAC Phalaris arundinaceat Reed Canary Grass FACW Plantango lanceolatat English Plantain FAC Plectaris congestaf Pink Plectritis FACU Poa pratensis Kentucky Bluegrass FAC Ranunculus repens Creeping Butter-Cup FACW Rosa nutkanat Nootka Rose FAC Rubus discolort Himalayan Blackberry FACU Tanacetum vulgare Common Tansy NI Traxicum officinalet Common Dandelion FACU Trifolium pratense Red Clover FACU Trifolium repent White Clover FAC* PASTURE UPLAND Agrostis alba Redtop FAC* Agrostis tenuist Colonial Bentgrass FAC Alopecurus pratensis Meadow Foxtail FACW Centaurea cyanus Bachelor's Button UPL Danthonia californica California Oatgrass FACU* Daucus carotat Queen Anne's Lace UPL Festuca rubra Red Fescue FAC+ Lolium perenne Perennial Ryegrass FACU Lotus corniculatus Birds-Foot Trefoil FAC Prunella vulgarise Heal-All FACU+ Taraxacum officinale Common Dandelion FACU Trifolium repent White Clover FAC* MIDDLE WETLAND Acer macrophtyllum Big-Leaf Maple FACU Alnus rubra Red Alder FAC Carex deweyana Short-Scale Sedge FACU* Carex obnupta Slough Sedge OBL Corylus cornuta Beaked Hazel-Nut FACU Crataegus douglasii Douglas'Hawthorn FAC Epilobium ciliatum Hairy Willow-Herb FACW- Equisetum arvense Field Horsetail FAC Equisetum hyemale Rough Horsetail FACW Fraxinus latifolia Oregon Ash FACW Glyceria elata Tall Manna Grass FACW+ Hedera helix English Ivy UPL Holcus lanatus Common Velvet Grass FAC Juncus patens Spreading Rush FACW Lonicera involucrata Four-Line Honeysuckle FAC+* Phalaris arundinacea Reed Canary Grass FACW Polystichum munitum Pineland Sword Fern FACU Populus balsamifera Balsam Poplar FAC Ranunculus repens Creeping Butter-Cup FACW Rubus discolor Himalayan Blackberry FACU Rubus ursinus California Dewberry FACU Salix lasiandra Pacific Willow FACW+ Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 5 Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME INDICATOR STATUS Solanum dulcamara Climbing Nightshade FAC+ Thuja plicata Western Red Cedar FAC Trifolim repens White Clover FAC* Turf Lawn MIDDLE UPLAND Festuca arundinaceat Kentucky Fescue FAC- Poa annuat Annual Bluegrass FAC Agropyron repenst Quackgrass FAC- Holcus lanatust Common Velvet Grass FAC Agrostis tenuis Colonial Bentgrass FAC Turf Lawn UPPER WETLAND Agrostis albat Redtop FAC* Agrostis tenuist Colonial Bentgrass FAC Alnus rubra Red Alder FAC Alopecurus pratensis Meadow Foxtail FACW Cornus stoloniferat Red-Osier Dogwood FACW Equisetum arvenset Field Horsetail FAC Festuca arundinaceat Kentucky Fescue FAC- Fraxinus latifolia Oregon Ash FACW Holcus lanatus Common Velvet Grass FAC Phalaris arundinaceat Reed Canary Grass FACW Quercus garryanat Oregon White Oak UPL Ranunculus repens Creeping Butter-Cup FACW Rosa nutkanat Nootka Rose FAC Rebus discolor Himalayan Blackberry FACU Salix lasiandra Pacific Willow FACW+ Salix scoularianat Scouler Willow FAC Scirpus microcarpus Small-Fruit Bulrush OBL Spiraea douglasiit Douglas'Spiraea FACW Tanacetum vulgaret Common Tansy NI UPPER UPLAND Agrostis tenuis Colonial Bentgrass FAC Daucus carotat Queen Anne's Lace UPL Festuca arundinaceat Kentucky Fescue FAC- Holcus lanatust Common Velvet Grass FAC Prunella vulgaris Heal-All FACU+ Taraxacum officinalet Common Dandelion FACU Trifoliun:pratense Red Clover FACU Turf Grass tUsed as a dominant species in vegetation calculations(see Appendix II). *Indicator status tentative as of 1993 revisions to the Region 9 Plant List. 5.0 LIMITATIONS The delineation of wetland boundaries is an inexact science. Wetlands are ecotones or transition areas between upland and aquatic environments. Consequently, their boundaries often change over time and individuals will often disagree on the precise location of a boundary. The final determination of wetland boundaries is the responsibility of the resource agencies that regulate activities in and around wetlands (in Oregon it is the Division of State Lands). Accordingly, the wetland delineation performed for this study, as well as the conclusions drawn in this report, should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agency prior to any detailed site planning or construction activities. We recommend that the wetland study be verified with the appropriate regulatory agency as soon as practical. Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 6 Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope-of-work, we warrant that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices. The results and conclusions of this report represent the author's best professional judgement, based upon the information provided by the project proponent in addition to that obtained during the course of study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 6.0 REFERENCES Clark, J.R., and J. Benforado, editors. 1981. Wetlands of Bottomland Hardwood Forests; Proceedings of a Workshop on Bottomland Hardwood Forest Wetlands of the Southeastern United States. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company,NY. Guard, B. Jennifer. 1995. Wetland Plants of Oregon & Washington. . Lone Pine Publishing, Redmond, WA. 239pp. Hitchcock, C. Leo and Arthur Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 730 pp. Munsell Color. 1975. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgan Corporation. Baltimore, MD. Pojar, Jim, and Andy Mackinnon. 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone Pine Publishing, Redmond, WA. 527 pp. Reed, Porter B. 1993. 1993 Supplement To List Of Plant Speices That Occur In Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington D.C. 10 p. Resource Management Group, Inc. 1993. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands, Region 9-Northwest. B.J. Sabine, editor. Resource Management Group, Inc., Grand Haven, MI. 72 pp. Soil Conservation Service. 1982. Soil Survey of Washington County. George L Green, editor. U.S. Department of Agriculture. U.S Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA. Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 7 L I I L' 1 L./ ---__III L ) r A — - / i \ wig:' /... A 1.,. 4, , . ,,,,. ,..._ INNS ' E _ ■ Ta . .��TAY - -S FE RY , Ira y'''° : r Ri ritillf•I'''''"k'n_ . Am. 1 111-7 , 4(,, c� N r FiTryll / 1111/4111 - -� ! \ IIINFESIM I WITfflaill ilia ilidie 7 M A -LE EAF il . ild. i .N,, ,,,"-W--1. .i `` ,Ash X11_ �;N pr. - ,,c, ,, , ir' il,e in QPG �,' `2 t 'milli kIllirr •- En; , 'AL, I ONO i / IMO§ . .1 • IP Ji s.. ..., • •-•...1, 4# $■\\v I -4 f . ' � ir � . II , 1:24000 0.5 0 0.5 1 Miles /\/ Street ,Aj Major Arterial / .,e Stream Wetland Delineation Figure 1 11/ III ill II Vicinity Map Metzger Trunk (1577) KTJRAFIA S HI Unified Sewerage Agency & ASSUCIAFES, [ NC_ August 1997 f'f / - - 1 � 'n ' ' / " ( / 10 ,♦ / 1 I ♦ / .— ‘ a7, .I / ` ' , u PE M 1 Y ■ .1/ �I . ) I L � . L C' 4\\, 1 �.. _ -- - - _ ` oO '~ + i-` Study' Reach-�1° / --a 1, /k L© r` - - / • r ` � i t 1 h 1:24000 0.5 0 0.5 1 Miles � �� Major Arterial / �� Stream NWI Wetlands Wetland Delineation Figure 2 11 IIII II M NWI Map (Beaverton Quad) Metzger Trunk (1577) KURA T A S HI Unified Sewerage Agency & ASSOCIATES, IT.ic. August 1997 _ iummirji• 1 -- , 1 1 -- 111, _ L . . , . / 7 1 I - . -° -- % ••■ h i / ,... - - - .... _ ..... . 1 1 ,ii■ „,„ _0, .. - 1 , Ni i / [ iI i 1_ , ■,„,.. 1 •••• 1 dl , i ‘ / ■IIII Study Reach ;:k._ ,, ..0 .... .... / -'/ ‘■ I / '1 / Nk I /* r .•.. ..,(44/ 1 Il fir 7 ' / .•.ir. 'S ) / / i I it ) ■i// 1\\‘, 1/ i ( li ii 1:24000 0.5 0 0.5 1 Miles r----ii----- N' Major Arterial 1 Stream Woodburn silt loam Wapato silty clay loam Verboort silty clay loam Aloha silt loam Wetland Delineation Figure 3 " Mb 91 SCS Soils Map Metzger Trunk (1577) KU RA I-IA.S I-II_ Unified Sewerage Agency ce ,A,ssc:Dc:: I}scr ES, I 1■1C.7. August 1997 .- qv* ': . , .. --ii ' ' '..''',' '' ' A.,_ I 11 A.:.,,,: 14,.,* ,"..—Iiiik."4.,, IL,'„4',. i - *1 t. „ " '• * .‘,.. , 1$ - . -.or', ',',4,-v,`• *.'' "4.'' ..,., . # 4-4, P'IL.' •-•'` ' 44 ,, ,,,,„,..,,‘,Lt .'.r V '' l'' .--', , • . 'i-- ." ', i'`I'' 7147IN orrimit. ,,, 114V ' ' •i ' V 414 at k ttlkLkts' .Ak'V*. 1 ,t-II '- - , --,A'‘,,r,, • .:-* sir - , : ' ‘ ''\ ' ' q , • ,' ,' ‘1 ::: - , .,,,:,.1-$ , •••% . ' :„. . ki„tkt ‘t itiZI,1k. .‘','''\'', ',*11 4L‘,4, if . . I . .; ' ... ' - , 9 $ * 14,- ,, I ',‘„ ', ; . -it „, ,,,...„,".:„.2„,,,\I„,-;::„....,,,..ki ,,,,,,,,,,, ...:„ . .... .t„ . - . i . - . ,„.. .. 'kw- t .' ,....p-,-.'.,......-..„.,,,‘„..v.”‘ „t. ., ...„..t.,..„..x.k.!..„.„.:„:„ . ,,,.,.., 4,,,,, ..„4".. * ' - A ,:.; '.. . • ,/r k..1 . ,':':';',',;.*:'''s ,.. ,,,'!' :. 'si:''''', ...-..:1'-';'1;:,..,‘..=;,...' .2' s ' : ,,,,,, ,,., k44AA, ti '','''' '4 t.Z,It' 't A ,:; i 't ..:.„4,, i.,‘.,',,,,,,.‘ &:,;:#1,,:t; itLt.ticS.,,.•. ,‘4k, . .4;; ; ;„ ‘,,'i::AA' Si: `,.. ''''';‘:-= ,,, i*tv-,;',.Vs 4iit' .*•, \)',. ‘. 0‘, :,' •.i,-.,.=-, . 4 ''‘,/' - ' : ., ' ” il. % t•,,4.,,,„,:, v,.,,,, ,,,, . t.,- ,4‘14 41k,VA".44 -,*.':-•,, ''''''\v= V ihN4st•Olcit,!‘t 4 '',' Av -W4',',,\-k.,' 4'',,„;',' , ik t, . ..., 4 4'' I'4 0 - * ;.;:k1,,.„,..::'-qw:.'''' ......,' ...??i , 4 '' '‘.e''' ' it--''' ..*.' t 'St,''.4•''.1‘f'‘‘'' ' \'''''''''it:', 441' *lit 1 -''el " ' ' 4.•.-'''',*"' '''''''''''''I,4.w ik : 1,.t. '...„, 1 ' -, 1 ,,, , ' •., ..,,....4'..,..lo :-.: .... - ' ..,.„„:%:.:1„:„„,,,,0110,. ‘,.‘,. ,,4:: A, '-4;\s:- ' t"..,; A,, , ;* . ,,„., ,VS*„.. 1 '-i ,A:- ,,'.' .%,;,-,`'.44:kl''' qj t)tt,,,,. - t, r--, , „ ,1,,--,, :: i r,,,, , .' fir , "7..4.. ,- . ' ''':''4, 'i%.11i .1..">„.. .i', ' ,,,,k' ' "s",•1.*.'''' i * " :',(4,1t 'Ks s..,- * ,,,•-• . • '' i' :f r r*4. ':I:,:t'v, ," .,":0, :k.:- ''',3 — : , ti ,..., ,. 1.,,,, - % ,,,,,,., „%„.. .,,,,, ,,,. 1 .,,,,„ 't.,,, : -.,,,,,e:,.,.. , ,,,, ''. ', 4 4i."''; ..4,. . , , filts4 , ‘ ,,c,,,,, . ,,, 1,,,,,.4, 40. , Ikk- , :. , 1 • tl , 14.. ..., :' .it*' , : • .., ° , fl''':4 4 ,$t\'''', ' ' ' *''''.4.' *:SNO.A,44;''':''' -'-4 . . , IR4.'4, ",j-:.';''', , '‘,,,'•'•iit.',,ks,t•*,' ,,,,,4-„'se.7"' ,,;',,,';,,, ''';'00,i'..',4:,,"°:.`,.,..:.41 4..:4*,30,:4 11 Ak ' ' --: 4 ,,,, 7.11b04:±'L'. ,,i.,-,1.4„,'.ra, 1,-T4'..`4';7 7- '-' .,, ,,,, ',,,,,,,1,, „ ' ,,, ''' ' ., '`rt * - 4 i .. . •,,.,, , i,,•. , . -,..*‘,'"Ji?"‘ t.- . -, ,:-,--4'.. -tv. s' , .'. -,-,4, ‘= . ,T ' ..„' . .. ‘,4" 4 "",-;,.'' ti,„.,,•,:, : . ‘, . , ‘ ..,•_,,,i,, , „,, , , ,‘ , '-.4, ,, 4.,,W 464 • ,,'-',,•••;,4,..,, 1, ' • ,tot si .,4*, .4,' -, , , , ''.;1'.4';i....t. \...: t' •',,,4„s„.,,,,..ivt. ., ,p,...,,Iiii..; .,.t,,.::,..a.t., , ?I, L., I i, ir .. , .,„., , ..„... , . , _ ,,.., 1 , .. ,,.‘ 4,.„,411 40 s: . ,, ,.., ,t, '''' k''''' '' It ; '' .• , ' ' 14;444 r"' ' "' '`.■ . i-4' , -11r, ' '44044'Z ' kt\l'.4&'''4,' k'' ':4'-''''4, ' ,t4i•til,-.?,t„-r—iits . - ' F''''' ' i,`I ''.2 0''41111. • * ' ' ' AZT i'' . ..II.0,..,1- :‘.,''''''' k4' \ ‘''..-‘ ik-1' \ '' 4,,' „.• '.ii, . 1...,, , '!„.- A,414 . .,:.‘' , iL4elf * .. ki. *`'. * t'Ss.*-' " ‘'4.:.‘4 * ' '' - ''.:., , 9" ,, ..e.•i.., ,--,4t. .-,.t.-1., ' t '4''''1 1 4 ' ' ' ''' ''''''-'44. ‘, 'V -,'• • '...V,/,4'44'' q. '''', '''.' ',.. ir•t'1*-,,wi if:. ,' , .,..;„. ,A. ,,,,,,,.,.., ,t)* i . .%_Ls..., , ..,.., .i*V,,,:,,,',4.k,‘..,' . ,-#-. 2,40A4 4 tl'- , -*t .• 4 ,k ‘' - ,7'1,1 .t...,:',1 •-i'. , ,A '.0**,1,,"*.'-'k,' , 7w.',',',•,-. ..!.,..,,,,,'-:f04*,-. ,m,:y1,.,, ,—,'-' ‘ii, - ' -‘ 4..rit, *6. .- : A ' ., ',, ' , ‘'. •--; 4 ',t ', .s.,,,.,,..:.i.,,..,,,,,3. ' , .., 4,,,,tk...t.,..ItI,, ..1, ., . ,„i 4 x -',.„...- .-.L...,., ''.‘t,,t k,`...*, , ,:‘, ,,A 4. : '.„''",.,..."..*.q.::'' -,"'",, ,•.,...-i..',,,‘I,,., ,•-•`'s. ., . ,,,'',.s.,,-,.:„„ , :.4., • ",''' -:-',,s,,"'''s ',...."'"f *„. 7, , i4 lit ‘, i 4:itk.k4',, 4'Y . ',IS, .‘ ... . ' ' , , . ,„: ,'''' 1 .4 :i ‘;'''' -A ' .'' .%II ) 't , it„koAt. 1,....''' .: - 0, '- <'4L ' ' 4. 4 ' ' '0, - ' ' - . 44 J-',' r • : t't*' 'f' , ' It i44,,,44:V0,00,t jz,,,f' \ '...f4„,„,,,..z.:,404igk '..,..., ',''f:V,"'' ,i..,".., A :-.r,,, ., x...„.i.,,,,,,.. - 0," , 4,.,,,„,, , ‘,., , ... 10,,,,,,,-..t------ ,,,,,,..:,, ,,.,. ..:„,r----, !ylkl,,,:,,-, .:!:..,: 7 i,,,1..1,:,-,,t,, 'i,,,,,''' ' ,,,,...,:::i,,iv7 ,, s'''' , : :,'-'1114' 7 ;:':::: t4 ‘,4:',.14-::::,':7:''''' ''' - A.‘S' : (1..05,..,.<,.:.ii,,,,4.:..40.1...::.,,,,,,,,)4014'.,, ,,,'i:,., t.',,, s,..s.tort,itit..k...‘,,,i14.1,,-':'.'4,...,i1'',':',1‘‘.-.-i',..,,,‘,,,::i'''',.,,,''''''1‘1''.‘''.,'''''''''',,'It.,,,*'4L4:',‘ji.:::,',...---ok '.."...::s.4'.4‘*k*.i...i.''bikar.'S:'.IIIr,''tl:',a' ',t'4.i'..;°:laklslf.',If' 4''''7'*'L'wt;4$''''''tj's'•":''':'I :'':1''' ,10,41 „.''''..4`*,''fi 41' if ' ,,,,''''. ' '''‘‘;' ' ''.''k*:4:-F,:' , T7 ' ,*k` Z,' : k, . 1 , ,. ,'' -*,*‘ 4 ‘.•, '5,„„.,4 4 -'',.. t‘ " '-'''',V,ti.ir''' '''' , :4! L1.*.,.„,1 ,k''F. ',, ,,,, ,,,k„ p: wt-04 , ,.,,,:: •.. .. '• ‘4.,'.i,,,,,,,..., 1*.k' - , ,,,,, ' ' '- , , lk „, ....,• 'k ‘i4k , ' -' ', -' ''‘.4 ''-' , : \;,, I' ''.. ... '' - . '" „f.A , ,^4ikak,,, 4 '^ t )-'1, - , ..* - ...,...„. ,,N. .,: i :Itliitit ....,,t, , ..„..t 1 tt--, .5/ ...,. .k L c 1 1 - 4.• „‘.- ,, ‘' ,,, el.*s*iir'll. k4;,,,,,'if....;I:,:i-? : t `, 1,1: \> ” 1541i „,,,,',.,..,,,.,,,,,i;.,:,„ 7'i-pkto1 4,:.,.:,. -.:' .,"-4' '''.' ' .4,'‘ `-. : . ',: I'' , - 1., ''i`4,-..-t i'4I.. 4' 'i s't#14\:.' X i int•k •k-- ,rig..„,':.. .0 ■',...r WIR2.,,,4**'''.„15:‘ t 044 ,_4,4 (k *.e, ,u,,,. . . , .. , ,,,,o4f4„,.rf t,.. 41,-,4 j,, ,It4,..:,, 1,4 * ,,. ,1 4 "1,..._. ,... ...,,., ,Is' r-ez,,,t,,:,,,tt,\k„./..,-,' . *, "-. ... ,N'ilit ''''', - „`'.A.0 ",, -'' As:,4';', '.4./4', ', , '.1,'' ':::''''Ct:*' I,' ',f.' *141%. 6:454? •,'1,', 4 14 -. - "tq'tfo:i*-.- . '-• . 611' A' ' •,. ...— - -. 0, ,,,,,,,„,,, ,,,,,J4,,, ,„, ,,,,,_.,,, . , , ‘ ,,,,,,,,,,, „7:,, i. c.,.,4,4 ,...k ,---zow:2::.0,,,: 4., 4,;.; ,,,,. i.,,,,., :40,,, . ,at,,•,". ,t4::::::fiti,:::::,.,,::, . , ;,',4 0%, .01‘..t, ..' , -*.*ti.: 4.--;''''''.'i-,:•.'.,'44-'.'• .. = ' -, A,to,. \tt kv.,:', i ,tti,,..,4,-: ..',-. ' : 4# :;,4.4,4,,:,s, -‘‘ ‘ l"'''.'‘. I 1,)" , ,:..,,c, ':‘,.--.;..,1,,.-,? $-. !-- , \‘'.:‘, ',• :v.':-"\'- '"'"-'4',.''' ' f:: r '''' ,' ,'. ;;-'' ii4:, . ' ' ''" kAtit 4,0, ----''..- .t,- z,,,. 7k..,-i44k‘,v i si U41---, '. ..., ' 1 -' ' 41,.::. _ * ,--t*,- .'.-",,, ,.--;-'''' • .„,,, f--, i9i; ; 6 ki i -, • ' g--- "'-i--ti" 4‘10i tvlf) vt S. -.-, kiri' — , - i.ot- 0AR -, to :-,' , ' . ,-,ill 4*.--', ',,,,'•fts. . . a ik lit ' . * . ' " II ' . . ‘, , ,44‘'-',V iita... r74,1 tat ...„ ..... , . . , , , , „ ,so Iv, , .. ._ .. ),,....,00 ‘. , .,. ,,.. , , ,.::: „1444.. . , ilii , -, i ... ''' ''4‘ Ott -, - ; • . I ,,,.„'i 4,2 . :?- ,,,,,. ,,. .:0't -111 . .. -:-:;-41, iti,. . i,117/4 1 ,.., :...: lg .'7,-`, ri."?','-‘,.;.: , :-.„:' 3:''' , i'i se-,7 "IL.,I,-7,'.. ' ' " : ', /.- - ' ; ' ' '' ' ' 4 , i" s "tip Lit , ,,,o, ' :7'4,a• ' -. ,. i , : , Wi VA-,,,, ' .4t- -„, L ,,.* .,' - -,,,,. A- :.. - .,-cll. - ,,4 -... .',,, tv 1 '.1:: ':,1‘ ''''. t*, ,..**-- i',11/*.■,-A'.kir4'' ''S 1 VI ,...';'''':',,, -::,..,..,„....,,--''14--s's,,, ,,',,"k4-4*7',.; 4 , ." ,, 1'.... 1,,,, „,, ...2 ..„.. t ., . % ,4, &. ,,,,,,L,,,:ftlip",, ‘,.-t'i, ' 4-."1.'-41„. -„:',.,===,,,,.'t kl-,., 0.:—,..., "..,..,,,, : .4 ' -..,.. ' 1..1! =*. at , -,4”' itOriti ,St 4 :41.1.44„ ,. ,,z , ,, . , tr.., 1 ., _,.. ,..: ,„ , . , ,''',4*,,,o,.st...,-,.;' .;..:t.,...',,, , ,.,„,' ,, .,-,,i-,';,,, ',,,* .0" , . z 3. 'I** , 4*.,.:'*v ‘4; ' .1. .' .''..'.' itr,-'' ‘• . * # ',,ii(:47 t.t..!, -,, 11..c: '4, .1, ' , A•e., ' '‘'.:=!'-',---.=',- 4141 - . ' ,i, , '' f',"' - -- .'.... ' -;. .t. '‘ - .-1,irf-i - , . i, ' -' - .• : "-At"' . ..t,„e, ,, . .;y _1: , A,1 .wtt,, 4444 ',4 A, ,':',i-'7,..k '2.,':41 ■'',!i;A: a '',Z"'W.i ., ', 1.‘'*-,4 S.,, if'A'',- ■ -: '' - ,,, . V 4.--",,,4,. •-• ..qr',-,,,. „„,,t.i...z.„,..,, ' . ' ., ' ' ,ita ,:. , * . - it:i if '-4,- ' i. '''' ' , ..,. s'', .: 1.14,IrS"-i,*-1 • ."''.*"7., (Tit,' ' , *444 ' ° ''',,7.. , •0:', ;:;:nt:. '.,*:;., , ,' '''.22.-s' , 4,1J:Y..-!' .,- • .' ts.,....;.... V* '4*.0-'•-.'''''' kllir:-. I , , ',416Le-. ., rC s', -44 , ' -, ' ' 4,4r,4. 14 ' t ; 0:Alt' 4'- ' ;'' . .k.' Okk ' • l'''' ` N''''-‘- i ' .' 'i'''',- ' (titoof-, 1.4.'„,.: - .-: '''..i ',...t ,- .. -, ...‘,1,%.4 4 .itz,.., .k.y.i., „.; .,,.. , . ,- .,, ,- ‘,4 ., ,`:''Si . 1,...* Air/ ' .',,. . , .-:` *.,' ,,' fir ' -IR', --.I.,- .4.i. tli44404'1.#4tt.'17 rid' ' -1* -4','' ,-4:441(4..'‘', .''''•' s';''' '''',' ,•'; - '' ,. 44'''-:.k--4 ilk* ' ' - . ‘ „; #,', yr 1' . 4, so, v ,,- .,....,,,,i,Yr‘ -',•'-' ,.„. ---- , 41*P.‘:'W, '' '.: '.' - ' .' '''', ' -! • *.1 '',,ts ti,,4 4;,,:,, -- , ,: .;i, a , ‘,t # 2.i.„. E.E' . -, - -,,,se z•01..* , ,,,,-03,,,, ' ';•'1. -,- *A,,, -.. :'',,',.' .11.,.•1:4 ,,,e„$,,,t ,;--, —. At 1 71414,‘, T..,.. ',".. ,, i vit . ,.,,....,, ,, ‘‘ , :,‘,,,,,. ,„,,,,,,.. ::, ., ritilliit4firi 4. 2C.„ CT , AL. iiiii,q11, ".0, hq 4r730°Ilt t,O,' , ,,,„,,, 1 .4V • t, . ', 01 __IA . li ,e, 441*. ''"IIE t, i'7''':; x. tiff- tZiir . w .,.... 4 , ...,,,. viw, -. A ', '.,S, ‘,,A,44±,14.,' , ',",„,..2 .,'‘W.4.:' tA,' •'‘, `4 * & 41.6 r4 '.''., • 'TIV '-'I ! - 1 iii -4,.•. ii, _..,... , ... , ,..*.r- .,...: , 41,,, _,., . ', *go),, ,,,? tiejaik 04MA ''. -''''''7' s,''' ...; '',,';,''.':1,‘i'‘. Iii.4*: .,'44* ' ‘-‘,4, ',, .'t*1 Vt a§‘';';:'''ji*1 4 " .'', , , , .,‘ .:‘,.,„, , ,,,,,..1.,„-.,:,,,, 4 V,,,,;,,,,' .k.,. ' ';''kk/,..,,,,:,,,e, ,t ,. - 44;. .„-, '‘ ....,, ' • 4 ' - ',4''''''' .0711434'i'3°11,1PVVi if . 410 '€44.1t:ikf ''' - 16",*,, . = . .-itidi-„i. ..- L41,-:44,„51 , . = It:4 . . 4 '."'!'-',..‘.ti , '''.''',‘:7771,,,L..„''''1:',1'.„ '' '. .. loitl.J '' '" 4 'Iv ' ''''‘''''.?.,4*(fy -. vs ' ' , ,..4, ' "-- ...ti.. ' '''k ‘,..-' • , - s . ..,.*. ,..;.4'.: -,,' - 4. '''',.‘ '' ' 'm1 ''''''' '''' :#)i: ' ' ta. i ',:;,:‘ -:"‘k , '‘,‘;'' '1; •..0 ','vo'•` if .... , , *, s) , 'A -- ..,„ , ,' 40' .. ' i*' 7."--s* :''t I „ ',,A, ,'''at Iti , 0. :,:, tr tp .- .. '. ft --4, , .,. ' '..‘,`'' .-X14-• '''*'' „-' ... 1! ..41$11146 ' v..r,:, ,i, t• .t-W4i. ,A-4 • -,.. t ,z,''4'414% '.. 1: ,,firt#4 . • --;•- 44,;,;','. ‘.•':' it 4 IC ' ‘0 , 0 - tik' N44. 1 ""-''',: ' 4 , .,. i ,,.... , . , . , :, . .,,• ,, ,,,,,,,,,. ,, , P'' -,t,' ' .•,4, ,.• , ', a..'. ' -.,s,f iil -,i ' '‘ ;,,,,tt, L.,'•'' '00 ' f.,' i"A- k. ', ,ile' '''' ' ' '-'■ - 'aIPA1 t I , ' `•A'&'''‘ . ' ..'' ' \ .4:'*.' ' 4.. ',<', '',. ' ",''''AS \ .'. ' , ,,,,, ,4 •'.'' *4.; .' -Alf, „.„'s. ,.,,-, -,,‘ .• ',0';',,,lik,r4*:, ..:.,'", „`„'''' .„,.,"-' -",'".. ',, s•4„,, * ,,,,,••' 's:, 4(4.,..,\'1.1 .'i. - 04, 4 tjlt ,, - ,,, i,, ,., . , ,,,, mAdi,,, ,,,,, ‘,.‘4,,4, ,,,,,,,4-,,!,‘,,Itz,, ,t-,,,, •„:,..‘ ,t„,,,,,,,,4 640,,, — ,, , ,,,,...,,s.,,,..,‘14,,,,, ,„itift, , , ,:,,,,,, , olis ,4,,,,'" ti,„,,,,, iiii„,, , :„.. , .. - -, , 146,1 .,. _t -.. , ..*-4° 4 .,.': ,-,;''. .,,•''''`' -lie, ' .;4 ',,''-.' ''''''',4 '.-'41k,-4.' ' ,, '' ''",:44 ',.4',... :'' '4 ' ... '-'4't ^ . '-'4- -4 Tom'Ai: k .. ` -- ' 4.1 ' :*,,'''' '',"::::-' tib,.' ''', *s' I '',.„*'',/.'s,.,N.,,,Vi'L'il: ',:t44'"--:' ' ' '''.k.: * e 4L . „..,41 „Lti,44444 ot . : -' . ,4. 4 if 4 itk•-• ,, '4‘..,N. 4'4161-- ',,,- ' titaha 1,141 . ..4,....b, 1 j 1 ,,,..40,,,A,,,,,,, ,., e , ..'-'' 7„, _, k.. , .:., ;,,, ..,„E.. . II ,. I .,,,,, , r k' , t i 1! :''1.--4 0 r , ti jP,■::.,-,,,f‘f: :'t‘::‘;,,,iiii ,,,,,.,‘,,. ,, i„:::::,,,,,41,. ,_**•_01*., ,..-ii , tvrik,:,,,,, -,,,,xi.:. , . ,,.,,is' 1-.# ' i_i ,!7 ;k tokt 4 . . ,,.jib= ;_‘ ,,,,,, t4 .=, ,,,4. ...,*.4‘eki,t„, t„,,, t- „,., . 7I0011si # v'JR, , , ' ' '410 .0',. *1," 1 sr, - , 4 ''' -. 4 le - ..,. b, *, .,....-. .,, . .47,, .. , •. . 3v-,,,..›"••.„, . ,,,......„.. , ,, ...., at:, - ,- - 4 "v•,4" ti, ,T i' . -- - * - ' , . , *-- '1";" R'. • - i A'e . ' ' ' ii.4 - '' • . .'! ,. -,:-,,,,,,,,-„,,a...- , ., . ••• - .., 'If,: .:• , 4 1* : si ' ,. .. - , st'' ,.)('-- • t ,•-•. , r t A 1 1A44trt4.40 .... .. 1 1 e, 11 1 ' r . . ......-:".--i ,..., 41Pqr '„r . : 1 .t', ,, 1,., ,----ii-- k $ ',C.... . • t ,' t" 4 *tit S.1 * ...4,,,;,... * . i ., 1 ,,04,1„.* , • .p, 1 t,;0 Is`.-1K-- , . „..,„,....... ' ._. . , .... .,., H ,.... .„. : , „ i __T-e.. ,.. .., 0 c / — ' * 1 •N '‘'‘ lit tt ' l'.. .•,--,.:-.' )04,4,-' .4kKit:\(-- f'PVICk- 4 . - ' T.-EA,,,,,L,-.. i 1 1 ..,..,._ , ,,. ,. ,. ., - - ''-' •;,., i -;,,-. •:.• ,,- . ,,-,.,. 4 ,...",-- ',, ,.1,4,,,e4 -„0„,,r„, ,,,"'-., .,*‘‘ `.110,44,„. ' .: ,':-..-... ....'—g- p',,-,' ',' „,- - , " , 7 , . .* -,.::„,,I,..;f*..„,.s,.,-.,1'...2,-.1. ,..',,,A,g,'‘....w2:-.,... ..,,,, .,., ,.,,,,,':i.„:'',, s: Ott,„%y, '4,,,, 0 !,,."..• I 0,1,0'4 .„, , , ,,-; ' .- *;,-14#1,1t.,,, ,,,,,,.,.•,4„,41.,:m >.‘,,,,:.Alltr ' ' s'i'N#011-:',...,',. 4,""It.4 ' ,,,,,,,;,,,.' ,, ,,".4,,,,,,,,,t '-,L. , ,4-1,,,,4*-:::„„„,-„,,, ,,,,.;,,t„,-.ii.. , -,,,, 1; ,„.;:,* lel VO 41, ,, 411 . 'b.,' 4,4-71.4i1,‘,„1„?;;;:-:„.,:.:4,‘S.,•• ,f,-...,"1-,.,,,,-- , .--.1!. ,'"rv., 4 44" ,.• ek . •" - --J4 ',7:11',Z; !:" i ft'' .1*** ,,-•ikt4 ilit 1r NIA" .:144* r _ tan• .47\ 47.Spepressiona N \�w \ WETLAND w \\ /• i \ / YEAR \BLOOD PLAIN �� ✓ A ,\ Pockets �d \�� �a P---- 1,s_d_ kl.,,,i'l o V \ ry l �1 ra �✓ s �` .✓' I 1• ` o� =��� (\emu. �� Ty •` / j� II*, , IS-1,7" ........ ----"`--7" ..„,„...-40 -......, ‹) (;) \ :. �-lor Q ,.d �r ����� �1QZ �, � � er \ '- tip• .� ��;_I�s `r`� - ` 4� � ��� �� �,. irk ctx \_..717 :*---,:i11- ,'''''■^417,11 / „N ...°••• 0.1.d•-• • ___44/ �� Nom, illb '.' -",..- _____mo_ ,,t■-'...." .4\ \-Si__ '7'- EXISTING SANITARY ALIGNMENT Z \e' .... ..\\46 --40::,,,...7: �� PROPOSED SANITARY ALIGNMENT KURAHASHI At ASSOCIATES. INC. mr.o1m®I0I4. ..1[I1 1®01.7 nvvvv one. MU 1171 OM-14W as ■o 1 ! f l.nitied Sewerage Agency METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION W-001 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION d ■° ufA r� o= wetland Boundary „o, „6, c» 7 I I 133 N.F Mon. ,,,1r,,,C o„,,,, WETLAND DELINEATION 17 1RR; OIFI NO WIC RFVISKK: _ - PROPOSED SANITARY ALIGNMENT EXISTING SANITARY ALIGNMENT ____-----:_ SW 87th Avenue " 1 1- = 120' 1 —*---,si.o, 1 -a 1 -0 \ $ o :\ WETLAND _ SW Hall BLvtl. ! ,Blvd — — -1s } \ --..., 1 \, 1 0 j �� _ 1 " s a \ . \ Ili N? ' --- \ ■-'7s ''‘. � ��\ ` ` Cam`.. �.! _ r f „o sii�\ \ 4* '07 Pfilaillilliklintill- ' lint 0 a., ROI '.' - ;''s . _ It i -► `�`� ='mss_—.... _ --- _c?h� APPROX. 100 YEAR / p "w"� ,= r- 68 z* < FLOOD PLAIN i' i 1 d P \. 10 VI MI c.0 o � .a a e- SW v r. KURAHASHI At ASSOCLTCS. INC. CM ...= L.,CP,..ou,a„n. .051 401.-10,6 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION e. I U Unified Sewerage Agency METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION w-002 of Washington Count, Wetland Boundary _ WETLAND DELINEATION 11w 1997 ArPD `' ,sn OW/ Mt[I RMSph -.--- ---. _i r.. . r..r..,..... ....mw^.0..., / X` .--4-' '.--- 1• = 120' WETLAND sm �5►ad1 g ■ a G ,,,r>• , \ ; • . ' �,------ --� 0.^ ��, ii �_./ EXISTING SANITARY _ ` ., \_ ALIGNMENT c� ``� i . N.,.. ._ \i��.ti�i�:. . . ,Il• •API; w ,� '_—�•- SANITARY t�� ` • ��.�z ,'i� �`` \ �� PROPOSED S �'�_�� \�� /` l - + `7►�''' J - ALIGNMENT ___Air-- _ �, = ". , * \ /1 ` AN ;rte..= N •b r -� • AC" / `"'"° 1\1 "°,6- St \ - ',-,1,\,11,11‘411114k11 \___ ,_------0: ''''''....„....... ��? APPROX. 100 YEAR fir, l.► ' ��e VI N. FLOOD PLAIN i'. 1 _r eli • tit► \\�► * )b.-----z•---..r;-------,•,;;.o.- 1- 311*r . ,. ,•0\ li , e a „,..„ .. , ___. .... , _ - . \ \A��,ue � �� - 1\ i I 11 SW 82 --J` — r KURAHASHI a ASSOCIATES. INC. Cr-0.1013AIK. MI”RESOCRCE tiT—003 on - Unfitted Sewerage Agency METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION aT ��� NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION °�■" V �a�I, Wetland Boundary APPt e— , .:. DATE 0 . .. . . WETLAND DELINEATION N, 1577 42 \ n WETLAND tz t 70.-V"'I---7: - .- .. e-___I___:C _4:11 414494\' --::*" ‘\!ik , . <.s‘ '"% ______—X / ....- tk ill*A11101,\\a\.,. \‘..:2:r-be.". - ., ..--, .•.o., < er cP Virr ,---,,,,,,,,., 4 • li il II i'llp,,,,"fir .41,11.,....487W .. ''.4 •.,\71:1111:.``'..liiiiIIII, 14' .11111111r \ '''''.s.... ib__.'" -1.1'.--.4"....." - --lo--. 172.1*. \ \ `...............-", ._..11.101Ntaini„ _,Wmati‘1111 .." 'Illp., \ ' 7z7Y Niv " ,'�- ds ------a • :+ EXISTING SANITARY z tot-—-- ____,..:;17 777. - (Wit"\ --C<N\ ioe A. • .. 4 \ ------ ._GI----- -404) •,....4wro- ..;" \li. \ \\\ \ei, 416----4,„;?isj,,,s,--_,,,,le" ( / tp.... "e 7\sr. / / \ 0e,, ALIGNMENT i Y' /� PROPOSED SANITARY / ' to \\ \ N� ALIGNMENT �, / \ 5� MIMI KURAHASHI & ASSOCIATES. INC. z. .7 LT'..'CCD mac Urn MA 203V / 1Wa00nnc 07232 r. 10001 00e-1000 / • cc, we Unified Sewerage Agency METZGER SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION w—oo4 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION E : uf(, of• on Ca�w.e`°4••v.• Wetland Boundary N.t„or,�, WETLAND DELINEATION " 1977 wye DM NO a17I REVN E aKO E E Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency APPENDIX I: ON-SITE WETLAND DELINEATION CRITERA 1.0 Hydrology Water must be present in order for wetlands to exist: however, it need not be present throughout the entire year. Wetland hydrology is considered to be present when there is permanent or periodic inundation or soil saturation for a significant period (usually a week or more) during the growing season (Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation, 1989). Indicators of wetland hydrology, including areas of ponding or soil saturation; evidence of previous water inundation or saturation, such as dry algae on bare soil, or soil mottling along live root channels; and drainage patterns should be examined. When positive indicators of wetland hydrology are observed, wetland hydrology is likely to occur for a significant period of the growing season. The table below summarizes some of the hydrologic regimes that can be encountered and their wetland characteristics. Degree of Inundation or Saturation Duration* Wetland Characteristic Permanently inundated** 100% present Semipermanently to nearly permanently inundated or sat.*** >75- 100% present Regularly inundated or saturated >25-<75% usually present Seasonally inundated or saturated >12.5-25% often present Irregularly inundated or saturated >5- 12.5% often absent Intermittently or never inundated or saturated <5% absent * percent of growing season ** inundation>6.6 ft mean water depth *** inundation<or=6.6 ft mean water depth Sources: Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, 1987 Clark and Benforado, 1981 2.0 Soils One characteristic of wetlands is hydric soils. Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil profile. The Soil Conservation Service has compiled a list of hydric soils in the United States. The list identifies soil series mapped by the SCS that meet hydric soil criteria. A map unit of upland soil may have inclusions of hydric soil, and vice versa. These inclusions may not be included as part of the SCS soil survey; therefore, field examination of the soil conditions is important to determine if inclusions exist. The wet anaerobic conditions create certain characteristics that are typical of hydric soils. Such characteristics or indicators include: high organic content, accumulation of sulfitic material, greenish or bluish gray color (gley formation), spots or blotches of orange/black color (mottling), and or dark soil colors(low soil chroma). Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 Metzger Trunk(1577) Unified Sewerage Agency Hydric Indicator Diagnostic Criteria Organic Content >50%by volume Sulfidic Material "rotten egg"odor Soil Color mottling,dark soil matrix,gleyed colors Water Saturation poorly drained soils with low permeability Sources: Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, 1987. USDA 1975. 3.0 Vegetation Plants must be specifically adapted for life under saturated or anaerobic conditions in order to grow in wetlands. Such plants are classified as "hydrophytic" vegetation, meaning "water loving." The Corps of Engineers and the US Fish and Wildlife Service have assigned "indicator status" to most plant species, based on the estimated probability that the species occurrence in wetland areas. Definitions of each indicator status from the Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation,(1989) are listed below. Species with an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC are considered adapted for life in saturated or anaerobic soil conditions. Indicator Definition OBL Obligate. Species that occur almost always (99% probability) in wetlands under natural conditions. FACW Facultative wetland. Species that usually occur in wetlands (67%-99% probability). but occasionally are found in nonwetlands. FAC Facultative. Species that are equally likely to occur in wetlands or nonwetlands (34% - 66% probability). FACU Facultative upland. Species that usually occur in nonwetlands (67% -99% probability), but occasionally are found in wetlands. UPL Upland. Species that usually occur almost always in nonwetlands under normal conditions (99% probability). NI No indicator. Species for which insufficient information was available to determine indicator status. Sources: Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, 1987. Resource Management Group, 1988. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993. Kurahashi&Associates, Inc. September 25, 1997 APPENDIX It . 1111111 Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KITEtAIALASEII Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State .e6Lssc_ c 1.,A.-r es, c:. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: #16-r24,6.,‹ jx, Project Number: /577 Investigator: "age-Ajr Date: 3_1101(11 Plot ID: I Plant Community: pKrup.e: wpr pieovoad Normal Environmental Conditions? Yes No Remarks: 4./A/6-Art p,,erAyec Significant Disturbance(Atypical)? Yes CO. 30 Foie. ELAICes,_(,/ Problem Area? Yes o RePn4 EA./7-- VEGETATION Species I %Cover I Indicator I Species j %Cover 1 Indicator Trees Herbs F0C-1 A 1-40 FACVsj (a_ UPL- Gito.51-t> 4°. fa2-10c-4 LuILEA. 10 R4- A AGIo_23-rts ALB 1 0- AF.Ado v.126., /t. 'Zo _ Shrubs cs_ Foecoi 10 Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: 3 By Stratum o loo Number of Dominants FAC- UPL: Relative 50%level: So Total Dominants: %Wetland Vegetation: too Relative 20%level: 2_0 Wetland criteria met? (NG) No Remarks: -rvg,,Fs c.j.g.,)Bs AR.G /*Dyik_c_skyr- potp..4 6..pr Aze R4-Di a.S. 1‘14E" 2±5. USCA-4)OED I C- LLjONt. *Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW OBL? 0 Total FACW ig)OBL? 2 Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL c>f•ACU? 0 Total UPL FACU? j Total FAC-? vnsitive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream,Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water — Aerial Photographs _ Depth to Free Water in Test Pit — Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines t.-4AC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits iher(explain below) — Drainage Patterns in Wetlands _Wetland Criteria Met? Yes No Remarks: THERE I ,1■1.>) ^-to' -iR o -- "ilokildk Or --- Origin /NOIe/F,oi2 : goof: PAfN73 S•rc SdotF"i+cE 5aCG&sr- 5 wr�/1.4r�an! SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): veiz,3oom' 5u %H La+w. Drainage Class: ?tog. Subgroup: T MP« � Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes ICI 9 P� I1Al.po�.t„S Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. r l- to A-3 !-_ It'IR. ` /I to /IZ 41(42. E, 1a�.... Co, ko,.I �LL4� GO4M — I n — a ' z S�I '112- t 0`(iq .4(10 tinw 3 l�tsT? 1wT,_.Coro, o t 4 Wyttit Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol tAredoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor 1 Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List — — Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) Listed on National Hydric Soils List fdeyed or Low-chroma Colors 1 Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? No Remarks: M02-L.0:5 ---- WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? * No Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? 4:1) No Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Q L iEs –&L CJ FOAM vJc= 5. r al 91 Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State ..,s,ss<Dc2 Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: plc-r2 .< Project Number: /577 Investigator: -3zE, J7- 4Jj5 Date: --7((oioii Plot ID: 2 Plant Community: P -rop_e I A)Er evide .Dov,) Normal Environmental Conditions? des, No Remarks: 6.,,vd-AA pi,ocjec_r- Azal Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? (131 No apo')( 30' poy-4 5 _ Problem Area? Yes CD eZP -EM EJL/7— VEGETATION Species %Cover Indicator I Species I %Cover I Indicator Trees Herbs A6ttoSrt 5 le,..),,rs ie- AGaDtri '5'rept.c.k.)i-PEAA Pig..ArEp.)5 IS)4- __E04.-v3 • oc:F-icirkne* 20_ Ot PcL.cricms o c144.%) LE4c-ANT \JUi-GAXE* _10 _ALM, Shrubs :11-112:9Lis116.6. 4" _Lb c_ rAc. _ Fesc—A- .tsIc_cacd ._._ 10 FAt_ s LA.gezc PRL).a•!,.x.e ..1.o_ --- Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: By Stratum -Lb lac Number of Dominants FAC- UPL: Relative 50%level: 3 Total Dominants: 10 %Wetland Vegetatici: Relative 20%level: 2.< Wetland criteria met? CC/7) No Remarks: *Indicates dominant species as determined by the "50/20- rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST (OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW OBL? I Total FACW OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL FACU? 3 Total UPL FACU? FAC-? Positive vNegetive 1 2600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water - Aerial Photographs - Depth to Free Water in Test Pit Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated ✓6xidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Co 4," Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves - Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines F)C-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits p/bther(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? 'a" No Remarks: - o : _ 0A../ o 4a - - -E ") n10 c -cam - — .E iv_A 5 5.471(2 rF1-O icE/J FZ:-ji SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): Je goFT- surly cc.,ti-j cAWKA i Drainage Class: Tbtges Subgroup: T-4Pic A g.c.k AL_scLcs Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. O-`. A Io-t12-1j2 1 Lorw. -.— °I t ,_.._. B Z5i 4 rt..-4!ei(t- (___. i CAUR', ,-0∎ 71 r IGT ._cz"t.-°NI LAA4l'A Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol vKedoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils J Sulfidic Odor I Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime i Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) I Listed on National Hydric Soils List vGleyed or Low-chroma Colors i Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? cs, No Remarks: ox%,I-v D Roo' c!}Rr,1N61.%1 t2K1Z00.4ES 6 (." i tuoTTLES WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? '..y- No Wetland Hydrology Present? s Nib Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? 'es No Wetland? es No Remarks: isJr•5,4-04 )(-7 1nl/i-r/[IN iN8-r(A.c%) (u) vA.0cr< iAI EK'& NCoco-r e-5 P Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form K_LTRAFIA_S Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State s c:pc A.-r as, c: Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: Aelerz4.6A Project Number: j7-7 Investigator -aze-Air /2‘t/r5 Date: 7/10/er) Plot ID: 3 Plant Community: Pfte.-roiqe: VP(..0-Mo Normal Environmental Conditions? y) No Remarks: 4 - z pAoge.c_r- Sn.ioy 4R504 Significant Disturbance(Atypical)? Yes 162 6.?....00'X 30' Fiv2 Problem Area? Yes g Re-PL./K.6W,e.A./7— VEGETATION Species 1 %Cover I Indicator I Species %Cover I Indicator Trees Herbs kcaT-erall.S Te^stoS TAC. A:Cri_ JS A4-13" Fo‘C to FAC-4- TeettPFlot timAs.Z < S. -- A.Loec-c--kao PizovN^ Ls to FA(.14 CA42-10-rA 20 Shrubs ANTtitto,1 tALIE-ott-Icas, 5 'FINCO Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: I By Stratum I po Number of Dominants FAC-0 UPL: I Relative 50%level: Sb Total Dominants: 7, I %Wetland Vegetation: 50 Relative 20%level: 7-o Wetland criteria met? Yes Remarks: -Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW OBL? Total FACW OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL o FACU? Total UPL 0 FACU? Total FAC-? Positive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard,Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream,Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water Aerial Photographs _ Depth to Free Water in Test Pit Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: , Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves ., Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? Yes CRO Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): Jc r �l�y Cjaty Lo&m____ I Drainage Class: 71,0,z Subgroup: -r„I',, }.cc,,AL 2,,,,L, 1 Field Conformation of Mapped Type? 1 Yes I No Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. 6 4- __._.— a „3/Z l0't(2.3fl _!... -.c,..17_..t tl! ,_r.£_IAi___.Si I_cA,93__4f?L4!`1.._..__. Hydric Soil Indicators: ___ _ Histosol_ l 1.44-edoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon 1 High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ____ Sulfidic Odor 1 Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils — Aquic Moisture Regime i Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List __ ,�Gleyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? es No Remarks: !Apr-Les WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes o Wetland Hydrology Present? �Yes Is the Sampling Point Within a C 'V°7 Hydric Soils Present? No Wetland? Yes (lo Remarks: KIP A& D 6:star1 AT►od..\ 0 Pc..04r,5 t7 0,vO rL 1NTEr tv.■ Pia[€D o ( Dti s f.l o r ►VNE E r (An-Fre-A- rFA PG ) P 11 11 11 Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KURAHA S HI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State .e ssc. c:[RTES, r-.4 Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: M6:7Z6,6,e, Ta� 1 Project Number: /577 Investigator: L ZgNr Z 4v .S Date: Z (to(ct• Plot ID: Lj Plant Community: 'PP.ST,.)426 J?LMJD — Normal Environmental Conditions? No Remarks: 4_,,v64,2. p,eaTec -; s dv-y /liter¢ Significant Disturbance(Atypical)? Yes _-(e 2.00.x 30 Fe'R. SEKrcpt. Problem Area? Yes to RePL-4c6-A4 eAJ7 VEGETATION Species %Cover I Indicator I Species I %Cover Indicator Trees Herbs --... -- - 1.7gc i rieLf u w. 55f,peas * Z� - - _...—_ GRosr es STex oN1 ri- t,fl 17A►)C C,k�c T-A--- — 5' Olt,- Shrubs LOTUS Cot�nl,r1L'�T�S..— CS — FAC P ER.E>- .46 <5 FAci s5 P. CS_ Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC c OBL: I By Stratum t 0 0 Number of Dominants FAC-a UPL: Relative 50%level: 5o Total Dominants: Z I %Wetland Vegetation: So Relative 20%level: Zp Wetland criteria met? yes MOD Remarks: -: �. ► ✓E - in, ._ L:" . . C , 4. ✓ /711710 i/'JG l i�1 I I Cc i5/ ,e -P-c.) . —A4 • • *Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW b OBL? 0 Total FACW b OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL b FACU? I 1 Total UPL o FACU? /Total FAC-? Positive vIVegetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1 105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water -- Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated `✓Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches y Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves • Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? Yes No Remarks: 1J 0,--4e-g_ ,',.).)A,.z/ /N_Dic4-7-cic S PRL— �.►i- SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and phase): _too Coma .,"1 Drainage Class: oosZ Subgroup: T' et c_ lAq.c—t NLi36uS Field Conformation of Mapped Type? I Yes Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. 0-4 1 A 1_rioy2 42, _ _ i LO'X"` 4.1- i Alp Z, Li j Z : o4R.31b/N 2.10i -.IC 1)M+stisfv4 i.C - 6ru.k.T I C Ls UO.# I i I Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol edoximorphic Features(describe below) _ Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime ! Listed on Local Hydric Soils List R ucing Conditions(Chemical Method) , Listed on National Hydric Soils List leyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? Yes No Remarks_ S-�tx� -r-‘2RT_ISLsIS_I . o'S J LZ KsoT (h4 ANNC- �_M1_9 t(e_ s5___- WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes Wetland Hydrology Present? ro Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? Ye No Wetland? Yes No Remarks: N;NII) {Z i1.1Tt?IZEn^ Pg.CC C DORg.S 1-111, PL.c r t S ( 4, LE- 4f (fl e S /-fe; !31 •---" 7" C,2.TE&t 4 fc"Z .4 Pc 1>E-S16A1r¢rru-.i ) r & Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KLTRAHAS HI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State Ass c i cr s. i IV c- Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: /11ETZ ,z, TR✓N� _Project Number: Investigator: /\17- .4✓r5 Date: 7/101/1 _Plot ID: 5 Plant Community: pA.St.A2E, SuJ RAE Normal Environmental Conditions? ,: ags� No Remarks: Lo�4rz r'AvfxTEc.T.__.S Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? Yes (�Zpp',� �p' r,,2 Problem Area? Yes ('f rZC PL.4C6wl C/T- VEGETATION Species I %Cover l Indicator Species I %Cover l Indicator Trees Herbs GhlocEpe..% oa coR ras 3o —_.. \1PLr AR.JopNAs A * _ FAC _tom rJS,!t-fZ`?. -- I(?_.. t__... c14z. "^—__— .....4_ .._.—__ _roe ?,R,4T ,I s t ----------- -t° Shrubs /�/ �rJ 4 _<...oBel_N.0�tS�3?_��_._._...__.._—.. �_.—..--—�R c-- F ix irJ �� !_AA-r Fo -i A 10 W --- C.-24t'I GJS FA_O L(•110 A --_--- g � __--- Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC b OBL: By Stratum 30 -7 o 1 p s' Number of Dominants FAC-a UPL: o Relative 50%level -55 S 3 Total Dominants: 3 %Wetland Vegetation: I O Relative 20%level: I y 2 I Wetland criteria met? es No Remarks: /NC ENSe (eCA/ EsccC.l PEA F/Zom C.ALCS. 1. -C[/!45E /7s 6..d7" /.0 "- Com m c/AJ/T* "Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20" rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW 'OBL? I I Total FACW o OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL bfAU? 0 I Total UPL o FACU? Total'FAC-? '-Positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard_ Oregon 97223 503.968.1 605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream,Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water — Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit — - Other(explain below) _ Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated vQxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches e. 4CE Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves Water Marks I Soil Survey Data Drift Lines AC-Neutral Test - S diment Deposits Other(explain below) ✓Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? rire No Remarks: S_k{At-t ff�c,1 StA3 A LM I ,7eeaG56(°M SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): geiz? R-r- StL.T,1 cus.y c04,,A. ' Drainage Class: 'peal& Subgroup: TIPtc- Atr...t AL.BOLC-s ! Field Conformation of Mapped Type? T Yes i No Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. 0-S legit 31Z _5.-'1_—'.._A/6 i !o qag._312— 1 yA 3/4., N Q__.`.CG .,... ).1:57 .c. ,,-Cow! 44..! a44T�. c .■►Y c M._.._ II t A _ lL$/O Z•sl y/3, /0Y-/4 A 17 [ r• °wi�!'!,anJ_S_11.2r/ c(. Lv9M -_- Hydric Soil Indicators: • • _ Histosol edoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime __ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) � Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? qes„) No Remarks_�oc/c6AJTRario"CS� ? r D i a s, O ,Dizeo Vic! N� 1 [ ST _ WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? -s No Wetland Hydrology Present? dial No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? No Wetland? QYes) No Remarks: t)nJDitt- ildwzoik Ilkty EDJr2 ,-- --- c jT i 4 i .92Ec..&-v ft-s 1,s,/ 11111111. 91 Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KURAHASHI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State ASSOG I./..-r ANC. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: /116"--r24,, ,.<, Ta✓� Project Number: /577 Investigator: ze,Qr- 1��4✓,s Date: -7//o1ct7 Plot ID: 6 Plant Community: pRSTu12G : farLE Normal Environmental Conditions? (-"C;;;e No Remarks: LavcAr2 P,evcTEc.l; ST�vY i¢,Zc,� _ Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? Yes 61 Problem Area'? Yes fro) ,zePLifC.Ewt Ci.J7 VEGETATION Species %Cover I Indicator Species %Cover j Indicator Trees Herbs Ee✓i5E root i4RuEN.Se_._ ZO — �___.� _—_.--- TRi FJtd J (2EP6a_S ._— S .—_.._ F� �?•_..&�s�Qt r• Arc 6'�. S —Shrubs _tkoc.C.uS Lfto1ATJS <$ (- f?�y�.�S Qi ---------.- MCL) re~SSTVtN Z.-)BR A _jQ FAC-4- (2-05•4 nSUT<kmA _._.._ 40 PAC LE)Uuwr, PEfLENNE (0 FAC _C-12471-a cc,uS 04,o.Jocs-1&1 A 5 PAC.) ACE,f0- 4S- (!K . �An1�a1JCJCyt� l2�Pcas __ _-- cs 1:AC43 - CoitN --_-...—LS FAC ......_.. ...._...__. Total % Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL 3 By Stratum (0 S' I DO Number of Dominants FAC-= UPL: 1 Relative 50% level 33 50 Total Dominants: %Wetland Vegetation: 7S Relative 20%level: 13 ZO Wetland criteria met? ( 1) No Remarks: `Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20" rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW* OBL? 0 I Total FACW a OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL a FACU? I Total UPL a FACU? .-Total FAC-? Positive rf�egetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1 605 FAX 503.968.1 105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream,Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secon ary Indicators: Inundated xidized Root Channels in first 12 inches p y" Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Wifnent Deposits Other(explain below) rainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? CreD No Remarks: 51-4gt-C.ovj S1/4.1.34ALE/ 0 5Si r.4 SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): f � R r 5ij c. ant Drainage Class: tZ Subgroup: TyPL t� ►,„LAoI r S ' Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. 0 _._ __A I Lo yR J2 _ ._ _..._....._.... = Co.4w� __1 fit___�13 ! i.0--1A-512. 1101-&-V-4 _iz A/64..../.3Lb.Ti /LT,.._Gt! .ft Dd ,5/4L ..«A_c_441_3....... f I 1 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol __ i rKedoximorphic-Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon 1 High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils .__ _ Sulfidic_Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ _ Aquic Moisture Regime i Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Re ucing Conditions(Chemical Method) Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ leyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? Yes No Remarks: Lon1cTK#17-,b A/SJ oh 10 f2 EP R iLrzo3PHt2 /_Roo r- ci44"'n)c-c-s.-.-- • WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? - No Wetland Hydrology Present? eV. No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? e, No Wetland? es No Remarks: ..);J17LtZ tNTE2twA PP .at%R— 46 PWT t-S LA AELEO r45 v✓ Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KLTRAHASHI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State ATES, I N c. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: MgTZc,z TR��� Project Number: /57 7 Investigator: [ 2Etir J4✓ s Date: 7//077 Plot ID: 1 Plant Community: rvt tDpr-G : uPc.,A44.40 Fig'-p Normal Environmental Conditions? No Remarks: 6_,Ne A P,zrx7Ec�_ _s,i,vy i},zcr4 _ Significant Disturbance (A typ ical)? Yes Ob _‘_Z O* 30, E0A.._S EtiI � G inJC= Problem Area? Yes ■ ,Zc Pt 4CEwt e A/T VEGETATION Species I %Cover I Indicator I Species I °/U Cover i Indicator Trees Herbs X193—__ANnl_0. _.—_. _AGgs)_ s ant..__._ r,NS _ JTtf G2hSSES _ ID Shrubs Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: Z By Stratum O Number of Dominants FAC-o UPL: 2_ Relative 50% level: 5C Total Dominants: y %Wetland Vegetation: 50 Relative 20%level: 2 Wetland criteria met? Yes Remarks: Ftrc.p 2.EM\ t5 Axe FREe;ZJE- -r.L l • 'Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20" rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW a OBL? I Total FACW a OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL b FACU? Total UPL a FACU? Total FAC-? Positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1 605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY _ Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water -- Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit -- _ Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil -- No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: _Secondary Indicators: _ Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data — Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands _Wetland Criteria Met? Yes f�o) Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): t/eRBoo( -r S(-T`c ctAy C Drainage Class: Ro(- Subgroup: Typic Agc.i Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes I No Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. — —..PIS.__—__.Lo Y&412. _.— i i c ki_...o�a,v_1.....-.. Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol Redoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? Yes (NP Remarks: - WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 4 Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? Yes o Wetland? Yes Jo Remarks: 'f Lew —IAREA L FL E J. -T 6c, ' cps}D c Q ?t-oT .-- — - — P M Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KURAHA S HI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State ASSC ■G I.AT'ES, I N C. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Sur'eying Project Name: p/16---7-24,, , , TR��� Project Number: /57 7 Investigator: 3 j -' s Date: 6113( 9 1 Plot ID: g Plant Community: nnipw..e. t,,avmJ Normal Environmental Conditions? No Remarks: Li�yci4r2 PztkT�c�; 5 y 4676-41 Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? No _42pp'x gyp r ,2 SE,�r�� L�••�C_ Problem Area? Yes No IZO PGfIC.6A4 EivT VEGETATION Species %Cover Indicator Species % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs LA-7 k czaL I, 'moo — FaFcv%7 ;4.)Rr= iti(0 i V, 5 of 02.,r = 4ofl _ -7 -- Shrubs Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: By Stratum 30 IGo Number of Dominants FAC- UPL: Relative 50% level: Total Dominants: %Wetland Vegetation: Relative 20%level: Wetland criteria met? Yes No Remarks: df:-:6E1-147 10r..! R.dE43_, 5 r= POTS 4i io hofi T43 1e-,4-I..• UEC� t N 1,c`3S D(S J sty a6�• t-• .5s.1CaCcEST- 14 0ito I y-1 _.. `Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20" rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW b OBL? Total FACW OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL a FACU? _Total UPL b FACU? Total FAC-? Positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1 605 FAX 503.968.1 105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: _Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water -T Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit Other(explain below) _ Depth to Saturated Soil . No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: _Secondary Indicators: Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves wl ater Marks ON Tr ES dwADrr/65 Local Soil Survey Data _ Drift Lines FfFC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits .-"Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? vg) No Remarks: orytErz 54Nd 0449 ✓>L,o ro Hew, r34cc- w4/1:5rt /N va(-r 5 .,-see,/ -....446. ReFelte^)ccy (,c09-1-ro, s /f+4 vC 4i O,40coG y ' i -'1 o.cs, . / ( (,ac/+-T rorS 4 r '1 ,,.r E[EJ#tfio,.N 14, r14is D4-TA ITT SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and phase): v,,) piro SI,t*y. (.1."y (.L v1/4. Drainage Class: Subgroup: ptoghQ,36 (_ L4.4pt.A C1.12,tis Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes i t -) Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. 0-(9 A 1 /0.4 12. 3I L ' _..— L cr4en -- 6 1- � ' iv / 14_ ;..Car+�?�[,..Jl r r Co�•� l I i Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol 'doximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils • Aquic Moisture Regime i Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ eyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? es No Remarks_ Gwve N>r;•tTfo —.,. — -..._.._.. ... _.....__..__.._.__._ WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? c No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? Cci No Wetland? &s% No Remarks: pm-A peers 9E lb uses) , i2Eezeje6��/'�C'°_�—, _&10.16 /RELA-T,v0' RI_e JRtro,✓s i tyte,i ..... T'( 7a creE'ets_-1I_71x)r'INTgC ✓E~ T.¢Trdrll lNFe-&REP P4.,0,-,‘ ph-ATI -L Parr} (712EEC,.4-/El2.) A�T�scFiJr A"V'4 pcoTS • ! WINN Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KURAHA S HI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State & .SSOC IATEs, I TV c. Lands data forms(revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: p16-7-24, ,‹ TR0,4t. Project Number: 1577 Investigator: i2ENr LEA✓i$ Date: jicti Plot ID: 9 Plant Community: MtoDL.e: F91oe3TE0 4.0E11./01) Normal Environmental Conditions? Ces No Remarks: L,h,6,gr2 P,eaTEcT: Si ivy til,?aA¢ _ Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? Yes ® 4 app'X 30' , R. ..5E1"11(_-=": Problem Area? Yes No RC;'Pt�ItEMC-Ad7 VEGETATION Species ( %Cover I Indicator I Species ] %Cover Indicator Trees Herbs tkidxs IZ466A 4' 50 [-AC. C fis. ONNOPTA4' .50 013L_ T NN-J r A R.(Ca4Ti4 4. ZS Fes- L-1—coca."— I4 L I , Zo _ t1f l- _ _tor'Jr....) r.s_ ttt-'ERA _ 1O FAL- lZJevs JtZStt S __Zo CALi., __.�._..� , R../4,40 n1CJLuSS13.epe:JS _--lo -.- HOK-u1 -.. Shrubs --- IZu3J5 _DIsc Lc + 40 rrle.J— P-A"'"03" CA-rtraLiA - Z.eD FACtii .� . _(..3Fu5 Dex c PIS tt S �Fk __. Cc+ILA(LJS co i2i■ 'T A 1 0 FAC,/ --- �P-ArPtEGV5 6440^1c64NA1 C S FR-CJ ---ACeR- \ArC•-t2aR4`iLLV,M 10 - r-A` - — — - Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC b OBL: y By Stratum g5 i3S- I o y' Number of Dominants FAC-b UPL: I Relative 50%level: 4 3 4.15 5-5 Total Dominants: 5 %Wetland Vegetation: 90 Relative 20%level: I i 1"/ z-1 Wetland criteria met? UV No Remarks: 'Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) _ Number of Dominants FACW b OIL? Z I Total FACW b OBL? Total FAC+? b Number of Dominants UPL U? I Total UPL o FACU? Total FAC-? tP6sitive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1 105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: - Field Data. Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water --- Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit -- Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil — No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated _ .--crdclized Root Channels in first 12 inches ___ 6•.- Saturated within first 12 inches _ Water-stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data .._ - Drift Lines L.--fAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits , Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands _Wetland Criteria Met? Cep." No Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and phase):Wivocce, an,te,ki Lpie,„,,A. Drainage Class: -Subgroup: eLov-itscioeonc_ 1-40$4-k6100‘...LS i Field Conformation of Mapped Type? 1 Yes 1 (IF) Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. -. /0/4 3/_2_ t I (.4500914A .__ , i ' SI- 1 4113 1 /1>yra V2. lioqs.5/4 S/3 . sii iCas-56 DIM-IA/CT, C044 A40"/ L3fc.. coy 4.0,141 I ...._ i , ----- : ---------- . . . . . • . : Hydric Soil Indicators: . . _........ Histosol i L•11-e-c-rloximorphic Features(describe below) Histic ETi3e-p iron — 1 High Organic in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils -- ---- _ Sulfidic Odor 1 Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Wegii-ne----- I Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ ___ Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) I Listed on National Hydric Soils List --1-;dleyed or Low-chroma Colors ! Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? dre) No Remarks: 0).„.0.1_ , R9,2.04ette-,etcrs4,2rc/f4widats -, am ze wrLe.611,,,,..evs _.cepc_eiri 0/,-(-1- ______ -- --------- . ____ WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No Wetland Hydrology Present? 4iar No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? -es No Wetland? (T30 No Remarks: - - - -- plasm Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form K_IJRA A_S Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State & , r-.4 Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: is,16---7-2‘,6-,.< Project Number: /577 Investigator: 'aze,\)r „k,//5 Date: cfq/3(co Plot ID: j Plant Community: iyi)Doc,61 p v.)erurrn43 Normal Environmental Conditions? 6j2 No Remarks: Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? Yes o' Problem Area? Yes 0 Re P aft/ VEGETATION Species %Cover Indicator Species I % Cover j Indicator Trees Herbs 411,10") 64404. 50 Eraim From Ag tiez.4—$E_ _LQ Ae■iuNcui_us + RtAki Hoc: ., LA-^1,9-TLZ 2.o÷ FAK 1-4c6-4,01- EL-4r4 - E&011- riv't 757W— PA< Shrubs FAW Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: 9 By Stratum ‘4-0 c Number of Dominants FAC- UPL: Relative 50% level: Total Dominants: s- %Wetland Vegetation: to Relative 20%level: IS Wetland criteria met? Cirip No Remarks: -Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20" rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST (OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW 9 ? 1 Total FACW OBL? 2 Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL*/ CU? / Total UPL* FACU? J Total FAC-? positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water — Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit — Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil — No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: _Secondary Indicators: Inundated -Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches -j" Saturated within first 12 inches _ Water-stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines —AC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands ' Wetland Criteria Met? j No Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): yy��o I-4 6_,A4 (,py„■ Drainage Class: pc ,p_ Subgroup:Two 6,JhL e4pou C.LS 1 Field Conformation of Mapped Type? i Yes Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. __Q-y N1.-14 31L Coe fM ._.`t + ..__ ._.!gip (°`�'�`l� - YLlc_YilYl[e.._ Pio 'CaL _,.. sr...'cr,_._Gowrp J ' 5'- '( c(-4Y Co.44A ■ Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol i 'edoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon 1 High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor i Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime I Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) j Listed on National Hydric Soils List > ed or Low-chroma Colors i Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? es No Remarks:......yy�(,,�61.�. nzil 7_'-�'!-�-- (' .0_, ,D,,FO .�vrc E?.5� ? _._._E'7" 14. Tits.__'ti' So/.0::. Mix o t .(o Y/- yi2_—.._..- li. ‘yeg.--..`3/-L - ------ WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 432) No Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? es-.) No Wetland? ea No Remarks: WI II M Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KURAI-A S HI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State .ssc c 1.6 r s, >I N c. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: N1 ET'ZroErz, TQ�i 1� Project Number: /577 Investigator: gJ?- p40 Date: 81 1311 Plot ID: II Plant Community: 11(1114,/,6 : '1L1 (Awl./ Normal Environmental Conditions? No Remarks: L, G Repo- s wry 4iZe Significant Disturbance(Atypical)? No (Zoo'. 3O �-o/Z 5E'h/'E13 LinICE Problem Area? Yes No RePG-4CEMC./T VEGETATION Species %Cover ( Indicator I Species I %Cover ( Indicator Trees Herbs -rag (dlo.JED 5fko r) T z I r-o I I✓M RepeN S /J �' Shrubs Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC b OBL: By Stratum Number of Dominants FAC-b UPL: Relative 50%level: Total Dominants: %Wetland Vegetation: Relative 20%level: Wetland criteria met? Yes No Remarks: DILN MEn1TAL- LM,Jh1 s f' o'r t-z Fop iOr SlPA4t .E OP oN i3iSTJ i2 ? -D Pr-a T ZO FGET oF T I♦iS PLOT *Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW b OBL? l Total FACW b OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL b FACU? Total UPL b FACU? Total FAC-? Positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 1 00 Tigard,Oregon 97223 503.968.1 605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: -Field Data: Stream,Lake or Tidal Gauge _ Depth of Surface Water — Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit ^ Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil — No Recorded Data Available: _Primary Indicators: Secopdary Indicators: Inundated xidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Serrated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves ✓Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) ✓brainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? Y s No Remarks: GJ, OE,JC E of Po I i,JG (r-c.cov,NG W I r1$,A/ 6' mp f4o f___ Cocafr'0,4. SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): v,.),cm-r0 Salt CLAN Co040�. 1 Drainage Class: Pe 4 . Subgroup: FC.JJ hQJe,„,-riC 14+4t LAQpcuLS Field Conformation of Mapped Type? ' Yes i Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. .....D_..±___.__ _-__4/ PIP.- 4/I RIYR 1/t' &kV-56i 0/57/../c1 014,!konl_ C.ri[Ch'-/ L.cv4M ! I j -- i Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol i t,R'edoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon I High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor 1 Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List ReOucing Conditions(Chemical Method) Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ �Gleyed or Low-chroma Colors i Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? "'% No Remarks: ,Jo /404,240,N1 —._�./ me=..iT ro' /c —_ CeNCEr-+JKf4-Lr0' ChcQIZCD 461 . F_le'1 T c4414NELS WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? a No Wetland? No _Remarks:__ r i t'(.c— I ■ F- L Fork ONJi%i0it D fbpJJtTiee-I ► r4YARDPr (C_ JEGe—T/i-<<8"-I IrJPER-ED Fkc.,n 14-4=Ari4-L tJEG (c'-C—FD.5 IrI (-01-4"4) "fro _AP -■ —r■.) . II 11 II 111 Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KU-RAMA S FII Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State & 46..ss(Dc:.1 Acr e.s, 1 r■ic;_ Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: //16--rz4,6, -7--kv,,j< Project Number: / 77 Investigator: -afZEA.)r . At/i 5 Date: 8113 Plot ID: I 1._ Plant Community: rh Lome: t=oass-reo VT'-olo Normal Environmental Conditions? e_, No Remarks: 64 pAerx7eca,.... s ,7,_ 4tza,it _ Significant Disturbance(Atypical)? Yes d5D 67,a2:& v:k: ag, Problem Area? Yes No RePLACenel e.A./7— VEGETATION Species I %Cover Indicator I Species %Cover Indicator Trees Herbs F(4-.../e_ssio 0.5 _L.Ac ra_F44...1 A B 0 cszfw_Fi-Ps._ 1 S4 .....__.......PL-,____ _ _ _.__________ _hs_go't PuLc-A-6k tmt-A_____ lo __.F.IKA___ ---- - -- — -- _____ _____ ------ -- — -- • — -_ ___- __------ Shrubs R.d5A- ?istc A P•Pt"\ 2.o* . MC. -------- ...... ---- --- __F,...?..a,rs ..../(2.5 IN. Q.L_ LOT- mo _ frm(3— ---- -- -- 6-414,1_1,--0. cc4P-oor_A_ c s. L 0./41 CERA r/NIVoLc/cAt4rA_____ 10 ____ Pik __. ------------------ Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC* OBL: 4-( By Stratum 8o (it. 8S Number of Dominants FAC-g> UPL: 1 Relative 50%level: Zo 4'1 Total Dominants: 5 %Wetland Vegetation: 80 Relative 20%level: A 11 Wetland criteria met? ( j No Remarks: — -- — _ _ --- *Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW g>OBL? 2- Total FACW g>OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL g. ACU? i Total UPL g, FACU? Total FAC-? _ ositive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard.. Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water , Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit ----, .. Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil , No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves V ater Marks Lyeal Soil Survey Data Drift Lines "FAC-Neutral Test S iment Deposits Other(explain below) rainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? es No Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase):U.S __ __ Str_zy C L f L,cloonA 1 Drainage Class: P' '- Subgroup: Fklio0,QJ6,yi'1L r{•rEt'Le,6)0e LAS Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: /Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. A1—Ce_._.—.._......__Ls._— 60•(g. '> -1 1 _....._.. —--- ..._...__...... —_40.1- f',1!!. - (CMEK. ........ ..6)...i-_...._.._........_ fib_..__ JL_1 4/1,1_11)..1A-4., i.i. c do 5. cU I-iI.X T4_CJ$4..44__5t A-__K..LM c. '4. ^----.. • • Hydric Soil Indicators: I Histosol 1 Redoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List- ._ — _ Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) ! Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ yed or Low-chroma Colors 1 Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? No Remarks_ Co,acEvT R a,:rsefaS WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? 0) No Wetland? es No Remarks: EFElz.E,JCE 1--n(z a, -r.)R3e_D AREA ESCF.% t3 et) t rJ rlillIbil Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form K_LTRA1-1.2k S Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State , I N c."7. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: /%16.-r2G,6w, Project Number: /57 7 Investigator: jr j43 Date: 6 li51 cri Plot ID: 15 Plant Community: rAioinel f---00‘-r-ED win Normal Environmental Conditions? No Remarks: LeiNo>.1.,..z pmto.acx.,. Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? Yes dr) 30 Problem Area? Yes <E), _ iZ5pL4M e..A./ VEGETATION Species J %Cover I Indicator I Species I %Cover Indicator Trees Herbs 1,) 16-t . a_qC0.1U&.__e_iPSA L-N.KWIALE __.3 ._ PEE-Yelp-1A 50LAN fl4 1°1C+ _ Shrubs _12/11...cA-K-IS c, Lo 44- 20 ___ ----_____ CS!t (1-/•3 0 Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC g> OBL: 3 By Stratum 7..o Number of Dominants FAC- UPL: Relative 50%level: L/C 35- Total Dominants: Li %Wetland Vegetation: 7 S Relative 20%level: /8 I y Wetland criteria met? CM? No Remarks: — - *Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW OBL? 3 Total FACW OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL' .,FACU? I Total UPL FACU? Total FAC-? — Positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: _Secon dary Indicators: Inundated xidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines -Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? 1rraP No Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): \IEzaboR-T Stay(uty Lopy,v■, 1 Drainage Class: '' to� Subgroup: etc_ ARCe1PPL9c1. —S i Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. -....b-5.---=----A--- --I o_(K 3(. _.___... n _._._.........— ---- ... E --._._.... ,.3._.._1 _19*. Lit z. .11.01g....0/ .yfs,_3f/ C 3c,.._c M-1,Dthri,).cT.._......._.�L. r..._C.C_rt' ._LOA4 Hydric Soil Indicators: • Histosol doximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon 1 High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aq_uic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) Listed on National Hydric Soils List keyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? No Remarks. conIc6N7 Z_c%,►Zr._2E tE,Tgt _r 0,crO12,4:o ...gri'.ZosikleAa.../_Apo7c fAL16,LE4s WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No Wetland Hydrology Present? es No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? s No Wetland? COI No Remarks: Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KLTRAHASHI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State ASSOCIATES, r1VC Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: file---r2 ,6,‹ TQ� /E Project Number: /57-7 Investigator: 5ZEk)r S Date: et 3 q-I Plot ID: y Plant Community: uPely. 514X0a(sC>208 weTUNNo Normal Environmental Conditions? 4jall No Remarks: 6_/Ne4,2 xT cr r Sr up,./ 4,ZC- Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? Yes ' rot Problem Area? Yes No Rd PG'}C.EM VEGETATION Species I %Cover I Indicator I Species ( %Cover Indicator Trees Herbs ?Pi/EAR'S "�- - --- EQv/s 67-J4,A FAG • Shrubs IilJ13J5 Drs WC.o(Z l D r .- _1=.fz�k..I tJ,-)�Isitl �t l!� 10 _.raSA) --. 5__. _ 5C _S. .t4.r.Rn1 P\÷. 2.o 141, 06 10 __�OS?�us sroc..4,4 z.a SP(I A- D0 QC,,,1✓otS 1 t '2-0 FACW - -- Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC a OBL: 5 By Stratum \o p -to Number of Dominants FAC- UPL: p Relative 50%level: So 35- Total Dominants: 5 %Wetland Vegetation: (o0 Relative 20%level: Zp (c{ Wetland criteria met? 'al No Remarks: *Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20" rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW b OBL? y j Total FACW a OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL ACU? D I Total UPL b FACU? Total FAC-? "Positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: _ Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water — Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit t 2 l' Other(explain below) _ Depth to Saturated Soil 9" No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated ✓Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches C., Z a maturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves _ Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines vfAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? LYco No Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and phase): J ,k,at— Stc.T+{ LLj`/ Lai-en ; Drainage Class: eaoR Subgroup: L YPLL Adzi,Lik.u3pLcs Field Conformation of Mapped Type? I Yes Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. ..._._4v_..-1`1 ...x+13 .to`(R / _WrJA, `i/y it/,/c 104 is T/^1CT_i_COniotoA/. GL.47. (.0i4M _- P-1 4.7 _L....... /U 33 O _ G LA-"/ .. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol i - edoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon I High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils — Sulfdic Odor 1 Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or low chrome Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? Yes No Remarks: Lo6x ,J r/tA rof s • - � o ,•,* O,z t o li,42.0sioNea*'zireco LIf� NELS WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? es No Wetland? 6-s) No Remarks: P 11111N1 Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: ple---rz6,6,< jy_ Project Number: /577 Investigator: azeN)r 4/ 5 Date: ti 3 I Plot ID: I Plant Community: WI,Elz; wfi Normal Environmental Conditions? Cri5) No Remarks: Significant Disturbance(Atypical)? Yes 4 WO. ao Problem Area? Yes 491 Rep 4.4.c..6n4 VEGETATION Species I %Cover I Indicator I Species %Cover I Indicator Trees Herbs ._fHAL611.1.5_ kg.t1t-)0 I-MACE-A* _9 0 ._ ‘I.A.A.,‘,..etz tcgOCARPQS. b131– J26001,)c1/4.)(.-Qs (Zaren4s S F-Aci,•3 (1.6_0.4s-n s Tefot F Shrubs fa-)ra•->s Pe 5 c oc_o R. 5 __F-ACJ- it.bsotl- A./or/c4sa/4- 14- FA< Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: By Stratum I o Number of Dominants FAC- UPL. Relative 50%level: c Total Dominants: %Wetland Vegetation: Relative 20%level: 3 1.6 Wetland criteria met? Yes No Remarks: /o 42. coueRAGE osec. M J EOA D 0'1 ei")ce - —- *Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW o OBL? I Total FACW=>OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL FACU? Total UPL FACU? Total FAC-? Positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: ` Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil , No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated iCccidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves — Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) rainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? C'Ye) No Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and phase): Rdootcr- StCN CAA. _L ,_n Drainage Class: Tho(Z Subgroup: j yplc A(LC.,l Lgou_S 1 Field Conformation of Mapped Type? i Yes Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. 3.._.__ ._...A ��11.,__�j ._._ — .__. __.5.-_ r..N _.. _.. 44.)R_S_C's_i-1?AT7.N1(174....[gnA.n4o4 .s5(L,Pi CLAN.__LOhvA._.._...... Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol i -- doximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon 1 High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) - I Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ kBleyed or Low-chroma Colors I Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? es No Remarks: - , WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? s No Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KURAHASHI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State ASSOCIATES, N C. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: N 1 6 T 2‘, , -rid/x Project Number: J 7 Investigator: '32ENr 17q✓rs Date: Plot ID: (b Plant Community: ✓pi?e✓c-: wEr A►efta Normal Environmental Conditions? C', No Remarks: L,Ncxi,z /9x0,7ec.T: sr,),),/_ Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? Yes (E) (�Zoo'x 30 Problem Area? es No R5'PGr}C.EM EAJ7 VEGETATION Species f %Cover [ Indicator I Species I %Cover I Indicator Trees Herbs Q)Clzcus V ►j IS ')Pl. �_�r�asrls 14c iiA'� ZS — FAS _. PrcaPCC.,12JS PP.ArEr S4' Lo E.IC.�,J --.._. FESrJc /iRQotiof CWa'" 20 — _ L Q.J I SETA rin �l2J E s F 5 EAc FAC Shrubs Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC a OBL: 3 By Stratum 15 I oo Number of Dominants FAC-b UPL: Z Relative 50%level: 50 Total Dominants: S %Wetland Vegetation: too Relative 20%level: 20 Wetland criteria met? (C) No Remarks: AtoTE TIfE LACK OF FiAC..) MAIP vAt_ 46/741,466-0..4,5 ✓EGEr44T/on/ *Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20"rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST(OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW b OBL? 1 I Total FACW b OBL? I Total FAC+? 0 Number of Dominants UPL b FACU? + i Total UPL b FACU? I ,■Total FAC-? I Positive Aegetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit Other(explain below) _ Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secndary Indicators: Inundated ✓Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches ,5' Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FC-Neutral Test _ — Sediment Deposits .-Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? Yes No Remarks: OxivIzFD %aoT C14rIA LS SAG CST SA1%) Arin"I I a 1KG, ROOr 'QJJ!j±C THE •w,) I.JV 3ER.Sarl• I?,LOxIr,w,T`{— V o .CR,GE� SEG PA.c —_- Age.A WO%C. i c,tKrNfHoe2 C F S-0$6o/0 L SS P T't' t.I. A,EA- 'S t -J R. oPl'tAirJ SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase):Jc2eoe,2T SILT`{ Cry L.o*wA Drainage Class: To,g Subgroup: I i/f'IC Atz.c.i ALRe Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes ' Cr" Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. V-S I I g 3/2 5+ I Ala ro'{R • Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol edoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime i Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) I Listed on National Hydric Soils List 1.,6leyed or Low-chroma Colors . Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? '9 No Remarks: ,ace zAr,o.1% oxt a,zrc D rz-ooTc_et_ArJ,.eLS I....glite-AIWI leek WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? No Wetland? es No Remarks: P cue._ ARE ._ • _ . . 5a“.s Co-?LED tTH 5Ecc.") Aut_PGy R•■I t v• CC 3%..) "t"t r-7"4 .!'4 CAN-lcu lStoH 1'FtE A-REr4 t 5 sE'hSeNALLY 5orr4 r -ATc D. 51 nn ty.A . To ,,0ETLr'F,aAS odsERJc-Q g.634'..1 K E (i.e. PCC iecCK C/26-€K Glontlls} ' WHIM Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KURAHAS HI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State u5.' ASSCJC IATES, I r- c. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: Mt -rza, .z, TRJ�� Project Number: /577 Investigator: ?),ZEti1T- X4//5 Date: Plot ID: ti Plant Community: uP'6 . FIELD Normal Environmental Conditions? Yes No Remarks: LiNCAez p, Jc.Ts t 'c4___ Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? Yes No -(e2p°. Problem Area? Yes No PLA•C.6M CAJ7 VEGETATION Species % Cover I Indicator Species I % Cover Indicator Trees Herbs -- —. —.......w s ..._c l 0-oTA..—.. _... �-_ ......._.__ PL,_..._.__ -- -- Res-r o cot- A206-)1D VA(F.Ikn=20 — — ?1N1 0. _—Shrubs ,_17APL G u 5 LAN. XAC Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: I By Stratum t oc Number of Dominants FAC-a UPL: 3 Relative 50%level: So Total Dominants: L{ %Wetland Vegetation: -LS- Relative 20%level: 7_0 Wetland criteria met? Yes Remarks: "Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20" rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST (OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW a OBL? Q Total FACW a OBL? Total FAC+? Number of Dominants UPL a FACU? Z Total UPL a FACU? al FAC-? Positive egetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1 605 FAX 503.968.1105 HYDROLOGY Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit -- Other(explain below) Depth to Saturated Soil — No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches — Water-stained Leaves Water Marks _ _ _ Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits _ Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Wetland Criteria Met? Yes ME) Remarks: NJo 5G ?q.-f ov014- ..oc.} C�Ss4? EO_______ SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and phase)_ Veci_e.,z, SIS.'C`{ ct-Oo . (oAri Drainage Class_ pt-b( . Subgroup: "NM r_ 14-C. to'tl xA S Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Structure.etc. _ o- ;_.._A to Y2 3_/2 — l L ____(,2_...* i—..N6 1 to/ft 'i t — - { - ----- 1 S t c.ry (-LAY co►M, • Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Redoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? Yes No Remarks: - WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes .• Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 411M Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Wetland? Yes No Remarks: Routine On-site Wetland Determination Data Form KURAHA S HI Adapted from the Corps of Engineers and Division of State �' ASSOG[AYES.. 1r-4 C. Lands data forms (revised October 1996). Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Surveying Project Name: Me-rzr6-iz, �RUN� Project Number: /57 7 Investigator: -arze-,jr 1�4✓rs Date: c; (i3157 Plot ID: Plant Community: u w P e T- Normal Environmental Conditions? es No Remarks: Li.vci4rz RexT ef; Si✓vy Significant Disturbance (Atypical)? P No - 4 WO.x _3p' ___ SEkI a_LinJ(= _ Problem Area? Yes No C.ti/T VEGETATION Species % Cover Indicator I Species %Cover Indicator Trees Herbs S h r u b s Total%Cover Trees Shrubs Herbs Number of Dominants FAC OBL: By Stratum Number of Dominants FAC-o UPL. Relative 50%level: Total Dominants: %Wetland Vegetation: Relative 20%level: Wetland criteria met? Yes No Remarks: PLoT 11 .__ - 5 Co rat REE To Tc.Pc. / ✓DTI QA/ 'Indicates dominant species as determined by the"50/20" rule FAC-NEUTRAL TEST (OPTIONAL) Number of Dominants FACW b OBL? Total FACW 'OBL? Total FAC+? —_ Number of Dominants UPL b FACU? Total UPL b FACU? Total FAC-? Positive Negetive 12600 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard, Oregon 97223 503.968.1 605 FAX 503.968-1105 HYDROLOGY - Recorded Data: Field Data: Stream, Lake or Tidal Gauge Depth of Surface Water — Aerial Photographs Depth to Free Water in Test Pit — Other(explain below) _ Depth to Saturated Soil No Recorded Data Available: Primary Indicators: Secondary Indicators: Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in first 12 inches Saturated within first 12 inches Water-stained Leaves Water Marks Local Soil Survey Data Drift Lines FAC-Neutral Test Sediment Deposits Other(explain below) Drainage Patterns in Wetlands _Wetland Criteria Met? Yes (-NO2_ Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name(Series and phase): qF.R.3corxr Sck.-t"{ CLP.-i Lc flow Drainage Class: 'roe �� Subgroup: ¶` t)l A42-6.% ry�g Field Conformation of Mapped Type? Yes (WO) Profile Description: Depth(in) Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors(Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture,Structure,etc. _O--", I A 1 1(344- 3te — [o "1 1- '--...AAA ! t o'-{Q y/Z 1 — — ._..._.__._ 1 Slc_.7-((CL I La1 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol 1 Redoximorphic Features(describe below) Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime i Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions(Chemical Method) i Listed on National Hydric Soils List • Gleyed or Low-chroma Colors Other(explain in remarks) Wetland Criteria Met? Yes Vo Remarks: - WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes (V Is the Sampling Point Within a Hydric Soils Present? Yes Wetland? Yes fmv* Remarks: r4Ti o D s v — L£J IA 10� t S At $c�J li (4. ) 66 /4.01J-K.(DP.°r rH rj r or...)6 Tb t2E(A4-7-1,1 G ELE y no�./ 4 L# 7t efiof1.o(,OC,/. Appendix E F/oodp/ain Certification KURAHASHI & ASSOCIATES. INC. Civil En_ineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning Survt vine November 19, 1997 Lee Walker Unified Sewerage Agency 155 N First Street, Suite 270 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Subject: Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation (1577) Floodway and Floodplain Issues Dear Mr. Walker: I have reviewed the grading plan for the proposed Metzger Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project. It is clear that portions of the construction will occur within the Floodway and 100-year Floodplain of Ash Creek. Bases on my understanding that the project will not alter the existing grades within the FEMA 100-year Floodplain and/or Floodway, I hereby certify the following statements: 1) The proposed construction in the Floodway will not measurably alter water surface elevations or contribute to the cumulative effect of existing or anticipated development in the Ash Creek Basin. 2) The proposed construction in the 100-year Floodplain will not measurably alter water surface elevations or contribute to the cumulative effect of existing or anticipated development in the Ash Creek Basin. 3) The proposed construction will not measurably increase the velocity of flood flows in Ash Creek. If you have any questions or additional concerns about floodplain issues related to your project please call me(968-1605) Sincerely, J /ii Roger C. Sutherland, PE Director of Water Resources c. Brent Davis, KAI Rick Raetz,Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation 126(X) S.W. 72nd Avenue, Suite 100 Tigard. Oregon 97223 503.968.1605 FAX 503.968.1105 0 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping:l Be t ter Community PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 1/16/98 FILE NO.: SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR] 98-0001 FILE TITLE: METZGER SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE REHABILITATION APPLICANTS: City of Tigard Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) of Washington Co. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Lee Walker, Project Manager Tigard, OR 97223 155 N. First Street, Suite 270, MS 10 (503) 639-4171 Hillsboro, OR 97124 (503) 684-7297 (503) 648-8678/(503) 640-3525 OWNERS: Various Owners - List is available upon request. REQUEST: A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to replace and upsize an existing 24-inch sanitary sewer trunk line to a 30-inch line. LOCATION: The sanitary sewer trunk line located in the city limits of Tigard is within the Ash Creek Corridor and runs between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Spruce Street. There are eight (8) directly affected parcels that include: WCTM 1S135AA, Tax Lots 01901, 02000, 02500, 02600 and 03600; and WCTM 1S135AD, Tax Lots 00900, 01200 and 01300. ZONES: R-4.5, R-12, C-G, C-P AND C-N. R-4.5; Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre. The R-4.5 zoning district permits standard urban low density residential home sites and related utilities. R-12; Multiple-Family Residential, 12 Units Per Acre. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments and related utilities. C-G; General Commercial. The C-G zoning district provides for the provision of a wide range of commercial goods and services. C-P; Commercial Professional. The C-P zoning district provides sites for groups of businesses and offices within centers. C-N; Neighborhood Commercial. The C-N zoning district provides for convenience goods and services which can be sustained by a limited trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA:Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.54, 18.60, 18.62, 18.64, 18.84, 18.85, 18.100, 18.150 and 18.164. CIT AREA: Citywide CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY: DATE COMMENTS DUE: MONDAY-MARCH 30,1998 STAFF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: K HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: MONDAY-4/20/98 TIME: 1:00PM PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:30 PM CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:30 PM COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION VICINITY MAP K LANDSCAPE PLAN K NARRATIVE X SITE PLAN K WETLANDS DELINEATION X U.S. ARMY CORPS. OF ENGINEERS PERMIT K DSL COMPENSATORY MITIGATION REPORT K STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext. 317 SLR 98-0001 METZGER SAN.SEWER TRUNK LINE(1577)REHAB. "AMENDED"NOTICE OF 4/20/98 HEARING'S OFFICER PUBLIC HEARING /.W98 lveec .Seas- vac fit 7/4‘6,-/i ree or GI// /:s- ,s-z,„472,14c1 y 144t_, 7 R yriA UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY February 17, 1998 RECEIVED PLANNING FEB 1 8 1998 City of Tigard CITY OF TIGARD Mark Roberts 13125 SW Hall Blvd Ti Qard. OR 97223 Dear Mark: Re: USA's Metzger Sewer Trunk Please find the enclosed USA check to the City of Tigard for your Sensitive Area Review, in the amount of$1,240.00. If you have any questions please call me at 648- 8678. Sincerely, Lee Walker Project Manager Unified Sewerage Agency Enclosure 155 North First Avenue, Suite 270, MS 10 Phone:503/648-8621 Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 FAX:503/640-3525 CITY OF TIGARD March 16, 1998 OREGON Lee Walker UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY 155 North First Avenue Suite 270 MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97124 RE: Notice of Incomplete Submittal / SLR 98-0001 Dear Lee: This letter is in follow up to previous discussions we have had concerning the incomplete submittal that was made for the sewer line replacement in the Metzger Area. As we had discussed previously, the City will need signatures on the application or separate written agreement by the property owners of the affected properties and copies of the Grant Deeds for these properties, to proceed with the land use review process. Please feel free to contact me concerning this information. Sincerely, Mark Roberts Associate Planner, AICP c: SLR 98-0001 land use file 1998 Planning correspondence file is\curpin\SLR98-01.Itr 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON March 20, 1998 Lee Walker UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY 155 N. First Street, Suite 270 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Dear Lee: This letter is in follow-up to the sewer trunk line replacement application. The City Manager has signed the application, therefore, this application is considered complete. The Public Hearing concerning this request is schedule for Monday, April 20, 1998. One week prior to the hearing, we will mail you a copy of the staff report. If possible, please advise me if you have any concerns with the report before the Public Hearing, so that I can address those issues, and hopefully, avoid any unnecessary delays. Please feel free to contact me concerning this information. Sincerely, 4 • • , • Mark Roberts Associate Planner, AICP c: SLR98-0001 land use file 1998 Planning correspondence file I 1c u rp l a n\m a rk_r\m etz swr.d oc 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES • szs `fig - ooi CITY OF TIGARD . PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ;;,ap �tte�U.c`e�upmu"tty NON-RESIDENTIAL DOTE, -/3/ sw- 37/ q /11Qrk, 6re9 B. v APPLICANT: US/9 AGENT: /./ r/,i t k Phone:[ I Phone: I I PROPERTY LOCATION: V ADDRESS: ice., ,rivc091>4 4,41 Ty`or� Fein casi,h TAX MAP/TAX.LOT: 5.¢ 'an 35 NECESSARY APPLICATION[SI: _ oSdVe L.P.-x/5 Rekk h/ PROPOSAL DESCRIP1ION: Sac/ /".14k l%►e /17,119/49 % COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: R 645. 's/&P ZONING DESIGNATION: q,io/ C-P CITIZEN INVOLVEMAT E4sf- FACILITATOR: TEAM AREA PHONE: 15031 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size: sq. ft. Average lot width: ft. Maxis -- .5' sing height: ft. Setbacks: Front ft. Side ft. Rear •. Corner ft. from street. Maximum site coverage: °/a a andscaped or natural vegetation area: [Refer to Code Se I 1 ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partiti.a • ess7 Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of front-_- . ave a minimum 15 foot wide access easement. The depth of all lots shall not exceed '• - e average width, unless the parcel is less than 1 times the dot - o e applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.060-Lotsl CITY OF T16ARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 'r:O9-ItesideoUal aoollcatloo/Plannloa OeNrtreeet Section SPECIAL SETBACKS A Streets: feet from the centerline of --,-_ ____ Established areas: feet from -_`�_' Lower intensity zones: et, along the site's boundary. Flag lot: 10-foot sid r setback. [Refer to Code Section and 18.96] SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS •Building Height Exceptions - Buildings located in a non-residential zone tt-To ha eight of 75 feet provided that: ---— A maximum building floor ar i e area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; All actual building setbacks will be at least half (I/t) of the building's height; and :- The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. (Refer to Code Section 18.98.020] PARKING AND ACCESS Required parking for this type of use: Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): Secondary use required parking: Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): No more than 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimen • ned as compact spaces. Parking Stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 8 inches x 18 feet. • Compact parking space dimensions 8 feet x 15 feet. [Refer to Code Section 18.106.020] Handicapped Parking: All parking areas shall provide appropri tely 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 osted. Bicycle racks are requir for multi-family, commercial and industrial developments. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: . Minimum pavement width: All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: [Refer to Code Section 18.106 and 18.1081 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 NON-Residential eopiicetlooiPleooing Department SecUon WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor la •'- • of stairs. ramps or elevators of all commercial, institutional. and industrial uses, to the - - which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient •• - -c ions between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexxe—tTnless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neigiltrofing developments. [Refer to Code Section 18.108.0501 LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS Every d6mmercial or industrial building in excess of 10,000 square feet shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. [Refer to Code Section 18106.070-0901 CLEAR VISION AREA The City requires that clear vision areas be maintained_ betwee ree and eight feet in height at road/driveway, road/railroad, ancirclastircad interses. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the ab tng-si Bet's functional classification. [Refer to Code Section 18.1021 BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order to increase privacy and to either reduce or eliminate adverse noise or visual impacts be teen adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped bylffet 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 The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways.---Aaditional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1001 The required buffer wilt is which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: _ feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. In addition, sight obscuring screening is required along LANDSCAPING 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 of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees mus ave a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade---Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of theyjsapoSed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A minimum of one (1) tree for every severking 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. These design features may include the usedf Landscaped berms. decorative walls. and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. [Refer to Code Chapters 18.100.18.106 and 18.1081 CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 MOM-lesIdentlal application/Hannla,Department Section SIGNS 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 requesditional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be . permitted if the s_i9n proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code xception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. (Refer to Code Section 18.1141 SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides regulations for lands which are potentially unsuitable for development due to areas • within the 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas, on slopes in excess of 25 percent, or on unstable ground. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive lands areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. Residential development is prohibited within floodplains. __ (Refer to Code Section 18.841 STEEP SLOPES 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 18.84.040.B. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of 18.84.040.B.2 and 18.84.040.B.3. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY(USA]BUFFER STANDARDS,R a 0 96-44 Purpose: 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. Design Criteria: The vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet wide, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. 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 otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A gravel walkway or bike path, not exceeding 8 feet in width. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than 10 feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetation; and Water quality facilities may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of 10 feet with the approval of the Agency or City. CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of I NON-Residential application/Planning Department Section Location of Vegetated Corridor In any residential development which creates multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership. such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract. and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R&0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Design for SWM) TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS A tree pan 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, major partition, site development review. planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is .preferred over removal where possible. The tree plan shall include the following: • Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; • 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 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: Retainage of less than 25 percent 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 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D: Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50I percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; Retainage of 75 percent 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 18.150.070.D. (Refer to Code Section 18.150.025) MITIGATION 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. CITY OF T1811110 Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 NON-les,dspUIl appllcaUon/Planning Os artn ut Section 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. • (Refer to Code Section 18.150.070(D] SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION Prior to submitting a Subdivision land use application with the City of Tigard, applicani's--are requ ri ed to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washingto my Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. a ions will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirma approval from the County of the Subdivision Name 'Reservation. (Ce rveyor's Office: 648-8884) NARRATIVE The applicant shall submit a narrative which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. (Refer to Code Section 18.32) CODE SECTIONS 18.80 _ 18.92 18.100 18.108 18.120 18.150 18.84 18.96 18.102 18.114 18.130 18.160 18.88 18.98 18.106 18.116 18.134 18.162 18.164 IMPACT STUDY As a part of the application submittal requirements, applicants are required to include impact stud with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the developJ] ent on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum. the transportation system, including bikeways. the drainage system. the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact. the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected-fmpacts of the development. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32.Section.050) When condition of approval requires transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32,Section.250] 16H1111RHOOD Pill The applicant shall notify all property owners within 250 feet and the appropriate CIT Facilitator and th members of any land use subcommittee(s) of their proposal. A minimum of 2 weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout] CITY OF TIGARO Pm-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 N014-BesIdentlel epplicetlep/PIepnlnp Department Section BUILDING PERMITS Plans for building and other related permits will not be accepted for review until a land use appro as been issued. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. RECYCLING Applicant should contact franchise hauler for review and approval of site servicing compatibility with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTAC RSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Se cdo><t .1161 AOOITIOMAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: COinirle'1l'S c!J/t � lA � 67/- .=3 f/JS i o% 4;,97/5 - PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. v Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 ION-Residential application/Plannlag OepanmeatSaction • The Planning Division and Engineering Division will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10, to 20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard C'!7 Counc;1 . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. 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. PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. An Additional pre-application fee and conference will be required if an application pertaining to this pre-application conference is submitted after a period of more than six (6) months following this conference (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: 7 '/,q �, 10/( C CITY DEMAND PLANNING DIVISION PHONE: [503)639-4171 FAX: [503)684-7297 e:`Ioglplpetty\meuers intapp-c.mst (Engleesrloe Section:mitterilprtepp-c.eegl 71-Mar-97 CITY OF TIGAR0 Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 at 8 NON-IesIdeetlel eppllciUeuRleeelee Iepertmnt Section CITY OF TIGARD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT �r APPLICATION CHECKLIST 'l' . 'I CITY OF TIGARD The items on the checklist below are required for the succesful completion of your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be returned and submitted with all other applicable materials at the time you submit your land use application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. Staff: 7-1-1- v LS Date: -7/-061 7 APPLICATION & RELATED DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ✓ MARKED ITEMS A) Application form (1 copy) B) Owner's signature/written authorization C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed p� D) Applicant's statement No. of Copies oZ-O E) Filing Fee $ 12(-10 SITE-SPECIFIC MAPS)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ✓ MARKED ITEMS A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies 20 1 . Vicinity map t5 2. Site size & dimensions [� 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10°I°) iI' 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: tY (a) Floodplain areas (b) Slopes in excess of 25°/° / (c) Unstable ground d/ (d) Areas with high seasonal water table L� (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils PJ 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: / (a) Wildlife habitats la? (b) Wetlands 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings ems/ (b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level {Y 8. Location of existing structures and their uses 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources ra' 10. Location of existing utilities and easements / 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways ta/ LAND USE APPLICATION./LIST PACE 1 OF 5 B) Site Development Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . The proposed site and surrounding properties ❑ 2. Contour line intervals ❑ 3. The location, dimensions and names of all: (a) Existing & platted streets & other public ways and easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site ❑ (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension ❑ 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site ❑ (b) Parking and circulation areas ❑ (c) Loading and services area ❑ (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation ❑ (e) Outdoor common areas ❑ (f) Above ground utilities ❑ 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site ❑ (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ 7. Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ 8. The location areas to be landscaped ❑ 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques ❑ 10. The location of mailboxes ❑ 11. The location of all structures and their orientation ❑ 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies %-' The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: 1 . The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating: (a) General contour lines (b) Slope ratios (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report ❑ (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals ❑ (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION J LIST PACE: OF 5 D) Architectural Dr. lgs Indicating: No. of Copies - The site development plan proposal shall include: 1 . Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures proposed for use on-site 2. Typical elevation drawings of each structure E) Landscape Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 2.S.). • The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate: 1 . Description of the irrigation system where applicable ❑ 2. Location and height of fences, buffers and screenings ❑ 3. Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials ❑ 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions ca' (b) Erosion control measures that will be used it/ F) Sign Drawings: ❑ Sign drawings shall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 of the Code as part of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: ❑ H) Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Map Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . The owner of the subject parcel ❑ 2. The owner's authorized agent ❑ 3. The map scale (20,50,100 or 200 feet- 1) inch north arrow a • date ❑ 4. Description of parcel location and boundaries ❑ 5. Location, width and names of streets, easements and • er public ways within and adjacent to the parcel ❑ 6. Location of all permanent buildings on and • in 25 feet of all property lines ❑ 7. Location and width of all water co -s ❑ 8. Location of any trees within 6" - greater caliper at 4 feet above ground level ❑ 9. All slopes greater than ❑ 10. Location of existin: tilities and utility easements ❑ 11 . For major land •.rtition which creates a public street: (a) The pr•.osed right-of-way location and width ❑ (b) A s . ed cross-section of the proposed street plus any reserve strip ❑ 12. Any applicable deed restrictions ❑ 13. Evidence that land partition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION I LIST P'GE 3 OF 5 • , ' I) Subdivision Preiii ary Plat Map and Data Indicating No. of Copies 1 . Scale equaling 30,50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet ❑ 2. The proposed name of the subdivision ❑ 3. Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets o 4. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyer and designer (as applicable) ❑ • 5. Date of application ❑ 6. Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adjacent subdivision or names of recorded owner of adjoining parcels of un-subdivided land ❑ 8. Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at -foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater than 10% ❑ 9. The purpose, location, type and size of all the follow' g (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): (a) Public and private right-of-ways and easem- is ❑ (b) Public and private sanitary and storm sew,r lines 0 (c) Domestic water mains including fire hy. ants ❑ (d) Major power telephone transmission Ii es (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses ❑ (f) Deed reservations for parks, open aces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ 10. Approximate plan and profiles of pr osed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicate on the plans ❑ 11 . Plan of the proposed water distri tion system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire h drants ❑ 12. Approximate centerline profil showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision , ❑ 13. Scaled cross sections of oposed street right-of-way(s) ❑ 14. The location of all area subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ 15. Location, width & dir ion of flow of all water courses & drainage-ways ❑ 16. The proposed lot co igurations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots. ❑ 17. The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the location of proposed tree plantings ❑ 18. The existing es of the property, including the location of all structures and the prey nt uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to rem n after platting ❑ 19. Supplem tal information including: (a) Pr posed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ (b) Proof of property ownership ❑ (c) /A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements ❑ 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, wetlands & marsh areas ❑ 21 . If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION V LIST PACE 4 OF 5 J) Solar Access Calculations: ❑ K) Other Information No. of Copies 2-0 (A/ cis ddh cgiL /ao yew- r4re,c/rgin CYelI�Q h:UoginlpatrylmastersUild at.mst Mav 23.1995 LAND USE APPLICATION LIST PACE 5 OF 5 CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE CHECKLIST 1. Applications should be received preferably, a minimum of one week prior to scheduling on the Pre-App calendar (with exceptions, as approved by Mark Roberts, Will D'Andrea or Julia Hujdak). 2. The application is usually a plan (2 copies) and should contain the following information: A. Name, address, and telephone number of the applicant and agent if applicable. B. Site plan showing the proposed lot and/or building layout, drawn to scale. The iocaiion of the property in relation to the nearest street(s), location(s) of driveway(s) on the property and across the street are helpful in providing a more accurate assessment of issues. C. The proposed use(s). D. Tax Map(s) and Lot Number(s). E. Current owner of the property, if not the applicant. F. Topographic information with contour lines if possible. NOTE: If the above criteria is addressed, then a pre-application conference can be scheduled within 1 - 2 weeks on a Tuesday or Thursday morning, between the hours of 9:00 - 11:00, on a first come, first served basis. EFFECTIVE 7/1/96: $240.00 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE FEE I:PREAPP.DOC(DST)6/97 . June 1997 July 1997 August 1997 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pre-Apps (CD Meetings) 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 30 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 9A Kenneth 9A Too late Montgomery 10 Laurie Wall 635-9080 SDR 205-2374 10 Bill M. 11 Too late. 639-3453 15200 109th 11 Lewis Parsons, 639-7133 -7 8 9 10 11 -12 9A Leslie Sieg 9A No Pre-aps. 639-4179 St Brian has Anthony's meeting. Church 11 Sue Starker- Will discuss SDR 97-0005 14 15 17 18 19 11A Kara Hall 918-587-6158 SDR Cascade Blvd. 23 24 25 26 10A sheri 10A No Pre-aps. quaintance-burks Brian has another (8181 598-8657 meeting. mlp greenburg 8 29 31 • 9A Richard 9A Lee Walker - Aanderud USA Metzger 228-7571 SDR Trunk Line - Children's Day 648-8678 School 11 Liz &John Volpe RE: Sign Variance 11:10AM Friday,July 18, 1997