Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDR2007-00004 .r Community Development TIGARD Request for Permit Action TO: CITY OF TIGARD Building Division Services Coordinator 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 Phone: 503.718.2430 Fax: 503.598.1960 www.tigard-or.gov FROM: ❑ Owner ❑ Applicant ❑ Contractor ® City Staff (check one) REFUND OR Name: Douglas A. Fry INVOICE TO: (Business or Individual) Mailing Address: 22151 SW 55th Avenue City/State/Zip: Tualatin, OR 97062 Phone No.: 503-638-2414 PLEASE TAKE ACTION FOR THE ITEM(S) CHECKED (1): ❑ CANCEL PERMIT APPLICATION. ® REFUND PERMIT FEES (attach receipt,if available). ❑ INVOICE FOR FEES DUE (attach case fee schedule and explain below). ❑ REMOVE CONTRACTOR FROM PERMIT (do not cancel permit). Permit#: SDR2007-00004/PDR2007-00001 Site Address or Parcel#: 12625 SW 70th Avenue,Tigard,OR 97235 Project Name: Red Rock Retail Center Subdivision Name: NA Lot #: 00100 EXPLANATION: Application is void as of November 28,2007 pursuant to ORS227.178(4) -- exceeds 180-day period. Signature: Date: 12/7/07 Gary Pagenstecher Print Name: Refund Policy 4 1. The Director or Building Official may authorize the refund of: a) any fee which was erroneously paid or collected. 1 b) not more than 80%of the land use application fee when an application is withdrawn or canceled before any review effort has been expended. c) not more than 80%of the land use application fee for issued permits. d) not more than 80%of the building plan review fee when an application is canceled before any plan review effort has been expended. e) not more than 80%of the building permit fee for issued permits prior to any inspection requests. 2. Refunds will be returned to the original Payer in the same method in which payment was received. Please allow 1-2 weeks for processing refunds. FOR-©FFICE USE ONLY —.. Rte to Sys Admin: Date By Rte to Bldg Admin: Date By Refund Processed: Date By Invoice Processed: Date By Permit Canceled: Date By Parcel Tag Added: Date By Receipt# Date Method Amount$ I:\Building\Forms\RegPermitAction.doc Rev 07/26/07 III CITY OF TIGARD 5/31/2007 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 4:17:13PM Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD - Receipt #: 27200700000000002435 Date: 05/31/2007 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid PDR2007-00001 [LANDUS] Conceptual Plan Revw 100-0000-438000 6,083.00 PDR2007-00001 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 897.00 SDR2007-00004 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 6,854.00 SDR2007-00004 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 728.00 Line Item Total: $14,562.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DOUGLAS A FRY ST 2303 In Person 14,562.00 Payment Total: $14,562.00 cReceiptrpt Page 1 of 1 Gary Pagenstecher From: Gary Pagenstecher Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 8:20 AM To: tans Stout' Cc: Dick Bewersdorff; Kim McMillan; BPihas @aol.com; Dale Bushnell; janderson @adarchitects.com; Dianna Howse; Patty Lunsford; Dick Bewersdorff Subject: RE: REFUND REQUEST Attachments: ReqPermitAction.doc Lans, I have initiated the refund process with the attached request form. Please note that the refund policy (1.b) applied to this application will be 80% of the fees paid. Diana Howse, Permit Specialist (503-718-2430), will process the refund, which will be mailed within 2 weeks. Gary Original Message From: Lans Stout [mailto:LStout @tmrippey.com] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 6:45 AM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: Dick Bewersdorff; Kim McMillan; BPihas @aol.com; Dale Bushnell; janderson @adarchitects.com Subject: RE: CWS Site Certification I agree that there really is no different answer possible, and we are going to proceed that way. What do they have to do to get a refund on the prior fees paid? Thanks. Lans Original Message From: Gary Pagenstecher [mailto:Garyp @ tigard-or.gov] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 2:27 PM To: Lans Stout Cc: Dick Bewersdorff; Kim McMillan; BPihas @aol.com; Dale Bushnell; janderson @adarchitects.com Subject: RE: CWS Site Certification Lans, Our City Attorney agrees that your application is void as of November 28, 2007 pursuant to ORS227.178(4). As such, a new land use application will be required. As we understand, CWS Ordinance 70-20 requires that new land use permit applications accepted by the land use authority (Tigard) after June 1, 2007 must be accompanied by a Service Provider Letter dated on or after June 1, 2007. Therefore, as we discussed in our meeting on Tuesday it appears you will be subject CWS's revised standards. In the meantime, we look forward to your zoning map amendment application. Gary Original Message From: Lans Stout [mailto:LStout @tmrippey.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 11:44 AM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: Dick Bewersdorff; Kim McMillan; BPihas @aol.com; Dale Bushnell; janderson @adarchitects.com Subject: RE: CWS Site Certification Gary, did you get this, and is there anything we need to discuss before the pre-app? 1 • Thanks. Lans Original Message From: Lans Stout Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 8:06 AM To: 'Gary Pagenstecher' Cc: 'Dick Bewersdorff' ; 'Kim McMillan' ; 'BPihas @aol.com'; 'Dale Bushnell' ; 'janderson @adarchitects.com' Subject: RE: CWS Site Certification Gary: We have looked into the ramifications of applying the new standards, and they would present a significant impact on the mitigation requirements because enhancement of vegetated corridor no longer can be used for mitigation. Consequently, we need to consider ways in which the existing SPL can be kept alive. There are several important points here. First, the existing SPL references "commercial development" of the property, and not a specific application type. Therefore, it would be applicable to either a PD or SDR application. Most importantly, there actually is a SDR case open for this project, file number 2007-0004. I believe that this file was opened for the "Detailed Plan" component of the application, while the PD file was for the Conceptual Plan review. Finally, it is very important to note that both Julie Wirth in her conversation with me, and Astrid in her e-mail below indicate that it is the City's call as to how to handle this situation. Since the SDR application was never deemed complete, we can submit supplemental information to address all of the outstanding issues in the context of a "normal" SDR application, and continue to rely on the existing SPL from Clean Water Services. Once the zone change is approved, we can withdraw the existing PD application and simply proceed with processing the then-completed SDR application. I'm confident that this is a defensible position for the City, and will work for our client as well. Let's discuss in the pre-app next week, and confirm our plan. Thanks. Lans Original Message From: Lans Stout Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 8:43 AM To: 'Gary Pagenstecher' Cc: Dick Bewersdorff; Kim McMillan Subject: RE: CWS Site Certification Gary, thanks for sending this over. There certainly is a lot of fuzz on the words, but I think the first thing we need to do is really determine the ramifications of the new standards. Let's put this on the agenda for the pre-app for the zone change, which I expect Brad to submit soon if not already. Lans Original Message From: Gary Pagenstecher [mailto:Garyp @tigard-or.gov] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 3:15 PM 2 To: Lans Stout Cc: Dick Bewersdorff; Kim McMillan Subject: RE: CWS Site Certification Lans, It appears to me that your assessement is logical. However, according to Chuck Buckalou, Order 70-20 applies to any land use applications submitted after June 1, 2007, notwithstanding the standard 2-year valdity clause. Please review the message below from Astrid Dragoy on the validity of CWS provider letters vis-a-vis Order 70-20. If you withdraw the PD and resubmit for an SDR, I believe CWS will require the applicant to obtain a new SPL subject to Order 70-20 or, at minimum, a revised SPL that references compliance with the Order. Gary >>> "Astrid Dragoy" <DragoyA@CleanWaterServices.org> 05/29 5:07 PM >>> Andy: District staff has been working closely with you to get the Tigard Business Center project completed and issued under R&O 04-9. We were under the impression that the project was waiting on a Service Provider Letter (SPL) so it could enter Land Use at the City and therefore we felt that it was important to expedite the project. After issuing the SPL (May 2, 2007) we learned that the project was not ready to go in to Land Use and we tried to problem solve with the City as to how we could assist the project to get approved under R&O 04-9. One suggestion that we made (internally to the City) was that the June 1 2007 deadline be extended by 30 days to July 1, 2007. We believed this would give the project enough time to get into Land Use. We were wrong. The bottom line is that the language in Resolution and Order 07-20 is not flexible. The language states as follows: Resolved and Ordered that this Resolution and Order shall take effect for all development and construction permit applications received on or after June 1, 2007. More specifically: * New land use and building permit applications accepted by the land use authority on or after June 1, 2007 must be accompanied by a Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter dated on or after June 1, 2007 or one dated before June 1, 200 which specifically references compliance with this Resolution and Order. * Modifications to Service Provider Letters for land use or building permit applications which were accepted by the land use authority before June 1, 2007 will be reviewed and processed for compliance with the rules under which the Service Provider Letter was originally issued. * Construction drawings submitted for Site Development and/or Erosion Control Permits will be reviewed under this Resolution and Order if initially accepted by the District/City on or after June 1, 2007; earlier submittals will be reviewed under R&O 04-9. While District staff thought the language could be interpreted differently (allowing for 7/1/2007 submittals), it is ultimately up to the Land Use agency, not Clean Water Services to interpret this language. This is state law and we must defer to the City of Tigard to carry out this rule. 3 If you have any questions on this, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Astrid Dragoy Plan Review Supervisor Clean Water Services 503-681-5157 Original Message From: Lans Stout [mailto:LStout @tmrippey.com] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 1:17 PM To: Dick Bewersdorff Cc: Gary Pagenstecher; Kim McMillan Subject: RE: CWS Site Certification Old applies to me for sure, and I guess "experienced" too! My goal here, if it wasn't abundantly clear, is to keep the existing CWS Site Certification alive, withdraw the PD application that is still incomplete, apply for the zone change and then apply for Site Design Review. The catch is that I don't want to withdraw the PD until I'm sure the rest of it will fall in place. Brad Pihas was supposed to turn in the paperwork and fee for the pre- app for the zone change, but I'm not sure if he has yet. Lans Original Message From: Dick Bewersdorff [mailto:Dick @tigard-or.gov] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 1:12 PM To: Lans Stout Cc: Gary Pagenstecher; Kim McMillan Subject: RE: CWS Site Certification Lans: Nice job! Shows that old folks or should I say experienced, mature folks get it. Somehow, it appears things got might have gotten twisted. Gary P. can respond, he has the most difinitive background on the conversations. The zone change makes much more sense from the development side. Dick Original Message From: Lans Stout [mailto:LStout @tmrippey.com] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 10:42 AM To: Dick Bewersdorff Subject: CWS Site Certification «CWS Manual page 4.pdf» Dick. . . I was going to call you to talk about this, but decided to send the background first. This is back on Fry's site and how the PD versus SDR application would be effected by CWS Service Provider Letter status. The issue is that the existing SPL (Site Certification in their words) was issued in May of 2007, and the standards changed in June. Therefore the concern is how the existing SPL would be effected by withdrawing the PD application and resubmitting as a SDR. Julie Wirth at CWS says that the Manual changes may or may not significantly effect the mitigation requirements, but that the SPL is good for two years and that if there is any issue it would be up to the City to make the call. 4 As I read the applicable section of the manual, attached, the Site Certification has a life of two years notwithstanding any changes in the manual which might occur during that time. I don't see where it says I have to have an application in process at any given point, only that it has to be "complete" in two years or construction has to be underway. I also don't see anywhere that the City is given any prerogative to make a different call and apply the revised standards. Consequently as I see it the existing PD application is really irrelevant to the validity of the Site Certification, and I should be able to submit a SDR application using the mitigation approved in the existing SPL and be fine. I really think that the best way for all parties to proceed on this is for us to withdraw the PD application, apply to rezone and remove the PD overlay, and then apply for Site Design Review based on the site development and mitigation reflected in the existing documents. However, the status of the existing Site Certification is really important. Could you give this some thought and see if you agree with my logic? Thanks. Lans 5 r City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigara, _JR 97223 IN TIGARD- December 20, 2007 Douglas A. Fry 22151 SW 55th Ave. Tualatin, OR 97062 Re: Permit No. SDR2007-00004 Dear Mr. Fry: The City of Tigard has canceled the above referenced permit(s) and enclose a refund for the following: Site Address: 12625 SW 70th Ave. Project Name: Red Rock Retail Center Job No.: Refund: ® Check #54964 in the amount of$6,065.60. ❑ Credit card "return" receipt in the amount of$ . ❑ Trust account"deposit" receipt in the amount of$ . Notes: Application voided as it exceeds 180-day period. If you have any questions please contact me at 503.718.2430. Sincerely, .,; ,,579 Dianna Howse Building Division Services Coordinator Enc. I:\Building\Refunds\Administ ration\LtrRefund-CancelPermit.doc 01/16/07 Phone: 503.639.4171 • Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 f City of Tigard TIGARD Tidemark Refund Request This form is used for refund requests of land use, engineering and building application fees. Receipts, documentation and the Request for Permit Action or Refund form (if applicable) must be attached to this form. Refund requests are due to Tidemark System Administrator by Friday at 5:00 PM for processing each Monday. Accounts Payable will route refund checks to Tidemark System Administrator for distribution. Please allow 1-2 weeks for processing. PAYABLE TO: Douglas A. Fry DATE: 12/10/07 22151 SW 55th Ave. Tualatin, OR 97062 REQUESTED BY: Dianna Howse GBP TRANSACTION INFORMATION: Receipt#: 2007-2435 Case#: PDR2007-00001 SDR2007-00004 Date: 5/31/07 Address/Parcel: 12625 SW 70th Ave. Pay Method: Check Project Name: Red Rock Retail Center EXPLANATION: Application voided as it exceeds 180-day period. REFUND INFORMATION: Fee Description From Receipt Revenue Account No. Refund Example: [BUILD] Permit Fee Example: 245-0000-432000 $Amount [LANDUS] Conceptual Plan Revw 100-0000-438000 $4,866.40 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 717.60 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 5,483.20 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 582.40 TOTAL REFUND: $11,649.60 APPROVALS: If under$500 Professional Staff If under$7,500 Division Manager If under$22,500 Department Manager If under$50,000 City Manager If over$50,000 Local Contract Review Board FOR TIDEMARK SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY Case Refund Processed: I Date: I %v2//0 7 By: I:\Building\Refunds\RefundRequest.doc 05/23/07 CITY OF TIGARD 5/31/2007 II ■ 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 4:17:13PM Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TI GARD Receipt #: 27200700000000002435 Date: 05/31/2007 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid PDR2007-00001 [LANDUS]Conceptual Plan Revw 100-0000-438000 6,083.00 PDR2007-00001 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 897.00 SDR2007-00004 [LANDUS]SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 6,854.00 SDR2007-00004 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 728.00 Line Item Total: $14,562.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DOUGLAS A FRY ST 2303 In Person 14,562.00 Payment Total: $14,562.00 cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 1 ' Community Development Request for Permit Action 1,,_Arl) TO: CITY OF TIGARD Building Division Services Coordinator 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 Phone: 503.718.2430 Fax: 503.598.1960 www.tigard-or.gov FROM: n Owner ❑ Applicant ❑ Contractor ® City Staff (check one) REFUND OR Name: Douglas A. Fry INVOICE TO: (Business or Individual) Mailing Address: 22151 SW 55th Avenue City/State/Zip: Tualatin, OR 97062 Phone No.: 503-638-2414 PLEASE TAKE ACTION FOR THE ITEM(S) CHECKED (✓): ri CANCEL PERMIT APPLICATION. 'l /1 REFUND PERMIT FEES (attach receipt,if available). El INVOICE FOR FEES DUE (attach case fee schedule and explain below). n REMOVE CONTRACTOR FROM PERMIT (do not cancel permit). Permit#: SDR2007-00004/PDR2007-00001 Site Address or Parcel#: 12625 SW 70th Avenue,Tigard, OR 97235 Project Name: Red Rock Retail Center Subdivision Name: NA Lot#: 00100 EXPLANATION: Application is void as of November 28,2007 pursuant to ORS227.178(4) --exceeds 180-day period. Ae-AiA s FD 7o Signature: (, ` Date: 12/7/07 Gary Pagenstecher Print Name: Refund Policy 1. The Director or Building Official may authorize the refund of a) any fee which was erroneously paid or collected. b) not more than 80°40 of the land use application fee when an application is withdrawn or canceled before any review effort has been expended. c) not more than 80%of the land use application fee for issued permits. d) not more than 80%of the building plan review fee when an application is canceled before any plan review effort has been expended e) not more than 80°o of the building permit fee for issued permits prior to any inspection requests. 2. Refunds will be returned to the original Payer in the same method in which payment was received Please allow 1-2 weeks for processing refunds. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Rte to Sys Admin: Date By Rte to-1344 Admin: Date /i/ /o 7 By 7 Refund Processed: Date /02,0/0 7 By� Invoice Processed: Date By / Permit Canceled: Date 0 7 By Parcel Tag Added: Date By Receipt# 6 T,gy25 Date p 7 Method c etc__ Amount$ I:\Building\Forts\RegPermitAction. oc ev 07/26/07 City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, .JR 97223 • N TIGARD December 20, 2007 Douglas A. Fry 22151 SW 55th Ave. Tualatin, OR 97062 Re: Permit No. PDR2007-00001 Dear Mr. Fry: The City of Tigard has canceled the above referenced permit(s) and enclose a refund for the following: Site Address: 12625 SW 70th Ave. Project Name: Red Rock Retail Center Job No.: Refund: ® Check#54963 in the amount of$5,584.00. ❑ Credit card "return" receipt in the amount of$ . ❑ Trust account "deposit" receipt in the amount of$ . Notes: Application voided as it exceeds 180-day period. If you have any questions please contact me at 503.718.2430. Sincerely, "di>,4 Dianna Howse Building Division Services Coordinator Enc. I:\Buil ding\Refunds\Administration\LtrRefund-CancelPermit.doc 01/16/07 Phone: 503.639.4171 • Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 City of Tigard TIGARD Tidemark Refund Request This form is used for refund requests of land use, engineering and building application fees. Receipts, documentation and the Request for Permit Action or Refund form (if applicable) must be attached to this form. Refund requests are due to Tidemark System Administrator by Friday at 5:00 PM for processing each Monday. Accounts Payable will route refund checks to Tidemark System Administrator for distribution. Please allow 1-2 weeks for processing. PAYABLE TO: Douglas A. Fry DATE: 12/10/07 22151 SW 55th Ave. Tualatin, OR 97062 REQUESTED BY: Dianna Howse GBP TRANSACTION INFORMATION: Receipt#: 2007-2435 Case #: PDR2007-00001 SDR2007-00004 Date: 5/31/07 Address/Parcel: 12625 SW 70th Ave. Pay Method: Check Project Name: Red Rock Retail Center EXPLANATION: Application voided as it exceeds 180-day period. REFUND INFORMATION: Fee Description From Receipt Revenue Account No. Refund Example: [BUILD] Permit Fee Example: 245-0000-432000 $Amount [LANDUS] Conceptual Plan Revw 100-0000-438000 $4,866.40 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 717.60 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 5,483.20 [LRPF] LR Planning Surchargze 100-0000-438050 582.40 TOTAL REFUND: $11,649.60 APPROVALS: If under $500 Professional Staff If under$7,500 Division Manager If under$22,500 Department Manager If under $50,000 City Manager f` If over$50,000 Local Contract Review Board FOR TIDEMARK SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY Case Refund Processed: Date: a /d p B : 1:\Building\Refunds\RefundRequest.doc 05/23/07 prCITY OF TIGARD 5/31/2007 . 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 4:17:13PM Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt #: 27200700000000002435 Date: 05/31/2007 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid PDR2007-00001 [LANDUS] Conceptual Plan Revw 100-0000-438000 6,083.00 PDR2007-00001 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 897.00 SDR2007-00004 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 6,854.00 SDR2007-00004 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 728.00 Line Item Total: $14,562.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DOUGLAS A FRY ST 2303 In Person 14,562.00 Payment Total: $14,562.00 cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 i Community Development TIGARD Request for Permit Action TO: CITY OF TIGARD Building Division Services Coordinator 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 Phone: 503.718.2430 Fax: 503.598.1960 www.tigard-or.gov FROM: ❑ Owner ❑ Applicant ❑ Contractor ® City Staff (check one) REFUND OR Name: Douglas A. Fry INVOICE TO: (Business or Individual) Mailing Address: 22151 SW 55th Avenue City/State/Zip: Tualatin,OR 97062 Phone No.: 503-638-2414 PLEASE TAKE ACTION FOR THE ITEM(S) CHECKED (✓): CANCEL PERMIT APPLICATION. REFUND PERMIT FEES (attach receipt,if available). ❑ INVOICE FOR FEES DUE (attach case fee schedule and explain below). H REMOVE CONTRACTOR FROM PERMIT (do not cancel permit). Permit#: SDR2007-00004/PDR2007-00001 Site Address or Parcel#: 12625 SW 70th Avenue,Tigard, OR 97235 Project Name: Red Rock Retail Center Subdivision Name: NA Lot #: 00100 EXPLANATION: Application is void as of November 28,2007 pursuant to ORS227.178(4) --exceeds 180-day period. REC-RA/S % Signature: e Date: 12/7/07 Gary Pagenstedier Print Name: Refund Policy 1. The Director or Building Official may authorize the refund of a) any fee which was erroneously paid or collected. b) not more than 80%of the land use application fee when an application is withdrawn or canceled before any review effort has been expended. c) not more than 80%of the land use application fee for issued permits. d) not more than 80%of the building plan review fee when an application is canceled before any plan review effort has been expended. e) not more than 80%of the building permit fee for issued permits prior to any inspection requests. 2. Refunds will be returned to the original Payer in the same method in which payment was received. Please allow 1-2 weeks for processing refunds. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Rte to S•s Admin: Date B Rte to : .• Admin: Date / o B Refund Processed: Date %,2 p/P 7 By Invoice Processed: Date By Permit Canceled: Datei�a 7 By 4<-- Parcel Tag Added: Date By Receipt# 6 T-AY35 Date.s3, p 7 Method C/ C�� Amount$ I:\Building\Forms\RegPermitAction. oc ev 07/26/07 r ' t PRE-APP.HELD BY: 14 ., CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION '''' LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION Center 13125 'City of Tigard Pewit S �1 OR 972 � 120Phore S 9.4171 Fax SO598.1960 �N/Ty" 0,Mn; FT;,., .6)": File#Pa. otr7-DOoO f Other Case# 66e_ D.41.02_o C o ,-i Date ,61314 ,2 By .1- 4( Receipt# X6.1) 7°-:-`(3.5-^ Fee 1`r I 514"U� Date Complete , TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑Adjustment/Variance(I or II) ❑Minor Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) lePlanned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation(IV) El Conditional Use (III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑Historic Overlay(II or III) (Site Development Review(II) ❑Home Occupation(II) El Subdivision(II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY WILL QOCUR(Address if available) /26 z� 70 A� r ore) qi J z 5 TAX MAPS&TAX T NOS. 5/00446001.00 / a j� 70Tfb SITE SIZ '5 It /O/A f ev a(J Z APPLICANT* totAa7 l MAILING ADDRESS/QTY/SATE/ZIP 22 S1 SW 55-7" 11-1/*_. , "x`14.14-hN o — 970.6h PHONE NO. NO. a� 44 3� t33-- 0412.3 NTA P ONE NO. (nee R1 i (57,3) 330` ba PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLD ch list if more than one) MAILI ADDRE/QTY/STATE/LIP 1 Yi 5tA.) S-S-74 avec. ----7----c,..c.144,-)-). PHONE NO. F4-2%10. l '5 638- o Lfcg ( 3)6 3 8 bYz3 '` en the owner and the applicant are different people,the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) /!/,`4..be 0-74-a/ Q / `r►cA,t/ ce APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS"INFORMATION SHEET. is\curpin\masters\land use applications\land use permit app.doc THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true;and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued,based on this application,map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. 5/30-3 • , , J:nature , Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date /,44� s/l/01 Appl' if ent/ ' -presentative's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date e.4TK y e-a Li /1,5cle ekkrcZ. IL7-3673 1.,-i 1.01,24-44=4-. 9177• 7 ?l> b `T go. if v9- - fE1m10 SL fL 1 / Z S D (- S-fc-Z 35 7) ry,sb� � hl - -";=0 =2.OD. ,o, I ;00 r ,ec,.z 5,D14 1474; / / jtr c (ast imp r�v'��=C wiz v�r/o� _ �'"p wee 11J 3/ 1'4=27 ,ivbi 4190-17 Weee ACti-e----;(c.fi 5 c-walf-4.0 ce 7 441 Fk-7 p WN�72 �?nua1�i� oh' V r - ■•,• e ' 16/0 41/0/Ceee /C/W5 Z 7/ 1424 crO 7/26 /, l 7 DiuJe L3L2SJW7' A AideA4 /:/)( 1-4/.Sk &4ateei:, 11111 CITY OF TIGARD 6/4/2007 r 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 11:59:03AM . II Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt #: 27200700000000002464 Date: 06/04/2007 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid MISC Misc Fees(copies/labels/maps/prints)- 18.5000 @$1.0000 100-0000-451000 18.50 Line Item Total: $18.50 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Cash JOHN ANDERSON KJP In Person 19.00 Change C.O.T. KJP In Person (0.50) Payment Total: $18.50 cReceiptapt Page 1 of 1 RED ROCK CREEK RETAIL CENTER LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION PACKAGE SUBMITTED TO: CITY OF TIGARD SUBMITTED BY: COMMERCIAL TENANT ADVISORS AUGUST 1, 2007: PRE-APP HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISIO6>t6. , Iii LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATIONr9 �', , City of Tigard Permit Center 13125 SW Hall Bled, Tigard CA 97(223 r' Phone. 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 41,17 �'l-,.,, 1�0 1 File#pDe- c,-43-_,0 coo i Other Case# '�\ j_C`.�,L:.,' - ,�,4„,,,Y��J f�IL �-(j C +°a Date 4:::/;de -) By 5-- 4' Receipt# '-'14-31' l:;1`t 3� Fee i`t, 5"." --� Gu Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) El<3lanned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation(IV) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑ Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑ Site Development Review(H) ❑ Home Occupation(II) ❑ Subdivision(II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY WILL QCCUR(Address if available) /26 ? 7 Ake) r c/r 0/z) q7 j TAX MAPS&TAX L T NOS. ZfK SI'T'E SIZ 5 5/0/' /0d /0 7 /Aea ZONING CLASSIFICATION f APPLICANT* (20 LA hif. MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/VA 2-l) Si 5 U SSAA-vec. ; 1;4-1h Ore- °j1)0.62_-- PHONE NO. NO. C 5?3 NTJ $ 2-(-t 1 � t 38- b z3 ACPE c9)_ NE NO. �� -f (573) 33 0_65-2)t:' PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLD ch list if more than one) 1'01-r MAILING ADDRE/CITY/STATE/ZIP 22 151 5w SSA 4-vet, . 75.4-‘4.--n1-0 012- 11-206- PHONE NO. F O rpj 63F- 0 'ICS. 5 3)63 S _ bt23 " -en e wn r o e and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) eece4v !a-7‘..a fir)q—s.2/ Cei/ -1— APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. is\curpin\masters\land use applications\land use permit app.doc THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true;and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued,based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. - 5,30 d'7 • • s: s 1:nature 4 Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date 313/0/ App • t/ :ent/ ' "presentative's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date II. NARRATIVE NARRATIVE TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION A. Proposal Summary Information B. Project Design Team C. Proposal General Description Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map with Zoning Overlay II. CONFORMANCE WITH CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (Title 18) Section 18.350 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS Section 18.360 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Section 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Section 18.620 TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS Section 18.755 MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE STORAGE Section 18.765 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS Section 18.775 SENSITIVE LANDS Section 18.790 TREE REMOVAL Section 18.810 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS In. EXHIBITS(Drawings Reduced to 11x17 where necessary to fit binders) Exhibit 1 Pre-Application Conference Notes Exhibit 2 Ownership Information Exhibit 3 Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter Exhibit 4 State of Oregon,Department of Fish and Wildlife Comments Exhibit 5 Joint Permit: US Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Department of State Lands Exhibit 6 Hydrology Report Exhibit 7 Geotechnical Report Exhibit 8 Record of Neighborhood Meeting Exhibit 9 Lot 300 FAR Easement Letter Exhibit 10 Report of the Transportation Engineer Drawing PD A1.0 Site Location and Development Plans Drawing L1.1 Landscape Plan Drawing L1.2 Landscape Plan Drawing G1 Engineer's Title Sheet and Vicinity Map Drawing G2 Standard Abbreviations and Notes Drawing Cl Existing Conditions Plan Drawing C2 Proposed Site Plan Drawing C3 Grading/Erosion Control Plan Drawing C4 Tree Removal/Mitigation Plan Drawings C5-C8 Street Plans/Profiles Drawing C9 Parking Lot Elevations Drawing C10 Storm Sewer Plan/Profile Drawing C11 Wetland Mitigation and Restoration Plan Drawing C12 Waterline and Fire Protection Plan Drawing C13 Sanitary Sewer Plan/Profile Drawings Dl-D4 Engineering Details Drawing PD A7.0-A7.2 Building Elevations Drawing PD A3.0-A3.2Building Plans August 1,2007 Narrative Page 1 I. INTRODUCTION A. PROPOSAL SUMMARY INFORMATION Case File Number: SDR207-00004 Application Planned Development Concept Plan Detailed Development Plan Applicant's Agent: Anderson Dabrowski Architects, LLC 1430 SE 3rd Avenue Suite 200 Portland, Oregon 97214 Contact: Jon Anderson Phone: 503.239.7377 Fax: 503.239.7327 Developer/Planner/Applicant: Commercial Tenant Advisors 22151 SW 55th Avenue Suite 100 Tualatin, Oregon 97062 Contact: Brad Pihas Phone: 503.638.2414 Fax: 503.638.0423 Property Owner: Doug Fry 908 Deborah Road Newberg, Oregon 97032 Location of Property: 12625 SW 70th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97235 Map and Tax Lots: 25101 AB 00100 and 00300 Zoning Designations Tax Lot 100—C-G,Community Commercial with an existing PD,Planned Development Overlay Tax Lot 300—MUE, Mixed Use Employment Both Tax Lots fall within the Tigard Triangle Development Overlay Site Area Tax Lot 100 Existing Site 3.07 Acres New ROW Dedication 0.08 Acres Wetlands &Buffer 0.12 Acres Buildable Land 2.87 Acres Tax Lot 300 Existing Site 0.76 Acres New ROW Dedication 0.11 Acres Land Under Easement 0.65 Acres August 1,2007 Narrative Page 2 B. PROJECT DESIGN TEAM Developer Architect of Record Brad Pihas Jon Anderson, AIA NCARB Commercial Tenant Advisors Anderson Dabrowski Architects, LLC 22151 SW 55th Avenue Suite 100 1430 SE 3rd Avenue Suite 200 Tualatin, Oregon 97062 Portland, Oregon 97214 503.638.2414 503.239.7377 BPihas @AOL.com janderson@ADarchitects.com Civil Engineer Wetland Specialist Brian Lee, PE Andy Harris PACE Engineers Harris Stream Services 1300 John Adams Street 2270 Arbor Drive Oregon City, Oregon 97045 West Linn, Oregon 97068 503.655.1342 503. 699.9158 brianl @paceengrs.com harrisstreamservices @comcast.net Landscape Architect Transportation Engineer: Laurel Macdonald Bonnell Tom R. Lancaster Macdonald Environmental Planning, PC Lancaster Engineering 1022 SW Salmon Street Suite 222 321 SW 4th Avenue, Suite 400 Portland, Oregon 97205 Portland, Oregon 97204 503.224.1225 503.248.0313 lacdonald@mep-pc.com August 1,2007 Narrative Page 3 C= i, F C. PROPOSAL GENERAL DESCRIPTION Project Summary: The applicant,Commercial Tenant Advisors,is seeking to construct a new commercial development on property located to the east of 72nd Avenue and south of Dartmouth Street in the City of Tigard. The proposed project involves the following components: • A total of 5,028 square feet of restored, and unproved wetlands plus 152 square feet of restored Red Rock Creek tributary channel at the southeast corner of the intersection of 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street. • Three small to medium scale, one-storey,retail buildings with areas of 12,000, 10,725, and 10,700 square feet for a total of 33,425 enclosed square feet. • 162 parking spaces,of which 6 will be accessible. • 53,000 square feet of open space comprised of 43,300 square feet of landscaped area and 9,700 square feet of pedestrian walkway. • Substantial improvements to the streets on all four sides of the site with on-site allowances at 72nd and at Dartmouth for future expansion and turn lanes. yr ,..,;y Stet Stew,51 .' -.:y .(_ !•1 F.a C rte, R" C—G 1 ;ti r Mato_;: r . > Swt Yd119Y,:? cs s 411 MU a St S I n,s 5t `.'w z,� TE "'• ,w Ear S.4 52 SS.Funrf�cyr Ln Y^ s C� , x rrhov _,, ,C e ; \,,,,,,, , c,„:„,„ NI(� qo` wmm t h4..., w=a :a,A.,, Sv f;nza� St SY r �, l jc g MUE 3 o O? Inc, c a?vnv7eo _:MAPQIk7T Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map with Zoning Overlay August 1,2007 Narrative Page 4 Site and Context The existing site is 4.21 acres bounded on the west by SW 72nd Avenue, the north by SW Dartmouth Street, the east by SW 70th Avenue (to be built as part of the project), and on the south by SW Elmhurst Street(to be improved as part of the project) and by existing residences in the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zone. After street dedications and wetlands are subtracted,the buildable site area is approximately 2.87 acres. Both SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street are designated in the City's Transportation System Plan as major collectors and as Major Arterials in the Tigard Triangle. In addition the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street is designated a Focus on the Tigard Triangle Street Plan—Urban Design Concept— implying that the values of the Triangle Plan are especially important at the intersection which occurs at the northwest corner of the site. Tax lot 100 comprises the northern 80%of the site and is zoned C-G(Community Commercial)with a PD (Planned Development) Overlay. Tax lot 300 comprises the southern 20%of the site and is zoned MUE (Mixed Use Employment). In addition construction on tax lot 300 is restricted by an easement that allowed the FAR (Floor Area Ratio)to be transferred to benefit another parcel (SDR 98-00021). For purposes of the proposed development, tax lot 300 may only be developed as parking. The entire site is within the Tigard Triangle and is subject to the requirements of chapter 18.620 of the City of Tigard Development Code. Adjacent uses and zoning are as follows: • North and northeast across SW Dartmouth Street: a residence at SW 72nd Avenue with a vacant site east of that; zoned MUE (Mixed Use Employment). • East and southeast across SW 70th Avenue: three unremarkable office/service buildings at the north and southeast with a parking structure across from the south end of tax lot 300. All is zoned MUE(Mixed Use Employment). • South across SW Elmhurst Street at the eastern portion of the site and directly adjacent to the site at the western portion: single family residential in an MUE (Mixed Use Employment)zone. • West across SW 72nd Avenue: vacant land zoned C-G(Community Commercial) with a PD (Planned Development) overlay. • Northwest across the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street, big box commercial development in a C-G(Community Commercial) zone with a PD (Planned Development) overlay. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 5 II. CONFORMANCE WITH CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (Title 18) This section of the narrative includes discussions of how the proposed development conforms to the City of Tigard Community Development Code. Only Code provisions that contain applicable criteria or that otherwise require discussion related to the proposed development have been included. Except where it will aid clarity, discussion of issues occurs in the order in which they occur in the Code. Chapter 18.350 Planned Developments 18.350.020 A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. Discussion: The northern 80% of the site, tax lot 100, is in Zone C-G (General Commercial) with an existing PD, (Planned Development) overlay. The southern 20% of the site, tax lot 300, is in an MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zone. Because of a FAR(Floor Area Ratio) transfer easement (SDR 98-00021) on tax lot 300— see Exhibit 10, construction of enclosed structures may only be done on tax lot 100. For this reason, it is intended that tax lot 300 be dedicated to parking and the discussion of issues particular to the MUE zone are moot. B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1.The approval of the planned development concept plan; and 2.The approval of the detailed development plan Discussion: The application is for a combined Planned Development concept Plan and a Detailed Development Plan. The applicant has proceeded with the required Neighborhood Meeting, and the plan is a fairly simple and small commercial development, it is hoped that the planned development concept plan and the detailed development plan can be addressed simultaneously. 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone Discussion: The planned development overlay zone exists. No further action regarding a planned development application is anticipated. C. Decision-making process. 4.Applicants may choose to submit the concept plan and detailed plan for concurrent review subject to meeting all of the approval criteria for each approval... Discussion: Please see 18.350.20.B.2, above which refers to the limited size of the project for which application is being made. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 6 18.350.020.D 1. In the case of an existing planned development overlay zone, once construction of the detailed plan has been completed, subsequent applications conforming to the detailed plan shall be reviewed under the provisions required in the chapter which apply to the particular land use application Discussion: It is anticipated that the application will be reviewed by means of a Type III-PC procedure. Further information will be found in findings responding to the appropriate subsections of section 18.390.040 and chapters which apply to C- G, PD, and MUE zones and overlays. It is understood that future applications will be made under the specific chapters which apply to the specific land use application and not to the overlay zone. 18.350.030 A. Time limit on filing of detailed development plan Discussion: Applicant will comply with requirements of this section. B.Zoning Map Designation. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Commission. Discussion: No application is being made for an amendment to the existing zoning map. The planned development overlay zone has been approved previously. D Phased Development 1. The Commission shall approve a time schedule for developing a site in phases,but in no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than seven years without reapplying for conceptual development plan review. 2. The criteria for approving a phased detail development plan proposal are that: a.The public facilities shall be constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase; and b. The development and occupancy of any phase shall not be dependent on the use of temporary public facilities. A temporary public facility is any facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard. Discussion: The proposed Red Rock Creek Retail will be a partially phased development. The first phase will develop the public facilities; utilities, and wetlands as set forth in these standards. Later phases will involve the construction of the parking, pedestrian paths building pads, landscaping, and retail center buildings and completion of minor site features as required. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 7 18.350.030.D.2.b The elevations presented with the application are somewhat conceptual in nature, it is anticipated that development plans that depart significantly from the detailed plan will require submittal under the conditions of the code. It is not anticipated that development of all phases will take longer than seven years No temporary public facilities will be necessary—see 18.350.030.D.2.a & b Discussion. E. Substantial modifications to conceptual plan Discussion: Modifications affecting the Code requirements applying to the conceptual plan are not anticipated. G. Issuance of occupancy permits. Discussion: The Developer will comply with all requirements of City Planning and Building officials. 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type III—PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following: 1. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include a. A description of the character of the proposed development and the rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant. Discussion: A look at the City Zoning Map with the C-G zone jogging east on both sides of Dartmouth reveals the rationale behind the applicant's first and second assumptions, that the intersection of 72"d and Dartmouth is a good commercial location and that he should develop facilities for retail and service at the site. Looking at the Tigard Triangle Transportation Plan, it becomes clear that what the City considers a "Focus" intersection (72"d & Dartmouth) is also a kind of gateway to the eastern portion of the Triangle and that what happens on both sides of Dartmouth,just east of the intersection with 72"d will set the tone for much of the future development in the portion of the triangle east of 72nd. The applicant sees this as an opportunity to combine his own values of smaller scale, pedestrian friendliness, and respect for nature with those of the City in the development of the site. Thus he chose to retain and enhance the wetland and the portion of the Red Rock Creek tributary adjoining the intersection where the most people will see it. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 8 18.350.040.A.a He oriented two prominent, but smaller scale building facades toward the dominant streets, with parking and a larger scale building toward the interior and back of the site away from the intersection. He is choosing to reduce the scale of the buildings to the human, walking size by varying materials, proportions, and smaller aspects of scale. And,just as the forms of the entries and the grouping of the buildings around a central crossing area soften the transition from street to site, he is using the form of the walkways and such items as awnings to soften the transition from exterior to interior of the buildings. Most of the above issues have to do with perceptions of people using, or passing, the site. The choice of three medium size buildings broken into smaller sections on the exterior, but with the flexibility to develop into a variety of sizes on the interior— including just one large retail store, is economical. This is the result of the appreciation that small investments in the transitional elements of the buildings, materials, vertical scale, and both vertical and horizontal breaks in the surfaces at a variety of scales can provide significant gains in the users perceptions and comfort, while allowing simple, open interiors that allow for great flexibility. Two issues that may go unnoticed or underappreciated by passers-by are the beneficial effects of the restoration and enhancement of the wetlands at the "Focus" corner, the installation of a storm water retention field for on-site, hard surface runoff; and the wetlands function as a stream retention area which allows storm "surges" to be released slowly into the stream below (west of) the site. While certainly benefiting the developer, who, by running the portion of the Red Rock Creek tributary below ground gained a large area that would have been required as a buffer between development and the stream, he had the vision to simultaneously benefit the community by managing the flood surges of the stream and site runoff and creating and enhancing wetlands,both of which also serve to filter the water on its way to the sensitive wetlands in the valley below. b. An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning principles are utilized including any innovation in building techniques that will be employed Discussion: The architectural "style" of the development is best described as small retail vernacular. In many ways it is not special. No particular structural, material, or technical innovations make the buildings unique. What is innovative is the decision to use a mix of finishes, variety of scales, and both horizontal and vertical reveals at a variety of scales to bring the buildings to human scale. Of course, as stated above, the investment in restoring the Red Rock Creek tributary and its associated wetlands to a flow pattern one would expect in an unbuilt environment, while improving the water quality is an unusual commitment to nature and to the community. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 9 18.350.040.A c. An explanation of how the proposal relates to the purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010 Discussion: Please see the discussion of paragraph 18.350.040.A.1.a and b for responses germane to 18.350.010.A.1, 2. 3, and 6. Paragraph 5 is not applicable. Discussion of paragraph 4: The predominant landscape features are 9 second- growth Douglas Fir, a continuous slope from southeast to northwest, and a ditch through which the Red Rock Creek tributary runs from where it comes out of a culvert at about 70th Avenue to where it enters another culvert at 72nd Avenue. There is a small wetlands east of 72"d Avenue and south of the Red Rock Creek tributary that is dominated by invasive species. Most of the north of the site is a grassy area being overgrown by blackberry, hazel, ash, and willow. Towards the south portion of the site are more and larger ash and willow. d.An explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. Discussion: Relevant items in the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox were addressed by the Tigard Triangle Standards and Planned Development Standards which were addressed before the Toolbox was considered. So the proposal utilized those issues as addressed by the Code, but not directly via the Toolbox. 2. A general development schedule indicating the approximate dates when construction of the planned development and its various phases are expected to be initiated and completed. Discussion: Initiation of the construction schedule is dependent on the date of approval of the detailed development plan. Public improvements, sitework, and wetlands development will begin almost immediately with a hoped for completion date of September 30, followed by construction of the first building, for which a tenant has been tentatively identified, in approximately two to three months with completion after four to six months. Construction of the second and third buildings will proceed as soon as tenants have been identified for the second building and both should be complete four to six months after commencement. Landscaping will proceed as soon as it can be assured construction will not damage it and should be completed within a month after the final building. 3. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the planned development Discussion: The applicant currently has no specific intention. Such decisions will be market driven within the limits of the Development Code. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 10 18.350.040 B. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in Subsection A above, the conceptual development plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information, the detailed content of which can be obtained from the Director: 1. Existing site conditions; Discussion: See Engineering Drawing Cl Existing Conditions Plan, and the drawings attached to the Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter,Exhibit 2. 2 A site concept including the types of proposed land uses and structures, including housing types, and their general arrangement on the site Discussion: The site and buildings in this Planned Development are designed to fulfill the retail development needs of the community in a town center type setting. The differing building sizes and possible lease configurations allow for a variety of retail uses. Site: The placement of the buildings on the site has been carefully planned to take in account the design standards for the Tigard Triangle with the placement of the buildings occupy over 50% of the frontages on Dartmouth and 80% of the frontage on 72"d Avenue. Buildings A & B have been designed to provide dual facades, with large amounts of glass on the street frontages. Parking areas have been hidden to enhance the pedestrian experience. Canopies have been provided as an integral feature of the design of each building, providing weather protection for the users. In addition features incorporated in to the site from the "Commissioner's Toolbox" include such as the creation of off street pedestrian connections thru the site, and the use of meandering pathways along Dartmouth Street Over Buildings: The design of each building within this development is unique. Each building is distinguished from one another to create a townscape atmosphere, a sense of place which is unique to a development of this size. Building A will be primarily constructed of architectural metal panels, with composite metal panels used as accents. The exterior components of Building B will primarily be tan colored spilt face concrete masonry units, with brick and accented colored spandrel panels above the canopy. Building C will also utilize tan colored spilt face concrete masonry units base with stucco and ceramic tile inserts. The entrance parapet shall be stucco with stucco trim bands and cornices. All buildings will have aluminum storefront glazing systems with mullion patterns varying between different facades of the buildings. Significant advantages over standard development: The main advantage for this site of using the Planned Development Concept was the ability to enhance and combine the wetlands area and make it a valuable part of the site development. Additionally, the site, and the features incorporated into the development will provide a distinctive look in this area, and allow a pedestrian friendly environment. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 11 18.350.040.B 3. A grading concept; Discussion: See Engineering Drawing C3 for the proposed grading concept. 4. A landscape concept indicating a percentage range for the amount of proposed open space and landscaping, and general location and types of proposed open space(s); Discussion: See Architectural Drawing L1.1 and L1.2. The total open area, excluding the wetlands area, is 48.240 square feet, or 27.1% of the site, paved interior walkways leading from the street to the site interior and to building entrances total approximately 9,740 square feet. Landscaping covers 38,500 square feet. 5. Parking Concept; Discussion: Refer to Sheet C9 and the General concept plans, Sheet A2.0 and C2, Site Plan. The parking was developed on the site to insure the least disturbance with the natural site drainage. Also the below-grade treatment system at the central area of the site will be incorporated into the natural site drainage. 6 A sign concept; and Discussion: As the main entrance will be on 70th Avenue,signage will be designed to provide the feeling of a gate like entrance to the development. Signage will be constructed out of brick and spilt faced masonry units with perennial beds at the base using native plant materials 7 A streets and utility concept; and Discussion: See Engineering Drawings C5 through C8, C10, C12, and C13, 8 Structure Setback and Development Standards concept, including the proposed residential density target if applicable. Discussion: Setback: The Tigard Triangle development standards require a 0 foot minimum and 10 foot maximum setback for buildings fronting street rights of way. Both 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street require additional 11 foot set-asides for future right of way development. The buildings are required to provide a connection at the major corner of the site. However, the wetland fronting on 72"d Avenue requires a minimum 35 foot buffer zone. In the face of this apparent code contradiction, the applicant has elected to preserve the wetlands with appropriate setbacks in order to preserve this important amenity rather than adhere to a strict numerical interpretation of the setback rule. As us discussed further in Chapter 18.620, efforts August 1,2007 Narrative Page 12 18.350.040.B.8 to make the buildings visually accessible have been made in order to offset the loss of the direct corner connection. Development Standards: The Tigard Triangle development standards require that buildings occupy 50% of frontages along major arterial streets. The placement of the buildings on the site has allowed the buildings to occupy over 50% of the frontages on Dartmouth and, disregarding the wetland, 80% of the frontage on 72" Avenue. Buildings A & B have been designed to provide dual facades,with large amounts of glass on the street frontages. Other Development and Design Standards are addressed in the discussion of paragraph 18.350.040.B.2, above. C.Allowable Uses 2 In commercial zones: The intended uses are retail commercial and service. Both are allowed in commercial zones. 18.350.060 Detailed Development Plan Submission Requirements A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, the additional information required by 18.350.040.B and the approval criteria under 13.350.070. Discussion: Issues are discussed under the section where they are identified or, if identified in multiple sections, in the first section that identifies them specifically. B. Additional Information. In addition to the general information described in the Subsection A above, the detailed development plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information: 1. Contour intervals... Discussion: Please see Engineering drawings Cl, C3, and C5 through C11. 2. A specific development schedule indicating the approximate dates of construction activity, including demolition, tree protection installation, tree removal, ground breaking, grading,public improvements, and building construction for each phase. Discussion: Please see the discussion for section 18.350.040.A.1.a, above. Public amenities are intended to be complete by September 30, 2007. Following schedule items will be determined in large part by market forces. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 13 18.350.060.B 3. A copy of all existing and/or proposed restrictions or covenants. Discussion: Restrictions and covenants will be those determined by provisions of the development code. They are mentioned in the pertinent sections, but have not been developed fully at this time. Lot 300 has an easement, transferring floor area ratio to a nearby building. A copy of the easement has been attached as Exhibit 9. C. Compliance with specific development standards. Discussion: This section appears to address residential developments, and is not applicable except that the developer will meet the requirements of section 18.350.060.C.4.b.(1) 18.350.070 Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria A. Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria. A detailed development plan may be approved only if all the following criteria are met: 1. The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan Discussion: Documents for the concept plan are a portion of the documents for the detailed plan. No significant changes are anticipated. 3. Except as noted,the provisions of the following Chapters shall utilized as guidelines. A planned development need not meet these requirements where a development plan provides alternative designs and methods, if acceptable to the Commission,that promote the purpose of the chapter. In each case, the applicant must provide findings to justify the modification of the standards in the chapters listed below. The applicant shall respond to all the applicable criteria of each chapter as part of these findings and clearly identify where their proposal is seeking a modification to the strict application of the standards. For those chapters not specifically exempted,the applicant bears the burden of fully complying with those standards, unless a variance or adjustment has been requested. b. Chapter 18.705 ACCESS, EGRESS,AND CIRCULATION Discussion: The applicant intends to comply fully with this chapter. No exceptions are requested. c. Chapter 18.715 Density Computations Not applicable. e. Chapter 18.765, Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements; Chapter 18.780, Signs; Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas; Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Improvements; Sections 18.810.040 Blocks; and 18.810.060, Lots; August 1,2007 Narrative Page 14 18.350.070.A.3.e Discussion: No exceptions are requested. 4. In addition, the following criteria shall be met: a. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: (1) The streets,buildings and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible. The commission may require the applicant to provide an alternate site plan to demonstrate compliance with this criterion; Discussion: The streets, buildings and other site elements have been specifically designed and located to preserve the existing topography and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible. However, it was necessary to remove some Douglas Fir trees that would not have survived disturbance to their roots and/or changes in water available to their roots after parking was installed. These trees will be replaced with appropriate native varieties as noted on Engineering drawing C4. The bed of the Red Rock Creek tributary has been severely disturbed in the past, being run in culverts above and below the site and in an artificial ditch on the site. The result is that the creek no longer flows in a more-or-less steady state normal to its unbuilt past. After careful consideration, and discussions with Clean Water Services, the State of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a plan was developed to pipe the water from its entrance to the site to an enhanced existing wetland area at the northwest corner of the site where volume surges could be absorbed in temporary localized flooding. Storm water from the on-site parking areas and roofs will be diverted to a retention system as shown on engineering drawings C10 and D1 where it will be released gradually to encourage natural behavior of the wetlands. Please see engineering drawing C11 for a detail of the on-site wetlands. The purpose is threefold: better control of the flow of the Red Rock Creek tributary, restoration and improvement of the most prominent wetlands on the site, providing a valuable natural feature at the Focal intersection of the Tigard Triangle, and control and treatment of stormwater runoff from the hard surfaces and roofs on the site. Two other wetlands exist on the unimproved site. Providing adequate buffering space around these marginally defined areas would have made the site unfeasible to develop. Off-site mitigation was chosen as an alternative with a much higher impact, and non-City agencies having jurisdiction over such mitigation have issued permits to proceed. (2) Structures located on the site shall not be in areas subject to ground slumping and sliding as demonstrated by the inclusion of a specific geotechnical evaluation; August 1,2007 Narrative Page 15 18.350.070.A.4.a.(2) Discussion: A geotechnical analysis of the site which demonstrates compliance with this section accompanies this application as Exhibit 6. (3) Using the basic site analysis information from the concept plan submittal, the structures shall be oriented with consideration for the sun and wind directions, where possible; Discussion: Because the primary exposure of the site is to the north, with wind sheltering by trees on the south, and because the purpose of the buildings on the site respond more to the orientation of the buildings to the street and to parking than to solar orientation, it was considered unfeasible to orient the buildings to take sun and wind into extensive consideration. A serious effort was made to orient as much frontage to the on-site wetlands as possible, as this is considered a significant natural amenity. b. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: (1) Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, e.g., between single family and multi family residential, and residential and commercial uses: Discussion: Please see Landscape Plans L1.1 and L1.2 which demonstrate compliance with this requirement. (2) In addition to the requirements of the buffer matrix (Table 183745.1), the requirements of the buffer may be reduced if a landscape plan prepared by a registered Landscape Architect is submitted that attains the same level of buffering and screening with the alternate materials or methods. The following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy and extent of the buffer required under Chapter 18.745: Discussion: The landscape design described on Landscape Plans L1.1 and L1.2 conforms to the requirements of this section and to the requirements of Chapter 18.745. This statement is made in lieu of an extended, point-by-point discussion of chapter 18.745. g. Access and circulation: (1) The number of required access points for a development shall be provided in Chapter 183.705; Discussion: Please see Engineering drawings G2, C2 and C5 through C8. Please also see the Traffic Engineer's report attached as Exhibit 8. As the access points and street development conform to the requirements of Chapter 183.705 and the City of Tigard's Engineering Standards for the Construction of Streets, no further and/or direct discussion of Chapter 183.705 will be made. August 1, 2007 Narrative Page 16 18.350.070.A.4.g (2) All circulation patterns within a development must be designed to accommodate emergency and service vehicles; and Discussion: Please see Engineering drawing C2 which demonstrates the adequacy of the circulation design for emergency and service vehicles. (3) Provisions shall be made for pedestrian and bicycle ways abutting and through a site if such facilities are shown on an adopted plan or terminate at the boundaries of the project site. Discussion: Please see Engineering drawing C2. No such facilities abut the site. j. Parking: (1) All parking and loading areas shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.765; Discussion: Please see Engineering drawing C2, C3, and C9, and Architectural drawing PD A1.0 which demonstrate the conformance of the plan to this requirement. k. Drainage: All drainage provisions shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.810. An applicant may propose an alternate means for stormwater conveyance on the basis that a reduction of stormwater runoff or an increase in the level of treatment will result from the use of such means as green streets, porous concrete, or eco roofs. Discussion: Please see Engineering drawings C10, C11, D1, and D2. Drainage generally conforms to the requirements of Chapter 18.810 except that it is proposed to treat and convey stormwater via a stormwater treatment and retention field designed to release stormwater gradually to an emergent marsh and restored natural wetland where material not captured by storm drain filters will be degraded biologically and released to the adjacent tributary to Red Rock Creek. m. Shared open Space Facilities: The detailed development plan shall designate a minimum of 20% of the gross site area as a shared open space facility. The open space facility may be comprised of any combination of the following: Discussion: Open Space Facilities were discussed in section 18.350.040.B.4. While a portion of the site is set aside as a wetland,it is not included in the open space. The open space will be owned by the single owner of the property and maintained by the owner or his designee. It will be available for low intensity use by anyone who chooses to access it for legitimate purposes. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 17 18.350.070.A.4.m (4) The open space area shall be shown on the final plan and recorded on the final plat or covenants. Discussion: Please see Engineering drawing C2, Proposed Site Plan. Because of the nature of the open space in a commercial development, it is reserved for setbacks, buffers, required landscaping, and circulation. The site is not platted, and covenants are not required as intrusion into these areas would violate a number of Code requirements. Chapter 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 18.520.060 Additional Development and Design Guidelines b. Other site development standards: (1) All lighting fixtures shall incorporate cut-off shields to prevent the spillover of light to adjoining properties; Discussion: This requirement will be incorporated into the Architectural drawings and specifications. (2) Mechanical equipment, if located on the building, shall be located within the roof form of the building or enclosed within a screening structure, the design of which is consistent with the design of the building; Discussion: Screening parapets which comply with the requirements of this section are shown on Architectural drawings PD A7.0, PD A7.1 and PD A7.2. (4) All refuse and recycling containers within the district shall be contained within structures enclosed on all four sides and which are at least as high as the tallest container within the structure; Discussion: Locations of enclosures are visible on Landscape plan L1.1. They will be detailed on the Architectural construction documents. Their materials and details will be matched to the adjacent buildings. (5) Bicycle racks shall be provided on site. Facilities for a minimum of ten bicycles shall be provided for developments having 100 or fewer parking stalls, notwithstanding Section 18.765.050. For each 100 additional stalls, facilities for five additional bicycles shall be provided. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways. It is strongly encouraged that bicycle parking areas be covered; August 1,2007 Narrative Page 18 18.520.060.A.2.b(5) 162 parking spaces have been provided, requiring facilities for 15 bicycles. The racks will be of the serpentine type. Specific locations have not been identified but will be indicated on the construction drawings. (6) The site development plan shall incorporate a special feature at the corner of the site. A special corner feature can be a landscape feature, seasonal color planting area, sculpture or water feature. The feature shall provide a visual landmark and some amount of seating area; Discussion: The preserved and enhanced wetland and improved stream bed area at the intersection of 72"d Avenue and Dartmouth Street is expected to provide this feature. Locations for seating have not been identified at this time but would necessarily be located outside of the wetland area and buffer zone. (7) Parking areas shall be designed to minimize conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular movements. Parking area landscaping shall be used to define and separate parking, access and pedestrian areas within parking lots; Discussion: Landscape drawings L1.1 and L1.2 and Site Development drawing PD A1.0 demonstrate compliance with code requirements for layout of street access, circulation, parking areas, pedestrian access, and parking area landscaping. (8) The landscape design for the site shall include plantings which emphasize the major points of pedestrian and vehicular access to and within the site; Discussion: Landscape drawing L1.1 and L1.2 demonstrate compliance of the layout of parking area landscaping with the requirements of this section. (9) Site features such as fences, walls, refuse and recycling facility enclosures, and light fixtures shall be designed to be consistent with the scale and architectural design of the primary structure(s). Such site features shall be designed and located to contribute to the pedestrian environment of the site development; Discussion: Landscape drawing L1.1 and L1.2 show the locations of walls, refuse and recycling facility enclosures, and light fixtures. Details will be indicated in the Architectural construction documents. . (10) In multiple building complexes, buildings shall be located to facilitate safe and comfortable pedestrian movement between buildings. On sites which are adjacent to other properties within the community commercial district, building location shall be chosen to facilitate pedestrian and vehicular connections to buildings on those adjacent properties. Consideration should be given to locating buildings closer to the public street with entrances to the buildings from the public sidewalk, with no August 1,2007 Narrative Page 19 18.520.060.A.2.b(10) intervening parking or driving area. Corner locations are particularly appropriate for this treatment; Discussion: The discussion under paragraph 18.350.040.B.2, and drawing PD A1.0 demonstrate compliance with the requirement of this section. Pedestrian access to the site is adjacent to automobile access points, but internal circulation is far enough from the major streets to allow drivers time to react to pedestrians and for pedestrians' feeling comfortable when it is necessary to cross a vehicular path. (11) Opportunities shall be found for safe, convenient, and pleasant pedestrian connections to existing or proposed transit facilities. Where needed, shelters and layover areas for transit vehicles shall be incorporated into the site development. Discussion: The area surrounding the site is developing in an elongated block pattern with sidewalks on both sides of the streets. Access to bus on SW 68th Avenue is available by existing sidewalks at Dartmouth and Elmhurst Streets at the eastern corners of the site. No other transit is indicated in the area on Tri-Met maps. c. Sign design standards: All signage shall be an integral part of the architectural design. Discussion: Please see comments under section 18.350.040.B.6, for discussion of compliance with this requirement. Chapter 18.620 TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS 18.620.020 Street Connectivity A. Demonstration of standards. 1. Design Option a. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. Discussion: Please see engineering drawing C-2 Proposed Site Plan which demonstrates compliance with this requirement. b. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 20 18.620.020.A.1.b Discussion: Please see engineering drawing C-2 Proposed Site Plan which demonstrates compliance with this requirement. 18.620.030 Site Design Standards A. Compliance. 1. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials - Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Discussion: Please see the discussion in the Paragraph headed "Site" under 18.350.040.B.2, and engineering drawing C-2 Proposed Site Plan for demonstration of compliance with this requirement. 2. Building setback- The minimum building setback from public street rights-of- way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. Discussion: Please see Engineering Drawing C2—Proposed Site Plan, with attention to the locations of the Rights of Way. A more extensive discussion of the requirements of this sections was made under paragraph 18.350.040.B.8 in the Discussion paragraph headed "Setback". 3. Front yard setback design - Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway Discussion: Please see Engineering Drawing C2—Proposed Site Plan for the demonstration of compliance with this requirement. 4. Walkway connection to building entrances -A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway... Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. Discussion: Please see Engineering Drawing C2—Proposed Site Plan for locations of walkways at building entrances. A conflict exists between preserving a significant natural feature—a wetlands area— and placing an entrance at the intersection of 721 and Dartmouth. The applicant considers the wetlands both a valuable natural element, and a worthwhile contribution to the awareness of the community of the importance of its August 1,2007 Narrative Page 21 18.620.030 endangered natural resources. Therefore he has elected to preserve the wetland and set the building back from the corner by the depth of the wetland plus the depth of the buffer required. The treatment of the building aligned with 72"d is intended to open the view of the wetland to the occupants and allow a visual connection between people using the street and the interior of the building, thus offsetting some of the building to corner connection lost in the preservation and improvement of the wetland area. 5. Parking location and landscape design - Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. Discussion: Please see Engineering Drawing C2—Proposed Site Plan for the demonstration of compliance with this requirement. 18.620.040 Building Design Standards A. Non-residential buildings. 1. Ground floor windows - All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50%of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings Discussion: Architect's drawings PD A7.0 through PD A7.3. Building Elevations demonstrate compliance with this requirement. 2. Building facades - Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off-set of at least 1 foot... Discussion: Architect's drawings PD A3.0 through PD A3.3 Building Plans, and PD A7.0 through PD A7.3 Building Elevations demonstrate compliance with this requirement. 3. Weather protection- Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Discussion: Architect's drawings PD A3.0 through PD A3.3 and PD A7.0 through PD A7.3 demonstrate compliance with this requirement. The dashed lines on the plans indicate solid, structured awnings. 5. Roofs and roof lines— Discussion: Architect's drawings PD A7.0 through PD A7.3 demonstrate compliance with this requirement. Roofs are expected to be flat, built-up or membrane type. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 22 18.620.040.A 6. Roof-mounted equipment - All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets... Discussion: Architect's drawings PD A7.0 through PD A7.3 show screening for the mechanical equipment, constructed of the same materials as the building facades. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. 1. Zoning district regulations - ... non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone, 18.780.130D. Discussion: All signs will comply with the requirements of section 18.780.130.D. These requirements will be passed on in the form of lease requirements or covenants. Details will be shown on the Architectural construction documents. Further discussion of the designs considered is located after section 18.350.040.B.6, above. 2. Sign area limits, and 3. Height limits. Discussion: All signs will comply with the requirements of section these sections and with the requirements of 18.780.130. . Leases and/or covenants will require that these standards be maintained. 4. Sign location-Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. Discussion: Signs will not be places within the required L-1 landscape areas. As discussed in the response below section 18.350.040.B.6, a smaller sign at the entry from Dartmouth will direct drivers to the 70`h Street entry, and a larger sign, identifying the development will be placed at the entry from 70th. Neither area is a required buffer area. Leases and/or covenants will require that these standards be maintained. 18.620.060 Entry Portals Discussion: The project is not located at a primary access point into the Tigard Triangle. 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening A. 1. L-1 Low Screen—and 2. L-2 General Landscaping - ... planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. August 1,2007 Narrative Page 23 18.620.070.A.1 Drawings L1.1 and L1.2 Landscape Plans regarding placement and types of landscaping and screening demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this section. 18.620.080 Street and Accessway Standards ACCESS WAYS Discussion: Drawing C2 - Proposed Site Plan demonstrates compliance with the requirements of this section. Chapter 18.755 MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLE STORAGE Discussion: The Architect will assure that directions for the contractor(s) to abide by the requirements of this Chapter will be included in the construction specification. Chapter 18.765 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS Table 18.765.2 Requires a minimum of 3.7 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of sales oriented General Retail use. Discussion: Projected parking area available allows approximately 162 spaces. Solely considering the above requirement,43,784 square feet of tenant space could be built. The design proposed consists of a total of approximately 33,400 enclosed square feet. The balance of building area to parking in this case is driven by the market, and conforms easily with the minimum Code requirement. 18.765.030 General Provisions D. Parking in mixed-use projects Discussion: Although a variety of general commercial uses are considered, all of the uses considered for the development fall under the category of"General Retail Use" so the value for that category 3.7 per 1000 square feet was used. Chapter 18.775 SENSITIVE LANDS 18.775.020 Applicability of Uses: Permitted, Prohibited, and Nonconforming D. Jurisdictional wetlands. Landform alterations or developments which are only within wetland areas that meet the jurisdictional requirements and permit criteria of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Division of State Lands, CWS, and/or other federal, state, or regional agencies, and are not designated as significant wetlands on the City of August 1, 2007 Narrative Page 24 18.775.020.D Tigard "Wetland and Streams Corridors Map", do not require a sensitive lands permit. The City shall require that all necessary permits from other agencies are obtained. Discussion: The subject site is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Division of State Lands, and CWS, and therefore is not subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.775 Chapter 18.790 TREE REMOVAL Discussion of the relevant sections of Chapter 18.790 is at the bottom of the portion of this narrative headed "Chapter 18.790 Tree Removal". Non-relevant sections have been removed to provide clarity. 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement A. Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot... for which a development application... planned development... is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. B. Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: 1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; 2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: a. Retention of less than 25%of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18.790.060D of no net loss of trees; 18.790.060 Illegal Tree Removal D. Guidelines for replacement. Replacement of a tree shall take place according to the following guidelines: 1. A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species taking into consideration site characteristics; August 1,2007 Narrative Page 25 18.790.060.D 2. If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value; Discussion: Engineering drawing C4 Tree Removal and Mitigation Plan demonstrates compliance with the requirements of this section. Chapter 18.810 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS 18.810.020 General Provisions, 18.810.030 Streets, 18.810.040 Blocks, and 18.810.070 Sidewalks, Discussion: Engineering drawings G2, Cl, C2, C4, C5, C6, C7, and C8 demonstrate the intended compliance with these sections. 18.810.080 Public Use Areas Discussion: Landscape drawings L1.1 and L1.2, and the discussion under Section 18.350.040.B.4 demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this section 18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers Discussion: Engineering drawings C13 and D4 demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this section. 18.810.100 Storm Drainage Discussion: Engineering drawings C3, C5, C6, C7,C8,C9,C10, C11, D1, D2, and D3, the discussion under Section 18.350.070.4.k demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this section. 18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways Discussion: Landscape drawings L1.1 and L1.2 and Architectural Site Development drawing PD A1.0 demonstrate compliance with code requirements for layout of street access, circulation, parking areas, and pedestrian and bicycle access. 18.810.120 Utilities Discussion: Please see Engineering drawings GI and C12, for domestic water. Construction specifications will require contractor(s) to coordinate with power and communications providers to run service underground during installation of street improvements and other contractor controlled utilities. END OF DISCUSSION August 1,2007 Narrative Page 26 III. EXHIBITS EXHIBIT 1 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES °.- (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) aTIGA RT FEAT?` rVIG DE • /y NON-RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: 1),_)-hEvj itc =-4<( ,i/c'e/ifT&2.rs AGENT: Phone: ( ) Phone: ( z G;t):11 PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: ot/Zi i V 22 r 4v/e- TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): 2..S /0/ 413 6C 1(ND n 3 c)cC NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: / .VT PG ?A-N.4-z?, 1-)2"--41f4“-L,'( ,r,) PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: ' /f���j`� ���1fX�S-S f�`�ZIE".' �� /.�5� Sf'b'kx'E �z�`f'/�'-��'�.�14c= • ;.: �J.(efx.=y:c 31, �-C z`'' . /(24-12/441.5 y1CG` COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Lne--) ,t( C;rit'��ktecO� i�1< ��� � �S )74.e �� 1 ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: C & IONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18. .5 2 o I MINIMUM LOT SIZE: C) sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: ft. Max. building height: 45 ft. Setbacks: Front ) ft. Side ft. Rear ft. Corner ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: %. ZilEIGHBORHOOD MEETING [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED PARTIES, AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 NON-Residential AppricationfPlanning Division Section 7] NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18.3901 The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. IMPACT STUDY [Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.0501 As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. ACCESS [Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.7651 1 �/ Minimum number of accesses: / Minimum access width: 4,0 /��-� . Minimum pavement width: 21.f1 c' All driveways and parking areas exbept for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: >7 WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.705.030) WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. I I SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) > STREETS: feet from the centerline of > LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. > FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. I SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS [Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.8. BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: > A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; > All actual building setbacks will be at least half ('/z) of the building's height; and > The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chanter18.7451 In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS applicable to your proposal area are: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. I feet along south boundary. 1 o feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: SA ! V LANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.705) STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. (RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Pride Disposal can be reached at (503) 625-6177. PARKING [Refer to Code Section 18.765.0401 G c ( 1 -"7 •/o& sr• i'""�' s 3 3 / �� REQUIRED parking for this type of use: 3� �� , � Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): h: BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Section 18.765) 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. I/1 SENSITIVE LANDS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7151 The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DERAl.NAGEWAYS, WE TLALIDLAREAAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will wilr attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. I I STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Cotle Section 18.775.080.C) When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall , include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. /CLEANWATER SERVICES[CWS)BUFFER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 31 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 WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION & ORDER 96-44 SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTH OF VEGETATED TO SENSITIVE AREA 4 CORRIDOR PER SIDE5 • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 10 to <50 acres 15 feet ► >50 to <100 acres 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres • Natural lakes and ponds • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% 30 feet 10 to <50 acres >50 to <100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in • Natural lakes and ponds <25%slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine' 4Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. SVegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 6The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet,if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section 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 provided for in the CWS Design and Construction Standards. 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. ki..____i,,,,CWS vder Letter: PRIOR Ser TO ice SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the R&O 96-44 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. VSIGNS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.180) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review.7 1 TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.190.030.CJ A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. 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 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: 0 Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; 0 Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two- thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; 0 Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; 0 Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; > Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and > A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. MITIGATION [Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.EJ REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section > 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: 1 The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. > The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN-LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. VCLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1951 The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.060] MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot-wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2% TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. CODE CHAPTERS _ 1 8.330(Conditional Use) V 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) /18.760(Nonconforming Situations) - 18.340(Director's Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ✓ 18.765(off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) 18.350(Planned Development) 18.640(Durham Quarry Design Standards) ..__ .1 8.775(Sensitive Lands Review) 18.360(Site Development Review) _ V 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) V 18.780(Signs) 18.370(variances/Adjustments) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) - 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(Tree Removal) - 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) V18.795 Visual Clearance Areas) 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) V 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) _ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) //--' 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) - 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.740(Historic Overlay) _ 18.430(Subdivisions) 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) V 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) - 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) _L 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. 1/ 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. The Planning counter closes at 5:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2" x11". One, 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project shall be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Applications with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section 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-day public appeal period(7/17,..follow all Ianc,/use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard -z ,il ( A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is ilable from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to 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). / 1 PREPARED BY: ( T7'1� G am._- "�-E'2 'l' CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING IVISI 1 AFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX: S 3-684-7297 DIRECT: 503-718-...2 V3Y EMAIL ©tigard-or.gov TITLE 18(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNET ADDRESS: www.tigard-or.gov H:Ipatty\masters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 12-Feb-07 (Engineering section: preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 NON-Residential ApplicatioriPlanning Division Section PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES • TIGARD X ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION < City of Tigard,Oregon CommunitycDeveCoptnent ShapingA Better Community UBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map[s]: 2S101AB Tax Lot[sl: 100 a 300 Use Type: SDR The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: IX SW 72nd Avenue to 46 feet (Arterial - appears to have been dedicated in 1999) X SW Dartmouth Street to 36 feet from centerline (Collector) with an 11 foot preserve ROW (currently 35 feet of ROW from centerline). Additional ROW required for radius at 72nd and 70th Avenues. X SW 70th Avenue to 30 feet from centerline (full 30 feet dedication from this property) [7f SW Elmhurst Street to 60 feet (alignment must match Elmhurst to the east of 70th) Street improvements: X Half street improvements will be necessary along SW 72nd Avenue, to include: • 33 feet of pavement from centerline ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 13-foot concrete sidewalk with tree wells ® street trees sized and spaced per Triangle Standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. •Y OF 11GARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 leering Department Section Other: [X Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Dartmouth Street, to include: ® 22 feet of pavement from centerline ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 6-foot concrete sidewalk with 7 foot planter strip ® street trees sized and spaced per Triangle Standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. [ I Other: ® Full street improvements will be necessary along SW 70th Avenue, to include: Z 36 feet of pavement from curb to curb ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 12-foot concrete sidewalk ® street trees sized and spaced per Triangle Standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: X Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Elmhurst Street, to include: ® 18 feet of pavement from centerline plus 6 feet on other side of centerline ® concrete curb • storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 12-foot concrete sidewalk ® street trees sized and spaced Triangle Standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: I I feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb [ I storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk street trees —TY OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 ,neering Department Section I I street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1.) (2.) Overhead Utility Lines: X Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW 72nd Avenue and Elmhurst. If a fee-in-lieu is proposed the request must be approved by the City Engineer. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is located in Dartmouth Street. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to extend the public sewer in 72nd Avenue, 70th Avenue and Elmhurst Street. Water Supply: The Tualatin Valley Water District (Phone:(503) 642-1511) provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: Eric McMullen, (503) 612-7010] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. OFT1GARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 eering Department Section Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. On-site detention is required. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on- site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ( Construction of an on-site water quality facility. Payment of the fee in-lieu. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. 1) Must provide Traffic Impact Analysis (see attached). Must also provide analysis of the p.m. peak trip contributions to Dartmouth/68th, Dartmouth/72nd and 72nd/Hwy 217. Contact Jason Grassman with ODOT for any additional Traffic Report requirements. 2) 18.705.030.H.1 Provide preliminary sight distance certification for all access points and intersections of 70th/Dartmouth and 70th/Elmhurst.--/1cv 3) 18.705.030.H.2 & 3 These code sections must be addressed,in the Land Use application narrative. Adjustments may be required. /i7/ 4) 18.810.030.Q.5 Must provide primary access off of 70th Avenue not Dartmouth per this code section. 5) Application needs to address Chapter 18.810 6) Focal Point contribution may be required. • OF TiGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 eering Department Section --AFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. Pay the TIF °IMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for any final design-related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in `V OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Bering Department Section cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. ..JADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: Imo' , ID. ! 4. O(p ENGINEERING D 'AR MENT STAFF DATE Phone: (5031639-4171 Fax [5031624-0752 ..ment3 Ised. September 2,2003 1 of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 3ering Department Section EXHIBIT 2 OWNERSHIP INFORMATION C O N co ca 7/1/06 TO 6/30107 REAL PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT a o � �WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON •155 lU FIRST AVE.,RM 130•HILLSBORO,OREGON 97124 o tip o PROPERTY DESCRIPTION [MAP: 2S1 1AB-00300 k I ACCOUNT NO: R456973, co i SETUS: 0 CODE AREA: 023.81 ' ACRES .90 1 200G-2007 CURRENT TAX BY DISTRICT: I .4' t. FRY, DOUGLAS COLL-PORTLAND 21.68 p ESD-NW REGIONAL 11.79 SCHOOL - TIGARD 3B2.47 rn SCH-TIGADD/TUAL/AFTER LOL 76. 66 EDUCATION TAXES: $492.60 23077 SW MEWLAMD RD WASHINGTON COUNTY 172.35 W{LSONV]LLE, OR 97070 REG-METRO SERVICE 7.41 PORT-PORTLAND 5.37 VALUES: LAST YEAR THIS YEAR nzEZ>�_TV FIRE & RESCUE 21.68 MARKET VALUES: CITY-TZGARD 192.65 LAND 423, 350 423,350 TV FIRE & RESCUE LOL 19.17 STRUCTURE 0 0 GENERAL GOVERNMENT TAXES; $513.87 TOTAL RMV VALUE 423,350 423,350 BOND-WASHINGTON COUNTY 15.41 TAAZRr.lz 1rkr,UF9- BOND-METRO SERVICE DI51' 13.92 ASSESSED VALUE 74,430 76, 660 BOND-PCC 15.80 BOND-SD #23-TIGARD 68.24 PROPERTY TAXES: $1, 216.54 $1,207 .48 BOND- TV FIRE & RESCUE 3.39 BOND-CITY OF TIGARD 16.37 I APPEAL DEADLINE January 2nd,2007 BOND-TRI-MET 7.46 Value Questions Call 503-646-8828 SCH-TIGARD/TUALATIN-AFTER 60.42 Tax Questions C211 503-846-8801 BOND AND HIBC TAX: $201.01 S Personal Property Questions Call 503-846.8741 b, Other Questions Call 503-846-8741 2006-07 TAX (Before Discount) $1,207.48 b PROPERTY TAX PAYMENT OPTIONS (See back of Statement for payment instructions.) � Pay Due Discount Net Amount Due 2 In Full 11/15/06 36.22 $1,171.26 213 11/15/06 16.10 $785.59 in 11/13/06 NONE $402.50 PLEASE MAKE PAYMENT TO Washfngton County Tax DELINQUENT TAXES Np DELINQUENT TAXES DUE i— Make Online Payments at: (.See back for explanalion of taxes marked with an asterisk(`), N tg Delinquent Tax Total is iricltrded in payment options b Ieft.) ° https:ll ecomm.co.wachingfoe.or.riiprapertytas TOTAL (After Discount): $1,171.26 iv Pay by Phone at (888)510-9274 All Payments Processed Upon Receipt L- . 7/1/06 TO 6/30/07 REAL PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT r8 WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON •155 N FJRST AVE..RM 130`HrLLSSQRO,OREGON 97124 f PROPERTY DESCRIPTION I IMAP; 2S11AB-00100 ACCOUNT NO: R45694S ~` co ° "SITUS: 12625 SW 70TH AVE, - CODE AREA: 023.81 N ACRES 3.19 I 2006-2007 CURRENT TAX eY DISTRICT: 1-, N COLL-PORTLAND 82.69 '- EBD-NW REGIONAL 44.97 .,y SCHOOL - TIGARD 1,458.84 a �e SCH-'lI(;:7HD/TU?L/AYTAR L4I� 292.40 � m SDUCATZON TAKES: - $1x876.50 FRY, DOUGLAS 23077 SW NEWLAND RD WASHINGTON COUNTY 557.40 WILSONViLLE, OR 97070 REG-METRO SERVICE 28.25 !VALUES: LAST YEAR THIS YEAR j PORT-PORTLAND 20.5G J FIR1-2V FIRE & REScuH 445.97 MARKET VALUES: CITY-TIGARD 734.83 LAND 1,446,590 1,445,590 TV FIRE & RESCUE Lox, STRUCTURE 0 0 73.10 TOTAL RM4V,VALUE 1,445,590 1,446,590 GENERAL aOVH8r7MaNT TAXES: $1,960.45 TAXA ELL VALUES: BOND-WASHINGTON COUNTY 58.77 ASSESSED VALUE 283,890 292,400 BOND-METRO SERVICE DIST 53.10 BOND-FCC 60.26 BOND-SD 123-TIGARD BOND- TV FIRE & RESCUE 260.27 PROPERTY TAXES: $4, 640.10 $4,605.59 12.92 ----, BOND-CITY OF TIGARD 62.43 APPEAL DEADLINE January 2nd, 2007 BOND-TRI-KEY 28.45 Vaiue Questions Call 503-846.8826 SCR-TIGA D/TUA ATIN-AFTER Tax Questions Cal!503-846-880 766.64 BOND Personal Property Questions Call 503-846-8741 AND bSISC TAX: $766.64 Other Questions Calf 503-845-8741 S 2006-07 TAX (Before Discount) $4,605.59 w PROPERTY TAX PAYMENT OPTIONS D w cg P (See back of Statement for payment instructions.) , ,,..)q 1 c'S< -Z------- b Pay Due Discount Net Amount Due In FulI 11/15/06 138.17 $4,4 67.42 1 J g 2(3 21/15/04 61.41 $3,009.99 1113 11/15/06 NONN $1,535.20 I I PLEASE MAKE PAYMENT TO:Washington County Tax 1 DELINQUENT TAXES: I NO DELINQUENT NQU]3Nr' T11$g$ DUE Make Online Payments at: (See back for explan ation("flexes/narked with an asterisk(7. . littps_//ocamai.co.rvashiagton.ar.uslprapertytax TOTuent Tax Total Is induced in payment options la me l ,) �- a� Pay by Phone at: (888)510-9274 TOTAL (After Discount): $4,467.42 j0.0. All Payments Processed Upon Receipt EXHIBIT 3 CLEAN WATER SERVICES SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER File Number CleanWater Services 07-000354 Our commitment is clear. Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter Jurisdiction Washington County Date May 02, 2007 Map &Tax Lot 2S101AB-00100, 00300 and Owner 1 S134BD-00200 Site Address Applicant Harris Stream Services Tigard, OR 97223 Address 2270 Arbor Dr West Linn, OR 97068 Proposed Activity Commercial Development on tax Phone (503) 866-0901 lots 2S101AB-00100,00300; Off-Site Mitigation on tax lot 1 S134BD-00200 This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards 1R840 04-9). _ YES NO j YES NO Natural Resources I Alternatives Analysis Assessment(NRA) X i Required X Submitted ( (Section 3.02.6) District Site Visit X Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis Date: X Concur with X Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis X submitted information Sensitive Area Present On-Site X Tier 3 Alternatives Analysis X Sensitive Area Present Vegetated Corridor Off-Site X Averaging X Vegetated Corridor Vegetated Corridor Present On-Site X Mitigation Required X Width of Vegetated Variable 25 feet to 50 feet On-Site Mitigation X Corridor(feet) 1,445 sf Condition of Vegetated Good/Marginal/Degraded Off-Site Mitigation X Corridor 115,177 sf Enhancement Required X Planting Plan Attached X Encroachment into Enhancement/restoration Concurrent with site Vegetated Corridor X completion date development (Section 3.02.4) - - Buildings/Parking: � 45,376 sf X Type and Square Footage Wetland Creation: Geotechfical Report of Encroachment i required 16,157 sf ROW:1,676 sf Allowed Use (Section 3.02.4) X Conditions Attached X j This Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. Page 1 of 9 File Number 07-000354 In order to comply with Clean Water Services (the District) water quality protection requirements the project must comply with the following conditions: 1. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the sensitive area which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.3. 2. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the vegetated corridor which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.4. 3. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction the vegetated corridor and water quality sensitive areas shall be surveyed, staked, and temporarily fenced per approved plan. During construction the vegetated corridor shall remain fenced and undisturbed except as allowed by Section 3.02.5 and per approved plans. 4. Prior to any activity within the sensitive area, the applicant shall gain authorization for the project from the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The applicant shall provide the District or its designee (appropriate city) with copies of all DSL and USACE project authorization permits. 5. An approved Oregon Department of Forestry Notification is required for one or more trees harvested for sale, trade, or barter, on any non-federal lands within the State of Oregon. 6. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) for Erosion Control, in accordance with the CWS Erosion Control Technical Guidance Manual shall be used prior to, during, and following earth disturbing activities. 7. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from the District or its designee is required pursuant to Ordinance 27, Section 4.B. 8. The District or City/County shall require an easement over the vegetated corridor conveying storm, surface water management, and/or sanitary sewer rights to the District or City that would prevent the owner of the vegetated corridor from activities and uses inconsistent with the purpose of the corridor and any easements therein. 9. Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with Section 3.13 of R&O 04-9. 10. Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the greatest extent practicable. 11. Removal of invasive non-native species by hand is required in all vegetated corridors rated "good". Replanting is required in any cleared areas larger than 25 square feet. 12. Should final development plans differ significantly from those submitted for review by the District, the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and if necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider Letter. Page 2 of 9 File Number 07-000354 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 13. The vegetated corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum of 25 feet for isolated wetlands less than 0.50 acre and 50 feet for perennial streams and hydrologically connected wetlands, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive area. 14. For vegetated corridors 50 feet wide or less, the entire vegetated corridor shall be equal to or better than a"good"corridor condition as defined in Section 3.02.7, Table 3.2. 15. Clean Water Services shall be notified 72 hours prior to the start and completion of enhancement/restoration activities. Enhancement/restoration activities shall comply with the guidelines provided in Landscape Requirements (R&0 04-9: Appendix D). 16. Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the vegetated corridor shall be removed. During removal of invasive vegetation care shall be taken to minimize impacts to existing native trees and shrub species. 17. Enhancement/restoration of the vegetated corridor shall be provided in accordance with R&O 04-9, Appendix D. 18. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction, the applicant shall provide the District with the required vegetated corridor enhancement/restoration plan in compliance with R&O 04-9. 19. Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with Section 2.11.2 of R&O 04-9. If at any time during-the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80% survival level, the Owner shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity and the two year maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting. 20. Performance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2. 21. For any developments, which create multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership, the District shall require that the sensitive area and vegetated corridor be contained in a separate tract and subject to a "STORM SEWER, SURFACE WATER, DRAINAGE AND DETENTION EASEMENT OVER ITS ENTIRETY"to be granted to the city or Clean Water Services. 22. The water quality swale and detention pond shall be planted with District approved native species, and designed to blend into the natural surroundings. Page 3of9 File Number 07-000354 CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS 23. Final construction plans shall include landscape plans. Plans shall include in the details a description of the methods for removal and control of exotic species, location, distribution, condition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preserved, and installation methods for plant materials. Plantings shall be tagged for dormant season identification. Tags to remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes. 24. A Maintenance Plan shall be included on final plans including methods, responsible party contact information, and dates (minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September 30). 25. Final construction plans shall clearly depict the location and dimensions of the sensitive area and the vegetated corridor (indicating good, marginal, or degraded condition). Sensitive area boundaries shall be marked in the field. 26. Protection of the on-site vegetated corridors and associated sensitive areas shall be provided by the installation of permanent fencing and signage between the development and the outer limits of the vegetated corridors. Fencing details to be included on final construction plans. This Service Provider Letter is not valid unless CWS-approved site plan is attached. Please call (503)681-3613 with any questions. ._ . --f•-- - a,g‘ Julie Wirth Environmental Plan Review Attachments ( 5 ) Page 4 of 9 COMMUNITY "A" - GRASS 1 1 DEGRADED CONDITION e '° . '"e - .° d a d.. •• i.• � a .. _ , .. • ""d ':d �" f. d . .. a -- . A . . . • . .. . ems- . •• N., NI, W .L -.Y Vr di 4, y y y y y At y y , 4, y y y �����iiii� 1 ��i� //_/_/r-.--i%���%I I //-7, 44_ 10' SLOPE EASEMENT .� .v .1. i .� .� ./2�, ii/���A /����/� / ����� r /P ii///Illiiiiiii///////// �ii f"iS///�/�//// %%iii�////��/iiiiii //// ` iiiiiiii% ii%�/// T T T y" // I// ii�i������ii���//�� �'��I//iii�i//�111 RED ROCK CREEK TIGARD ROW / - - - - * iF * * ( * y W W y �' W W SP-1 W 126 LINEAL FEET j y .� y w y y y N y y 522 SF, ± 0.012 ACRES ' / < 0 (3 E) z) 0y , IF *lex,♦,4 - - * �� V 0 0 4 y y . sp. V, y 4, 4, �, y y y 4, y y sl' y .I, y 4, y `� x N, y' y y * 4 STREAM DITCH TIGARD ROW 4 * SP * * ♦ y W sl, y y y y `1, y `I' 682.35 SF, ± 0.02 ACRES 1 . )(SP=8 • . f Q * =01 y RED ROCK CREEK (TBC) WETLAND #1 y SP-4 WETLAND ;3 TBC f * * -at- YOX 0 571 LINEAL FEET 602 SF « 1V1 4- it s* 3,585 SF, ±0.08 ACRES I( i 5,734 SF ACRES ± 0.01 ACRES � ( * JO - It Y L * SP * TREE COMMUNITY "E" TREES st, . - xSP-3 - 0 It WETLAND ;3 TIGARD ROW , 4 * x DEGRADED CONDITION YSP-6 4 fir* 3,132 SF, ±0.07 ACRES ;* t * ;* • SP-10 COMMUNITY "D" — GRASS i - - N T ZeX `v' DEGRADED CONDITION * * T * 0 • WETLAND ; Ø : * * * � WETLAND #2 l+, x SP-5 * 4,529 SF 1'` * ± 0.10 ACRES COMMUNITY "C" - TREES TIGARD RIGHT-OF-WAY ' �* 0 4 GOOD CONDITION �DE (3 le3 4 COMMUNITY "B" - TREES GOOD CONDITION CU/ J • —oo03Sy Approved Clean Water Services - ,G.it v w- "i a.... ..I ?I...., £ e 1 1 B y. .A u> Date ---a-o9- 3 ?� - c4en-c. 17 / S PLAN SCALE �� ;, "' n - 0 25 50 75 100 125 MIMI _ ��� . R DESIGNED - • 1300 Jdm AdantS Sheet DRAWN - A ' . 0 OR S CITY OF TIGARD DATE JOB Boa NUMBER BER CHECKED - p.503155.1342If.503.655.1360 RED ROCK CREEK EXISTING VEGETATED CORRIDOR MAP SHEET NAME MODEL RI GW�SNdual I Phmmg I SuveY SCALE _ APPROVED BY - TIGARD BUSMESS CENTER - SHEET of 13 REVISION DATE BY M Egin..Yq Santa Cmp.F paceflngre-Wm I ?�q I I I , STA: 1+08.38 »_ - --- 1 j.. :r I ? ?s. STA: 0+00 CONSTRUCT NEW 48` STANDARD STA: 2+11.1 N8737.84. E7 74.26 MANHOLE PER DETAIL XXXXX FURNISH AND INSTALL I INSTALL NEW CLEANOUT I_E IN(N) 231.40 NEW CATCH 'ASIN 1 PER DETAIL XXXX% I IN(S)) 234.88 INRTADL,91 XXXXX� BASIN PE E.•I. .-- -- _ _ -- -- --4- - - _ _- -_. LE 240.30 L .. ��' - - -- ---=- - - ry RIM 245.47 RIM 2 36.91 I. IN E 000.00 LE 231.91-- --h' FINISH GRADE AT I.E OUT 000.00 DARTMDU7t1 STREET ;' zso - - L[ ITJIIf1[1IF_` -a -_.i__ � i�a O _- I ._-L-_.-._...-._ - _ 8I _ ! 1 I -I #3__ _1 2- ,.n ? ' __ NEW 48` PVC. L=276.8 0030 ' ® - 240 - _-_•L -s- �--- aL. - - - - I- -.I _ -I--- t>t w., r m i 0 `-=-=-- � _e_•1-_ - - - ���12,8^38_ -vvova. j''�' r1 1 1 _ - I_ _ - �F 1._ vvovvsJ 18682.84. E7466.74t I 0 i1 // - - - ? v v v v ll URNISH AND INSTALL -� '1 , _ �--__ _ fIEW CATCH BASIN if i Y ' j/ , - NEW 6• STORM .I.__D." 1027 Lf -� v v v v v• 1'+11 t , N8659.90. E755399 N8661.99, E7663.6' 0 - _•WETLAND _ o o v o v o 11 __ -�I :-- -_ t "' FURNISH AND INSTALL FURNISH AND INSTA'_L / FURNISH AND INSTALL ------ --- v o v v o v 7... c� _I TEMPORARY BYPASS SYSTEM v ENHANCEMENT �_-- - - �- �. fl NEW CATCH BASIN NEW CATCH BASIN:•• 1 �' 1gvio o v v v o o -- -----I ----+' I 1 } - ZI I SEE SEQUENCES FOR INSTALLATION I , - -jr- '4: H• .�o v v o v {� BUILDING B .1 --J 1 { ___ _ _ -_, ..- 11 -__ _ jjj ' ( I •- _ _ 1+00 ,I, I 1 I _ ��_ _ - " (0 • PROF �? \\ t11 - 1'-__ --,-� 1- l ,�c I 1 11.1 t_I.1.1.1_. gi_11._f D I PROFILE B 1 _ _ _ rJ/ C 1 1•=20.VERT. 1-=40•HORIZ. - - - N8559.54 E7719.TA ��\\v - FURNISH 4ND INSTAL ( V�\ l - y4 -c NEW CATCH BASIN v1 _ O 1 �� NEW 6 PVC' O O� t� �'. DEVELOPMENT S 40 1` .1 Fri 1 M1+' LIMIT LINE tf-- - '" d( •�� 1Ii STORMTECH.SC-740 s, t 'i - --- STA: 2+11.1 DETENTION SYSTEM .I :.9_ N8540; E7667.31 �' N8581.07, E7459.29 iI > ?I CONSTRUCT NEW 72` FLAT TOP 7>- BUILDING C '^; FU AND INS I FURNISH AND INSTALL .t d MANHOLE PER DETAIL X%XXX x, �� !_ 11 w NEW CATCH BASIN- FINISH GRADE AT NEW 60' FLOW CONTROL I ., I , -- .E IN 000.00 1I. MANHOLE I i;9 :1 -, 3 - - -.- RIM OUT 214.73 i,�0' 1` [. --- „ Z 1 '- 2�j--'1-- -1- -- - -- -- - I ;- -- ---- RIM 226.16 • -- -� - --"r - I p � I L r _ I _. 1 i I I 1 N8456-TS E7665 1 , ; .- NEW-CATCH BAN �I 220 I NEW 48-STORM BYPASS Q3X--T--: 178.9 LF..--t.._�- ---- '- -- 1 II _- _- I _.__-' ---'/-- i 14..1 \ -- - :, II - I t1 _ :rrrT: F1 ------ OI ; PLAN SCALE: Y� 1+00 •I I I I I _ - PROFILE C I I m A i / 20 L 1`=40 H« ' = I iv at, . 4Sec C w 5 a ,rover) SPL. 4: ucr' -.1. - " �� n •1'.11 f .... 3 �--t✓` r'8v►\4tn1nG� Sim VG '� 1 .. Q CWs E,2 �1 4. 07- oov3, - Approved -' �7 )C /1 n /1 Clean Water Services t rrnrrr - m �= _, ____r� / Set C�WJ y�✓�✓'Cd Si K �i�✓n CON:CONSTRUCT S �-�a�,(,,.,,,,�..�.i- �- vK�}l,�c�. �„ By Date .s= 2-0?- CONSTRUCT NEW 48`STANDARD vU MANHOLE PER DETAIL XXXXX LE IN((N) 219.32 STA: 1+50.1 S PL S LE IN(NE) 221.42 INSTALL NEW CATCH BASIN e� �� 4 I LE OUT 0.00 PER DETAIL XXXXX ��� ^ � -5-1S--- �`A r G rn LE OUT 000.00 LE 219.47 (Z //.S FINISH GRADE AT (((/// • ----_ -------"-- R?M 222.70 >� [/LL��I�V t - j 1 T-- I I TEMPORARY STREAM BYPASS SEQUENCE:I i 1)0 "Sift," II 11 - I I '- + - - - 1 I 1. CONSTRUCT NEW THEEMMHOLE AND AS 48AND PIPE SEGMENT•NEAR MANHOLE(DPRICR TO EXCLUDING 230 r THE T - - - . I - 7-- t TL Gl 7 1 �-- I' X 2. ONCE THE NEW STREAM AND 48-PIPE ARE N PLACE AND READY TO BE USED 1 -- - -- -�----- T I ' --- I (J AT FULL DESIGN CAPACITY.A TEMPORARY DIVERSION SYSTEM LOCATED AS SHOWN 4 ! 1 I -� i - -- _--_ _Lir- G�� , ON THE DESIGN DRAWINGS AND IDENTIFIED AS®SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED.Ilae GL,�O! .__ ? NEW B` STORM I 1 i 3. FLOW FROM THE EXISTING CULVERT,POINT -__-____ I 0.1%I 212.2 Lf ©SHALL BE DIVERTED THROUGH - - 1 STA: 0+87.68 1 I 1 . - - ....r.. • : . TEMPORARY DIVERSION YSTEM TO ISOLATE SECTION 4 FOR CONSTRUC110N. - --- "°"�'°°�' THE TE1JF'ORAR NEW 48` BYPASS l 1 I INSTALLATION OF MANHOLE 1 SHALL ALSO BE PERFORMED THE STREAM 1 LE 214.47 ! I I . I ! , I I-- ( i I IS TEMPORARILY INVERTED. --,- i i I I I I -- I _r- ---- -". H--'----- 4. ONCE ALL THE NEW 4r STREAM PIPELINE HAS BEEN INSTALLED AND IS READY I FOR UTILIZATION AT DESIGN CAPACITY. THE STREAM SHfiJ.BE RE-ROUTED BY DAWN 61.44V I I I CONNECTION OF THE NEW 48• LINE AT NEW MAHHCLE(� 1+00 5. THE TEMPORARY INVERSION SYSTEM SHALL BE REMOVED AND THE SITE RESTORED PROFILE A AFTER RE-ROUTING OF THE STREAM FLOW THROUGH THE NEW 48` PIPELINE. . _ �� 1`=2O VERT. 1=20 HORIZ. REVISED 5/01/2007 -___ DESIGNED ___ 1300 John Adams Street r-= DRAWN DA •.._ Oregon City,OR 191045 t.__ --_-_-- __--- ,----.--4.-- f---. po E p.503.655.1342 L503.655.1360 CITY OF TIGARD 12/22/06 06914 "'END -r--- RED ROCK CREEK • APPROVED BY ...._..• _ -- • '__i G>^11 1 IS Y TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER DRAIN PLAN PROLE + _ STORM :...�� SW' _ OAIE...i BY APP'D A^E�y. „y sw�Cmwv P' s 3 AS SHOWN _.:... -- SHEET C 10 of _ VEGETATED CORRIDOR RESTORARION WETLAND EXISTING WETLAND CHANNEL RESTORATION CHANNEL CENTERLINE r 50 FT 42 FT SDNG GRADE DEPTH = _ 4 EL 211.0 84 _ ' � 1 I \ MEAN D PTH I 0 5 FT ; _ • .. 220-.--.P '. I I I 1 -.7-1-V! BANKFU! ! ' I I c' S. -- - I — -- -- 1 - _• _____{ g' SA, - - o oc G, — 1 -00— + 2'o— _ I . -`I N 1-- { -�3 —� l 1 ^I I t I 1'`� -E705TING I to- 1 �' -- -t- _—)_ ! -J - ----- -- ---#1 STREAM 1 LS _ _ - - ---� -- P1.0Si GRADE I ! I '! ■ • -- ❑ ! • I m_ �. y. - --� --. 1il�bd D+00 ,f00 2+00 h ?10 34.37' ' � ��I CROSS SECTION A 1 " = 40' HORIZ., 1 " = 20' VERT. Vim% ti : ---, !: • V-V v V V-Y 1 ---C • STREAM `+.I.. �'�; 1 - v.V D Q V. -_-{ RESTORATION - - ' V V V V V V {` i . fi - V V V-V V V V •\ A3 s-'--_. sraww 1,y rye MOM.0 • • 3, 9T 2 ENHANCEMENT •:!:':. ' j - - V V. V-V V V. V-y • .12 5 „. .D --_- EXISTING GRADE ! ' vovvvv BUI DING B �lr j �, +, 1 '^ 1 1 l € _�—i : meremor•—•-1-+.00.COSTING < .. WETLAND i r : v: ;: 3 i _._.. +--- I----I-- -- _..�- !•• ■ 14 ' - - - + + + + _ I fl/S_EDI GRADE i \ --- - + + + 1 11$ I 1 1 I _J- i i_ 0 n,ii ; + + t� ;:F D VELOPMENT ,.e0 WETLAND SF CREATION !, - - / MIT LINE CROSS SECTION B: 1" = 40' H ORI Z., 1 " = 20' VERT. 1.436 SF i' 1 i 4 I.• il 1. i A NI 'ii I ;.i O I 1 L_ _ _ (`)/._______I Q.- -1:- !.. > •4( . . o . . . . . . • •.,` . • - • / • 1 _ NOTES: VEGETATED CORRIDOR . (` .`.-:-.-.•. -.-.-. - RESTORATION . _ .'S - - 1. STREAM RESTORATION. CONSTRUCT NEW NATURAL CHANNEL AND BOULDER �`RIP ARIAH FOREST I ��'A __ � __ \ C -(� I � � •� __---- � STEP POOL SEQUENCE TRANSITION TO EXISTING STREAM CHANNEL. �co Cc.e `---- Q 73.95' A - i c�a P1�1t�oc 2 WETLAND RESTORATION. REMOVE EXISTING VEGETATION, EXCAVATE WETLAND ��`"`� '''� BASIN, AND PLANT NATIVE EMERGENT MARSH VEGETATION. - m I1,1-e. . PLAN SCALE: 3. VEGETATED CORRIDOR RESTORATION. REMOVE EXISTING NON-NATIVE • o0 0 50 -�� VEGETATION, AND PLANT NATIVE RIPARIAN FOREST VEGETATION. 4. EXISTING WETLAND ENHANCEMENT. REMOVE NON-NATIVE VEGETATION AND j=rwq 1, G41. �� I,,� - PLANT NATIVE EMERGENT MARSH VEGETAION. --r`a _c' �R�� ��_� 1, 5. REFERENCE SENSITIVE LANDS RESTORATION PLANS ANS SPECIFICATIONS. Approved *PREPARED BY ANDY HARRIS OF HARRIS STREAM SERVICES • Clean Water Services �_ - . Tu elv►ra1$4Gc7- I pia., Kedt .44) ,c By c* -. Date_ s-?-°7 - spL /Wind, 3� - ��, i • REVISED 5/01/2007 Q i DESIGNED . ,. .u.- ..- -.�.- �. -- -° .----1,---------- JOB John Adams Stmet �. - -�r. ..� _ a,... - NUMBER i -- Oregon DATE P soa.r>SST-ltsosr>3s.T30o RED ROCK CREEK - ----_ -SWEET MODO CHECKED D I _--I PEE ----____ - SCALE RESTORATION PLAN SH4Er oil of 13 , - --— — - --- au�IsfncarallPlanlYglsurreT TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN APPROVED BY - ----- -..-1----------------------------.._ i AeEapiirig8rrbwC-py P -_ . SYM REVISION DATE ! BY APPb -� c;lVv,ti- Fne ivo. ui-Ouu304 Encroachments Required Off-Site Total Mitigation (square feet) Condition Activity On-site/Off-Site Tier 2 Required Mitigation Ratio Required 11,574 Degraded Buildings/Parking On-Site No 1:1.25 14,468 861 Good Buildings/Parking On-Site Yes 1:1.75 1,507 6,542 Good Buildings/Parking On-Site Yes 1:1.75 11,449 19,360 Degraded Buildings/Parking On-Site No 1:1.25 24,200 7,039 Degraded Buildings/Parking On-Site Yes 1:1.25 8,799 1,437 Degraded Wetland Restoration On-Site No 1:1.25 1,796 1,676 Degraded ROW Dedication On-Site No 1:1.25 2,095 14,720 Degraded Wetland Restoration Off-Site No 1:1 14,720 Area Mitigation On-Site/Off-Site Condition Proposed CL,). . EK �i (e D 7 –0 ao3sy New VC 1,445 On-Site Degraded Approved Existing VC 87,337 Off-Site Degraded r Clean Water Services New VC "A" 21,676 Off-Site Good t� Pn vv ,.rre—f,,,i T!o„ . .ckJ New VC "B" 2,324 Off-Site Good BY ✓ Date S- -z-o New VC "C" 1,054 Off-Site Good New VC "D" 2,786 Off-Site Good S'7 c- a C.„,,-e--,..4 TOTAL NON TIER 2 ENCROACHMENT MITIGATION REQUIRED 57,279 Square Feet TOTAL TIER 2 ENCROACHMENT MITIGATION REQUIRED 21,755 Square Feet rte 5.e{ GWS approve 5F L TOTAL MITIGATION PROPOSED 116,622 Square Feet a r( /,,,4J v Final Calculation Breakdown SC`' /Y!/1--,, c`„,, ..k- /dra{7o,,/, l� 116,622 -57,279 =59,343 Total Proposed Mitigation minus Non Tier 2 Mitigation Required. 59,343/21,755= 2.73 Remaining Proposed Mitigation divided by Tier 2 Mitigation Required. TIER 2 ENCROACHMENTS BEING MITIGATED AT A 1:2.75 MITIGATION RATIO LO/nje,P7 i _..10:41, 6 ' a , - moo.' 5,. Asproved NEW VEGETATED CORRIDOR(NVC) Clean .ter Services \ cr Cr(✓!✓aa, .J-4l pEA4 4C✓• ° N By � Date.. s • -o 2 ( SCAp\-(,S FERRY RpP TAX ARCEB C WETLAND-1 NOR is t MO S Pt- ot. - CL,.4.1.4.1 '.S `'s'a 9.W ACRES 4,595.5 SF y 18 INCH CMP ° NVC "A" W E x - 21,676 SF A n TWO 48 INCH o yil CMP CULVtRTS 1104,�+ • C!'". WETLAND WETLAND-2 RESTORATION 1* I%) 10 INCH CCP 8,469.7 SF 1,039.0 SF 13 '� • '- GRAPF37C SCALE �+ g STREAM(OHW) '''''''..e" • \ / 0 25 50 75 100 2 R1 TOPS OF BANK /� me o, \ �::Y:'t:.:. InMiiiiiI 0 BOTH SIDES /i d"' // ' lb lb DITCH -// ` \':*:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:..::: •...:.. r. 10 INCH CMP �Y//////�ins •y�::::•::::::::::. /` neo rn; WETLAND D RESTORATION '9' a DITCH OT f� ��/ �. \::i:::ii?i?: 3,177.1 SF TOPS / WETLAND-5 = � WETLAND-3 BRIDGE ///l/ �>r� r BOTH SIDES ° y/ii, :: t9_ 3,816.4 SF i 1,520.9 SF ///i/ :.:.....' O" STREAM ! /'/// Go.e', ■ i _ THALWEG 15 INCH CCP I ` //:':. 7•P d\it/ d°" Z = I EXISTING d"' , M ASPHALT `\ asara --- NVC nBn m I PATH V -ma z APPROX. NVC ee®.. �\ 2,324 SF -D-I n i �z� d0' M Z786 SF ' ,.:�\ 0 m + \\ 3. n M STREAM(OHW) 1 ! �WpO° TOPS OF BANK 1 t H Op BOTH SIDES �vCF \\ WETLAND ® yO WETLAND-4 �/ -00 \vim • RESTORATION 3,073.4 SF X 3,198.4 SF /,����/. 9.- \ WETLAND-6 � ,S, �i�i•///,/_.��� � �. .;� �,816.4 SF r'.1 0 \K 23 I g Q . n �// o NVC C --, A /////� ` OFy\4' NOTE:SUR EY AND WE AND 1,054 SF \ ���i//i// \ ` o`° BOUNDA'Y PERFORME10 AS A 5Q� 3RD. ORDER SURVEY A' 1 IN EXISTING . 36 INCH \, 9 m I 1 0,000 ACCURACY BY ASPHALT PATH CMP I RUSSEL A. LAWRENCE, PLS 1 T 5 AX LOT LOT 291` - PARCEL'Cr • EXHIBIT 4 STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMENTS vage I of I Andy Harris From: Devin Simmons [Devin.L.Simmons @state.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 4:23 PM To: BOS Louise Cc: harrissstreamservices@comcast.net Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Site visit Hi Louise, I wanted to let you know that I met with Andrew Harris today for a pre-app visit on Red Rock Creek in Tigard. It was determined that fish presence is not an issue due to urbanized hydrology, degraded habitat, and multiple barriers. Therefore ODFW finds that partial piping is acceptable. At this time we are still working out acceptable mitigation measures. We discussed several options ranging from engineered methods of water retention and energy dispersal, detention ponds, and creating new stream channel to disperse energy and reduce water velocity. He will discuss this with the owner and engineer and get back to me. Let me know if there are any questions. Thank you, f-1 IDevin L.Simmons Habitat Biologist North Willamette Watershed District Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 18330 NW Sauvie Island Rd. Portland.OR 97231 503-62 l-3488 x 32 11/9/2005 . rage i ui i Andy Harris From: Devin Simmons [Devin.L.Simmons @state.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 12:57 PM To: LARSEN Ellie; Andy Harris; Kathryn.L.Harris@usace.army.mil Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Tenant Advisory Group Hello there. The reason I am writing is to discuss the soon to be submitted project by Tenant Advisory Group (Brad Phis) represented by Andrew Harris. It seems that this project has created some controversy as I expected. I realized it is probably best that I explain the rationale behind ODFWs position that accepts the proposal to pipe part of a creek, and how ODFW helped reach this design. This site is located at the intersection of SW Dartmouth and SW 72nd Ave. in Tigard. The water- body in question is a sub-tributary of Red Rock Creek, Tributary of Fanno Creek(T1S, R1W, Section 36, SE). This is a very small tributary that shows little hydrology, yet is very flashy in nature. It has been determined that Native Migratory Fish do not presently occupy this site nor would they have historically. The original proposal planned to completely pipe the stream through the property. I stated that ODFW would not support this concept even if the channel is incised, the hydrology is mainly supported by parking lot runoff, and the riparian zone is almost non-existent. Instead I proposed a combination and on- site mitigation. A planning concept arose from Andy Harris and myself hammering out what would be viewed as acceptable mitigation by both parties. It is ODFWs position this plan meets ODFWs Mitigation Policy and will be supported as long as the following project details are followed: • To mitigate for the piping of the stream it was agreed that an outfall be designed at the pipe exit on the property that would reduce excess stream velocity and energy. At this time most of the stream above this site is already piped with little or no devices installed to slow runoff or to encourage infiltration. Most of the basin and the stream has been paved and built over. ODFW recognizes that repatriation of this stream is extremely unlikely if not impossible. Energy dissipation will be achieved via the use of a roughened outfall, swale, and a new sinuous channel through the swale. ODFW finds that the current flashy hydrology is the number limiting factor for habitat downstream of this site. It is apparent that good habitat still exits downstream of this site, and may also contain fish. This is why ODFW views energy dissapation as the primary focus for mitigation. • • The proposed swale will assist in filtering runoff pollutants originating off-site, providing groundwater infiltration to support local hydrology, and energy/velocity reduction. 6 • The swale, its edges, and the edges of the new channel will be replanted in such a way that benefits the filtration process, energy dissapation, and provides shading. If there are any questions about these comments please call me. Thank you, -Devin Devin L.Simmons Habitat Biologist North Willamette Watershed District Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 18330 NW Sauvie Island Rd. Portland, OR 97231 503-621-3488 x 32 9/16/2006 EXHIBIT 5 JOINT PERMIT US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF STATE LANDS Dc:pa,tment of State Lands Permit No.: 37247-FP 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100 Permit Type: Fill Salem, OR 97301-1279 Waterway: Wetlands/Hiteon Creek m 503-378-3805 County: Washington Expiration Date: April 25, 2008 Corps No.: NA TENANT ADVISORY GROUP IS AUTHORIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORS 196.800 TO 196.990 TO PERFORM THE OPERATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED COPY OF THE APPLICATION, SUBJECT TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS LISTED ON ATTACHMENT A AND TO THE FOLLOWING GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. This permit does not authorize trespass on the lands of others. The permit holder shall obtain all necessary access permits or rights-of-way before entering lands owned by another. 2. This permit does not authorize any work that is not in compliance with local zoning or other local, state, or federal regulation pertaining to the operations authorized by this permit. The permit holder is responsible for obtaining the necessary approvals and permits before proceeding under this permit. 3. All work done under this permit must comply with Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 340; Standards of Quality for Public Waters of Oregon. Specific water quality provisions for this project are set forth on Attachment A. 4. Violations of the terms and conditions of this permit are subject to administrative and/or legal action which may result in revocation of the permit or damages. The permit holder is responsible for the activities of all contractors or other operators involved in work done at the site or under this permit. )5. A copy of the permit shall be available at the work site whenever operations authorized by the permit are being conducted. 6. Employees of the Department of State Lands and all duly authorized representatives of the Director shall be permitted access to the project area at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting work performed under this permit. 7. Any permit holder who objects to the conditions of this permit may request a hearing from the Director, in writing, within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the date this permit was issued. 8. In issuing this permit, the Department of State Lands makes no representation regarding the quality or adequacy of the permitted project design, materials, construction, or maintenance, except to approve the project's design and materials, as set forth in the permit application, as satisfying the resource protection, scenic, safety, recreation, and public access requirements of ORS Chapters 196, 390 and related administrative rules. 9. Permittee shall defend and hold harmless the State of Oregon, and its officers, agents, and employees from any claim, suit, or action for property damage or personal injury or death arising out of the design, material, construction, or maintenance of the permitted improvements. NOTICE: If removal is from state-owned submerged and submersible land, the applicant must comply with leasing and royalty provisions of ORS 274.530. If the project involves creation of new lands by filling on state-owned submerged or submersible lands, you must comply with ORS 274.905 - 274.940. This permit does not relieve the permittee of an obligation to secure appropriate leases from the Department of State Lands, to conduct activities on state-owned submerged or submersible lands. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in civil or criminal liability. For more information about these requirements, please contact the Department of State Lands, 503-378-3805. Michael Morales, W Region Manager Wetlands & Waterways Conservation Div \ Oregon Department of State Lands tr ��r__, April 25, 2007 A thorized Signature Date Issued ' r ATTACHMENT A Permittee: Tenant Advisory Group Special Conditions for Removal/Fill PLEASE READ AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH CONDITIONS OF YOUR PERMIT. This project may be site inspected by the Department of State Lands as part of our monitoring program. The Department has the right to stop or modify the project at any time if you are not in compliance with these conditions. A copy of this permit shall be available at the work site whenever authorized operations are being conducted. 1. This permit authorizes the placement of up to 190 cubic yards of compacted fill material in wetlands and 85 cubic yards of compacted fill material in waters, in T 2S, R 1W, Section 1, Tax Lots 100 and 300, Washington County, as outlined in the attached permit application, map and drawings, dated November 16, 2005. 2. This permit also authorizes removal and fill activities necessary to complete the required compensatory mitigation. 3. Issuance of this permit is contingent upon acquisition of the required local permits and approvals, including the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services. If the local permit(s) results in any modifications to this project relative to this permit, the permit holder shall contact the Department and request adjustments to this authorization. 4. The permittee is responsible for carrying-out the terms and conditions of this permit unless the permit is transferred to another party as approved by the Department. 5. TURBIDITY/EROSION CONTROLS. The authorized work shall not cause turbidity of affected waters to exceed 10% over natural background turbidity 100 feet downstream of the fill point. For projects proposed in areas with no discernible gradient break (gradient of 2% or less), monitoring shall take place at 4 hour intervals and the turbidity standard may be exceeded for a maximum of one monitoring intervals per 24 hour work period provided all practicable control measures have been implemented. This turbidity standard exceedance intervals applies only to coastal lowlands and floodplains, valley bottoms and other low-lying and/or relatively flat land. For projects in all other areas, the turbidity standard can be exceeded for a maximum of 2 hours (limited duration) provided all practicable erosion control measures have been implemented. These projects may also be subject to additional reporting requirements. Turbidity shall be monitored during active in-water work periods. Monitoring points shall be at an undisturbed site (representative background) 100 feet upstream from the turbidity causing activity (i.e., fill or discharge point), 100 feet downstream from the fill point, and at the point of fill. A turbidimeter is recommended, however, visual gauging is acceptable. Turbidity that is visible over background is considered an exceedance of the standard. Attachment A 37247-FP //)/— w/�Gx �c�K, j°i�0 0 Page 3 of 6 `/U/o5 / — Sc°A70-1 edit- 3 0 The following erosion control measures (and others as appropriate) shall be observed: a. Filter bags, sediment fences, sediment traps or catch basins, leave strips or berms, or other measures shall be used sufficient to prevent movement of soil from uplands into waterways or wetlands. b. To prevent erosion, use of compost berms, impervious materials or other equally effective methods, shall be used to protect soil stockpiled during rain events or when the stockpile site is not moved or reshaped for more than 48 hours. c. Erosion control measures shall be inspected and maintained daily, or more frequently as necessary, to ensure their continued effectiveness and shall remain in place until all exposed soil is stabilized. d. Unless part of the authorized permanent fill, all construction access points through, and staging areas in, riparian or wetland areas shall use removable pads or mats to prevent soil compaction. However, in some wetland areas under dry summer conditions, this requirement may be waived upon approval by DSL. At project completion, disturbed areas with soil exposed by construction activities shall be stabilized by mulching and native vegetative plantings/seeding. Sterile grass may be used instead of native vegetation for temporary sediment control. If soils are to remain exposed more than seven days after completion of the permitted work, they shall be covered with erosion control pads, mats or similar erosion control devices until vegetative stabilization is installed. e. Where vegetative erosion control is being done on cut slopes steeper than 1 H:2V, a tackified seed mulch shall be used so the seed does not wash away before germination and rooting. f. Dredged or other excavated material shall be placed on upland areas having stable slopes and shall be prevented from eroding back into waterways or wetlands. 6. Erosion control measures shall be maintained as necessary to ensure their continued effectiveness, until soils become stabilized. All erosion control structures shall be removed when project is complete and soils are stabilized and vegetated. 7. HAZARDOUS, TOXIC AND WASTE MATERIALS. Petroleum products, chemicals, fresh cement sandblasted material and chipped paint or other deleterious waste materials shall not be allowed to enter waters of the state. No wood treated with leach able preservatives shall be placed in the waterway. Machinery refueling is to occur off-site or in a confined designated area to prevent spillage into waters of the state. Project-related spills into water of the state or onto land with a potential to enter waters of the state shall be reported to the Oregon Emergency Response System (OERS) at 1-800-452-0311. 8. All exposed soils shall be stabilized during and after construction in order to prevent erosion and sedimentation. 9. If any archaeological resources and/or artifacts are uncovered during excavation, all construction activity shall immediately cease. The State Historic Preservation Office shall be contacted (phone: 503-986-0669). 10.The Department of State Lands retains the authority to temporarily halt or modify the project in case of unforeseen damage to natural resources. f Attachment A 37247-FP Page 4 of 6 MITIGATION Compensatory Wetland Mitigation 11.The following conditions apply to the actions described in the Mitigation Plan dated January 22, 2005 (revised). The issuance of this permit is contingent upon the successful replacement of compensatory wetland mitigation for the loss of 0.12 acres of wetlands and 571 linear feet of waterways according to the HGM classes and Cowardin classes shown in the mitigation data form. 12.Compensatory Wetland mitigation will be conducted off-site. Mitigation for the loss of 0.12 acres of wetlands (palustrine emergent/slope valley class) shall consist of restoration of 0.12 acres of wetland at Hiteon Creek. 13.Compensatory mitigation for the loss of 571 linear feet of waters shall consist of on-site channel restoration of 38 linear feet and off-site channel restoration of 533 linear feet on Hiteon Creek. Compensatory mitigation shall follow the revised mitigation plan submitted January 22, 2007 and shall meet the design objectives outlined in the plan. 14.Issuance of this permit is contingent upon long-term protection of the mitigation wetland areas by filing deed restrictions approved by the Department. A draft deed restriction has been approved by the Department. Any changes to the draft deed restriction must be approved by the Department prior to recording the document with Washington County. There shall be no wetland impacts until the approved documents are recorded with Washington County and copies have been sent to the Department. Copies of the recorded documents are due at the Department prior to wetland impacts and no later than June 1, 2007. 15.Mitigation site construction shall be completed prior to completion of the wetland/waterway fill project. 16.No removal or fill of any amount of material shall be conducted within the compensatory wetland mitigation areas without prior authorization from the Department. 17.Prior to any site grading, the surveyed boundaries of the avoided wetlands and on-site wetland mitigation area shall be surrounded by silt fencing at all times during construction of the project. There shall be no heavy equipment in this area except during mitigation construction. 18.Removal or control of invasive, non-native plant species shall be done by hand, selective mowing, or chemical means. Only herbicides approved for near water use shall be allowed and shall only be applied by appropriately licensed persons. 19.The mitigation sites shall be irrigated as necessary to avoid water stress for at least two years after the completion of planting. 20.A contiguous 4'-6' fence (or other barrier) shall be installed around the surveyed mitigation and buffer areas, immediately following wetland grading. A locked gate will be provided to allow access for authorized routine maintenance and monitoring activities. The barrier shall be installed prior to grading any lots adjacent to the mitigation and or buffer areas. Attachment A 37247-FP Page 5 of 6 21.Signs shall be posted around the buffer and wetland mitigation areas bearing the following message: MITIGATION WETLAND Protected under State and Federal Law PLEASE DO NOT DISTURB 22.If, in the judgment of the site monitoring agent or Department, planted shrubs and trees become adversely affected by herbivore or other damage so as to jeopardize compliance with success criteria, then shrubs and trees shall be physically protected from herbivory and other damage with heavy gauge wire mesh or other appropriate material. Mitigation Success Criteria To be deemed successful, the mitigation areas shall meet the following success criteria: 23. Hydrology in the compensatory wetland mitigation areas will be established in the first year following site grading and determined adequate for the proposed mitigation plant community prior to commencing site planting. 24.There shall be 80% survival of planted trees and shrubs for the duration of the monitoring period for both the wetland and waterway mitigation areas. Survival shall be determined through stem counts. 25.For both the wetland and waterway mitigation areas, there shall be 40% cover of planted and native recruits of herbaceous species after the first year of planting, 60% after year two, and 80% after years three, four, and five, as measured by aerial cover. 26.For both the wetland and waterway mitigation areas, there shall be no more than 20% cover of non-native, invasive species for the duration of the monitoring period. 27.The wetland mitigation areas shall meet the hydrology and vegetative criteria specified in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual by the end of the five-year monitoring period. 28.There shall be no perennial inundation within the compensatory wetland mitigation areas and inundation shall not otherwise be of depth or duration to adversely affect plant cover success criteria. Mitigation Monitoring 29.An as-built survey shall be provided to the Department of State Lands within 90 days of mitigation site grading. )30.The permittee shall monitor the mitigation site to determine success for a minimum period of five (5) years. The annual monitoring report is due by December 31 of each year and shall include the following information: a. Permit number, permitteee's name, project name F Y Attachment A 37247-FP Page 6 of 6 b. Location of mitigation site: describe and show on current map. I c. Location of impact site d. Description of all activities that have occurred on the mitigation site during the past year (i.e. grading, re-grading, planting, re-planting, weed eradication, etc.) e. Description of monitoring methods used and documentation that success criteria are being met. f. Recommendations for remedial actions, as appropriate. g. Photographs from fixed photo monitoring points. h. Qualitative discussion of mitigation site performance relative to the two identified reference sites. i. Other information necessary or required to document compliance with mitigation plan. j. Year 5 monitoring report shall additionally include a wetland delineation report documenting wetland acreage by Cowardin class within the defined mitigation areas. 31.The monitoring period will start when the permittee has demonstrated that hydrology has been established and initial plantings have been accomplished. Failure to submit a monitoring report by December 31 each year may result in an extension of the monitoring period, loss of the performance bond, and/or enforcement action. 32.A performance bond in the amount of $10,214 has been provided to the Department to ensure completion of compensatory mitigation in accordance with the conditions of this permit. The permittee shall file a written request with the Department for release of phases of bond. Portions of this bond will be released based on the following schedule: a. 25% release upon approval of the first year monitoring report for both mitigation areas, which demonstrates successful establishment of site hydrology through hydrology monitoring in March — April, following completion of grading and initial planting. b. 25% release upon approval of the second year monitoring report for both mitigation areas. c. 50% release upon approval of final monitoring report and demonstrated success of both mitigation projects based on success criteria. Contingencies 33.The Department retains the authority to extend the mitigation-monitoring period and require corrective action in the event the success criteria are not accomplished for two consecutive years (without re-planting for failure to meet survival or cover criteria) within the five-year monitoring period. Issued: April 25, 2007 G:\wwc\AttachmentAwesttAS\FP Fill Permits\37247-FP.doc EXHIBIT 6 HYDROLOGY REPORT HYDROLOGY REPORT for E end rat alt C�rie�e�1=�� B;t i nes s J J � J J J Centeri 12625 SW 70th Ave,Tigard,Oregon il mioiauEST :„} �'s� L PARC_E-m PARCEL Iv I L.%-% '.'t,'''' t 3 anti x R a F - 1 I' 5w Atia'+ta St Sw Haim 53 y r. _ ••n_ !!I aN P 1 'fi4 I ;r„..,1 '! �� '^ cn t+ay4x St q *1 5w Gunttoer L i'. l', ,',,,v,. S i:�wthnerr St i .�■. I s I. BLOIX 20 5.v Damao g ,Y 'a s E,`N_.. d ! ©/ ��.. 4:1 g e � Sw CNnhurstSt,A , ! l'n - ', Sr Ganzaga S[ 3 BLOCK Z vC„3 t r ,,,,, ,,,,:f4., g a ,,r, I i ^c1aB>nvTEQ — Site Plan Vicinity Map (s,--d PR0FS�Prepared for: Prepared by: �N('INs /p Michael C.Monical,P.E. 16,659 9 I' Anderson Dombrowski Architects. Pace Engineers,Inc. Attn:Jon Anderson 1300 John Adams Street OREGON 1430 SE 3'a Ave,suite 200 Oregon City,Oregon 97045 0 °/y 20 599' ci Portland,OR 97214 PH: (503)655-1342 tigFL. C MOB Ph:(503)239-7377 Fax: (503) 655-1360 EXPIRES: 12/31/2006 Fax:(503)239-7327 Proj#:06914 SIGNATURE DATE: 7-31-07 .PAGE PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:106914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 1 of 19 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Purpose 2 2.0 Project Location and Description 2 3.0 Storm Water Standards 2 4.0 Summary of Hydrology 3 5.0 References 3 6.0 Design Parameters 3 7.0 Calculation Methodology 4 7.1 Conveyance 4 7.2 Detention 4 7.3 Water Quality 4 8.0 Maintenance Requirements 5 9.0 Downstream Analysis 6 Exhibits EX 1 Vicinity Map 7 EX2 USGS Map 8 EX 3 Aerial Photo 9 EX 4 Assessors's Map 10 EX 5 Soils Survey Map 11 EX 6 Existing Condition Hydrology Map. 12 EX 7 Developed Condition Hydrology Map 13 EX 8 Water Quality Calculations 14 EX 9 HydroCAD Model Diagram 15 EX 10 HydroCAD SBUH 2 yr Summary Report 16 EX 11 HydroCAD SBUH 10 yr Summary Report 17 EX 12 HydroCAD SBUH 25 yr Summary Report 18 EX 13 HydroCAD SBUH 100 yr Summary Report 19 Appendices A. Hydro Cad 25 year Complete Report B. Stormfilter Maintenance Instruction C. Upstream analysis, maps,photos and hydrographs PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 2 of 19 1.0 Purpose The purpose of this report is to demonstrate the compliance of the proposed improvements for the Red Rock Business Center with the requirements of the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services, Washington County. 2.0 Project Location and Description The project is located on Tax Lots 100 &300 on the south side of SW Dartmouth between SW 72nd Ave and SW 70th Ave (2S101AB000100&300) in Washington County, Oregon (Vicinity Map, Exhibit 1, page 6; Assessors Map, Exhibit 4, page 9). The irregularly shaped site slopes generally east to west at 7-10% and is currently undeveloped with brush and a few trees. A drainage ditch which is the remnants of the intermittent stream that was relocated by the construction of SW Dartmouth runs east to west along the north boundary. The south east portion of the site drains generally to the northwest. Small wetlands are located in the middle of the site and on the west side next to SW 72nd Ave. The site has historically been rural farmland cultivated for grass and grains (Ref 6). Development is proposed to construct three commercial buildings with associated parking. Exhibit 7. The existing ditch will be piped from the current discharge location to a restored/mitigated wetland location on the west side of the project with some offsite mitigation occurring at Hiteon creek as part of a different project. On site drainage from the parking and buildings will be collected in the a private storm drainage piping system and conveyed to an underground detention system from which it flows through a water quality vault and is then discharged to the restored natural area on the west side of the site. According to the Washington County Soils Survey, the existing soils are primarily (69%) Woodburn Silt Loam, hydrologic group "C" with Cove Silty clay and Huberly Silt Loam hydrologic group "D" , 31%. (Soils Survey Map, Exhibit 5, page 10). The existing ditch is being piped across the site as part of a previously approved Clean Water Services and Division of State Lands permit. The analysis of the upstream basin and flow calculations are included in Appendix C. 3.0 Storm Water Standards Per the preapplication notes, the site requires on site detention and water quality. These facilities will be constructed to Cleanwater services requirements but will be structural in nature. The 2, 10 and 25 year storm events will be detained and the routing of the upstream areas calculated and adequate conveyance for the 25 year event w/o surcharge provided in the public storm system. Water quality will be provided for a 4 hour .36" rainfall per CWS. PACE Engineers Inc_ 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 3 of 19 4.0 Summary Hydrology The storm system consists of conveyance pipes and an underground detention system and a stormfilter water quality vault. The water quality flows are calculated per CWS standards at 0.23 cfs requiring a 9 cartridge water quality stormfilter vault. The following table shows the runoff quantities and water surface elevations generated for the site as calculated by HydroCAD using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph methodology. Input and results appear in Appendices A. Storm Existing Developed Discharge Event Runoff (cfs) Runoff (cfs) (cfs) 2 yr 0.50 1.91 0.50 10 yr 1.09 2.69 1.09 25 yr 1.46 3.14 1.46 100 yr 1.93 3.67 3.31 5.0 References 5.1 Clean Water Services, Washington County, Oregon (June 2007) 5.2 NRCA Online Soils Survey data, July 2007 5.3 Hydro Cad 8.00, Hydrology Modeling Software, © 1986-2007, Applied Microputer Systems. Hydro Cad software 6.0 Design Parameters 6.1 The 24 hour standard SCS Type 1A storm was used to determine runoff from the site. The 24 hour rainfall amounts are: (Ref: 5.4) WQ (4 hr) 0.36 in 2 yr 2.50 in 10 yr 3.45 in 25 yr 3.90 in 100 yr 4.50 in 6.2 Exhibit 5 includes the soil data information from NRCS Online Soil Survey.. The following soil types are present on the site and are used to determine hydrologic runoff CN numbers. (Ref: 5.2) Map Soil Name and Map Hydrologic Symbol Symbol Group 45 Wood burn Silt Loam C 69% 13 Cove Silty Clay Loam D 17% 22 Huberly Clay Loam D 14% PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 4 of 19 7.0 Calculation Methodology 7.1 Conveyance. The rational method will be used to size all on site pipes to convey the runoff during the 25 year Storm Event. 7.2 Storm Event Runoff. The Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph methodology is used to calculate developed runoff hydrographs based on hydraulic parameters developed from the topography, soils information, survey and design information. HydroCad 8, a computer software hydrology program is used to complete the calculations and provide graphical outputs. The hydrologic parameters and results for the pre-developed and post- developed hydrologic analysis are included in Appendix A and summarized in Exhibit 10, 11, 12 and 13. The developed conditions model is shown in Exhibit 7, page 12. Utilizing SBUH methodology, total runoff for the WQ, 2, 10, 25 and 100 year storm was calculated and conveyed to the swale. Complete calculations for the 25 year event are included in Appendix A. 7.3 Water Quality. Clean Water Services standards are used to calculate a total water quality runoff volume based on the .36"14 hr. This volume is equally distributed over the 4 hour period to determine the water quality flow to be treated by the Stormfilter Cartridges. Contech's design parameter of 15 gpm per cartridge is used to determine number of required cartridges and the size of the vault. PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P.\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 5 of 19 8.0 Maintenance Requirements The following O&M Instructions will be applied for the Stormtech Chambers detention system. O&M instruction for the and the Stormfilter Vault are included in Appendices B. Underground Detention Tanks, Vaults, and Pipes Operations & Maintenance Plan Underground detention tanks, vaults, and pipes are designed to fill with stormwater during large storm events, slowly releasing it over a number of hours. There are numerous components to each system. Drain Inlet Pipes convey stormwater into the detention facility. The detention Chamber is the structure in which stormwater accumulates during a storm event. Orifice Structure/Outlet Drain Pipe restricts the flow out of the detention chamber, allowing it to fill up and slowly drain out. The orifice structure is located at the downstream end of the detention chamber. Underground facilities shall be inspected quarterly and within 48 hours after each major storm event. The facility owner must keep a log, recordinc all inspection dates, observations, and maintenance activities. The following items shall be inspected and maintained as stated: Drain Inlet Pipes shall be inspected for clogging or leaks where it enters the vault or basin during every inspection and cleanout. • Debris/sediment that is found to clog the inlet shall be removed, tested, and disposed of in accordance with applicabli federal and state requirements. Detention Chamber shall be inspected for cracks or damage during each inspection. • The detention chamber shall be cleaned out yearly or after an inch of sediment has accumulated. If there is a valve c the outlet pipe it shall be closed otherwise the outlet shall be plugged prior to cleanout. Grit and sediment that has settled to the bottom of the chamber shall be removed during each cleaning. • Water and sediment in the detention chamber shall be removed, tested, and disposed of in accordance with regulations. • Cleaning shall be done without use of detergents or surfactants. A pressure washer may be used if necessary. Orifice Structure/Outlet Drain Pipe shall be inspected for clogging during unit inspections/cleanouts. • Debris/sediment that is found to clog the inlet shall be removed, tested, and disposed of in accordance with applicabli federal and state requirements. Vegetation such as trees should not be located in or around the detention facility because roots from trees can penetrate the unit body, and leaves from deciduous trees and shrubs can increase the risk of clogging the intake pipe. • Large shrubs or trees that are likely to interfere with detention facility operation shall be identified at each inspection then removed. Source Control measures typically include structural and non-structural controls. Non-structural controls can include streE sweeping and other good house keeping practices. It is often easier to prevent pollutants from entering stormwater than to remove them. • Source control measures shall be inspected and maintained (where applicable). Spill Prevention procedures require high-risk site users to reduce the risk of spills. However, virtually all sites, including residential and commercial, present dangers from spills. Homes contain a wide variety of toxic materials including gasoline for lawn mowers, antifreeze for cars, nail polish remover, pesticides, and cleaning aids that can adversely affect storm watE if spilled. It is important for everyone to exercise caution when handling substances that can contaminate stormwater. Spill prevention procedures shall be implemented in areas where there is likelihood of spills from hazardous materials. Training and/or written guidance information for operating and maintaining detention facilities shall be provided to all property owners and tenants. A copy of the O&M Plan shall be provided to all property owners and tenants. Access to the detention facility is required for efficient maintenance. Egress and ingress routes shall be open and maintained to design standards. PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:106914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 6 of 19 Underground Detention Tanks, Vaults, and Pipes Operations & Maintenance Plan Signage may serve to educate people about the importance or function of the site's stormwater protection measures. Signs may also discourage behavior that adversely impacts the stormwater protection measures and encourages behavior that enhances or preserves stormwater quality. If debris is a problem, a sign reminding people not to litter may partially solve the problem. Signage (where applicable) will be maintained and repaired as needed during or shortly after inspections. Insects & Rodents shall not be harbored in the detention facility. Pest control measures shall be taken when insects/rodents are found to be present. • If sprays are considered, then a mosquito larvicide, such as Bacillus thurendensis or Altoside formulations can be applied only if absolutely necessary, and only by a licensed individual or contractor. _ • Holes in the ground located in and around the detention facilit shall be filled. 8.0 Downstream Analysis The site will discharge in to the adjacent on site wetland which will drain through culverts under 72nd Avenue and then by natural drainage to Fanno Creek. 72nd street is currently under design by W&H Pacific who will be redesigning the conveyance. There are no apparent restriction and the site is providing detention. PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 7 of 19 -T., . A N-y , )0 s (200m 1 600f i 1,.,m ` _ fzefiel 1 r .,.. ..;,.:00•‘,LV 14k 1, r" 1 "--1 1 r # SW Pallay ct z a i( E Q 3 Sw{bank ray '293:54 Haines St _..___t #. .. —A,.,„,,,,,:--- -F-1, r t , Si) Sw .. I 1 i� ,, Sw Gunther L (,,,,,,, ri z.t Sw aint st �. ..- , r..„ 1 � � 3 r,o2 -,„_ ';.4 , ,41L 1 r—"--------'' i '''. ''. t;'"--..,,,,---,,,,,.$4,v ! ' ' , .ic ,' _ ril ,...,"______A.., '',. ..„. 0: 1 :4 `s.-.0, -,„,--f?art4.1) --- . L 1 i '. . vim+ 4c, I '4 ° \ '.:$g 4; ' 1 '. Swfimhu I t k '. '293 1 . .,-- :... Site 1 ( i ,...../ i . ;' 5w 1 inldin St # . 7 r,,,,, ____,.,,,,_,, , .',.,,- , ‘ El - 4 '14' --"I . .'i Uz +a S ' � ,,r., ''''''''''''''- ,,'''--==.„,,... 1 ,,_ ° = Li: l , , ,, , ,„... -,,,,.......„ ., . , . [20071'YlapQvest"inc . ,., _:. ` ` , C 2DO N*VTEQ Exhibit 1 — Vicinity Map PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 8 of 19 0„,„.1/4,,,,, ,.� +fF � l }j[�y,�y.''}f'yy!.. 5 ti#�_ },�3f ti �� F � I,i,' E !�- 1� r i Paf/ a w, v t r; i ..!4/47,-,ly : r— it 14 `�t i r :♦> rte; , ,� .47;.„(a! .,- �y r€vry �N:�•t _ .1+ "° a 11;L .I 1 ,� /� .�t 0 x ' 4 :' p'•` ♦ J.I ._T.i\- '4h'� •.474_rr j...`r -�y i t.'r•I.. t,AI 1 \: 1 „f 1 r(" ! I r �a'.i `.__'�. �l �_ � . « 2Y -.-1 ,��,. 1R / 'I / 'f tx ct r +' , �. �. _ I .r.",.--- 4 r __ ' :l•r5l ' 1;1 1- _ _ .` ',,',.!1 1;J r jr lI \ ' I�I ), ', �4‘...,:?*' z0C1 _�4,..,-..."` ..�" f .I . 1 7* 7 �''1 j41 1. it ',, 1 I ',.t ,.• f!i:♦• • t,.., ,'N' ,4 F1M£'• .• } ,''� i 8 i t 1, ',,,. ,_A ti . . • : 1 ti r3 q'a r ,_� s`\' 9s' •, f, ,• •L-X A ,i.. i ; ";. s _'yam ` ti^°. 1'rr 1 'v. a, 1 .1/4. ;� �1 i y.i.�� 1 tr _• v \ti..t �� ti'. 1 ‘1„.„..., i �� .1� + t ,' ,r9 t ''. .1;..,:,..c;:.:,,.._.........:1181:". , 6 ry y y 11.e,":;.......:‘,::,•*-7;71,,,',,,;...::\,/, • qr k • ,<I :, "'1 if i .4.1...: 'j �� 1 i 1 t , I �. 1 s r 1 .,fA.,, +1 "—P:',..„„F`q Ya r-" r ' P \ 5cl- .4•; \d ii i' ;' \ r\1 •s. ‘ 1; " J : 7 • h� � I • f 6 a r' 'r j 'i I k„.` \,',1` '\,,,1.1 . saS "1�- 4•- C -t.,:i -- ' ', ..-. ' G e •`, ,-* / , N.,; , 2 . . • ! .:4„11,: i:4 , ' xl. ,..-.,1:I.,_\_-_. _'''',. I, -- ,„....-7 •,• q. , 4\=,,,,, \ , ••,. J A FARM `�s"", 9,..,': Y ' .;�\ t..-- 4i � a,,. tc 3.,1 : I r o r ,♦ 'so 1 t"� , , ` 1 i Al R T • raw t � b•"..',.\•,.."_ I * E �%'+ -1'. c \' i _._.T __'4- , �l ' 13 1, . I C.Ft ••nW '`` —US 15 Exhibit 2 — USGS Map PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 9 of 19 d F a •� t J jL Kin I i[ k .. i9I9 . C �E —�— _— — ( _ Ii„ , , , ,, , . , , Site I iu � a a} - I lit ■ 11 i Sri ELM-Q.11(ST-S3 a S i^9 l S _I (I i -� r M l I I I __,...,.„.".. i li I 7 , i FP.1 1 - _ ,e....4.wk% i ,,, ---1 Exhibit 3 — Aerial Photo Map PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology106914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 10 of 19 2S 1 01AB 2S 1 01AB (. • SW DARTMOUTH STREET - ,:. w r1 777 f ' a Site Z' _, . *:'4 �� a a �-. �. yid ` 1 ! ,,. ,n.t { ,. ,.,, � a w e.{`e y �rAr,$ f s !z ry�aS'0r• broil •✓z, _ 4 I, , ,a 'r y -y " •. "` `^ °S W WASHINGTON CO O N T Y OREGON EG O N w... r MWI/A NE1fA SECTION 01 T35 R1W W.M.t .yy,..5 .• d+ T ` ` scwu 1_ 100 r 4..% e* "r' ' l + , .... f! 5, It S/ 14 M 2! 91 If azn ,7. a ' n u ' e a ! a r ° ."',f .¢A7 'xr 7 <li,,'.' ,.+'_A ^s . a 9, n� peE h l ,- Y e,X 1• 7. Iz .. '- ,z e a w a ,: . XA ' , ,a r .c r. la 1a f*� �y 4 'aR •? `s,,x, � � : r i. s.-- i8 . .SW Eti0.M1RST STREET'. . {n n, 2 p. >u p Z' z2 N ,a"t'4 �• :2:i 4 ! s i �l a! , •:::2)%.):,;%.3.,3:-:>:\�" r yy .".' +n «< L• ae 2/ 22 as a. n se t w q _ It �� „ i .7 ,. ... » i I v ., ... `,, �n ” t O*,ll n !W IOpT200A2 MAPS OWl 0011 WOWII At i1 wwr.co wM.,P.^.a 23-81 , ` '---L..„_ f i `' ~ ja .S ° : .a n y! kER ! + Al 1, BO BA AB AA " t ; ' i lir i m- .4 I+ n" ,, SECTION 01„ � r i ! »��r wa�"�- •a .,yr t CB Co as 134' l - ; e' I "ti .° 4 ass.. ,... ec CO a m a 111 m M ._d. nn 3 i „ r} �} f ! cr.c...e�..m sr aw,.. »2. 2J�O 1 lea . B�ELAN0 [. _ e n v _ s✓ � 4 ��° D • �x! � a .. �l BEVELANO ROAD ” ��• ' .h �* CAR100 24PH' ? .. «. i ,'-'1..',; --1- — ., 1SW i;j•i _! ' : r.r 7. n n.. � POOT OATS:September 212005 * `, b ' d 6"`. bti�,- r € nx .....1! „. fOONOO pTP1E a4. ES ''k ' *• A{ r/ • «< t «” g ax RrR k r` #; + �- ro � "+ r ,p ,,, 4 — >,.- -- • o t .. w r �� a •r � 8z n W — . sf.. My } �� i � 7 `3 �w.. xlc ii > w . '-41.Vx. .e.. x /' `,. 1 ' rsCaa�.e1 2S 1 0.1 AB: 2S 1 Exhibit 4 — Assessor's Map T1 S, R2W, Sec 12(CA), TL 4100, 4200 &4300, WM PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 11 of 19 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map T_ i f -r Site tt ° V —'- —-- \ s , ; _ t _ - \* :oil kt / i ', , i ,°":9..... �,,s, ' • A 0 25 60 100 75ters Feet 0 0 100 200 400 600 Exhibit 5 — Soils Survey Map PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology 106914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 12 of 19 ^lm r p. -_r .---•.e....a�+, . •l+� +R:': wa.n:w.� s f+�ra.�a or t fir . .• I , . , . 4L it '11 (le" 1 . -.If l ' 4) 4,4,, f A , fkapi—Aro i As;Jo trAid , ,- rr ii ■ I -,,,"ir, til . fri it ct mom' : �:�' - 1D + IZ to j r W ii. o la f�! 1.' *'P.,. 1 s zr 4.- / .Exhibit 6 — Existing Condition Hydrology Map PACE Engineers Inc_ 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 13 of 19 I PARCEL III oo�9 9104..D L 0.9.0.«1 um..L III2E9 PARCEL IV WOMEN!NO 90-]l]1. Down s.rauea ooaw.i 9001 11•004ss ON 9001014 O s' DARTMOUTH s 7. .. ..® ..M ,'a —. I\ , ;f1';,,INE— 5 PP i T1F , _ , „ v,,, 1 , 1 ,. , i L, in sw.:,33 SPACES 2 M i1 `� 1 i' L 76 SP S 21C O l i F. © ;e1;!''',3 1 It__■..�i He b it r -sand/ 72nd culvert ° :. T� r VE M SPACES i TO AVE I1099092977 Ii Stornht Fech !r BLOCK 20 V �: is ON 9020999 ON 942.,92 a 92082009 Sr`_e 0e051. 110 NOME _. g . Mil lyrtiJ IBLOCK 21 Exhibit 7 — Developed Condition Hydrology Map PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 14 of 19 WATER QUALITY & QUANTITY FACILITY DESIGN 1.1 Water Quality Volumes and Flows The water quality storm is the storm required by regulations to be treated.The storm defines both the volume and rate of runoff. Per CWS: a. Water Quality Storm:Total precipitation of 0.36 inches falling in 4 hours with a storm return period of 96 hours. b. Water Quality Volume (WQV)is the volume of water that is produced by the Water Quality Storm. c. Water Quality Volume(WQV):0.36-inches over 100-percent of the new impervious area. WQV = 0.36(in)x Area(sf) = 0.36 x 140698 = 4221 of 12(in/ft) 12 * Pond elevation to contain WQV=. 1.3 See pond storage in hydro report. d. Water Quality Flow(WQF):The average design flow anticipated from the water quality storm. WQF = WQV(ct) = 4220.94 = 0,293 cfs 4 hrs"60min/hr`60 sec/min 14400 • equal treatment requirement for flow based treatment. For Stormfilters: 0.2931 *449 gal/cfs/15gat/cart= 8.77 cart use 9 Cart e. To meet water quality requirements with detention the water quality volume must be discharged over a 48 hours period WQF = WQV(of) = 4220.94 = 0.024 cfs 48*60*60(sec) 172800 (Vice Size: USE: D=24*[(Q/(C12gH)^0.5)/pil^0.5 Where: D =diameter of orifice(in) Q =WQF= 0.293121 (cfs)or 0.0244267 (cfs) based on detention(pond)or flow treatment(swalelter) C =0.62(constant) g =32.2(ft/s^2) H =2/3* 1.3 Storage Height of WQV= 0.866 (ft) pi =3.14 D = 3.41 (in) Exhibit 8 — Water Quality Calculations PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 15 of 19 I i - 11 . I I �� a l l 9`` I I �I II r i'\ ' I lit �. Y" I f / om , O - I 1 0 1 � = I 1. 1 . • _ .Its o y 37,1661Y °I'– -- iNS _ •I oZ� 1 N. Rom / 1L I p,,.,. ,. ... I i I ��. F.., - .. .��� - I I. 1 1 l l. I zEz; p. 1I W ii• • . . . W<� I 1 ,t Yo,, ■ N 4. #�m I.1 121_, ,goo'o..s't W. -1 1 I I'Ili I I .1 I �" -II . .• z S 11 g°°`s 'o 91'1 1 I f•I I I !•I•II II I I a 11 d.9 M3N p.•. and .9 M3N,--" I VIII 1 -- -- I I ,^,`` ulmn ll HI I �; C7� 111111111 11111 I I —�4 1: �' illy 11 II�umro 2u. mliroAd .e M3N 11111II p _1191-1, ! IIIIII1 I .� �. . IIIIIIC �o _ � I Kil E i6 111 ; 1, .. . gt ii. :ii aa I l W I ch<e F:›. Wob r J n a 1 I Q 117 J In ) i ? Ol h Q • I ia �I 11 a a a..Iki � P I 1'- J leitinangeor _,..... , __ _______ .f iiir N b 1..a If• I I I :N O< 1 I 'g3 °I Exhibit 9 — Site Drainage Plan PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 16 of 19 Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 2 yr Rainfa/f=2.50" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 1 HydroCADO)8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 l0 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER,which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only For actual design er modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www,hydrocad'.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation,technical support,training materials,and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Time-span=0.00-24:00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,2401 points Runoff by SBUH method,Split Pervious/lmperv. Reach routing by Stor-lnd+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 2S: Site Runoff Area=3,800 so Runoff Depth>2:01" Flow Length=350 To=4.4 min CN=73/98 Runoff=1.91 ofs 0.637 of Pond 3P:Storm Tech Peak Elev=222:76' Storage=7,459 of inflow=1.91 c fs 0637 of Outflow=0.50 ofs 0.578 of Exhibit 10 — HydroCAD 2-yr Summary PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 17 of 19 Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfa11=3.40" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 2 HydroCADO 8.00 SAMPLER sin 021614 O 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER,which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation,technical support,training materials,and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Time span=0.00-24.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,2401 points Runoff by SBUH method,Split Perviousllmperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 2S:Site Runoff Area=3.800 ac Runoff Depth>2.85" Flow Length=350 Tc=4.4 min CN=73/98 Runoff=2.69 cfs 0.904 af Pond 3P:Storm Tech Peak Elev=224.18' Storage=9.501 cf Inflow=2.69 cfs 0.904 at Outflow=1.09 cfs 0.805 af Exhibit 11 — HydroCAD SBUH 10 yr Summary PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Repot-bloc Page 18 of 19 Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 25 yr RainfaN=3.90" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 3 HydroCADS 800 SAMPLER s/n 021614 CC/2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER,which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation,technical support,training materials,and additional features which am essential for actual design work, Time span=0.00-24.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,2401 points Runoff by SBUH method,Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Intl+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 25: Site Runoff Area=3.800 a Runoff Depth>3.33" Flow Length=350' Tc=4.4 min CN=73/98 Runoff=3.14 cfs 1.054 of Pond 3P; Storm Tech Peak Elev=225.04' Storage=10,745 cf Inflow=3.14 cfs 1.054 of Outflow=1.46 cfs 0.935 of Exhibit 12 — HydroCAD SBUH 25 yr Summary PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report.doc Page 19 of 19 Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 100 yr Rainfa11=4.50" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 4 HydroCACO 8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 02006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER,which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation,technical support,training materials,and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Time span=0.00-24.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,2401 points Runoff by SBUH method,Split Perviousilmperv, Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 2S:Site Runoff Area=3 800 ac Runoff Depth>3.90" Flow Length=350' Tc=4.4 min CN=73198 Runoff=3.67 cfs 1.236 at Pond 3P:Storm Tech Peak Elev=225.36' Storage=11,199 cf Inflow=3.67 cfs 1.236 of Outflow=3 31 cfs 1 098 of Exhibit 13 — HydroCAD SBUH 100 yr Summary PACE Engineers Inc. 1300 John Adams Street Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Ph 503-655-1342 Fax 503-655-1360 PARCEL III Dd 4 qE Y U R U,0 VOLLO PARCEL IV OCNTAEO NO 110-73210 DONALD E GULLOR DDCUr.ENI n0 a.COTOSA . 014 Yo010140 - o a.0. 8 ft.at. ft.JON alt.alt.. alt- Mrs Aft-•:-.�rs-t,n-•r..r•tr•-s•ors. �- _ ss-:.�.: mom,- .z<ss-e'nt..-e ' '•�_ 4 :44 Er 1 8 of , : • It 1 L ;a°° 3 SPACES Zr� �r )E 17 ri 15 5P S 2HC ..'Y7� lir and/ 72nd culvert ° snow " `"_-• -�7ir;,+ 's, fil 84 SPACES 70Th AVE. YE 11 Stornteech ' I� BLOCK 20 V - ---- ' . is I i. 1 • • S ON MM. 1 ' ON 9Y0}b.Y w 9}0!10}8 . _1_300 i 0.80•< I moue • ililiii m BLOCK 71 "on, Drainage Diagram for Red Rock On site Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net 7/31/2007 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Red Rock On site Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 2 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Area Listing (all nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcats) 2.622 94 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG C (2S) 1.178 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D (2S) 3.800 Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 25 yr Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 3 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Time span=0.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 2401 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 2S: Site Runoff Area=3.800 ac Runoff Depth>3.33" Flow Length=350' Tc=4.4 min CN=73/98 Runoff=3.14 cfs 1.054 af Pond 3P: Storm Tech Peak Elev=225.04' Storage=10,745 cf Inflow=3.14 cfs 1.054 af Outflow=1.46 cfs 0.935 of Link IL: Wetland/ 72nd culvert Inflow=1.46 cfs 0.935 of Primary=1.46 cfs 0.935 of Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 25 yr Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 4 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Subcatchment 2S: Site Runoff = 3.14 cfs @ 7.87 hrs, Volume= 1.054 af, Depth> 3.33" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 25 yr Rainfall=3.90" Area (ac) CN Description 2.622 94 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG C 1.178 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 3.800 94 Weighted Average 0.570 73 Pervious Area 3.230 98 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.8 50 0.0700 0.22 Sheet Flow, Sheet Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.60" 0.6 300 0.0500 8.98 4.90 Circular Channel (pipe), Pipe Diam= 10.0" Area= 0.5 sf Perim= 2.6' r= 0.21' n= 0.013 4.4 350 Total 1 Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 25 yr Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 5 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Subcatchment 2S: Site Hydrograph 3.14 cfs [11 t1 Runoff Type lA24-hr 25 yr Rainfall=3.90" ;Runoff Area_3.800 ac Runoff-Volume=1.054 of- /� Runoff Depth>3.33" 0*. w� FIoLength=350 o• _ LL % Tc=44 min 1- CN=73198 // I 1 I 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 25 yr Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 6 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Pond 3P: Storm Tech Inflow Area = 3.800 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.33" for 25 yr event Inflow = 3.14 cfs @ 7.87 hrs, Volume= 1.054 af Outflow = 1.46 cfs © 8.32 hrs, Volume= 0.935 af, Atten= 54%, Lag= 27.0 min Primary = 1.46 cfs @ 8.32 hrs, Volume= 0.935 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs / 6 Peak Elev= 225.04' @ 8.32 hrs Surf.Area= 3,600 sf Storage= 10,745 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 184.3 min calculated for 0.935 af (89% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 104.7 min ( 775.1 - 670.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 220.00' 5,597 cf StormTech drain rock (Irregular)Listed below (Recalc) 19,800 cf Overall - 5,807 cf Embedded = 13,993 cf x 40.0% Voids #2 220.00' 5,807 cf 44.6"W x 30.0"H x 900.00'L StormTech SC-740Inside #1 11,404 cf Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft) 220.00 3,600 348.0 0 0 3,600 225.50 3,600 348.0 19,800 19,800 5,514 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 220.00' 3.4" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Primary 222.70' 4.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #3 Primary 224.18' 2.7" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #4 Primary 225.05' 12.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate Limited to weir flow C= 0.600 Primary OutFlow Max=1.46 cfs @ 8.32 hrs HW=225.04' (Free Discharge) ar1=OrificelGrate (Orifice Controls 0.67 cfs © 10.66 fps) 2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.62 cfs @ 7.10 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.17 cfs @ 4.17 fps) 4=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 25 yr Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 7 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Pond 3P: Storm Tech Hydrograph / • ❑ Inflow L3.14 CfS , ❑Primary Inflow Area=3.800 ac 3- Peak Eleu=225.04' Storage='10,745 cf ! I � 2 i , , ;r . 1.46 cfs E I I I ! I I i I 1 I 1 I ! I I 1 0 r, r: r :.!r r r r i:r:,I::r:(r r r r I:r r r 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Red Rock On site Type IA 24-hr 25 yr Rainfall=3.90" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 8 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Link 1 L: Wetland/ 72nd culvert Inflow Area = 3.800 ac, Inflow Depth > 2.95" for 25 yr event Inflow = 1.46 cfs @ 8.32 hrs, Volume= 0.935 af Primary = 1.46 cfs @ 8.32 hrs, Volume= 0.935 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 1 L: Wetland/ 72nd culvert Hydrograph / a ®Inflow Primary Inflow Area=3.;800 ac 1— 0 u lam, � , � 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Appendix B Contech Stormwater Filter O&M Instructions Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report Appendix B.doc dOlk. I LITCwur `oul=ro Operation and Maintenance STORMWATER SOLUTIONS- The Stormwater requirements for treating runoff in compliance with the Clean Water Act. Management StormFilter® Through independent third party studies, it Vault, Cast-In-Place, and Linear Units has been demonstrated that the StormFilter is highly effective for treatment of first flush flows and for treatment of flow-paced flows Important:These guidelines should be used during the latter part of a storm. In general, as a part of your site stormwater the StormFilter s efficiency is highest when management plan. pollutant concentrations are highest. The primary non-point source pollutants targeted Description for removal by the StormFilter are: The Stormwater Management StormFilter® suspended solids (TSS), oil and grease, (StormFilter) is a passive, flow-through, soluble metals, nutrients, organics, and stormwater filtration system. The system is trash and debris. comprised of one or more vaults that house rechargeable, media-filled, filter cartridges. Sizing The StormFilter works by passing The StormFilter is sized to treat the peak Stormwater through the media-filled flow of a water quality design storm. The cartridges, which trap particulates and peak flow is determined from calculations adsorb materials such as dissolved metals based on the contributing watershed and hydrocarbons. Once filtered through the hydrology and from a design storm media, the treated stormwater is directed to magnitude set by the local stormwater a collection pipe or discharged into an open management agency. The particular size of channel drainage way. a StormFilter unit is determined by the number of filter cartridges (see Figure 1) The StormFilter is offered in multiple required to treat this peak flow. configurations, including vault, linear, catch basin, manhole, and cast-in-place. The The flow rate through each filter cartridge is vault, linear, manhole, and catch basin adjustable, allowing control over the amount models utilize pre-manufactured units to of contact time between the influent and the ease the design and installation processes. filter media. The maximum flow rate The cast-in-place units are customized for through each cartridge can be adjusted to larger flows and may be either covered or between 5 and 15 gpm using a calibrated uncovered underground units. restrictor disc at the base of each filter cartridge. Adjustments to the cartridge flow Purpose rate will affect the number of cartridges The StormFilter is a passive, flow-through, required to treat the peak flow. stormwater filtration system designed to improve the quality of stormwater runoff from the urban environment before it enters receiving waterways. It is intended to function as a Best Management Practice (BMP) to meet federal, state, and local 02006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions Toll-free:800 548.4667 1 of 9 contechstormwater.corn Vault,CIP and Linear Stomfilter Operati on and Maintenance Guidelines Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Dcbrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report Appendix B.doc Basic Function the entire filter cartridge is used to filter The Storm Filter is designed to siphon water throughout the duration of the storm, stormwater runoff through a filter cartridge regardless of the water surface elevation in containing media. A variety of filter media is the unit. This siphon continues until the available and can be customized for each water surface elevation drops to the site to target and remove the desired levels elevation of the hood's scrubbing of sediments, dissolved phosphorus, regulators. dissolved metals, organics, and oil and The cartridges are connected to the under- grease. In many cases, a combination of drain manifold with a plastic connector. media is recommended to maximize the Since some media used is potentially effectiveness of the stormwater pollutant buoyant, a threaded connector affixed to the removal. under-drain manifold (with glue or other adhesive) is necessary to ensure that the cartridge isn't lifted out of place. For the heavier compost media, a slip connector is used. The StormFilter is also equipped with flow :; spreaders that trap floating debris and surface films, even during overflow ""o` "" conditions. Depending on individual site characteristics, some systems are equipped _ with high and/or base flow bypasses. High flow bypasses are installed when the calculated peak storm event generates a flow that overcomes the overflow capacity of Figure 1. The StormFilter Cartridge the system. This is especially important for precast systems. Base flow bypasses are sometimes installed to bypass continuous Priming System Function inflows caused by ground water seepage, When stormwater in the StormFilter unit which usually do not require treatment. All enters a StormFilter cartridge, it percolates StormFilter units are designed with an horizontally through the cartridge's filter overflow. The overflow operates when the media and collects in the center tube of the inflow rate is greater than the treatment cartridge, where the float in the cartridge is capacity of the filter cartridges. in a dosed(downward)position. Water continues to pass through the filter media and into the cartridge's center tube. The air in the cartridge is displaced by the water and purged from beneath the filter hood through the one-way check valve located in the cap. Once the center tube is filled with water (approximately 18 inches deep),there is enough buoyant force on the float to open the float valve and allow the treated water in the center tube to flow into the under-drain manifold. This causes the check valve to dose, initiating a siphon that draws polluted water throughout the full surface area and volume of the filter. Thus, 02006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions Toll-free.800 548 4667 2 of 9 contechstornwater.com Vault,CIP and Linear StorrrFtiter Operation and Maintenance Guidelines Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report Appendix B.doc Maintenance Guidelines Two scheduled inspections/maintenance activities should take place during the year. The primary purpose of the StormFilter is to First, an inspection/minor maintenance filter out and prevent pollutants from activity should be done. During the minor entering our waterways. Like any effective filtration system, periodically these maintenance activity (routine inspection, pollutants must be removed to restore the maintenance removal),should the need for major StormFilter to its full efficiency and maintenance should be determined and, if disposal during major maintenance will be effectiveness. required, samples of the sediments and Maintenance requirements and frequency media should be obtained. are dependent on the pollutant load Second, if required, a major maintenance characteristics of each site. activity (replacement of the filter cartridges and associated sediment removal) should Maintenance activities may be required in be performed. the event of a chemical spill or due to excessive sediment loading from site In addition to these two scheduled activities, erosion or extreme storms. It is also good it is important to check the condition of the practice to inspect the system after severe StormFilter unit after major storms for storm events. damage caused by high flows and for high sediment accumulation that may be caused Types of Maintenance by localized erosion in the drainage area. It may be necessary to adjust the Presently, procedures have been developed maintenance activity schedule depending for two levels of maintenance: on the actual operating conditions • Inspection/minor maintenance encountered by the system. • Major maintenance. In general, minor maintenance activities will occur late in the rainy season, and major Inspection/minor maintenance activities are maintenance will occur in late summer to combined since minor maintenance does early fall when flows into the system are not not require special equipment and typically likely to be present. little or no materials are in need of disposal. Inspection/minor maintenance typically Maintenance Activity Frequency involves: The primary factor controlling timing of maintenance for the StormFilter is • Inspection of the vault itself sedimentation. • Removal of vegetation and trash and debris. Major maintenance typically includes: • Cartridge replacement • Sediment removal Important: Applicable safety (OSHA) and disposal regulations should be followed during all maintenance activities. Maintenance Activity Timing (:2006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions Tdl-free:800.548.4667 3 of 9 contechstormwater.com Vault CIP and Linear StormFilter Operation and Maintenance Guidelines Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report Appendix B.doc A properly functioning system will remove The recommended initial frequency for solids from water by trapping particulates in inspection/minor maintenance is two times the porous structure of the filter media. The per year for precast units. StormFitter units flow through the system will naturally should be inspected after all major storms. decrease as more and more solids are Sediment removal and cartridge trapped. Eventually the flow through the replacement on an annual basis is system will be low enough to require recommended until further knowledge is replacement of the cartridges. It may be gained about a particular system. possible to extend the usable span of the cartridges by removing sediment from Once an understanding of site upstream trapping devices on an as-needed characteristics has been established, basis in order to prevent material from being maintenance may not be needed for one to re-suspended and discharged to the two years,but inspection is warranted. system_ Maintenance Methods Site conditions greatly Influence maintenance requirements. StormFitter Inspection/Minor Maintenance units located in areas with erosion or active construction should be inspected and The primary goal of a maintenance maintained more often than those in fully inspection is to assess the condition of the stabilized areas. cartridges relative to the level of sediment loading. It may be desirable to conduct this The maintenance frequency may be inspection during a storm to observe the adjusted as additional monitoring relative flow through the filter cartridges. If information becomes available during the the submerged cartridges are severely inspection program. Areas that develop plugged, large amounts of sediments will be known problems should be inspected more present and very little flow will be frequently than areas that demonstrate no discharged from the drainage pipes. If this problems,particularly after large storms. is the case, it is likely that the cartridges need to be replaced. Ultimately, inspection and maintenance activities should be scheduled based on the Warning: In the case of a spill, the worker historic records and characteristics of an should abort maintenance activities until the individual StormFilter system. It is proper guidance is obtained. Notify the recommended that the maintenance agency local hazard control agency and CONTECH develop a database to properly manage Stormwater Solutions immediately. StormFilter maintenance programs. Prior to the development of the To conduct an inspection and/or minor maintenance database, the following maintenance: maintenance frequencies should be followed: Important: Maintenance must be performed by a utility worker familiar with StormFilter Inspection/minor maintenance units. • One time per year • After Major Storms 1. If applicable, set up safety equipment to protect pedestrians from fall hazards Major maintenance due to open vault doors or when work is • One time per year being done near walkways or roadways. • In the event of a chemical spill 2. Visually inspect the external condition of the unit and take notes concerning Frequencies should be updated as required. defects/problems. 8:2006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions Toll-free:800548.4667 4 of 9 contachstormwater.con, Vault.CIP and Linear StorrnFdter Operation and Maintenance Guidelines Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report Appendix B.doc 3. Open the doors to the vault and allow Replacement cartridges will be delivered to the system to air out for 5-10 minutes. the site. Information concerning how to obtain the replacement cartridges is 4. Without entering the vault, inspect the available from CONTECH Stormwater inside of the unit,including components. Solutions. 5. Take notes about the external and Warning: In the case of a spill,the worker internal condition of the vault. should abort maintenance activities until the proper guidance is obtained. Notify the Be sure to record the level of sediment local hazard control agency and build-up on the floor of the vault, in the CONTECH Stormwater Solutions forebay, and on top of the cartridges. If immediately. flow is occurring, note the level of water and estimate the flow rate per drainage To conduct cartridge replacement and pipe.Record all observations. sediment removal maintenance: 6. Remove large loose debris and trash 1. If applicable, set up safety equipment to using a pole with a grapple or net on the protect pedestrians from fall hazards end. due to open vault doors or when work is being done near walkways or roadways. 7. Close and fasten the door. 2. Visually inspect the external condition of 8. Remove safety equipment. the unit and take notes concerning defects/problems. 9. Make notes about the local drainage area relative to ongoing construction, 3. Open the doors to the vault and allow erosion problems, or high loading of the system to air out for 5-10 minutes. other materials to the system. 4. Without entering the vault, give the 10.Finally, review the condition reports from inside of the unit, including components, the previous minor and major a general condition inspection. maintenance visits, and schedule cartridge replacement if needed. 5. Make notes about the external and internal condition of the vault. Major Maintenance Give particular attention to recording the Depending on the configuration of the level of sediment build-up on the floor of particular system,a worker may be required the vault, in the forebay, and on top of to enter the vault to perform some tasks. the internal components. Important: If vault entry is required, OSHA 6. Remove large loose debris and trash rules for confined space entry must be using a pole with a grapple or net on the followed. end. Filter cartridge replacement should occur I. Using a boom, crane, or other device during dry weather. It may be necessary to (dolly and ramp), offload the plug the filter inlet pipe if base flows exist, replacement cartridges (up to 150 lbs. Standing water present in the vault should each)and set aside. be regarded as polluted and should be 8. Remove used cartridges from the vault contained during this operation by using one of the following methods: temporarily capping the manifold connectors. 0.2006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions Tdl-free:800.548.4667 5 of 9 contachstormwatarsom Vault CIP and linear StormFdtar Operation and Maintenance Guidelines Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report Appendix B.doc • • Important: This activity will require that a.Unscrew the cartridge cap. workers enter the vault to remove the cartridges from the drainage system. b.Remove the cartridge hood. Method 1: c.Tip the cartridge on its side. a.Using an appropriate sling, attach Important: Note that cartridges the cable from the boom, crane, or containing media other than the leaf tripod to the cartridge being media require unscrewing from their removed. Contact CONTECH threaded connectors. Take care not Stormwater Solutions for to damage the manifold connectors. specifications on appropriate This connector should remain attachment devices. installed in the manifold and capped if necessary. This activity will require that workers enter the vault to remove the d.Empty the cartridge onto the vault cartridges from the drainage system floor. and place them under the vault opening for lifting. e.Set the empty, used cartridge aside or load onto the hauling truck. Important: Note that cartridges containing media other than the leaf f. Continue steps a through e until media require unscrewing from their all cartridges have been removed. threaded connectors. Take care not to damage the manifold connectors. 9. Remove deposited sediment from the This connector should remain floor of the vault and, if large amounts installed in the manifold and capped are present,from the forebay. This can if necessary. usually be accomplished by shoveling the sediment into containers, which, b.Remove the used cartridges once full, are lifted mechanically from (250 lbs.each)from the vault. the vault and placed onto the hauling truck. If Method 2 in Step 8 is used to Important: Care must be used to empty the cartridges, or in cases of avoid damaging the cartridges extreme sediment loading, a vactor during removal and installation. The truck may be required. cost of repairing components damaged during maintenance will be 10.Once the sediments are removed, the responsibility of the owner assess the condition of the vault and the unless CONTECH Stormwater condition of the manifold and Solutions performs the maintenance connectors. The connectors are short activities and damage is not related sections of 2-inch schedule 40 PVC, or to discharges to the system. threaded schedule 80 PVC that should protrude above the floor of the vault. c.Set the used cartridge aside or a. If required, apply a light coating of load onto the hauling truck. FDA approved silicon grease to the outside of the exposed portion of d.Continue steps a through c until the connectors. This ensures a all cartridges have been removed. watertight connection between the cartridge and the drainage pipe. Method 2: b. Replace any damaged connectors. 11.Using the boom, crane, or tripod, lower and install the new cartridges. Once 722006 CONTECH Slormwater Solutions Toll-free•800 548 4667 6 of 9 contechstorn,watet.com Vauit CIP and Linear StormFilter Operation and Maintenance Guidelines Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report Appendix B.doc again, take care not to damage Material Disposal connections. The accumulated sediment found in 12.Close and fasten the door. stormwater treatment and conveyance systems must be handled and disposed of 13.Remove safety equipment. in a manner that will not allow the material to affect surface or ground water. It is 14.Make notes about the local drainage possible for sediments to contain area relative to ongoing construction, measurable concentrations of heavy metals erosion problems, or high loadings of and organic chemicals (such as pesticides other materials to the system. and petroleum products). Areas with the greatest potential for high pollutant loading 15.Finally, dispose of the residual materials include industrial areas and heavily traveled in accordance with applicable roads. regulations. Make arrangements to return the used cartridges to CONTECH Sediments and water must be disposed of Stormwater Solutions. in accordance with all applicable waste disposal regulations. It is not appropriate to Related Maintenance Activities discharge untreated materials back to the (Performed on an as-needed basis) stormwater drainage system. StormFilter units are often just one of many Part of arranging for maintenance to occur components in a more comprehensive should include coordination of disposal of stormwater drainage and treatment system. solids (landfill coordination) and liquids The entire system may include catch (municipal vacuum truck decant facility, basins, detention vaults, sedimentation local wastewater treatment plant, on-site vaults and manholes, detention/retention treatment and discharge). ponds, swales, artificial wetlands,and other miscellaneous components. Owners should contact the local public In order for maintenance of the StormFilter works department and inquire about how to be successful, it is imperative that all the department disposes of their street other components be properly maintained. waste residuals. CONTECH Stormwater The maintenance/repair of upstream Solutions will determine disposal methods facilities should be carried out prior to or reuse of the media contained in the StormFilter maintenance activities. cartridges. If the material has been In addition to considering upstream contaminated with any unusual substance, facilities, it is also important to correct any the cost of special handling and disposal problems identified in the drainage area. will be the responsibility of the owner. Drainage area concerns may include: erosion problems, heavy oil and grease loading, and discharges of inappropriate materials. (2006 CONTECH Storrnwater Solutions Toll-free:800.548.4667 7 of 9 contechstormwater.com Vault CIP and Linear$tOrrnFlltnr Operation and Maintenance Guidelines Hydrology Report—Red Rock Business Center July 31, 2007 P:\06914-Anderson Debrowski-Red Rock Creek Business Center\Hydrology\06914 TBC Hydro Report Appendix B.doc StormFilter Minor Maintenance and Ins.- tion Data Sheet Date: Personnel: Location: System Size: System Type: Vault Cast-In-Place Linear System Observations Media Months in Service: Oil and Grease in Forebay: Yes No Sediment Depth in Forebay: Sediment Depth on Vault Floor: Structural Damage: Estimated Flow from Drainage Pipes(if available): Cartridges Submerged:Yes No How Deep: StormFilter Minor Maintenance Activities(check off if done and give descriptions Trash and Debris Removal: Minor Structural Repairs: Drainage Area Report Excessive Oil and Grease Loading:Yes No Source: Sediment Accumulation on Pavement:Yes No Source: Erosion of Landscaped Areas:Yes No Source: Items Needing Further Work: Other Comments: Review the condition reports from the previous minor and major maintenance visits. 02006 CONTECH Stormwater Sdutions Tdl-free:009.548.4667 8 of 9 contechstvmwater_com Vault.CIP and Linear StormFdter Operation and Maintenance Guidelines Appendix C Upstream and Bypass Pipe Analysis The existing ditch draining a small basin to the northeast and southeast runs from east to west along the north portion of the site. This analysis identifies the drainage area and determines for the basin under developed conditions. This calculation establishes the flow that the new pipe in the right of way should be sized for. Attached is: 1. The basin delineation on USGS map 2. Hydrocad calculation of the peak 100 year storm flow Fr i — ._ .#--..'''' # , ,i''''''-'_Jr"'.4.',{„rpf el : . ' ''.,,, ..--,/* r • ...--i--. - - + 1711" a' .* +ti r e H iii „ 10R ' I l �r' 'k 11 R' r°=.vit ' �' 1 • ' 1 .may ' t w Wea i ' ;- q x n R-:ch)' i ' ✓ , -, t- !s • aim al jg I j '' ! r^''''. :ell' N ' , ' .1 4". " li x 1 all 1 1 1 Ajj 1 ' .1181 OW , in. j t II Ili 009 l''''"-' tki—::41,-: , .ice •*rjr _ _� w 1: 11111 t ,a 1•�,* , stream; . a U sit g �` �n Site Ii. rrge ; . `'i� ` : ." 7 r ii, ,_ . . _., ir I It, .-g"....":"."."".'''''' - .I.,P"' ITIlliS " ° 12R E— • .13� ' : et '.• `' 13R ' t . 1 new R r .� mi $15ifi' ,; . 7, ! '',. , '),,- - 1 to tit 4. ktitipp04.&,,,,,. 4 r U to y ! I I., d N a il Red rock Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 1 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Area Listing (all nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcats) 27.500 94 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG C (1S,2S) 27.500 Red rock Type 124-hr 100 yr Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 2 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Time span=0.00-24.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 481 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1S: Upstream North Runoff Area=14.000 ac Runoff Depth>3.88" Tc=5.0 min CN=71/98 Runoff=37.39 cfs 4.529 af Subcatchment 2S: Upstream south Runoff Area=13.500 ac Runoff Depth>3.88" Tc=5.0 min CN=71/98 Runoff=36.05 cfs 4.367 af Pond 3P: MH Dartmouth & 70th Peak Elev=243.47' Inflow=73.44 cfs 8.895 af 48.0" x 600.0' Culvert Outflow=73.44 cfs 8.895 af Pond 8P: New Wetland Inflow=73.44 cfs 8.895 af Primary=73.44 cfs 8.895 af Link 7L: On Site Drainage Primary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Total Runoff Area = 27.500 ac Runoff Volume = 8.895 af Average Runoff Depth = 3.88" 15.00% Pervious Area = 4.125 ac 85.00% Impervious Area = 23.375 ac Red rock Type 1 24-hr 100 yr Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 3 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Subcatchment 1S: Upstream North Runoff = 37.39 cfs @ 9.95 hrs, Volume= 4.529 af, Depth> 3.88" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type I 24-hr 100 yr Rainfall=4.50" Area (ac) CN Description 14.000 94 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG C 2.100 71 Pervious Area 11.900 98 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Upstream North Hydrograph [0 Runoff 40-1; L 1 37.39 cfs 38= --- --+ - - F Type 0 yy�� q yr36 , y ... Rainfa t ,x.50`' Runof-Area=1 . ...000 a.e... _ . --4_ _ ----T--.Ftunoff Vdlume=4.52 -af- -- za= ; 224. , _._L_ _-. a._ 'L._ _Runoff Depth>a.a. c=5 n/� i ; , t ' .. r ... - 16 - I F I : N=7 12 ' • 10 --•- r I i T� iid rse� rrrr 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Red rock Type I 24-hr 100 yr Rain/a0=4.50" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 4 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Subcatchment 2S: Upstream south Runoff = 36.05 cfs @ 9.95 hrs, Volume= 4.367 af, Depth> 3.88^ Runoff bvSBUH method, Split Pen/ious/|mperv.. Time Span= O.0O-34.0Uhns. dt= 0D5hns Type I 24-hr 100 yr RaintaU=4.50" Area (ac) CN Description 13.500 94 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG C 2.025 71 Pervious Area 11.475 98 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: Upstream south Hydrograph �o�^ . . . . . . I I . . . ■ . . ■ II . . . . . onu"vxh m� _ --� -� -'--� -� -� �36.05Cfs . | --� -� -|- �--� 4-�--� - ' -' --| �� « �� . . . . �� . . . . , - - r 0k yr �� .- r - r-, �- r--r -- � � �KV �� ' � -�- � �- �- �- � �--� 1 t -�--�� '' ms - � -'-- � . - $--� � � ' -- _� �'- :--� ��UK��� ���° . . . . . . . . . . . Rainfall=4.50" =� � - -� --�- � � '�--�--| �V� L � ���� ��K-� �� ^ ~ ~-� ---~-- ~- ~ ', -~ ^ �*uwuno��u���/ek*._n+u.~4v�wxa�� ■ . . . . . . . . . . " ----------` -, ---- ----' = `'-.Run-off Vo,l0m *=4.3=7- pf - - . 1� ' -`- e ' �--�-- �- �'- 1-- --| i- $ -f Runoff � �'' | | | | | | | | | ^ � - � ' � � � - � -� - i -i - � � ' -� -� r�\— _ � ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . ' ' . . . � - ' -�- r—�- 16. ^ �--�- ^ ^ �- ^--^ ~--^ -�--�-� ^ ^ -�-� ��� � ' , I ' II ' ' ' ' �h ��� �_ . 12- 10- . . 40, ' � i � | | -�-� _-^ � ~ ^ � -� -- . . . . . . . - - - ^ ^--^--^ -.- 2- . o . ' 1 2 3 4 5 6.,.,,.o , ,m 11 /.z o ,w 15 15..,n m 19 20 21 22 ux 24 Time (hours) Red rock Type 124-hr 100 yr Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 5 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Pond 3P: MH Dartmouth & 70th Inflow Area = 27.500 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.88" for 100 yr event Inflow = 73.44 cfs @ 9.95 hrs, Volume= 8.895 af Outflow = 73.44 cfs @ 9.95 hrs, Volume= 8.895 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 73.44 cfs @ 9.95 hrs, Volume= 8.895 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 243.47' © 9.95 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 240.00' 48.0" x 600.0' long Culvert RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 213.00' S= 0.0450 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Primary OutFlow Max=73.41 cfs @ 9.95 hrs HW=243.47' (Free Discharge) L1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 73.41 cfs @ 6.34 fps) Pond 3P: MH Dartmouth & 70th Hydrograph /- - I 1 I 1 13 Inflow II 80= ❑Primary 7s= ,. 73.44 cfs Inflow-Arrea=27500.ac 70-:: , 1 , ' 4 , „ Pr* : ,65 ; ' Pear;-Elev=243.47'- I 48.0' x_6QO.O` Culvert 55 :EIIH I , 1 ! I . 45_ I ! 3 40: I , ! : I LL 35� i i 30- I ! : , 25: ! ! -, r a 20 _- - 15 jf 10: �yy /// �G �l . /�l/!/jam .c-0, ,,/e"6r 0"/" 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) Red rock Type I 24-hr 100 yr Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by HydroCAD SAMPLER 1-800-927-7246 www.hydrocad.net Page 6 HydroCAD®8.00 SAMPLER s/n 021614 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 7/31/2007 This report was prepared with the free HydroCAD SAMPLER, which is licensed for evaluation and educational use only. For actual design or modeling applications you must use a full version of HydroCAD which may be purchased at www.hydrocad.net. Full programs also include complete printed documentation, technical support, training materials, and additional features which are essential for actual design work. Pond 8P: New Wetland Inflow Area = 27.500 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.8811 for 100 yr event Inflow = 73.44 cfs @ 9.95 hrs, Volume= 8.895 af Primary = 73.44 cfs @ 9.95 hrs, Volume= 8.895 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Pond 8P: New Wetland / Hydrograph i ._ Inflow 1 7'1 dd rf 80 • ,__ 73.44 cfs _ Primary _ 75= I e _ ! ; Inflow 3A a-21,_500_ac 70- 1 i 65' x. 60- ! _a. r � 1 �... _r .-r � 55; 1 I 1 1 , 50' I • 1 1 . `o q5 ; ! i I 3 J ! i I • ( I 1 - • ! 40-:_. , : , . 1 t I LL 35=, , .� ' / •30.' i I i L_ • 25: • i i 1 € 1 t 202 I i I , I 1 ; I I I 1 15 ii i ! I I 1 I 1 _ 1 . I 10 I i ///,//ir 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) EXHIBIT 7 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT a � '73 r j `+ I,y) Lin FEB 2 0 2007 11 I GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION RED ROCK CREEK TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER TIGARD, OREGON ,.11 \, f� II mi 0 G6) k Its �� • E I pill r jT A 5ULTA N1. PREPARED FOR MR. DOUG FREY NEWBERG, OREGON FEBRUARY 2007 : 11 GEOCON N O R T H W E S T, I N C. GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 0 P1475-05-01 February 16, 2007 Mr. Doug Frey 908 Deborah Road Newberg, Oregon Subject: RED ROCK CREEK TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER TIGARD,OREGON GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Dear Mr. Frey: In accordance with our proposal number P06-05-150, November 1, 2006, and your authorization, we have performed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Red Rock Creek Tigard Business Center in Tigard, Oregon. The accompanying report presents the findings of our investigation and our conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of the proposed construction. Based on the results of this investigation, it is our opinion that the site can be developed as proposed, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Important geotechnical issues addressed herein include perched/shallow groundwater potential, moderately compressible subsurface soil, deep foundation considerations, shoring and retaining wall evaluation, and grading recommendations for the moisture sensitive native fine-grained soil. It is highly recommended that site grading be completed during the summer months to reduce the potential for increased site preparation costs. If you have questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Sincerely, GEOCON NORTHWEST,INCORPORATED <<-REO PROFe oNf�c �O 6.2 / 18281 '9 B an Wavra, P.E. Wesley fang, P ., .E. GO Geotechnical Engineer President %' e 4N16, �9°'� BJW:AWS LESLEY S? cc: Mr.James Ponto,Anderson Dabrowski Architects 'EXPIRATION DATE: 6(3 01 O Mr.Brian Lee,PACE Engineers 8283 SW Cirrus Drive • Beaverton, Oregon 97008 • Telephone (503) 626-9889 • Fax (503) 626-8611 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 2 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 3 REGIONAL GEOLOGY 2 4 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND CONDITIONS 2 4.1 SITE EXPLORATION 2 4.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4 5 SEISMIC HAZARDS 5 5.1 LANDSLIDE HAZARD 5 5.2 CRUSTAL FAULTS 5 5.3 SOIL LIQUEFACTION OR CYCLIC FAILURE POTENTIAL 5 5.4 LATERAL SPREADING 6 5.5 2003 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS 6 6 LABORATORY TESTING 6 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7 7.1 GENERAL 7 7.2 SITE PREPARATION 8 7.3 PROOF ROLLING 10 7.4 FILLS 10 7.5 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE 12 7.6 FOUNDATIONS 12 7.7 PERMANENT CUT AND FILL SLOPES 14 7.8 CONCRETE SLABS-ON-GRADE 14 7.9 RETAINING WALLS AND SHORING 15 7.10 UTILITY EXCAVATIONS 16 7.11 PAVEMENT DESIGN 17 8 FUTURE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 17 9 LIMITATIONS 18 MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Vicinity Map Figure 2, Site Plan Figure 3, 2003 IBC Design Response Spectrum Figure 4,Typical Underslab Drainage Scheme APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report presents the results of the geotechnical investigation for the proposed Red Rock Creek Tigard Business Center in Tigard, Oregon. The approximate 4-acre parcel is located at 12625 SW 70th Avenue, which is at the southeast corner of SW 72" Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street. The purpose of the geotechnical investigation was to evaluate subsurface soil and geologic conditions at the site and, based on the conditions encountered, provide conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of the proposed construction. The scope of the field investigation consisted of a site reconnaissance, review of published geological literature,four exploratory borings,and four dilatometer soundings. A detailed discussion of the field investigation is presented in Section 4 of this report. Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples obtained during the investigation to evaluate pertinent physical properties. Appendix B presents a summary of the laboratory test results. The results of laboratory moisture content tests are presented on the exploratory boring logs. The recommendations presented herein are based on analyses of the data obtained during the field investigation, laboratory test results, and our experience with similar soil and geologic conditions. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Doug Frey and his agents, for specific application to this project, in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice. This report may not contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or other uses. 2 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The site is currently vacant and is occupied by overgrown grass, trees, brush, and wetlands areas. The wetlands areas exhibited saturated soil and perched water at the ground surface at time of the field investigation. Red Rock Creek extends along the north and northwest boundaries of the property. Private residences extend along the south margin,and a large block retaining wall has been constructed for the property adjacent to the east which forms the east perimeter of the subject site. The topography of the site slopes down to the northwest with maximum elevation of 260 feet at the southeast corner and minimum elevation of 210 feet at the northwest corner. Several piles of rubbish were sporadically located across the property, but evidence to suggest the presence of previous structures at the property was not encountered. Drawings provided by Anderson Dabrowski Architects and project civil engineer, PACE Engineers, indicate the development will include the construction of three single-story buildings, on-grade parking, and SW 70th Avenue. Building A will be positioned along the east half of the north perimeter, building B at the far west perimeter, and building C at the middle of the south perimeter. The proposed grading plans indicate that the east portion of the site will require excavation to achieve P1475-05-01 - 1 - February 16,2007 grade while the west section may receive fill on the order of 15 feet. The excavation/fill transition zone extends north/south through proposed buildings A and C. It is understood that the filled portions of the site will be retained by a retaining structure, and the cut along future SW 70th Avenue will be supported by a shoring structure. Red Rock Creek will be diverted to an underground culvert as part of the overall site development. Due to the City of Tigard building setback criteria, the north wall of Building A and the northwest corner of Building B may be positioned over the culvert. A discussion of deep foundation support in these locations is contained herein. 3 REGIONAL GEOLOGY Based on geologic literature reviewed for the site, the topography of the Tualatin Valley region is characterized by wide, flat lowlands and prominent uplands that are controlled primarily by the folding and faulting of the underlying bedrock. The near-surface geology of the project area consists of Late Pleistocene age deposits of silt and fine-grained sand described as Willamette Silt. These Pleistocene age deposits are characterized by brown to buff,beds and lenses of fine-grained sand, silt and clay. Willamette Silts are slack water fluvial and/or lacustrine deposits resulting from repeated temporary inundation of the Willamette and Tualatin Valleys by Late-Pleistocene glacial outburst floods. These glacial floods originated in the Missoula Valley of Montana, passed through eastern Washington, and followed the Columbia River downstream. When these large floods entered the Portland Basin they flowed up the Willamette River and its tributaries, flooding most of the Willamette and Tualatin Valleys to an approximate elevation of 350 feet MSL. The last of these glacial floods,also thought to be one of the largest, occurred about 12,400 years ago, establishing the minimum age of the silt deposit. The Willamette Valley silt is underlain by the erosional surfaces of older bedrock units including the Troutdale Formation. Well logs on file with Oregon Water Resources Department for the adjacent property to the east indicate the presence of silt which is underlain by andesitic rock at a depth of approximately 15 feet. The site west of the subject property is underlain by silt, sand, and clay to the maximum explored depth of 30 feet 4 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND CONDITIONS 4.1 Site Exploration The subsurface soil conditions at the site were determined based on the literature review, field exploration,and laboratory investigation. The field exploration was completed on December 29th and 30th, 2006, and consisted of four exploratory borings and four dilatometer soundings. The borings were completed using mud rotary drilling techniques to a depth of 31.5 feet below the existing ground surface(bgs). The dilatometer soundings encountered practical refusal at variable depths that ranged from 17 to 33 feet bgs. The subsurface conditions encountered in the borings and dilatometer P1475-05-01 -2- February 16,2007 soundings were recorded on the subsurface logs that are located in Appendix A at the end of this report. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown in Figure 2, Site Plan. 4.1.1. Dilatometer Test The dilatometer test provides a rational, cost-effective method to determine engineering parameters for the design of earthworks and structural foundations. It is particularly useful in silts and sands that can be difficult to sample or test by other methods. The DMT is performed in situ by pushing a blade-shaped instrument into the soil. The blade is equipped with an expandable membrane on one side that is pressurized until the membrane moves horizontally into the surrounding soil. Readings of the pressure required to move the membrane to a point that is flush with the blade(A—pressure)and to a point 1.1 mm into the surrounding soil (B—pressure) are recorded. The pressure is subsequently released and, in permeable soils below the groundwater table, a pressure reading is recorded as the membrane returns to the flush position (C — pressure). The test sequence is performed at 0.2-meter intervals to obtain a comprehensive soil profile. A material index (ID), a horizontal stress index(KD)and a dilatometer modulus(ED)are obtained directly from the dilatometer data. Marchetti (1980) developed a soil classification system based on the material index. According to this system, soils with ID values less than 0.35 are classified as clay. Soils classified as sand have an ID value greater than 3.3. Material index values between 0.35—3.3 indicate silty clay to silty sand soils. Empirical relationships between the horizontal stress index and the coefficient of lateral earth pressure (KO have been developed by Lunne et al. (1990) for clays and by Schmertmann (1983) for uncemented sands. While Lunne's method makes use of dilatometer data exclusively, Schmertmann utilizes both DMT and cone penetration data to estimate Ka. Since the DMT is strain-controlled, the measured difference between the B-pressure and A- pressure readings (corrected for membrane stiffness) and cavity expansion theory, can be used to directly measure the soil stiffness. Assuming a Poisson's ratio, the dilatometer modulus is correlated to shear modulus, Young's modulus, and constrained modulus. Four dilatometer soundings completed at this site were advanced to depths ranging from 17 to 33 feet below the ground surface, where refusal was encountered. A member of Geocon Northwest's engineering staff recorded pressure readings every eight inches along the length of the sounding. 4.1.2. Borings Four borings were advanced to a depth of 31.5 feet bgs using a CME-75 track mounted drill rig equipped with mud rotary drilling capabilities. A member of Geocon Northwest's P1475-05-01 -3- February 16,2007 geotechnical engineering staff logged the subsurface conditions encountered within the boring. Standard penetration tests (SPT) were performed in the boring by driving a 2-inch outside diameter split spoon sampler 18 inches into the bottom of the boring, in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 of the 18 inches(blow count) are reported on the boring log located in Appendix A at the end of this report. Disturbed bag samples were obtained from SPT testing. Service providers subcontracted by Geocon Northwest completed the borings. 4.2 Subsurface Conditions The subsurface exploration is assumed to be representative of the subsurface conditions across the site; however, it is possible that some local variations and possible unanticipated subsurface conditions exist. Based on the conditions observed during the reconnaissance and field exploration, the subsurface conditions, in general,consisted of the following: ORGANIC TOPSOIL—An initial layer of approximately 12 to 24 inches of organic topsoil was present across the majority of the site. The topsoil will require stripping in all planned structural and pavement areas. Unsuitable organic soil may locally extend to depths exceeding 2 feet, particularly where existing trees or large shrubs will be removed. Perched water was encountered across the entire site within the organic topsoil layer at a depth less than 12 inches. CLAYEY SILT TO SILTY CLAY—Medium stiff,wet, dark brown/dark gray/rust,mottled clayey silt to silty clay was encountered below the organic topsoil to depths ranging from 5 to 10-feet bgs. The mottling is an indicator of periodic saturation due to perched or shallow groundwater. Moisture contents of this deposit were in excess of 30 percent and will require substantial drying operations to achieve the optimum moisture content for compaction which is expected to range from 15 to 20 percent. SILT — In general, soft to stiff, saturated, brown/gray, silt with varying amounts of fine- grained sand and clay were encountered below the clayey silt to silty clay to depths ranging from 23 to 30-feet bgs. The soil consistency was soft in borings B-1 (12 to 24-feet bgs) and B-2 (15 to 23-feet bgs) with a standard penetration test blowcount value (N-value) of 2. Atterberg limits tests completed on samples retrieved from this layer had liquid limit values ranging from 28 to 30 and plasticity index ranging from 1 to 3 which characterizes the soil as having very low plasticity. SILTY CLAY — Beneath the silt in borings B-2 and B-4, a layer of very stiff, saturated, gray/light green, silty clay with seams of completely weathered gravel was encountered between 23 and 31.5-feet bgs.Blowcount values ranged from 16 to 20. CEMENTED SILT—A hard, moist, light brown cemented fine-grained sandy silt formation was encountered in borings B-1,B-2,and B-3 at the terminal depth of 30 to 31.5-feet bgs. P1475-05-01 -4- February 16,2007 GROUNDWATER—Saturated conditions due to either perched or static groundwater were observed at depths of 6 to 12 inches bgs. Perched or shallow groundwater should be anticipated during the majority of the year, particularly during periods of prolonged wet weather. 5 SEISMIC HAZARDS 5.1 Landslide Hazard Due to the gently rolling topography across the site, the landslide hazard is considered negligible. A discussion regarding potential slope/wall instability at the east perimeter of the site during grading is presented in subsequent sections of this report. 5.2 Crustal Faults Based on the literature review,there are no identified faults mapped within the boundaries of the site or within adjacent properties. Evidence was not encountered during the field investigation to suggest the presence of faults within the property. The potential for fault displacement and associated ground subsidence at the site is considered remote. 5.3 Soil Liquefaction or Cyclic Failure Potential Liquefaction can cause aerial and differential settlement, lateral spreading, loss of bearing capacity, and sudden loss in soil strength. Soils prone to liquefaction are typically loose, saturated sands and, to a lesser degree, silt. Cyclic failure can result in similar hazards to those of liquefaction, but is a phenomena related to low-strength, fine-grained silt and clay soils. When ground shaking commences, the low-strength saturated soils tend to generate excess pore water pressures. The degree of excess pore water pressure generation is largely a function of the magnitude and duration of the ground shaking, as well as the density or consistency of the soil. The sandy soils at the subject site were evaluated for liquefaction potential in accordance with the procedures presented in NCEER, 1997, while the cyclic failure potential of the fine grained deposits were assessed using procedures outlined by Boulanger and Idriss, 2004. The liquefaction resistance of the soils was assessed using methods based on the SPT blow counts and grain size distribution data obtained during the geotechnical field and laboratory investigation. The undrained shear strength of the fine-grained deposits were evaluated using the results of the dilatometer soundings. The seismically induced shear stresses at the site were assessed through the use of a standard-of-practice simplified empirical procedure. The analyses were conducted using the 2003 IBC design level earthquakes which consisted of a moment magnitude 6 for the crustal source, moment magnitude 7 for the intraslab zone,and a moment magnitude 8.5 for a subduction zone event. Peak ground surface acceleration values of 12%, 19%, and 30% gravity (0.12g, 0.19g, and 0.30g) were used for the subduction zone, intraslab zone,and crustal earthquakes, respectively. P1475-05-01 -5- February 16,2007 Based on the results of our analyses,the liquefaction potential at the site is considered remote due to the lack of sand deposits within the subsurface profile. However, an approximate 5-foot layer of soft to medium stiff silt initially encountered throughout the site at depths ranging from approximately 10 to 15 feet had a factor of safety against cyclic failure near 1.0 and may experience softening due to earthquake-induced shear strains. Due to the limited thickness of the soil layer, the effects of this softening on building foundations is anticipated to be minor and will not affect the building's life safety. Settlement of the zone of cyclic softening will occur after earthquake shaking has ceased. According to very preliminary research presented by Boulanger and Idriss, a factor of safety against cyclic failure of 1 corresponds to about 3 percent shear strain. The results of the analysis indicate a maximum settlement of 1 to 2 inches may occur due to the design level earthquake loading. 5.4 Lateral Spreading Lateral spreading is a liquefaction related seismic hazard that may adversely impact some sites. Areas subject to lateral spreading are underlain by liquefiable sediments and are sites that slope or are flat sites adjacent to an open face. Due to the gently sloping topography and lack of open face adjacent to the site, the potential lateral spreading hazard is considered negligible. Furthermore, it is our opinion that potential lateral movements due to cyclic softening of the fine-grained deposits will be substantially less than the magnitude of the vertical strain potential that was discussed in the previous paragraph. 5.5 2003 International Building Code Seismic Design Parameters The structures will be designed in accordance with the 2003 International Building Code (IBC). A soil characteristic called "Soil Profile Type" is used to account for the effect of the underlying soil conditions on bedrock motion. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered during the field investigation, Geocon Northwest's previous geotechnical engineering work in the site vicinity, and the geological literature reviewed for the site, it is estimated that the material in the upper 100 feet, determined in accordance with the procedures outlined in IBC Section 1615 "Site Categorization Procedure", has an average blowcount (N) value between 15 and 50 and an average shear wave velocity between 600 and 1200 feet per second. The preceding criteria characterizes the site as Soil Profile Type D. It is recommended that the 2003 International Building Code seismic factors and coefficients given in Table 1 at the end of this report be used for seismic design. Figure 3, shown at the end of this report, illustrates the design response spectrum. 6 LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory testing was performed on selected soil samples to evaluate moisture content, gradation, consolidation characteristics, and plasticity. Visual soil classification was performed both in the field and laboratory, in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Moisture content determinations (ASTM D2216) were performed on soil samples to aid in classifying the soil. Grain size analyses were performed on selected samples using procedures ASTM D1140 and ASTM D422. The plasticity index was determined in general accordance with ASTM D4318. Consolidation testing was completed in general accordance with ASTM D2435. Moisture contents are indicated on the P 1475-05-01 -6- February 16,2007 boring logs and are located in Appendix A of this report. Other laboratory test results for this project are summarized in Appendix B. 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 General 7.1.1 It is our opinion that the proposed construction of the Red Rock Creek Tigard Business Center project is geotechnically feasible, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. 7.1.2 The primary geotechnical concern associated with the project development is the consolidation of the moderately compressible soils when subjected to the planned fill surcharge. Settlement analyses were completed for the fills anticipated for each of the three structures. The results indicate settlements of 1 to 2 inches within building A, 2 to 4 inches within building B, and 0.5 to 1-inch within building C. Monitoring of the settlement in fill locations is recommended to determine when the majority of primary consolidation has occurred prior to the construction of the buildings. Analyses and experience with similar soils indicate that surcharge-induced settlement should be near complete after approximately 90 to 150 days. 7.1.3 The placement of structural fill should completed in staged intervals to prevent a bearing capacity failure of the low-strength fine-grained soil below the site. Recommendations for fill construction are provided in Section 7.4.4. 7.1.4 Red Rock Creek will be diverted to an underground culvert as part of the overall site development. Due to the City of Tigard building setback criteria, the north wall of Building A and the northwest corner of Building B may be positioned over the culvert. The building may not be supported on a shallow foundation that is positioned above or near the underground culvert. A discussion of potential foundation support in these locations is contained herein. 7.1.5 Retaining walls and shoring will be required around the majority of the property,the types of which have not yet been finalized. The retaining structures along the north, south, and west perimeters will retain structural fill soils and, potentially be subject to surcharging from building foundations. Retaining walls in these locations may consist of a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall, or a cast in place concrete retaining wall. An excavation is planned adjacent to the proposed SW 70th Avenue alignment. It is our opinion that the shoring structure must provide active restraint during excavation to prevent instability issues with the large block retaining wall on the east property margin. A shoring wall with soldier piles and pretensioned tie-back elements is recommended. 7.1.6 The existing organic topsoil layer is unsuitable for structural foundation or pavement support. Recommendations for site stripping and fill removal in structural locations are provided herein. Stripping depths exceeding 12 inches are likely. P1475-05-01 -7- February 16,2007 7.1.7 Recommendations regarding drainage and vapor retarders are provided in subsequent sections of this report. Perched water was present at a depth of less than 12 inches at the time of the field investigation. Recommendations for undersiab drainage in building pads located at or below the existing ground surface are provided. Underslab drainage is not recommended in locations where the building pad is founded on structural fill above the existing ground surface elevation. 7.1.8 Instability of excavations below the groundwater surface should be anticipated. Excavations made below the groundwater surface should be sloped or shored in conformance with OSHA regulations. Shoring systems are typically contractor designed. 7.1.9 Wet weather construction techniques should be anticipated during the majority of the year due to the presence of the moisture sensitive, near-surface soils. Recommendations for wet weather construction are provided in subsequent sections of this report. It is recommended that the project budget include costs for wet weather site preparation, regardless of the time of year construction is scheduled to occur. Extra costs associated with wet weather construction may include overexcavation of soft soils, geotextile separator fabric, crushed rock backfill, and use of crushed rock for structural fills. 7.2 Site Preparation 7.2.1 Prior to beginning construction, the areas of the site to receive fill, footings or pavement should be stripped of vegetation, topsoil, non-engineered fill, previous subsurface improvements, debris, and otherwise unsuitable material, down to firm native soil. The majority of the site is anticipated to be underlain by at least 12 inches of organic topsoil which will require stripping prior to construction. Additional removal and recompaction/replacement should be anticipated within the areas currently occupied by large trees to provide a stable subgrade. Excavations made to remove previous subsurface improvements should be backfilled with structural fill per Section 7.4 of this report. 7.2.2 Staging areas and haul roads specifically constructed to accommodate anticipated construction loading must be installed by the contractor to minimize future overexcavation of deteriorated subgrade soil. All concrete slab-on-grade and pavement sections presented in the following sections of this report do not include an allowance for construction traffic. Past experience suggests that 18 inches of rock underlain by a geotextile separator fabric typically provides adequate work pad/haul road thickness. The recommended design sections may be "overbuilt"to obtain the necessary working thickness and subsequently reduced to the design section for possible cost savings in lieu of overexcavation of suitable subgrade soil. Alternatively, the working surface may be incorporated into the final design. Recommendations for.wet weather haul roads and working pads should be implemented in areas of the site that will experience significant construction traffic. 7.2.3 Moisture contents of near-surface soils were significantly wet of optimum at the time of the field investigation. Due to the moisture sensitive nature of the near-surface soils, it is recommended that earthwork-related construction take place during dry weather. P1475-05-01 -8- February 16,2007 Recommendations for both dry weather and wet weather site preparation are provided in the following sections. Wet weather is defined as any time of year that adequate moisture control cannot be obtained. Increased costs, associated with subgrade stabilization, should be anticipated regardless of the time of year of construction. 7.2.4 Dry Weather Construction Native soil subgrades in pavement and structural areas that have been disturbed during stripping, cutting, or demolition operations should be scarified to a depth of at least eight- inches. The scarified soil should be moisture conditioned as necessary to achieve the proper moisture content, then compacted to at least 92%of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Minimum compaction for the 8 inches immediately underlying pavement sections should be 95%. Even during dry weather it is likely that most areas of the subgrade will become soft or may"pump," particularly in poorly drained areas. Soft or wet areas that cannot be effectively dried and compacted should be prepared in accordance with Section 7.2.5. 7.2.5 Wet Weather Construction During wet weather, defined as whenever adequate soil moisture control is not possible, it may be necessary to install a granular working blanket to support construction equipment and provide a firm base on which to place subsequent fills and pavements. Commonly, the working blanket consists of a bank run gravel or pit run quarry rock (six to eight inch maximum size with no more than 5% by weight passing a No. 200 sieve). A member of Geocon Northwest's engineering staff should be contacted to evaluate the suitability of the material before installation. The working blanket should be installed on a stripped subgrade in a single lift with trucks end-dumping off an advancing pad of granular fill. It should be possible to strip most of the site with careful operation of track-mounted equipment. However, during prolonged wet weather, or in particularly wet locations, operation of this type of equipment may cause excessive subgrade disturbance. In some areas final stripping and/or cutting may need to be accomplished with a smooth-bucket trackhoe, or similar equipment, working from an advancing pad of granular fill. After installation, the working blanket should be compacted by a minimum of four complete passes with a moderately heavy static steel drum or grid roller. It is recommended that Geocon Northwest be retained to observe granular working blanket installation and compaction. The working blanket must provide a firm base for subsequent fill installation and compaction. Past experience indicates that about 18 inches of working pad is normally required. This assumes that the material is placed on a relatively undisturbed subgrade prepared in accordance with the preceding recommendations. Areas used as haul routes for heavy construction equipment or construction staging areas may require a work pad thickness of two feet or more. P1475-05-01 -9- February 16,2007 In particularly soft areas, a heavy-grade, non-degradable geotextile fabric installed on the subgrade may reduce the thickness of working blanket required. The fabric should have a minimum puncture resistance of 80 pounds and a minimum Mullen Burst strength of 300 psi. Construction practices can affect the amount of work pad necessary. By using tracked equipment and special haul roads,the work pad area can be minimized. The routing of dump trucks and rubber tired construction equipment across the site can require extensive areas and thicknesses of work pad. Normally, the design, installation and maintenance of a work pad are the responsibility of the contractor. Cement treatment may be a suitable alternative for construction traffic or wet-weather subgrade stabilization at this site. Successful cement treatment is dependent upon moisture content of the subgrade soils, cement percentage,weather conditions at the time of treatment, depth of treatment, and adequate mixing and compaction of the soil and cement. Past experience indicates that approximately 5%to 8%cement by weight,tilled to a depth of 12 to 14 inches, is typically sufficient to produce an acceptable subgrade. It is generally recommended that cement amended soil be compacted within a four-hour window. It is recommended that cement treated soils have a three-day, unconfined compressive strength of 250 psi. Cement treatment design is typically the responsibility of the contractor. The high soil moisture content may require multiple cement treatment operations. 7.3 Proof Rolling 7.3.1 Regardless of which method of subgrade preparation is used (i.e., wet weather or dry weather), it is recommended that, prior to on-grade slab construction, the subgrade or granular working blanket be proof-rolled with a fully-loaded 10- to 12-yard dump truck. Areas of the subgrade that pump, weave, or appear soft or muddy should be scarified, dried and compacted, or overexcavated and backfilled with structural granular fill per Section 7.4. If a significant length of time passes between fill placement and commencement of construction operations,or if significant traffic has been routed over these areas,the subgrade should be similarly proof-rolled before slab construction. It is recommended that a member of our geotechnical engineering staff observe the proof-roll operation. 7.4 Fills 7.4.1 Structural fills should be constructed on a subgrade that has been prepared in accordance with the recommendations in Section 7.2 of this report. Structural fills should be installed in horizontal lifts not exceeding approximately eight inches in thickness and should be compacted to at least 92%of the maximum dry density for the native soils, 95%for imported granular material, and should be within 2% of the optimum moisture content. Compaction should be referenced to ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor). The compaction criteria may be reduced to 85% in landscape, planter, or other non-structural areas. P1475-05-01 - 10- February 16,2007 7.4.2 During dry weather when moisture control is possible, structural fills may consist of native material, free of topsoil, debris and organic matter,which can be compacted to the preceding specifications. However, if excess moisture causes the fill to pump or weave, those areas should be scarified and allowed to dry. The soil should then be recompacted,or removed and backfilled with compacted granular fill as discussed in Section 7.2 of this report. Past experience suggests that the native soil has a maximum dry density ranging from 110 to 115 lbs/ft3 at an optimum moisture content between 15 and 20 percent. Moisture contents of the near surface native soil were typically greater than 30 percent at the time of the field investigation. Extensive drying of the native soil will be required if used as structural fill during construction. 7.4.3 During wet-weather grading operations, Geocon Northwest recommends that fills consist of well-graded, angular, granular soils (sand or sand and gravel)that do not contain more than 5% material by weight passing the No. 200 sieve. In addition, it is usually desirable to limit this material to a maximum of six inches in diameter for future ease in the installation of utilities. 7.4.4 The site is underlain by relatively low-strength, moderately compressible soil. Current grading plans indicate the fills up to 15 feet high will be placed along the west margin of building B. The depth of fill decreases to the east with the excavation/fill transition zone extending north/south through proposed buildings A and C. The fill placement will create excess pore water pressure and, in turn, decreased strength in the underlying soil. To prevent a failure of the soil during fill construction, it is recommended that piezometers and settlement cells be installed prior to the commencement of grading operations. The piezometers will used to monitor excess porewater pressure and settlement cells to evaluate both total and time-rate of consolidation. It our opinion that both monitoring devices are essential for successful fill construction and to mitigate the potential for a bearing capacity failure. 7.4.5 Preliminary analyses indicate that a maximum of 8 feet of fill may initially be placed without a bearing failure. Settlement and pore pressure measurements should be evaluated to determine when approximately 80 percent of consolidation has occurred prior to additional fill placement. 7.4.6 Settlement analyses were completed for the fills planned for each of the three structures. The results indicate settlements of 1 to 2 inches within building A, 2 to 4 inches within building B, and 0.5 to 1-inch within building C. Monitoring of the settlement in fill locations is recommended to ensure the majority of primary consolidation has occurred prior to the construction of the buildings. 7.4.7 The results of our engineering analyses indicate that the structural fill-induced settlement should be near completion after approximately 90 to 150 days. Our experience with previous surcharges in the Willamette Valley has shown that evaluating the time rate of surcharge settlement from laboratory testing is extremely difficult. This difficulty arises from the small dimension and uniformity of laboratory test samples compared to the larger dimensions and P1475-05-01 - 11 - February 16,2007 non-uniformity of native soil(particularly with respect to drainage conditions). The time rate of surcharge settlement may be modified as settlement and piezometer data is interpreted during construction. 7.4.8 The time rate of settlement may be accelerated using wick (strip) drains if the construction schedule does not allow for the settlement time estimate. Wick drains are typically spaced 7 to 10 feet on center and would extend down to a depth of approximately 30 feet. The wick drains provide a shorter drainage path and significantly increases the time rate of settlement. It is estimated that the installation of wick drains would reduce the time rate of settlement at the site by 50%to 75%. 7.5 Surface and Subsurface Drainage 7.5.1 During site contouring,positive surface drainage should be maintained away from foundation and pavement areas. Additional drainage or dewatering provisions may be necessary if soft spots, springs, or seeps are encountered in subgrades or cut slopes. Where possible, surface runoff should be routed independently to a storm water collection system. Surface water should not be allowed to enter subsurface drainage systems. 7.5.2 Due to the proximity of groundwater to the surface, an underslab drainage system is recommended for those locations where slab-on-grade subgrade elevations will be at or below the existing surface elevation. An underslab drainage system is not recommended in fill locations where slab on grade elevations will be greater than existing grade. It is typically recommended that the underslab drainage system consist of 4-inch diameter PVC perforated pipe placed within granular fill at 15-foot centers beneath the building footprint. The granular fill should consist of a minimum 8-inch thick layer of crushed rock or gravel with less than 5% by weight passing the No. 200 sieve. The PVC pipe should be wrapped with a geotextile filter fabric. Figure 4 presents a cross-section of the underslab drainage system. Final design of the underslab drainage system should be completed by the project civil engineer,with consultation from Geocon Northwest. 7.5.3 Drainage systems should be sloped to drain by gravity to a storm sewer or other positive outlet. 7.5.4 Drainage and dewatering systems are typically designed and constructed by the contractor. Failure to install necessary subsurface drainage provisions may result in premature foundation or pavement failure. 7.6 Foundations 7.6.1 Spread and perimeter foundation support for proposed structures may be obtained from the near-surface, non-organic native soil, or from structural fill installed in accordance with our previous recommendations. If unsuitable fill soils, or soft, saturated soil are encountered at footing elevation, the unsuitable soils should be removed to firm soil. If these unforeseen conditions are encountered, a member of Geocon Northwest's engineering staff should be contacted to evaluate the suitability of the material before installation. Overexcavation P1475-05-01 - 12- February 16,2007 should be expected in cut locations across the site due to the potential for perched water near the existing ground surface. 7.6.2 Red Rock Creek will be diverted to an underground culvert as part of the overall site development. Due to the City of Tigard building setback criteria, the north wall of Building A and the northwest corner of Building B will likely be positioned over the culvert. The building may not be supported on a shallow foundation that is located within a horizontal distance equal to the depth of the pipe (1 H:1 V). Potential deep foundation schemes that may be feasible would include helical anchors, augercast piles, driven pipe, or driven H-piles. A deep foundation using an open-hole installation system is not preferred given the presence of near surface saturated soil and the potential for caving or"necking" of the borehole. Geocon Northwest should be contacted for deep foundation design recommendations as the building layout and project plans are finalized. 7.6.3 The following shallow foundation recommendations are based on maximum anticipated column and wall loads of 150 kips and 4 kips/foot, respectively. Furthermore, it was assumed that site grading will be limited to maximum cuts of 5 feet. Geocon Northwest should be consulted for potential modifications to the following recommendations if either of these assumptions are not correct. 7.6.4 Spread and perimeter footings should be at least 18 inches wide and should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent pad grade. Foundations having these minimum dimensions that are founded on firm soils or engineered fill may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot(psf). If unsuitable soils are encountered at footing elevation, the unsuitable soils should be overexcavated and replaced with compacted structural fill per the recommendation of Geocon Northwest during construction. 7.6.5 A minimum of 12 inches of compacted crushed rock should be placed beneath footings located in cut locations of buildings A and C due to the presence of near surface soft, saturated soil. Deeper rock sections may be locally required. 7.6.6 Foundation subgrades that are anticipated to be exposed to inclement weather prior to concrete placement should be protected to guard against future over-excavation of unsuitable soil. 7.6.7 Gravel or lean concrete may need to be placed in the bottom of the footing excavations to reduce soil disturbance during foundation forming and construction during wet weather. 7.6.8 The allowable bearing pressure given above may be increased by one-third for short term transient loading, such as wind and seismic forces. 7.6.9 Lateral loads may be resisted by sliding friction and passive pressures. A base friction of 40% of the vertical load may be used against sliding. An equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf may be used to evaluate passive resistance to lateral loads. 7.6.10 Foundation settlements for the loading conditions expected for this project are estimated to be less than one inch, with not more than one-half inch occurring as differential settlement. P1475-05-01 - 13- February 16,2007 These values assume that site cuts will be less than 5 feet. This settlement is only attributed to the aforementioned building loads and does not include the estimated settlement that will occur below planned structural fills. It is recommended that building construction commence once primary consolidation has been complete due to the structural fill placement. 7.6.11 Geocon Northwest, Inc. recommends that foundation drains be installed at or below the elevation of perimeter footings to intercept potential subsurface water that may migrate under the building area. 7.7 Permanent Cut and Fill Slopes 7.7.1 New permanent cut slopes should be sloped no steeper than 2H:1 V. These values assume that the slopes will be protected from erosion and that significant drainage will not occur over the face of the slope. They further assume that no loads will be imposed within a horizontal distance of one-half of the slope height measured from the top of the slope face. Cut slopes should be constructed with a smooth bucket excavator to minimize subgrade disturbance. Slope drainage may be required if springs, seeps, or groundwater are encountered. 7.7.2 Excavation should not be completed in the vicinity of the block retaining wall at the east perimeter of the property without the employment of an active shoring system as described in Section 7.9. 7.7.3 If permanent fills are placed in areas where ground slopes exceed 5H:1 V, the fills should be keyed and benched into existing native, undisturbed non-organic soil. Fill slopes should be obtained by placing and compacting material beyond the design slope and then excavating back to the desired grade or by other means that will result in a dense,compacted sloped face. Filled slopes should not be graded steeper than 2H:1 V. The face of the fill slope should be protected from erosion by applying vegetation or other approved erosion control material as soon as practicable after construction. Fill compaction should be as stated in Section 7.4. If slopes higher than ten feet above the original grade are proposed, Geocon Northwest should be contacted to evaluate slope stability conditions. 7.8 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 7.8.1 Subgrades in floor slab areas should be prepared in accordance with Section 7.2 of this report. Floor slab areas should be proof-rolled with a fully loaded 10-to 12-yard dump truck to detect areas that pump,weave,or appear soft or muddy. When detected these areas should be overexcavated and stabilized with compacted granular fill. 7.8.2 A minimum six-inch thick layer of compacted 3/4-inch minus material should be installed over the prepared subgrade to provide a capillary barrier and to minimize subgrade disturbance during construction. The crushed rock or gravel material should be poorly graded, angular, and contain no more than 5%by weight passing the No. 200 Sieve. The thickness of crushed rock should be increased to 12 inches in cut locations where slab on grade subgrade elevation will be less than existing grade. The underslab drainage system is only recommended in P1475-05-01 - 14- February 16,2007 planned cut locations where finished subgrade elevation will be at or lower than existing grade. 7.8.3 A subsurface drainage system is recommended due to the potential for shallow groundwater during the winter months. It is recommended that the underslab drainage system consist of 4-inch diameter PVC perforated pipe placed within granular fill at 15-foot centers beneath the building footprint. The granular fill should consist of a minimum 8-inch thick layer of crushed rock or gravel with less than 5%by weight passing the No. 200 sieve. The thickness of granular fill is in addition to the 12 inches recommended in Section 7.8.2 The PVC pipe should be wrapped with a geotextile filter fabric. Figure 4 presents a cross-section of the underslab drainage system. 7.8.4 A modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 pci is recommended for design. 7.8.5 The fine-grained near-surface soils at the site have high natural moisture contents and low permeability. These characteristics indicate that high ground moisture may develop under floor slabs during the life of the project. This moisture condition, coupled with differential temperatures and humidity between the subgrade soils and the building interior, can create a differential in vapor pressure between the above- and below-slab environments. The resulting water vapor pressure differential will force migration of moisture through the slab. This migration can result in the loosening of flooring materials attached with mastic, the warping of wood flooring, and in extreme cases, mildewing of carpets and building contents. To retard the migration of moisture through the floor slab, Geocon Northwest recommends installing a 10-mil polyethylene vapor retarding membrane below the concrete slab. Care should be exercised to ensure that any moisture accumulation on the vapor retarder surface, from either construction activities or precipitation, should be removed prior to the concrete pour. A concrete mix of low water/cement ratio (i.e. less than 0.48) is recommended. Thorough curing of the concrete, using water when possible, should be provided. 7.9 Retaining Walls and Shoring 7.9.1 The information presented in the following section is a general discussion of retaining walls and shoring that may be utilized at the site. Geocon Northwest should be contacted for specific design recommendations as project plans are finalized and the following discussion may be modified accordingly. 7.9.2 Retaining wall support in locations of the site that will be filled above existing grade will likely be accomplished using a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining wall or, less likely, a cast-in-place concrete cantilever retaining wall. The latter is not as likely due to expected height of the retaining structure, lateral soil pressure to resist, fill soil settlement, and potential surcharge from the new buildings. Several MSE wall-types are possible, the majority of which are designed as a proprietary system. The MSE wall construction may be complicated by the interference of geogrid reinforcing with underground footings and utilities for the buildings. The construction of the walls will need to be in accordance with the recommendations provided in Section 7.4 to prevent a bearing capacity failure. Additional P1475-05-01 - 15- February 16,2007 rock may need to be placed below retaining wall footings for subgrade stabilization. Geocon Northwest should be contacted to provide consultation for retaining structures as project plans become finalized. 7.9.3 Shoring support of the proposed cut along the east property margin should be accomplished using a soldier pile and tieback system. This system provides active restraint to limit wall movements, due to the tensioning of tiebacks prior to excavating below the current tieback level. Limiting wall movements and limiting the removal of soil buttressing the existing block retaining wall at the east property margin is critical in maintaining the stability of this wall. Soil nail excavation support is a system that consists of installing steel bars into the retained soil to provide an in-place "retaining wall" that resists the lateral soil pressures. A soil nail structure is a passive excavation support system as no tensioning of the steel bars(soil nails) is typically performed before excavating to the next level. The soil nail system develops resistance due to excavation-induced soil movements which mobilize soil-structure interaction within the soil nail mass. It is our opinion that a soil nail wall would not provide the degree of stability and restraint as that of a soldier pile and tieback system and may compromise the stability of the existing block retaining wall. 7.10 Utility Excavations 7.10.1 Based on the subsurface explorations, difficult excavation characteristics are not anticipated within the upper fine-grained soils. Perched groundwater was encountered less than 12 inches below the existing ground surface and may created trench instability issues. Utility trench bottoms will likely require stabilization with rock and geotextile fabric. 7.10.2 Excavations deeper than four feet, or those that encounter groundwater, should be sloped or shored in conformance with OSHA regulations. Shoring systems are typically contractor designed. Caving of trench sidewalls should be anticipated below the groundwater surface. 7.10.3 It is likely that perched groundwater will be encountered in the near surface soil during periods of wet-weather. Therefore, excavation dewatering may be necessary if substantial flow of groundwater is encountered. Dewatering systems are typically designed and installed by the contractor. 7.10.4 Utilities should be bedded in sand within one conduit diameter in all directions, prior to the placement of coarser backfill. Trench backfill should be lightly compacted within two diameters or 18 inches, whichever is greater, above breakable conduits. The remaining backfill,to within 12 inches of finished grade, should be compacted to 92%of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. In structural areas, the upper foot of backfill should be compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density. The moisture content at the time of compaction should be within 2%of optimum. P1475-05-01 - 16- February 16,2007 7.11 Pavement Design 7.11.1 Near surface soil samples were evaluated to determine pavement design parameters. A CBR of 3 at 95% compaction and a resilient modulus of 4,500 psi were assumed for pavement design. 7.11.2 If possible, construction traffic should be limited to unpaved and untreated roadways, or specially constructed haul roads. If this is not possible, the pavement design should include an allowance for construction traffic. Construction staging areas and haul roads specially designed to accommodate anticipated construction loading must be installed by the contractor to minimize future overexcavation of deteriorated subgrade soil. Past experience suggests 18 inches of rock underlain by a geotextile separator fabric typically provides adequate work pad/haul road thickness. The recommended sections may be "overbuilt" to obtain the necessary working thickness and subsequently reduced to the design section for possible cost savings in lieu of overexcavation of suitable subgrade soil. Alternatively, the working surface may be incorporated into the final design. 7.11.3 Alternate pavement designs for both asphalt and portland cement concrete(pcc)are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Pavement designs have been prepared in accordance with accepted AASHTO design methods. A range of pavement designs for various traffic conditions is provided in the tables. The designs assume that the top eight inches of pavement subgrade will be compacted to 92% of ASTM D-1557. Specifications for pavement and base course should conform to current Oregon State Department of Transportation specifications. Additionally, the base rock should contain no more than 5% by weight passing a No. 200 Sieve, and the asphaltic concrete should be compacted to a minimum of 91% of ASTM D2041. A geotextile fabric should be placed below the base rock. 7.11.4 Pavement sections were designed using AASHTO design methods, with an assumed reliability level(R)of 90%. Terminal serviceability of 2.0 for asphaltic concrete,and 2.5 for portland cement concrete were assumed. The 18 kip design axle loads are estimated from the number of trucks per day using State of Oregon typical axle distributions for truck traffic and AASHTO load equivalency factors, and assuming a 20 year design life. The concrete designs were based on a modulus of rupture equal to 550 psi, and a compressive strength of 4000 psi. The concrete sections assume plain jointed or jointed reinforced sections with no load transfer devices at the shoulder. 8 FUTURE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES The analyses, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they presently exist, and on the assumption that the subsurface investigation locations are representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site. It is the nature of geotechnical work for soil conditions to vary from the conditions encountered during a normally acceptable geotechnical investigation. While some variations may appear slight, their impact on the performance of the proposed improvements can be significant. Therefore, it is recommended that Geocon Northwest be retained to observe portions of this project relating to geotechnical engineering, including site P1475-05-01 - 17- February 16,2007 preparation, grading, and compaction. This will allow correlation of observations and findings to actual soil conditions encountered during construction and evaluation of construction conformance to the recommendations put forth in this report. A copy of the plans and specifications should be forwarded to Geocon Northwest so that they may be evaluated for specific conceptual, design, or construction details that may affect the validity of the recommendations of this report. The review of the plans and specifications will also provide the opportunity for Geocon Northwest to evaluate whether the recommendations of this report have been appropriately interpreted. 9 LIMITATIONS Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered during construction and cannot always be determined by a normally acceptable subsurface exploration program. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the investigation. If variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon Northwest, Inc. should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. This report is issued with the understanding that the owner, or his agents, will ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time,whether they are due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, the conclusions and recommendations provided in this letter are subject to review should such changes occur. If you have any questions regarding the information herewith, or if you desire further information, please contact the undersigned at(503)626-9889. GEOCON NORTHWEST,INC. +€14 - • Bryan Wavra, P.E. Wesle pang, .D., P.E. Project Engineer President P 1475-05-01 - 18- February 16,2007 REFERENCES Boulanger, R.W., and Idriss, I.M., 2004, "Evaluating the Potential for Liquefaction or Cyclic Failure of Silts and Clays," Report No. UCD/CGM-04/01, Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering College of Engineering University of California at Davis. Ishihara, K., 1985, "Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquakes", Proceedings, 11th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, pp. 321- 3 76. National Center For Earthquake Engineering Research, 1997, "Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils,"Technical Report NCEER 97-0022. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1982 Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Table 1: 2003 IBC Seismic Design Recommendations Seismic Variable Recommended Value Site Class D MCE short period spectral response accel., SMS 1.14 MCE 1-second period spectral 0.61 response accel., SMI 5%damped short period spectral 0.76 response accel., SDS 5%damped 1-second period 0.41 spectral response accel., SDI Table 2: Asphalt Concrete Pavement Design Approximate Approximate Number of Trucks Number of 18 Kip Asphalt Concrete Crushed Rock Base per Day Design Axle Load Thickness(inches) Thickness(inches) (each way) (1000) Auto Parking 10 2.5 8 5 22 3.0 8 10 44 3.0 10 15 66 3.5 10 25 110 4.0 10 50 220 4.0 12 100 440 4.5 12 150 660 5.0 13 I Table 3: Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Design Approximate Approximate Number of Trucks Number of 18 Kip P.C.C. Crushed Rock Base per Day Design Axle Load Thickness (inches) Thickness(inches) (each way) (1000) 25 110 6.0 6 50 220 7.0 6 100 440 8.0 6 150 660 8.5 6 200 880 8.5 6 250 1100 9.0 6 etga rsAAr KU,.., i �"',,... $/. a SW TAYLO• < FE•RY S2ao I Rp SK BCxia cr--al sX,- .. 1� SN '1I `�•E` Q9 G SW ST SN NIROI ��••1 YL >9 ilk s¢ ... 1 LYN 4l STS < 5N EYE YX �3_ . �" SW t w �1>/ °° ST 2:1 '" cursnLw �, W nceAm sr 1�I a a S7<. ,S ceauCRL cut .. E a� li Q 3 R a ¢ a ° /�/ n SN CEOARCRES a ST a rn SW HUGE' ST ° F LP owl., ° ezod `-1 'o SN NF1M17f yy: rr.a sN a NILBAAD STx o 0 It a a y 7900 7508- a I 1- .,TEA ea4Y54RADCLIFFE S ST . Z a 9, 114t. i n Jg 7�SW �' a ST r''' SN 5 710 z 4�a �ErnE sw SSW ALFRED -6 S� \FO- SN ARISES 1 ` •�Xwr tr a B a 3' a 8000. S4. § L0L/,,,. A.,,, -- stet S 5'1-1 ✓� 5300 ° 126 --'I ¢' SN as kBORDERS / a SW ELMWOOQ 1 /. : SN_. L+1�6� AIFRF.. s,;-•.. 9100 4 5800 ST �� 7700_ 1 B1 Lq SN VENTURA j rcv `"~ �' i T' watt I SW LEHMAN. °$ ST ° SN , ST I .6 n (y\64 D --R,r Nub 9200,_Z dal° �� ' _ sr 400, � .rr` v -' SW m CORAL ST v im" SW LARCH ST I RED SW VENT,„ sN �, ` v, 30 SW LANDAU a 1N( ST r vEN1URA >r e� • n• SW LOCUST I ST •� ° s mmwAa [ �I' OIRI/6q�' st N 't,€t/ mu :J y 9000 �� ° -$w—O1 r p T ¢' R ST a P. - sN '` ¢.< < '< .g, N _ o Sw Rut 'n.91 ° ' ,=, 0d,0 <a �� l rz z N wow' <• L 1 SW m I ^ MAPLELEAF ST' 1 e r=.. e e P t`C) swa 4 sw sr lvrF / u~ a i OAK'i-bl �° SW Pl ONA BpRgV> raaAA z .< OAK °° SW Ir n n at = SW x` N SW a del-,a I� leE ��, PAWN CAPITOL HWY ,ST v wCFEEY, F 3 W 8000 ST `` W I f. ir �/ ©� C SN B100INGLON ST 9 / �= n I a 7500 N 7000. , s41 �„<i g.. �F SW sPRUCET ST VI �50 , +,av 2 e 49.11 a a�!c1ol1g1ax 11"P"OS SN THORN = -- —1d4. a - V I srAFF o• sT JanLE cr .5 a AF„, r � � - , -,, r - Fy51 vESTA � : .�I sr wcrus a ST. x > N �. 3I ` a .. ST'S\ 1 II <n E n o`4b• LESSER A f a,„.T:. ,QZ G ° O � I 3 m 3 �..itib/. � ���, �t 6 � � �.fer ¢ rn1 EQq < \ -. akl-ti `^I y ,7i "'— 36 �� /. N N EPKEi �� 111- >, 7 r �,f I .3 SW PFAFfLEBoo'SITE l 1SA PALLIY a I ,, ' ':r 6 at..? w, RPFvBU �) N .� t AT TA ST 1 SW n HAINES S , "tg 1 'jj 1150 71j .y rn fr A��' _`S'-l,, I l L i z 6000 x■ p�n�•Ai r ; ® r , 4 i9 tATAXGEU+\sT 3 ?y �/ y - 'AY rR.®ST 1 €:-,y b'A r".c'1f' HERi d ii ® 'al.*`OF��r ;, 511 14 In f : € S / S F ec+v i). • TAXGEIA a 9G�F � � _ � 5� 1 � � �y�rr��r�,, 1, 5t N� Q_ fro I a 'T F..sw „E ;14.x/ �, P. �gRTM� 8 I III �1�. A, N a AEI �a,;it►as , ire!:.s1' >;i • - I� � - A\C•\ ._ _ _y,�, R 1 '.Rd. ("IJEFF ,1.11 ``ffSS ` _1 _ ° 1I ir?E� _ x.17 _ - __ •yF„� 4 ,f EY] \ EL0AIU I I S a y9.6 � I 4''''' :NW' '� <ip DR SW'HERMpSO - g SW 'La{KLIN 1 a I° sI''A cqE, y i ' 0. .arryii� f�1 ST SW BEVELANp u v+ qJ LN Q T' p �� S 7200 RO . N r SN E OOD 1bE - 3 t ° . �` ®r rX ry.Q titi° bpNl o SW o DR z° t;t+Arm ova 6 v° 4 ,,,///��y eG. \( kFRa NI ST , ,. I `�° N'y - t.' wuA (4"� • ` 1 y 1 SW PTI ST .I '23 tON -� AEI LL Ys it a Pa \ FS h~ Sr .,, 7DOD + I"N N ; o r 1. OIL vn � IS P1�1E nK 3L J y . . CRESTVIEW ,,,. 1 war KW PL , RrSE ST 0. •f1yS I - LI81 N- o ` u !-y1 1 mrcE '�iA"r r2 BAAR NGTIN P.If C r XesruIE ay NNO E fr SWaI' YARNS �� 14us r[ `:' ''' ''4� `i4 dr ® , i7, ., SPA I , 7zoD /Q �, rJ*pyEM/P/�y[Tp�NjY�y F Ysr ,,1 F/�W3 tk :•.� y- lO SI F .e'-n!l TTY' 1 r` ►�..a �f ��J y •`a6PTU!� , N L„ 3 SW FIR' o ID \\ ra .. . • It 1fJ4' :r'67- 9 �t r T J d N V,*�°N p A pfJ f° wrEXrgr [ ram 9500 Pp SW CHERRY DR 8 DBURG \ "�r •4 cta S cr u EDGEWC!OD' ST "ELn"A �� 9000 Erne t•.7.'. ]` l' ".. XE , W. .. ._sX SN SW TECH CENTER - �'�l� NALD ST er �. °1 sEEVU+R DR RU$ e Es �i K WY SO `(—El' 20'03""H MAS BROTH '4,,, PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA REPRODUCED WITH PERMISSION GRANTED BY THOMAS BROTHERS MAPS. THIS MAP IS COPYRIGHTED BY THOMAS BROTHERS MAPS. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO N COPY OR REPRODUCE ALL OR ANY PART THEREOF WHETHER FOR PERSONAL USE OR RESALE WITHOUT PERMISSION. NO SCALE GE O C ON 0 SITE VICINITY MAP N O R T H W E S T RED ROCK CREEK GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER 8283 SW CIRRUS DRIVE BEAVERTON, OREGON 97008. TIGARD, OREGON PHONE: (503) 626-9889 FAX: (503) 626-8611 BJW/RSS I 1 DSK/DOOOD February 2007 1 P1475-05-01 IFIG. 1 % RED ROCK CREEK-TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER , ; L i 0 , TIGARD, OREGON ib il J _ ____I _ _== _Lt ;-,, ,-. 1,-;:::-,,,,*. ------,.\--17-7----.; --, -17-4.4-1 --• - -r.... -_T ..-._.--_.4r.i.-,4.... —©-=- • — s.w DARTMOUTH STREET 1-.... 02 -..- ..... - --- scpssg,,•srs,svE v..(cts•c,r.sosi •:,4-s:re , ----,---,-.•••••/•---1,,,,..- 1e, 1( . B-2 ✓• tItI I I 11 • I B-4 1 -- . , \T 1 .- -Pailio D-3 - • — 1. •P ,.., B: 1 • 0 clI v.lop is I / II I =-1 I 1 f• IIIII-N I2I rilluiitiliT I , - mill it 1 will ,...-. II .,... 4 . —1-1-: T-1 ---- c‘ ' 1 I t • ,t. • .__ C\ __ NO SCALE — - • 1 — 1 1 chl ' 0 — '-' IA I 't -- I:I: B-4„ GEOCON LEGEND ki 1 i MR 11 Ilii APPROX.LOCATION OF BORING I I *.,, _---: ..__ D-40 APPROX LOCATION OF DILATOMETER 1 cd ! . 1 1 1 i 1 _ I, , I I I 1 i FI 1p 1 i i I 1 . 1 I _ I ...,..:.• T -- 1 i 1 sw ammaar -k-v, RtZ.io7,10;EEN-TEStli.)-= 'II- 3 ..-;.1C -,LIIITIg ...mg Tit,a-°:.--wwif-k ,I;;;717453EN: GEOCON NORTHWEST, INC. (II) 1 1 1 GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 8283 SW CIRRUS DRIVE-BEAVERTON,OREGON 97008-5997 PHONE 503 626-9889-FAX 503 626-8611 PROJECT NO. P1475-05-01 SITE PLAN FIGURE 2 DATE 2/16/2007 P1475 05-01_HG2_BW/RSS 2003 International Building Code Design Response Spectrum Red Rock Creek Tigard Business Center 0.9 0.8 0.7 rn 0 0.6 m Ti) 0 0.5 a> U, °c. 0.4 co a, re T! 0.3 5% of Critical Damping d a co 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Period (s) Figure 3 • • . CONCRETE-SLAB.ON GRADE ' - ' " • o • • • ° ° 3 /4"-0" CRU SIIED.-R OCK . 6" ° a ° • °a a . 1 0 MtL VA1OR RETARDER< A a NI 4 a d ° . 8" . (D4' _- 1Ot-15'. a °2i a�, • •• ° . 3/4"-0" CRUSHED.ROCK ° 411„13. PIPE . a ^ a . a 4" PVC PIPE ° SOIL SUBGRADE NOT TO SCALE UNDERSLAB DRAINAGE SYSTEM RED ROCK CREEK TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER 2/16/2007 P1475-05-01 FIGURE 4 GEOCON 0 N O R T H W E S T GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 8270 SW NIMBUS AVENUE-BEAVERTON, OREGON 97008 PHONE 503 626-9889 - FAX 503 626-8611 APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION The subsurface soil conditions at the site were determined based on the literature review, field exploration, and laboratory investigation. The field exploration was completed on December 29th and 30th, 2006, and consisted of four exploratory borings and four dilatometer soundings. The borings were completed using mud rotary drilling techniques to a depth of 31.5 feet below the existing ground surface(bgs). The dilatometer soundings encountered practical refusal at variable depths that ranged from 17 to 33 feet bgs. The subsurface conditions encountered in the borings and dilatometer soundings were recorded on the subsurface logs that are located in Appendix A at the end of this report. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown in Figure 2, Site Plan. Disturbed bag samples were collected and returned to the laboratory for further testing. A member of Geocon Northwest's geotechnical engineering staff logged the subsurface conditions encountered. Subsurface logs of the conditions encountered are presented in the following pages. Both solid and dashed contact lines indicated on the logs are inferred from soil samples and drilling characteristics and should be considered approximate. PROJECT NO. P1475-05-01 >- W BORING B 1 z W., - _ UJ DEPTH O Q SOIL I-Z LL D_N SAMPLE OJ > g Q Z u, Z FEET NO. i °z fins ELEV.(MSL.) 240' DATE COMPLETED 12-29-2006 I- o ° •a CO I- = O Wpm D! 2O c[ EQUIPMENT CME MUD ROTARY d ° U Q MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - 0 Mow Approximately 12 tp 24-inches of organic TOPSOIL Maw -Perched water encountered at time of drilling - - 2 CUML Soft,saturated,brown/gray,mottled Silty CLAY to Clayey SILT - - BI-1 I�00 - 2 31.4 -- 4 - 4004 - ML Stiff,moist to wet,brown/gray,mottled Clayey SILT with some 10 31.8 - 6 B1-2 I 0 fine-grained sand - - - - - 8 - B1-3 I - 9 34.9 / -Becomes saturated,color includes black rust seams - 10 - BI-4 1 5 37.2 - -, I / ——_— -Medium stiff,saturated,light brown/rust,mottled fine-grained sandy - - - 12 - ' silt with some clay I ML Soft,saturated,gray,SILT with varying amounts of fine-grained sand - - B1-4.5 and clay -SHELBY 37.3 - 14 - - - - B1-5 I - 2 - 16 - - - 18 - - - 20 - B1-6 I - 2 35.5 - 22 - - - 24 - - - - B1-7 10A CL/ML Medium stifT saturated,gray,Silty CLAY to Clayey SILT 5 42.7 - 26 - - - 28 - ' - - - �Gl - 30 - B1-8 ML Hard,moist,light brown,cemented fine-grained Sandy SILT 54 32.2 BORING TERMINATED AT 311/2 FEET Perched water encountered at 6-inches Figure A-1, P1475-05-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 1, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS IT•••SHELBY TUBE [...STA N DA R D PENETRATION TEST ....DRIVE SAMPLE(UNDISTURBED) :•3 ...DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE 10...CHUNK SAMPLE 1 ...WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON PROJECT NO. P1475-05-01 r W BORING B 2 o W F LL)o DEPTH 0 Q SOIL ~Z U ( !L' SAMPLE V) W LL - ♦Z IN O z NO. ELEV.(MSL.) 241 DATE COMPLETED 12-29-2006 N ° • FEET j (uscs) o a o z g.71 O Wpm 2O (.9 EQUIPMENT CME MUD ROTARY a ° O — 0 V MATERIAL DESCRIPTION • •.• Approximately 12 to 24-inches of organic TOPSOIL -Perched water encountered at time of drilling " — 2 — CL/ML Medium stiff,wet,dark brown/dark gray,mottled Silty CLAY to B2-1 I�w� Clayey SILT — 5 30.1 I B2-2 ML Stiff,moist to wet,light brown/rust/light gray,mottled Clayey SILT 10 30.0 — 6 — with a trace of fine-grained sand — — — — — 8 — B2-3 0/10 — 11 32.6 -Becomes saturated,color includes black/rust seams - 10 — B2-4 — 7 34.5 — — I 0 -Medium stiff,saturated,light brown/rust,mottled fine-grained sandy — — 12 — silt with some clay _ ML Soft to medium stiff,saturated,gray,SILT with varying amounts of — 14 — fine-grained sand and clay — B2-5 I 4 34.5 — 16 — — B2-5.5 SHELBY — 18 — — _- 20 — I — B2-6 2 40.5 -Soft,saturated,gray,fine-grained sandy silt with some clay — 22 — — — — CL Stiff to very stiff,saturated,gray,Silty CLAY with interlayers of — 24 — completely weathered gravel — 20 31.5 :: :_ B27 — - 30 B2 8 ML Hard,moist,light brown,cemented fine-grained Sandy SILT 23 24.2 — :1- — BORING TERMINATED AT 31''A FEET Perched water encountered at 6-inches Figure A-2, P1475-05-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 2, Page 1 of 1 m SAMPLE SYMBOLS I]SHELBY TUBE ...STANDARD PENETRATION TEST U...DRIVE SAMPLE(UNDISTURBED) .c. a: ...DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE KJ...CHUNK SAMPLE 1...WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON PROJECT NO. P1475-05-01 >- W BORING B 3 ow� , we DEPTH Q SOIL F-Z re F SAMPLE 0 1 Q V. u: D 2 FEET NO. °z CLASS ELEV.(MSL.) 229' DATE COMPLETED _ 12-29-2006 _ w°—'o °ate' �_ (USCS) z w m �v 5 O 0 EQUIPMENT CME MUD ROTARY -D:�" a 0 0 V MATERIAL DESCRIPTION — 0 ` - ^_ Approximately 12 to 24-inches of organic TOPSOIL -Perched water encountered at time of drilling — - 2 — �`_ CL/ML Medium stiff,wet,dark brown/dark gray/rust,mottled Silty CLAY to — — B3-1 / Clayey SILT — 4 31.4 — 4 — / / — B3-2 9 30.9 — 6 — -Becomes stiff — — 1 / ML Stiff,saturated,light gray/light brown/rust,mottled Clayey SILT with - 8 — B3-3 fine-grained sand — 10 33.6 / / - 10 B3-4 SHELBY 44.6 11-, — 12 — ML Medium stiff,saturated,dark gray/black,SILT with fine sand/caly — and organics — — B3-4.5 I — 4 84.9 — 14 — -6-inch seam of woody debris and additional decayed organics — B3-5 r — 5 48.2 — 16 — I -Medium stiff,saturated,gray,silt with fine-grained sand and clay, — trace organics — 18 — — - 20 — B3-6 [ — 11 34.6 -Stiff,saturated,gray,silt with fine-grained sand,clay and trace organics — 22 — — — 24 — — B3-7 1 4 34.7 — 26 — -Becomes soft to medium stiff,no organics — — 28 — — - 30 — B3-8 :0 Hard,moist,dark gray,weathered rock or gravel(no sample recovery) 50/2" t r — BORING TERMINATED AT 31%2 FEET Perched water encountered at 6-inches Figure A-3, P1475-05-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 3, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS [U•••SHELBY TUBE li...STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ....DRIVE SAMPLE(UNDISTURBED) iov ...DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ...CHUNK SAMPLE Z...WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON PROJECT NO. P1475-05-01 >-- w BORING B 4 o W— >-- DEPTH C7 Q SOIL I-Z U- � 0_H SAMPLE .j 5 Q C13 Z li Z IN FEET NO. oz o CLASS ELEV.(MSL.) 215' DATE COMPLETED 12-29-2006 w 0 o ° •a `-°LU J 70 (USCS) uZ,u1 m >-v O cc EQUIPMENT CME MUD ROTARY a `� ° 0 V MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - 0 MOMS Approximately 12 to 24-inches of organic TOPSOIL Mow Iliaimag- — _ -Perched water encountered at time of drilling — - 2 ' CUNT, Stiff,wet,dark brown/dark— — B4-1 I gray,mottled Silty CLAY to Clayey SILT — 8 29.8 B4-2 12 31.2 — 6 — -Stiff,moist,light brown/brown/light gray,mottled silty clay to clayey — silt — g — B4-3 �� — 13 28.9 000;1000; -Color change to gray — - 10 — -- — B4-4 I ML Stiff,saturated, 41.5 gray,fine-grained Sandy SILT with a trace of organics 41.5 8 8 - 12 B4-4.5 I SHELBY 38.7 — 14 — — B4-5 I 8 37.7 — 16 — — — 18 — — ML Soft to medium stiff,saturated,gray,SILT with fine-grained sand - 20 — B4-6 I — 3 35.4 — 22 — 24 — B4-7 I SHELBY 32.6 — 26 — — CL Very stiff,saturated,light gray/light green,Silty CLAY - 28 — — — - 30 — — B4-8 16 28.7 BORING TERMINATED AT 31'/:FEET Perched water encountered at 6-inches Figure A-4, P1475-05-01.GPJ Log of Boring B 4, Page 1 of 1 SAMPLE SYMBOLS m•..SHELBY TUBE 111...STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I•...DRIVE SAMPLE(UNDISTURBED) a•. ...DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE IE...CHUNK SAMPLE 1...WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. GEOCON Red Rock Creek Tigard Business Center Dilatometer Sounding #1 Dilatometer Values 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 0 , , , , , , , , ' „ ,. 1 '. J �� y 5 k w`� w ( ) w' ■ re — ..� • ," 10 1 �� - L 1 f 1 . aa 1 ■ t 15 • r+ a I� r O L I. ■ 1 1 i 1 • k. . 20 A ■ - ■ i Modulus (tsf) f) .� - - - Kd /f ! — —Id t I 25 ) 1 l .. J / I. 30 , - --- Red Rock Creek Tigard Business Center Dilatometer Sounding #2 Dilatometer Values 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 0 • ~ r iJ !� ! ti "----------------"ss--"Z_____ .. 5 '-' �� c•-) C 1',,: .) r . 10 �% .. , 0. 1 ..... ... J •• ti 15 I. . C_ ••�. /' .. .c •. d ,} o I _ 20 ` , , 1 � '+ i. I r •' (- I 25 cr _•' Modulus (tsf) _ C.....�� r) - - - Kd . •. i r — —Id • 30 • '.%t L... 35 Red Rock Creek Tigard Business Center Dilatometer Sounding #3 Dilatometer Values 0.1 1 10 100 1000 0 ( % • ` 5 I' s, r �� K-. r 4.0 / � ) . -r� +r r 15 �_ i 4.• CD c. , r' a> • .ti 20 r ti • 25 *%.. `� ` l _. 30 • _ Modulus (tsf) - - - Kd — —Id 35 Red Rock Creek Tigard Business Center Dilatometer Sounding #4 Dilatometer Values 0.1 1 10 100 1000 0 / ` / .. 4 k 1 f 6 / • I ` 1 a I , .' 8 f '. r 0) // i . C\ I d 10 )1 -. .... . ` � � �� C �� 12 , I ( 14 ` .1) • . / . (\ a \ a la 16 Modulus (tsf) / '. �� - - - Kd i — —Id 18 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM)or other suggested procedures. Selected soil samples were tested for their moisture content and gradation. Moisture contents are indicated on the boring logs in Appendix A. The results of the remaining laboratory tests performed are presented in following pages. TABLE B-1 SUMMARY OF PLASTICITY INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D4318 Sample Depth Liquid Plastic Plasticity USCS Number (ft) Limit Limit Index Classification B1-5 15-16.5 29 27 2 ML B2-5.5 17-19 28 26 2 ML B3-7 25-26.5 28 27 1 ML B4-7 24-26 30 27 3 ML Consolidation Test(ASTM D 2435) Project Tigard Business Center Boring Number B2-5.5 Project Number P1475-05-01 Sample Number 5.5 Description of Soil Gray Silt Depth of Sample 17-19 Initial Final Moisture Content 32.8 24.5 Void Ratio 0.64 0.48 Tigard Business Park Consolidation Test B4-7 Depth=25 feet 0.6500 0.6000 - 0.5500 0 w 0 0.5000 - 0.4500 - 0.4000 1000 10000 100000 pressure(psf) Consolidation Test(ASTM D 2435) Project Tigard Business Center Boring Number 84-7 Project Number P1475-05-01 Sample Number 7 Description of Soil Gray Silt Depth of Sample 24-26 Initial Final Moisture Content 34.9 29.5 Void Ratio 0.83 0.64 Tigard Business Park Consolidation Test B4-7 Depth=25 feet 0.8500 0.8000 0.7500 0.7000 0 I- L O > • 0.6500 0.6000 0.5500 - 0.5000 1000 10000 100000 pressure(psf) Grain Size Distribution (ASTM D1140 and D 422) Tigard Business Center Sample B1-5 Depth= 15 feet GRAVEL I SAND I SILT I CLAY 100 s 80 s 1 a, 60 ' a) ' 3 1 ' ai w w+ 1 40 , at 1 a 1 1 1 20 - t 1 _ 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain size(mm) Grain Size Distribution (ASTM D1140 and D 422) Tigard Business Center Sample B2-5.5 Depth = 15 feet GRAVEL I SAND I SILT I CLAY 100 ' 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 80 I I I I I 1 I 1 1 to 60 ' 3 1 1 >+ 1 1 I 1 at = I I 4 1 1 U 40 1 t 1 1 P-1 I I I I 20 ' I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I ' i I i 1 ' 1 1 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain size(mm) Grain Size Distribution (ASTM D1140 and D 422) Tigard Business Ccnter Sample B3-7 Depth= 25 feet GRAVEL I SAND I SILT CLAY 100 1 1 1 1 1 80 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 60 1 3 t 1 1 1 N 1 1 z 1 1 1 1 U 40 1 1 i.n � 1 1 1 1 _ 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain size(mm) Grain Size Distribution (ASTM D1140 and D 422) Tigard Business Center Sample B4-7 Depth = 25 feet I GRAVEL { SAND I SILT I CLAY! 100 , 80 , 1 i 60 40 ' 20 ' II • 0 I t t ■ i , I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain size(mm) EXHIBIT 8 RECORD OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING 1 . NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MINUTES N O . 1 PROJECT Tigard Town Center, 12625 SW 70t'' Ave., Tigard Oregon NAME: PROJECT NO: AD 05183 MEETING NO: # 1 TIME/DATE: June 6, 2007 at 7:00pm. Landmark Ford, Second Floor ATTENDEES NAME 1 FIRM ] PHONE 1 FAX I EMAIL John & Debi Scott 7085 SW Elmhurst 503.624.8020 503.620.9568 debi.scott @farmersinsurance.com JoAnne Nordling 7105 SW Elmhurst 503.352.9006 joannenordling1952 @hotmail.com Josh&Sarah Lau 7100 SW Elmhurst 503.730.8158 joshlyhlau @yahoo.com Mark& Pris Ditter 7070 SW Elmhurst 503.639.0070 dancingpris @hotmail.com Joe Curran Specht 503.646.2202 jcurran @spechtprop.com Barb Bauer 12335 SW 72nd 503.620.1207 bauerb @excite.com Clayton Hunt 7040 SW Elmhurst 503.515.9155 unitedroof @msn.com Dale Smith Landmark Ford 503.639.1131 dsmith @landmarkford.com Randy Myers RCM Homes 503.598.7565 rcminc1@aol.com Jon Anderson Anderson Dabrowski Architects, 503.239.7377 503-237-7327 janderson(a�ADarchitects.com LLC Brad Pihas Tenant Advisory Group 503.638.2412 503-638-0423 BPihas @AOL.com CC: Jim Corliss jcorliss©easystreet.com Purpose of Meeting: As required by the City of Tigard for submitting a Land Use application, the Applicant shall schedule a neighborhood meeting with property owners with in a 500 foot of the subject property. ANDERSON DABROWSKI ARCHITECTS, LLC 1430 SE 3'd Avenue, Suite 200 Portland, Oregon 97214 (503) 239-7377 Fax (503) 239-7327 TIGARD TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MEETING NO. 1 PAGE 2 NO. DESCRIPTION I ACTION I DATE I Items discussed NO. DESCRIPTION ACTION DATE 1.1 Jon Anderson opened the meeting at 7:04pm and read aloud the Statement of Purpose. Jon Anderson also provided a rendered presentation board that indicated the site development goals and design. 1.2 Jon Anderson discussed the project and specifically noted that the application would include both a Concept Plan on site building and parking lot design and a Detailed Plan for all Off-Site Improvments and Wetland Mitigation Improvements. The goal for the project was to get ( approval for the Detailed Plan so the construction time frame window for the Wetland mitigation could occur this year. 1.3 Neighbor Comment: There was concern related to the retaining wall and landscaping along the south parking lot adjacent to the existing residence on SW Elmhurst. Jon Anderson explained that to level the parking lot that there would be a need to construction a retaining wall that would allow the parking lot to become level and slope down to the new grade on the northern portion of the site. Concerns were related to the general public accessing the adjacent property. Jon Anderson also noted that the retaining wall would be adjacent to the property line with the landscaping area being located on the parking lot level. The landscaping and the retaining wall could also act as a deterrent to crossing into the residential property. 1.4 Neighbor Comment: There was concern related to the full street improvements of SW 70th and the connection to SW Elmhurst. Jon Anderson stated that the City was requiring the full street improvements from Dartmouth to SW Elmhurst with additional half street improvements to the projects ROW (right-of-way) connection to SW Elmhurst. It is their understanding that the original Neighborhood Planning Association recommendations indicated that all dead end residential streets should remain dead end until such time as the entire street was developed commercially. Jon Anderson indicated that this issue would need to be discussed with the City of Tigard as to the extent of such ROW(right-of-way) improvement. ANDERSON DABROWSKI ARCHITECTS, LLC 1430 SE 3rd Avenue, Suite 200 Portland, Oregon 97214 (503) 239-7377 Fax (503) 239-7327 TIGARD TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MEETING NO. 1 PAGE 3 I NO. [ DESCRIPTION ACTION I DATE 1.5 Neighbor Comment: There was a concern related to noise and lighting concerns. Concerns related to services that provided late hours of noisy (places that played music for example) entertainment establishments as well as early weekend morning parking lot sweepers. Jon Anderson noted that these concerns were out of his hands but that all uses would need to meet City Codes, Regulations and Standards. 1.6 Neighbor Comment: There was a concern related to the south end parking lot adjacent to SW Elmhurst in regards to a void of landscaping. Jon Anderson indicated that a curb cut was removed from the site plan and landscaping was not reinstalled in the presentation site plan. Jon Anderson indicated that landscaping would be installed per the City of Tigard standards and would resemble the landscaping occurring on SW 70`h. 1.7 Neighbor Comment: There was a concern related to when construction would start that existing landscaping would be removed. It currently acts as a barrier in the back yard and keeps their children/pets in the back yard. Jon stated that the site would probably be secured with a temporary construction fence during construction and new landscaping installed when the project is completed to meet development standards. 1.8 The neighborhood meeting closed at approximately 8:30pm PST Meeting minutes were taken by Jon M. Anderson, AIA, NCARB. These meeting minutes are assumed to be an accurate account of the topics discussed. If there are any errors or omissions, corrections should be directed to Anderson Dabrowski Architects, LLC within five (5)working days. ANDERSON DABROWSKI ARCHITECTS, LLC 1430 SE 3rd Avenue, Suite 200 Portland, Oregon 97214 (503) 239-7377 Fax (503) 239-7327 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF TIGARD A COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME PROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE,TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 131.25 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION,THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT &COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: I, pst.1'OE'eS6U ,being duly sworn,depose and say that on the 2'-t* day of MM 20_c_11_,I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list,a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) 12.OAS SW 10th A.)5 -ttC,ARD, Ge. 11235 ,a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at %5O6 Su3 Cath AVE eOa-TL I t Q' with postage prepaid thereon. / / %n '4 / /k Signature (In the t resence of a Notary Public) POSTING: I, 5dtsi AIVC>F—ta.SOt ,do affirm that I am(represent)the party initiating interest in a proposed land use application for "1-1 C (U) C •3V(Z . CE-4•VISQ_ affecting the land located at(state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s)and all tax lot(s)currently registered) 1?Sn2S Sv1 10 W\ 111\1E -1-1G 40:20 O .S1Z3S) L.C-TS 25101M 001 OC>Nt•1O2,513\1 00 306 _ ,and did on the 2.4 WI day of M PrY ,20�_ personally post notice indicating that the site maybe proposed for a ?LA MAEIAPM E1611 land use application,and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at lc kin f' O OPsCC \OQTN (state location you posted notice on p .perry) • 1,0 Signature (In 'e presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF O r Q.c e r ) County of 1-t ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 2 4 day of 1`�C�.� , 20 UT-. OFFICIAL SEAL BRENDA UNDERWOOD � NOTARY PUBLIC•OREGON �; � COMMISSION NO.384921 NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 20,zoos - My Commission Expires: Sep}ertber 2-di 2c:13g c\eurpin\masters\neighborhood meetings\affidavit of mailing-posting neighborhood meeung.doc Page 5 AD M E E T I N G S I G N - I N S H E E T JOB NAME: PROJECT NO: MEETING NO: DATE/TIME: ATTENDEEES: NAME I FIRM I PHONE _FAX 1 E-MAIL' I1. l ! . Elwhwra- -- 3. lln.. 6; SC t-. .N w.z.� :_ A_Fsoao ---4ua0_5' la;z~ ,1�- - 7 2. . G .._._.. OJ f/s" hNrs7` d Sa? o 64 I J O eratnord/. /9S.(Ohothr,4./. I 3' SAV L [7i0C 5 3 736 81551 SoSNLyHLAU yANDd.cam tom q aid s os�. ��u L�L��s S� F 1 4. 1 I<f'•°(S` . 6 I — �g I .4'e .ht. i 5v 3 6 4 Jdo L_TattEd4A c3,5Pecht-Pror.c. 6. p ,, ./— _ 7Z l due-�h .� QG�,e� 4�� f' 7. �._._._._ Ct._5 v �k.�ii� � . `lr!i3 S_....— (A vli 1 R0 j.ms . GO r 1 5 63?-113i 1i 8. <� /.. -.._.._.. .._'PI." .,Q+1! 9!�X_..... ..i�2...._._..l'51'' _..__..' ._.._ .... _-- -__ O CtSi-xii . _ f ! A► _cto.^.0 •co(---, I -9._..._._. 01)11 .__ " ,e-! _..__Ig ..I?1M s... 5'.._.._.- T- L z kG Ai.-c-c)-• 10. i it 1 • CC: Please list names and contact information for anyone not in attendance who should receive this meeting information: — NAME FIRM . PHONE 1 FAX I E-MAIL 1 I i j 2 I 'I i — __- —4 ANDERSON DABROWSKI ARCHITECTS, LLC 1430 SE 3rd Ave., Suite 200 S:\AD Documents-Architectural\Forms\Meeting Sign-In Portland, Oregon 97214 (503) 239-7377 Fax (503) 239-7327 dth2;, `scc, ccarme-s iv sDante STATEMENT OF PURPOSE THE FOLLOWING NOTICE SHALL BE READ TO ATTENDEES AT THE BEGINNING OF A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. 77641W7 g15l -a /2&25 510 70-714/111* This meeting is regarding ,located at , and is being held as required by the City of Tigard development review process. The purpose of this meeting is to inform neighbors of the project as currently planned. This meeting is not a decision forum and is not to approve or disapprove the project in whole or in part. It is to share information regarding the project and to solicit constructive input from neighbors and affected property owners. Application for the project being discussed here has not yet been submitted to the City. Therefore, the project will be at various stages of planning and some details may not be available at this time. Property owners of record within 500 feet should have received neighborhood meeting information and a list of frequently asked questions along with the notice of this meeting. This meeting is not attended by city staff in order to encourage dialogue between the developer and affected neighbors. Your comments and questions will be taken down and submitted with the application for consideration by the city planning staff. Property owners within 500 feet will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. For questions regarding the development review process,please contact the City of Tigard Planning Department. For project details,you will need to contact the developer. is\curpin\masters\neighborhood meetings\neighborhood meeting statement of purpose.doc Page 6 NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING May 24, 2007 RE: Tigard Central Center Dear Interested Party: I, Jon Anderson, am representing the owner of the property located at 12625 SW 70th Ave Tigard, OR 97235 on Tax Lots 25101AB00100 and 25101AB00300. I am considering proposing a commercial retail center that will improve the downtown pedestrian experience with expanded public pathways and enhance the natural aspects of the site. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Date: Wednesday, June 6th, 2007 Location: Landmark Ford Address: 12300 SW 68th Tigard, OR 97223 Second Floor Time: 7:00 pm Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the city. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 503-239-7377 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jon Anderson Principal, Anderson Dabrowski Architects, LLC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL CITY OF TIGARD NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING PROCESS NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING/NOTIFICATION IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS: Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Zone Change Sensitive Land Review — Subdivision -f —Site Development Review — Conditional Use 1. Applicant makes arrangements for the neighborhood meeting Applicant chooses a date and schedules a meeting facility. The meeting should be held in the evening(with the exception of Friday night and weekends) and located as close to the neighborhood/project site as possible(on-site is acceptable). 2. Applicant prepares a letter regarding the upcoming meeting to be held with the neighborhood (see example on page 2 of this packet) ► Applicant submits mailing label request to the City of Tigard Planning Division,Attention: Patty Lansford. ► Letter shall briefly describe the proposed development and location,and set the date,time and place for the meeting. NOTE: Meeting date is to be held within 2-4 weeks of the date that the letter is mailed. A vicinity map that clearly identifies the parcel(s)involved in the proposed development(either outlined,cross-hatched,or shaded) shall be included with the letter. ► Two(2)weeks minimum notice must be provided to the neighborhood property owners within 500 feet of the subject properties, Interested Parties,and the City of Tigard Planning Division. 3. Applicant mails letter of neighborhood meeting to all affected parties and includes "Neighborhood Meeting Information" sheets (pages 3 &4) with the letter, and on the same day,posts notice of the proposed project on the site Meeting date is to be held no sooner than two weeks and no later than four weeks of the date that the letter is mailed and the sign is posted. ► Applicant utilizes the list of affected property owners and interested parties acquired from the City of Tigard Planning Division and mails to all parties INCLUDING THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION. / Posting Notice Signs are available from the City of Tigard,Planning Division at a cost of$2.00 each. Sign must be posted at a location easily observable on each street frontage of the subject site. ► Sign shall state that the site may be under consideration for a land use application and include a phone number where the applicant can be reached for additional information or comments. 4. Applicant completes affidavit of mailing/posting notice (page 5) 5. Applicant holds neighborhood meeting as scheduled ► Applicant reads the required"Statement of Purpose"letter(page 6)to attendees. ► Applicant presents the proposal,including known City requirements,provides handouts with contact name and telephone number, and answers any questions. Handouts,at a minimum,shall include a copy of the proposed site plan. ► Applicant makes note(sign-up sheets)of the names and addresses of all individuals who speak at the meeting and provides documentation to the City of their comments,concerns or issues with the proposed development project. Tape recording the meeting is recommended but copies of the tapes need not be submitted to the city. 6. Applicant modifies preliminary proposal(if desired) following the neighborhood meeting to take into consideration recommendations, concerns,or issues which could delay the applications approval process / The Tigard Planning Commission has directed that if the proposal is substantially modified from the preliminary proposal,a new Neighborhood Meeting will be necessary. 7. Applicant submits the proposal to the City of Tigard for review,accompanied by the following essential documents ► A copy of the Neighborhood Meeting letter mailed to the affected property owners and a copy of the mailing list. ► The signed affidavit of mailing the neighborhood meeting letter/notice and the affidavit of posting the site. A copy of the sign-up sheets from the meeting(s). ► A copy of the minutes and/or comments,concerns or issues raised by those attending the meeting. ► A copy of the site plan,any other plans presented,and all handouts from the neighborhood meeting. APPLICATIONS WITHOUT THESE MATERIALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AS COMPLETE. FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE PROCEDURES MAY REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO HOLD AN ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. I:\curpin\masters\neighborhood meetings\neighborhood meeting notification process.doc UPDATED: 6-Jul-06 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING INFORMATION As part of the development review process for most land use applications, the City of Tigard • s requires that developers hold a neighborhood meeting to notify and discuss with property -' �; owners in the area, their proposed development. Below are some frequently asked questions TIGARI?, about the neighborhood meeting process. : WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING? The purpose of the meeting is to allow the prospective developer to share with you what they are planning to do. This is your opportunity to become informed of their proposed development and to let them know what issues or concerns you have in regard to their proposal. WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING? After the neighborhood meeting, the prospective developer finalizes their submittal package (often taking into account citizen concerns) and submits an application to the City. Sometimes it takes a while before the developer's application is ready to submit, so there could be several months between the neighborhood meeting and the submittal of an application. Once an application is submitted to the City, Staff reviews it for completeness. Once an application has been deemed complete, the formal application review begins. It takes approximately 6-8 weeks from the time the application is accepted for a decision to be made. Many types of applications require a public hearing at which citizens are given the opportunity to provide comments or concerns. Property owners within 500 feet will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. WHAT IF THE PROPOSAL PRESENTED AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IS NOT WHAT IS ACTUALLY SUBMI TIED? Applicants are not required to submit exactly what was presented at the neighborhood meeting if it generally follows the type of development proposed. This provides for the opportunity to address the neighborhood issues and address other changes necessitated by the development or staff. If the project is significantly different, a new neighborhood meeting would be required as determined by staff. HOW DO I KNOW WHAT ISSUES ARE VALID? A decision is reviewed based on compliance with the Tigard Development Code. Review the city's development code to familiarize yourself with what is permitted and what may not be permitted. A copy of the development code is available for viewing at the Tigard City Library, on the City's web site at www.ci.tigard.or.us, or a copy may be purchased at the Community Development Services counter. You may also contact city planning staff and ask what the standards are for a specific issue. Be prepared,however, that you may not LIKE all the standards,but at least you know what they are. If a development meets the code standards,it can proceed. For your assistance, attached is a list compiled of helpful questions to ask that may assist you in determining your position on a particular proposal. Page 3 A I • • AMA Alan AIM. AIM. An& Ald•• 1 4411&lrai /IM■ 111111.411.1a1r41.10WA/M11:=11...•.. . • l'I'I2.t IZIV.M 1••:kizzt:'..!rr.r.IP.any....•;4":CR.:&...,:10.41-44':nr.'.I.t.Ilrari• .,,":::.--,-,.,••••"Kr.s/•.:rtxr.1'■•••.^'''•••••1 IF1:f..••••X'r:•""'"V.:I'."',0.01.0=1111111N, INIIIPA,MIN/AawainumoorwmprALIGN•Ais 1-., = LLI F- -1 .. .. _ ; Z.. •••'r-.;•• .....;.....' ''2*,,,.....:•••• ,l, '01 rt, ii:V.- --,),:-,i,..•-•.. -1,1*'. ...0.0.4,....0.:::),,..c.;-iii;:rt''-',.. LLI 0 1 i 1 I 3 300 9F RE T. ••••••••••• 'V • ••I p RR ••••• "mole 4: 111 I::41 '•; El 11-.. PAD A •'- . .. , , Tr 1- LIJ CC 4 ' I E • 4::, 11.::.1; . 06,2.-SF RETAIL . ••• •• •• 4.,::• illi•:,,'•:; so •■ • • - 1 re t P AID• nit., :.-, •-...-39.-::: :. 111 + I 0 ..;;N, CC I 1 10,726 SF RETAIL IL) r 1:Ifur:• 3.i.:'"; ...4...• t^: I 1 pm P.•:-.?••■• I •I sriel* ; s• Fa Ni7 '.! : in . ::,, !.-, , , 1 ''il VI Fig.; ..."' - 1 I I • ..:,'..:.;••• , ::V Ell El ••-11•4 401••••• • NI%ex, •.-...■• lig M. I I !riio7711. I , 1...--• 1 33 SPACES 2 HC VII: ..• I 1 11. • :: 15 SP 4M 2HC .,,... I i 4 ,..i /7 74' 4 415 9F RETAIL. •• U II& l'•:',.,,,, 9 C . . , • :• . I I:,.,;. ,,,. •• •• 0.ku '''''. • Adi Ai& glik' 4014• 411,' I ,i--, 1 I . . , . .-.-----•,,,,----; - • • --.- ., . . -4,- -4,-, . _ ..C, I ■I ••••■••••■•••■la 12 SPACES 2 HC I ••••••••••• '''.4.1=CIT• • ..... ..•4 / :slmi •••• MI i II I 1 DEVEL1•-1•1,11.T Ole.l ir. ..e:ElRlPAiiN rTgS i l-i rel.iir. .i411.- 11-11 it.p. .':1.icilitibie7i,1h i ' 0•• .-.. .... - -er I I t AND•E•••-R••••S•.•.•.•O•- N i. k I DABROWSK I I I coioatmcou.Ormorwoor IrtAA•A•••FOR 11104CAliamudamploalserancr 1 e•' *1 nib- intrAlLar.nevonm,ftenntenel CO.1/311•111000•01111300.13 I 4., ,....• ....• - --__ ----- . • -ir--.. . '-, . •Il i'4,... • • I i ARCHITECTS L L C 1 1 t c030.1ca.(PS111111103•071P••••• 01013111111Al MOOT P•11011110.10110110103001031 Ape.. v.• i;.,PP••■ 46.. I i I ieleARM400 mow. IMP NM • 20,0. 1 rla •' PAD C I''■/ 84 SPACES . 70TI- AVE. ., , , id.an101•3111 :;.••'• ''''' 1.101 WI COVOVOL NM ..22. ',/,I: , If 10.7'00 SF MAIL I •i It c111111110 • I . I 100 K300 apt. I i I Ma LAMOICAPE NM 11111 um LOTM10111 AO/ NIN LOT Mlet .alai. 0 I•• . ____ I I ...ran,. ::gr.■MIN; 1 I ; I PITY*01110000•011 . ,• ---- 111: i I I i 1 1 MALOPOIllnal.CCCOPT NM OPAIL sneer la000001.00031■TACA AAO a•CA A1113111AL!MET. 3 MOM.1031101110 SLOILACK PROM 1•00.0 STREET MONT 01101'.CECICATED weruao• , IVY..".`e..64, .., ,,,,e",-,,,,.v•viv.,47/51%.(e,v,- ye,- ,nroze...; 1 011111.19.0131AMO 0101•1110110100111011AL MANUS•CAOT MO maarnmo0•1110. Oi.4 '4 .‘.4•• •1•1.' •• • SA.•• ''.• : _ s i 3 IAMOSCAPIPO.41 ARCADE OA A MAA0 flOIPAC/01013.1•011c0n•Pecelmtma Wm ••• ••• ••1 •I• i;•• . I 'F.Eini:•.7.7:1=---- • 110111•E P0000130 KWIC.A 11711.003101 IMO MARC RNLI 01111OTITCPMAY .... ..... 'a.' .'a.. . 'a.' • 'IMP ••••• •••. • . - - VEgliWEESF I 1 I •A INALltrY CO„1,11T,000 1.111110/0•01133••••••••••••31101111A091.0•11•03 I f k____ , PLANT'L S' I •/0.01.0 PON 10.130•02,11.110130.10 0•311•010.103•1••30130•0101101 a.OR I r .-__ .' i. Pa0•1113 I , AFAR or oewLv a...morons,rALF4•••A LorAmor...Ammo 10•7110r MINT IRIMOL PLANT NOM ouperry ICE CC•011:11 - i, i I FroNTA04,AAR...Tea NANO sAMONA•3444a4. ;30, I ill I 00•10011113 I 1 I Militi01111 Ake Is Cr- • •-•• T. i 1 - I 1 •....... Ihre a.....- • r... 10.01.3 1 1 044 1r-r.TOIME0*MOM MOM= !Lf-r... T ,I Ac, 1 1 ....... gh. CAW. ..,-.... I, .=...... I 1 I SRE DEVELOPMENT Itr-lir 6 ,..... ....... . r••• ItAl-..• '4 0 ••• 1:I.; -- •-••••■• I 1134 1=1.11=1 11.••• ••• f j ___ .. 1 ,r...31.•=1.11.1301110 1St AMIN/1/0•1311. I (1300 MAIM,111130CM•1 t 1/19 3711APMAPPROA 1 PADA 13.0 111 UM' ...••• km Am • • 11•0•• ••• 0 •‘ M... ;• 3 ., ........ ( gI • ---- 11 1. I I im. all Pa maa • I ' 1 :31! 10110•11 10100 Ili . I • imeasespe.. . . -- .......■Awmcia,131•••■•• 1 I I %T..IPALOAdAIMA 33.331.0 • eV.aaa •m 11 a• a.m. :1 _ I -•I . 03 I STANDARD•TUIA1 MVP* la VAL111 • a 0.0 i COMPACT STALLS PROV10133 •MM. • 1124 lab. ,a ,,.. .... I 1 ... 1 I Ilt CAVA ilielin INIg"lifiA4 • I; I 1 I I WiiiiNfilerRISP855_%_........... • t• . I p• • ..I a •gim ...... ( -1 I I i I • mumx• .........- • • ers.er 1 Amor- 414 ,.... „,,..„,„ ::• •.A% ,I: ) I 1 I 1 St •111.111. 10 4:,1..: .,;:, L i Er,SITE DEVELOPMENT • fuer... • 12••447 • Weir= a • • '••• 4w. . ••••••••• '. 4 ;'..i'.. .1 1 I I 4 •, . • I■tirc•X• • I 1/4-1 11,2cr-o Rem sareop--•• . I 1 =II WAVI14.1*"''''' 'n Aro a 4..1••OM ELMHURST ST.DEDICATION I . MEM Wori.4:04.•• w----ow__ I w.P•444 at •••• I EXHIBIT 9 LOT 300 FAR EASEMENT LETTER RECEIVED OCT 2 5 20Q5 *rt ..t..,,, c), n AD AiRC:iiiEC,I; la ,..4._NIK, ........_,„„„..,,,,_ -k. CITY OF TIGARD July 15, 2004 OREGON Douglas K. Pollack $" t1"'-:-.:q1;.^, 4 a 1834 SW 58th Ave. Suite 2.02 tom' o- Portland, OR 97221 f- -/ RE: WCTM 2S11AB tax lot 300. ;fi Dear Mr. Pollack: In your letter of June 16, 2004 you inquire whether parking would be a permissible use of the property identified as WCTM 2S11AB tax lot 300. As you are aware, pursuant to the conditions of approval for SDR 98-00021, a restriction was placed in the form of an easement to allow the FAR(Floor Area Ratio)to be transferred from the subject lot to benefit another similarly restricted parcel in the Tigard Triangle. The easement allowed development on the other parcel to exceed the 0.4 FAR limitation but removed the ability for tax lot 300 to be developed with commercial structures or any other development that was subject to this FAR ) limit. The easement acknowledges that the Grantor may develop its property subject to this easement in any way not inconsistent with Grantee's rights under this easement. Pursuant to the definitions found in the Tigard Development Code; Floor area is defined as "the gross horizontal area, under a roof, of all floors of a building, measured from the exterior walls, excluding vents, shafts, courts and space devoted to off-street parking. The floor area of a building, or portion thereof, not provided with surrounding exterior walls shall be the usable area under the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above." (emphasis added). Floor area ratio is defined as"the gross floor area of all buildings or structures on a lot divided by the total lot area." It would follow that off street parking is not considered floor area, and therefore not subject to the FAR limit. As such, the presence of the easement would not prevent the improvement of a parking area. I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact me at(503) 639-4171, should you have additional questions. Since ly, iORii G N TRACY Associate Planner .3125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 EXHIBIT 10 REPORT OF THE TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER I I 3I ''I. I > f I EX.SITE:4.21 ACRES APPROX I I I I i_r_EI- r I�--4 Jam{1 (REQ.SURVEY)LAND GIVEN:1.32 ACRES APPROX. , ' I 1'' r (REQ.SURVEY)BUILDABLE LAND.279 ACRES APPROX. 1 T_ I , ' I ;1� r PAD A 12,000 S.F. IT l PAD B 10,725 S.F. �l 1 I 1 I PAD C 10,700 S.F.IlII 'I'1 I I r MR Li p. , TOTAL BUILDING AREA: 33425 S.F. I I I STANDARD STALLS PROVIDED: 148 STALLS -n------:..::-----,f _ LL — COMPACT STALLS PROVIDED: 8 STALLS _ �1[ ,_ = ACCESSIBLE STALLS PROVIDED: 6 STALLS I I - 4 ,. I l 1,1 TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 162 STALLS I t I I I PARKING RATIO:COMMERCIAL(RETAIL) I - - - - j I I I L I 3.7/1000S.F.(MIN),5.14/1000S.F.MAX TOTAL=4.93/1000S.F. - DARTMOUTH Ir i TTT gm!f N �'r r'iLI �.L 11 F-� F+ TTT IT S- • l i I L�—J I . 5:k.s.::a.: a.:-;,a ;-.: s..-.s.:-. ' �'�Z '-`7L '`, i - '- - T T ,z�xRE,w I 100 O. . , J I-± I - iDIFI .4 ----.- --.4 ‘_=,_?--– ,,____ .i.4 1 — _ .■■ ' x ..ti 11 F — ''--•t- S 1 U 1 A J_'I11J 1 1 0 - +RESERVED 4 .4 ��• ... 511 JIMMIIM41...r.. „I _15 SP S 2HC 33 SPACES 2 HC i SITE LOCATION I +l, 11 1 . 4 1 11111 111 I I I I 1 72 SPACES 2 HC K II NTS C : 011 1 72NDIAVE. I I 84 SPACES if 70T AVE. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR MUE/C-G MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT I I` I �� M TABLE 18.520.1 — i PERMITTED USES:RESIDENTIAL(RESTRICTED) I - - - II-.:, ■ I _ CIVIC(PERMITED/CONDITIONAL) I -•4 I COMMERICAL(PERMITED/NOT PERMITED) I I - INDUSTRIAL(NOT PERMITED/RESTRICTED/PERMITED) I I vr TABLE 18.520.2 I I " �b ".4 BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT= 0'-0" SIDE = 20'-0" I — —•.,1` I BACK = 20'-0" I I — 0 MAX BUILDING HT: 45'-0" I -7/ ' MAX SITE COVERAGE: 85% — MIN LANDSCAPE REQ: 15% I ..4 — ••7 MIN LOT WIDTH: 50'-0" I MIN LOT SIZE: NO MINIMUM I ��° .4 I I 18.620.030 I I pa. , • -f I •.4 XII I I I I.°1 SITE DESIGN STANDARDS I "•A 1.BUILDINGS SHALL OCCUPY 50%OF ALL STREET FRONTAGES ALONG MAJOR AND MINOR — — — — ARTIRIAL STREETS. I _ - _ _ - - . — 4- 2.MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACK FROM PUBLIC STREET RIGHT OF WAY OR DEDICATED WETLANDS ELMHURSI ST.DEDICATION OR BUFFERS AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES IS 0'-O",AND MAX SETBACK IS 10'-0" I - - - - - - - ———+———— 3.LANDSCAPING,AN ARCADE,OR A HARD SURFACED EXPANSION OF THE PEDESTRIAN PATH - - - - - - - I I I I MUST BE PROVIDED BETWEEN A STRUCTURE AND A PUBLIC STREET OR RIGHT OF WAY. 4.A WALKWAY CONNECTION IS REQUIERED BETWEEN A BUILDINGS ENTRANCE AND A PUBLIC I STREET OR ACCESS WAY. I 5.PARKING FOR BUILDINGS...ADJACENT TO RIGHTS OF WAY MUST BE LOCATED TO THE SIDE OR REAR OF NEWLY CONSTRUCTED BUILDINGS.IF LOCATED ON SIDE...LIMITED TO 50%OF STREET FRONTAGE,AND MUST BE BEHIND LANDSCAPED AREA. TABLE 18.745.1 BUFFER MAXTRIX SITE DEVELOPMENT PARKING LOTS:50+SPACES ( I ) DRAWING REDUCED D2=15'-0"-TREES,SHRUBS,AND FENCE �� ■ RED ROCK CREEK RETAIL CENTER PD Al " �°' 1"=60'-0" TIGARD, OREGON III . 0 June 2007 • ; R W= 232.00 EET —� e 264'-5" �� `� —, v ® r 1 t I s I /__>2 zsmo,w .• •is 1, :/�^-,t� •:•1,,,.,.�••c r�` ,:a• ► 1 per ,.T._•^. •-viii /„-. r-a•.+ - -. _ TT = .._O n/- �°�F%�""• ���o ', • a'?;�. .,: .. .:. ii��//_ /��ii .. 1-... .;. iii so.a+.'.. �.: L VA,p.C.'42NALDpe W __e_�_ •. • .• _---• 4, 'ta 4 •. .. • It! .....,W ig: /%//%//%/// • • p0't.”: ,:! ,f. ':; ►.•.•-4• - • q•-a .It•• � •0 �� •�. SiO'J .} v ;:w wI .•J,.�-__ _-__ate.�.; „�'►A.�_ .'+_+ W � i•a%r s�••,vir?.q� •.5.;:�i6ip1�6r:.a...••.r�r.�e...•.Ld Os.��.�a.• •• / rr �r"r' �.:� '�p i'ri` � _ : i!?r -�� b 221 � ••;- .. .41i: cfoc '-��-''=�1'1' '"11� • i■■,L :':kOrywOL�Y�r.•aa�i1, L`0 �`�.a''.•i: ��':..t..=.,•� i in • l \ •1 ..re. �• i/ �r �i• ■■:41►\\i►�/i\�►•iu`i�!.•:� 4i,..4 iiiS i■ !• ►, — /= 6 All%�\ 1111 b� r1 • ce �p�,. Pr r,,! 3,300 SF RETAIL 1111 �� :P' ,7 rt"..".;��.g! W ._ .0;�. _- /4.:pb'I 1111 !.!�. Ni�■'•�Q PAD A ;: 1mt Sw teen•,Street.51.11.222 (�'���r.�•.. �j// � �... 1111 • •ii l• t r .rme'�;; �/% 1fJ.►�� 1111 �• ) !i•�W����i 12,000 SF RETAIL Y�/ Tr6pn...(5031 226-1x2 0 �D'• r :_vY� 1111 / ' '':';'':%■ �,Q O�p:�j/ Fax( esoe Ifingial O. 1411 j ♦ J �.<00 �, �j ''rl■ U. J._& .,- i});� ;.; ;. Nen .4 0�•-= '' 2631 Q inemmap—pr_corn •o " 1111 Q' o==/ t7 ^'=t°'JUG j j� i'•'■ PAD B 1111 _ ��.6i �'■■�0�1 L_ j iIi:d,69.l �i .:i •f . !f•- s 10725 SF RETAL 1111 ■I' a �!� ��7-;0!11 +1111■ ■■■■■■■■■■/ /%� ■■■■■■��■■■� [� 13'',/�► % � ■I L_. ,.,....45.;,,,44., ...tat, / : 1111 O �jai 1! ' �►� ■►\��_■ . / \. i !i1I; ?1111 % �' ■1111 i� �' ;t s = rya 1111 ` O' 4Ir %; -'t= 1,4.a ii SPACES 2HC �iip;:..' "a' :: 15 SP ° S 2HC : 4 oO// ;0` /O 4,415 SF RETAIL • fir wA /� I� • • ;,..a6-, - may� ►� j O O,.•I!!af1Ti:h c 1e• 11'11 �.;; ,� l••tii.'f• "l••ttii �+ A N D E R S O N �:•_-�YOj/ !- /.#•1 ■■nr_'�:!:!� �. — ,l.%1>f •'�� �e 100.1.1 rr•:a..ov.a+zrr•.-'.al000.�s:��rrlovoot:r.•.�a.•]OO.Ot'l1 DA B RO W S K I �•o..•.�r�%- ,.//iii...*CIY�/////Al'.�T� Mali , ■I■■'11■Fr!I■■■■■■■■■YlY • _ t ARCHITECTS •�E11'l/ ",:;:i. O O ... J,b .:'■■■\■■�.■■■■■■\■ . - . - LLC �Z:11.9 O� j O p 1111■.._r. . rrr ■■� G�"o�j �j fj �rMr 12 SPACES 2HC J� �•:i i• �!:�I1�r`f •1) ,5/e..i. a 1i.,0 o M'�,;,-:r *''/4,11/0 .:-',l•:.la:...:ii�•�aaa.:•®•:.iSi•••a�ra�.iaa• .•i►•.• aa8s]I�•rO..01:111 ..iiAl•• r• ,. *9!1•:••q\i7; \ �i °r 41A- _r�+. a �� I JD �.�,.• •111■Ir , ..�. .% =� :=Y: `•'•Iriir•�N�? e•. • .. 111111■■01■0101010101■01011111W�1107,■■!■11■■1101■■0111010101■1111■■�%■11 ea ��p�� r";.!�j 1430 SE 3rd Avenue 1�4;44,∎A1]/■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■1i,7!11(1rJ■■■■111011■■■■■■■■1101■■■■11,, •�•� • •'i%r ti Suite 200 ��4P�->•,r —........�IG7\I/A■o — Portland,OR 97214 a A '41:f;741► - I .►•. Tel:(503)239-7377 11S /•: �fJ!- ,'`.',� A. Fax:(503)239-7327 r •T .fat v-4' W W W.ADarchiteds.com Pei 84 SPACES a ALL MM.DESIGNS.AMMOMENTS.DRAWINGS.V MEETS ME=NED BY .1 .,.orr.oraso Der o.au •`eef• 10,700 SF RETAIL /�� 114 s �.. .D.. °�. ;u.PRUIMPED..•••• ' , 1 TIGARD CENTRAL CENTER '.:�. �,./ _ 11� SW 72ND AVENUE AND DARTMOUTH ,. , •= a'2 / STREET • �i � ( �'1, -- ///, TIGARD.OR,„.. • 4 / submittal Type fa / •rI -:rfI...4r /ter r `--•:��f / :s --'':. ',� 0 II.1 ...0.4'4 0'P 1111(1 +..-.r,fll1 Ails—e.. t, hr�. rrp►(►,,,,,z.„,1?, �//j �� �' �, \�, ��n!•-_•r; or j Dab: 51607 MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2 NORTH Project No.: AD051e3 NORTHERN SITE AREA ' Fie Name: SCALE: 1'=20' Dome Sy: JAG Checked By LMB Jurisdktion Approval: SEE SHEET L1 .2 FOR PLANTING LEGEND AND NOTES Shea Title: LANDSCAPE PLAN Skeet No.: L1.1 PLANT LEGEND MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET L1.1 r SYMBOL PLANT NAME QUANTITY SIZE CONDITION �/ ,,, ® IY TREES ft W .:...,�,\ r,w Z l M ACED Acer circinatum Multi-Stem w PC Vine Maple 18 4-5 ft. �,.f a 7„� y U 3 Trunk Min. �;� �_Acer saccharum � =Sugar Maple 42 3" cal. B do 8 �, ,-� A. J(14041° 4 1/2' S' CIr. j.'' \.�� Q Alnus rubra ����; rt 1)4).. Red Alder 3 1 1/2" col. B & B (1,:trt;■;,.1 p' F Cercls conadensis J,) Q {D Eastern Redbud 27 2 cal. B & B/25' Clr. ij Chamaecypans nootkatensis 4�/ ft. B k B �:: - I!�% Cornus nuttallii .:.e�•1 Q' oxx SW sdman se»t Salto 222 1, Western Dogwood 5 1 3/4" cal. B & B `2• it, Pw�a a.�n arm5 Q ir.°�� Tr •� a •PAm•(503)22x-1225 Ce ::::._1J Fox(503)29> 490E Pseudotsu a menziesii '"``S _ 0 ��� Douglas Fir 4 8-10' ft. B & B ''.."'i.� ei ^¢�7t 0 Quercus rubra 18 r'r.�•\ Red Oak 2 1/2" cal. B k 8 d: _. I L J 4 1/2'-5' Clr. ifit :.:�'I !� _ . [41 SHRUBS �s_ _® Crnus sericla 'Keleyi' 383 3 al. container .'I,IL Klsey Redosler Dowood 9 _ /� I Gaultheria shallon i O Solol 114 5 gal. container :a O Mahonia oquifolium �� I,:✓ Oregon Grape 78 5 gal. container ��G ,,:1///, � Mahonia re ens ►"- f% e Creeping Mahonia 279 3 gal. container `•':•e3M t1 r! ANDERSON Chinese silver •!'-7 DA B RO W S K I G Chinese silver gross 75 3 gal. container ;. �C> e^ ARCHITECTS Pieres japonica 1: Japanese Andromeda 163 24-30" container 03 / Pol stichum munitum �T ••••••„� e y 70 1 gal. container 0.2!AU w �VG L L C Western Sword Fern VC21A./*UA w 4Owa:00 SF,S.S, t Tl Zoble s laurocerasus 'Zable's' 72 5 al. container _, 0�fa.i _ ��'•II`M 'j1 J Zoble s Laurel g •..:.. �sii_tte „v , 11) e Ribes sanguineum vor. sanguineum 334 3 gal. container Red Flowering Currant Q Viburnum davidii 1430 SE 3rd Avenue David Viburnum 560 3 gat. container Suite 200 PERRENIALS AND GROUND COVERS E L M H U RST ST. DEDICATION Portland,OR 97214 — D Toughy leaf Iris 130 1 gal. container Tel:(503)239-7377 NORTH Fax (503)239-7327 O IO■■Bd Pesrli5 36 1 gal. container SOUTH PARKING LOT /"N www.ADarchitects.com © Lupinus polyphyIlus 27 1 al. container SCALE 1"=20' ■ 0FASDrs,us.AwwcE_.nscwA«„D:.AK, Big-leaved Lupine 9 „�;;E R OF R D; Frogaria vesca est. 12" o.c. .DES ® Wild Strawberry 4" pot Tri-space A""""`:/BENTS UTTHE MUTTER 'v ""s°" PROHIBIT. ® Afctostophylos uva-ursi est. 4" pot 12" o.c. TIGARD CENTRAL CENTER Kinnick I innick Tri-space SW 72ND AVENUE AND DARTMOUTH STREET r."-'.'.--"I PT-bb8s 40 do H Native opkins Bio-Flter Mix est. seed 20-40 lbs. per acre TIGARD.OR Ho F:7777•1 PT-402 do H Native opkins Riparian Grass Mix est. seed 15-30 lbs. per acre Submittal Type Hobbs Revisions: r...•; Pro-Time Lawn Seed Mix est. seed 5 lbs. •''� Hobbs & Hopkins per 375-500 sq. ft. Dale 5.31.07 41V4 sale. Protect Na.: A005193 TREE 1,) I GTIRO-STRAIGHT"TRAP TYPE File Nana: 1.4. _ Drawn By: JAG �. 2 2" X 2" X 8' TIO D.F. TREE TIES STRAP TYPE `I� STAKE, C N RUC I N GRADE Checked By LMe "GRO STRAIGHT" 1dr TREE WRAP TO FIRST BRANCH 2 - 2" X 2" X 8' P.T.D.F. STAKE, CONSTRUCTION GRADE I OPEN BURLAP ABOUT TRUNK �: Junsdelpn Approval: II FOLD BACK AND UNDER OPEN BURLAP ABOUT TRUNK. 2 DEEP RAINWATER COLLECTION FOLD BACK AND UNDER. REMOVE BURLAP FROM TOP BASIN. THOROUGHLY WATER IN. ` Y3 OF ROOTBALL MULCH TO GRADE 2" DEEP RAINWATER COLLECTION MOM 3" BARK MULCH WHERE SPECIFIED ` ► BASIN. THOROUGHLY WATER IN. 2" DEEP RAINWATER COLLECTION �r MULCH TO GRADE. BASIN MULCH TO GRADE. II111 11111111 EXISTING SOIL /r�_k 3" BARK MULCH WHERE SPECIFIED 112 % -l=1 I��� ;. 2" BARK MULCH WHERE SPECIFIED I_I=11 -•II-1I PREPARED PLANTING SOIL 11= � VA II SOIL °-1111O�A 11.4-g. PREPARED PLANTING SOIL -=11 11=11=11-1-[l 1 11 1 - II 11 II111 11 X111=11 PREPARED PLANTING SOIL 11=11. / 11=1I DRIVE STAKES A MINIMUM 11=4 . ..".:"=T=11= EXISTING SOIL - - -1r=I.-11 COMPACTED PLANTING SOIL TWO TIMES OF 12" OF RESISTANCE. - ROOTBALL SIZE I DRIVE STAKES A MINIMUM TWO TIMES TWO TIMES ROOTBALL SIZE OF 12 OF RESISTANCE. ROOTBALL SIZE DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING CONIFER TREE PLANTING DETAIL SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL Sheet TKle N.T.S. N.T.S. N.T.S. LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet No.: L1 .2 c ----- cini Y 410) �I T iG 4 �/ i1 f1 !I!1 A R if- D ROCK CR 1 EK TIGARD BUSINESS CENT J R 12625 SW 70th AVE. TIGARD, OR. 97235 JANUARY 2007 VICINITY V AP / PROJRCT SITE 25101 AB 00100 AND 00300 C." �� I SHEET INDEX / SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION SW CUNTON ST 01 TITLE SHEET/VICINITY MAP 02 STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS AND NOTES SW DwTUq, OWNER CI EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C2 PROPOSED COMPOSITE PLAN DOUG FRY CITY OF TIGARD DEBORAH RD cam! GRADING/EROSION CONTROL PLAN TREE REMOVAL/MITIGATION N WASHINGTON COUNTY ` 5 NEWBIIR(t OR. 87iss Cs DARTMOUTH STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN/PROFILE OREGON a 72ND HALF-STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN/PROFILE SW ELMHURST ST a C7 70TH FULL STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN/PROFILE DEVELOPER / PLANNER / APPLICANT CS ELMHUR,ST HALF-STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN/PROFILE C8 PARKING LOT ELEVATIONS BRAD PIZZAS C10 STORM SEWER PLAN/PROFILE ® COMMERCIAL TENANT ADVISORS Gil WETLAND MITIGATION AND RESTORATION PLAN 0)1\k < < < 12161 SW 55th AVE. SUITE 100 CU WATERLINE AND EIRE PROTECTION PLAN TUALATON, OR. 97062 C18 SANITABY SEWER PLAN o t at N " m DI STORM DETENTION DETAILS W 10-[ N N D2 WATER QUALITY DETAILS D8 DETAILS(WATER AND STORM) SW BEVELAND ST D4 DETAILS SAN AND STREET) SW HAMPTON ST NOT TO SCALE I.Z;) CIVIL ENGINEER WETLAND SPECIALIST ARCHITECT M 6pYwkVantrtCo�psy 1pDJo1in/d BRIAN LEA PA HARRIS STREAM SERVICES ANDY HARRIS JON ANDERSON Oregon 57015 PACE BNalIVE6R8 a � HARRIS STREAM SERVICES AD ANDERSON DABROWSKI ARCHITECTS, LW p.503.655.1342 If.503.655.1360 ]800 JOHN ADAMS ST. Restoring Stream and Watershed Health and Function 2470 ARBOR DR. 1480 SE 3rd AVE. SUITE 800 OREGON CITY, OR 97045 WEST LINN, OR 97088 Civil 1 Structural I Planning I Survey PORTLAND, OR 8721! www.paceengrs.mm G1,} ABBREVIATIONS. APPENDIX D - GENERAL CONDII1ONS APPENDIX E - WATER CONSTRUCTION NOTE APPENDIX F - GENERAL NOTES - GRADING PLAN PERMITS T. THE DNS STANDARD SPECFICATON FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL IS TMANuAL ON UNIFORM 1. AN ESTIMATED 12 PERCENT OF NE WATER SYSTEM COST MUST BE ON DEPOSIT PRIOR TO 1. THIS GRADING PERMIT IS NOT TO D CONSTRUED AS FINAL APPROVAL O SIT: TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR STREETS AND HIGHWAYS,U.S.DEPT O N BECINNC CONSTRUCTION ON WATER LINES.AND TO RECEIVE A TRW(aTY OF TIGARD PUBLIC GRADING.EMBANKMENT OR STRUCTURAL FILL WORK: IT MERELY PROVIDES FOR TRANSPORTATION,FEN,1988 ED. WORKS,WATER DIVISION)STAMPED APPROVAL ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS. INITIATION OF WORK AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING CITY APPROVAL OF THE 2. TRAFFIC CONTROL SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR BY THE CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ONE SET Cr TPW STAMPED APPROVED PLANS ON THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION-DEVELOPMENT PLAN SET THE CITYS STANDARD SPECIFICATION AND.ALSO,N ACCORDANCE WTH A CITY(JOB CONSTRUCTION SITE AT ALL TIMES. 2. SPREADING OF MUD OR DEBRIS UPON ANY PUBLIC ROAD IS PROHIBITED. THE CITY SPECIFIC)APPROVED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN. A COPT OF THE APPNOVED TRAFFIC 1 CURBS MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF WATER MAINS WTHIN NEW MAY ORDER STCPPACE OF WORK TO EFFECT CORRECTIVE ACTION.Al ANY TIME CONTROL PLAN SHALL BE AVAILABLE AT THE WORK AREA. SUBDIL4SKXN5. 3. EFFECTIVE EROSION CONTROL,DUST CONTROL. AND DRAINAGE CONTROL IS REQUIRED 3. PURL IC ROADWAY SHALL NOT BF(DOSED TO TRAFFIC.AT ANY TIME,PITHOUT HAVING 4. NOTIFY TPW,WATER DIVISION.48 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION TO AT ALL TIMES. THE CITY MAY ORDER STOPPAGE OF WORK TO EFFECT CORRECTIVE FIRST OBTAINED WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE CITY ENGINEER. THE PERMIT HOLDER IS SCHEDULE A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING. TELEPHONE 639-4171. ACTION,AT ANY TAE. RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVISION OF TIMELY NOTIFICATION OF TRAFFIC FLOW DISRUPTIONS 5. ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WIN AWWA(AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION) 4. EMBANKMENTS OR STRUCTURAL FILLS FOR ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION OR FILLS TO BE TO AREA HIDE EMERGENCY SERVICES(TIGARD POLICE DEPT.. TUALATIN FIRE k RESCUE) STANDARDS, CONSTRUCTED ON BUILDABLE LOTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FROM EXCAVATED AND TO TRI-RIFT AND TIGARD AND BEAVERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT. 6. ALL YORK WILL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY TOW, WATER DIVISION. MATERIALS ACCEPTABLE TO THE SOILS ENGINEER Al D SHALL BE BROUGHT TO GRADE 4. ADVANCE WARNING O IMMINENT TRAFFIC DISRUPTION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE 7. ALL PIPE AND FITTINGS SHALL BE DUCTILE WON,CEMENT-LINED,OF NEW MANUFACTURE AND IN LIFTS NOT TO EXCEED 6'LOOSE MEASURE. EACH LIFT SHALL BE COMPACTED TO GENERAL MOTORING PUBLIC BY PLACEMENT OF AN ADVANCE NOTFICAPON SIGN AT MADE IN THE USA- PPE SHALL BE"TYTON-JOINT DUCTILE WON,CLASS 52. ALL FITTINGS 90 PERCENT OF MA/ILIUM DENSITY AS OBTAINED BY AAS1H0 171R0 COMPACTION TEST. EACH END O THE CONSTRUCTION AREA 72 HOURS(MIN.)BEFORE NInATON OF SHALL BE MJ(MECHANICAL JOINO UNLESS OTERWSE SPECIFIED. 5. STRUCTURAL FILLS SHALL COVEY WITH APPENDIX CHAPTER 33 OF THE UNIFORM CONSTRUCTION WORK. B COVER FOR AU.WATER MAINS IN STREET AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY SHALL BE 36". BACKFILL BUILDING CODE. CONSTRUCTION ON DOSING SLOPES GREATER THAN 5:1 SHALL BE 5. ACCESS TO EXISTING PROPERTIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES.INCLUDING SHALL BE 1.-0•GRAVEL ACHIEVED BY BENCHING INTO THE EXISTING BANK A MINIMUM or TEN FEET. IF THE NORMAL DELIVERY SERVICE AND MAIL SERVICE AND IF NOT,SHALL BE CAUSE FOR 9. ALL VALVE-OPERATING NUTS SHALL BE PITIN 36"OF FINISHED GRADE,OTHERWISE VALVE BENCH EXPOSES SAND SOIL AN UNDERDRAIN MUST BE PROVIDED. THE UNDERORAIN,F WORK STOPPAGE UNTIL EFFECTIVE ACCESS IS ESTABLISHED. OPERATING NUT EXTENSIONS WILL BE REQUIRED. REQUIRED,WILL BE CONSTRUCTED BY INSTALLING NONWOVEN FILTER FABRIC, 6. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES.FLAGPERSONS,ETC..SHALL BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO is. POURED CONCRETE THRUST BLOCKS OF AT LEAST EIGHT SQUARE FEET OF BEARING SURFACE EQUIVALENT TO EXXON CTF 12500.ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE STARTING BENCH. INITIATOR OF CONSTRUCTION WORK AND SHALL BE EFFECTIVELY MANTAINEX. ARC REQUIRED AT EACH TEE,CROSS.AND BEND LOCATIONS(SEE DEEMS FOR MINIMUM THEN PLACING A SIX INCH LAYER OF 1W-3/4'GRAN ROCK,AND FINALLY 7. NO WORK HILL BE PERMITTED DURING THE HOURS O DARKNESS.NOR BETWEEN 9:00 �) COVERING THE DRAIN ROCK MTH THE NONWOVEN FILTER FABRIC. SUCCESSIVE BEARING P.Y.TO 7:00 A.N.,MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY NOR BETWEEN 9:00 P.M. TO 6:00 AM. it. A 4"X 4'X 6'-0',PANTED BLUE,SHALL INSTALLED W FRONT O EVERY 2-INCH WATER BENCHES HILL BE CONSTRUCTED MTH VERTICAL FILL BETWEEN TWO TO FIVE FEET AND SATURDAY,NOR BETWEEN 9:00 P.M.TO 9:00 A.Y.SUNDAY. SERVICE LOCATION,AND REMAIN THERE UNTIL ME WATER METER IS INSTALLED. ALL 2-INCH BE COMPACTED IN LAYERS NOT TO EXCEED 8 INCHES. EACH 8-INCH LAYER SHALL BE B. MINIUW TRAVEL LANE WITH SHALL BE TWELVE(12)FEET; PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL SHALL WATER SEANCES SHALL CONSIST OF A NJ X 2"PT TIE AND.2"PT%110 COMPRESSION COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 90 PERCENT AASHTO T-180 DENSITY. THE FILL ALSO BE PROVIDED FOR. FITTING E MANUFACTURED BY MUELLER COMPANY. SLOPES SHAD NOT EXCEED 21 AT FINISH GRADE NO ROCK OR SIMILAR MATERIAL 9. THE OTT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADD TO OR MODIFY TRAFFIC CONTROL 12. FIR FITTING HYDRANT ASSEMBLY CONSISTS OF A CO%6'. EXCEEDING A 12-INCH DIAMETER SHALL BE ALLOWED IN THE STRUCTURAL FILL REQUIREMENTS AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO EFFECTIVELY CONTROL TRAFFIC AND TO (FLANGE)TEE,6'FIG X MJ GATE 6. THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER FOi STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL BE NOTIFIED 24 HOURS IN ASSURE PUBLIC SAFETY. VALVE.6'MJ X MJ HOLDING SPOOL,AND A MODERN MUELLER CENTURION FIRE HYDRANT, ADVANCE,BY THE CONTRACTOR,OF STARTING BENCHWORK TO DETERMINE THE NEED 10. BEFORE INITIATING ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTMTY,NE PERMIT HOLDER SHALL CONTACT A-442.6'NJ,5-1/4'MVO,3-PORT(2-2W NUT HOSE CONNECTION.1-4T4-PEST PUMPER), FOR AN UNDERCRAIN LAYER AND TO VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS. THE OTYS PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ENGINEER,(8639-4171)TO ESTABLISH A 1g PENTAGON OPERATING NUT.OPENING LEFT,COLOR: YELLOW; APPROVED EQUAL 7. THE CITY SHALL BE PROVIDED WTH A COPY OF THE GEOTECHMCAL ENGINEER'S PLACE TIME.AND DATE FOR A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING. MUELLER CENTURION A-423.WATERIOUS PACER 6790,CLOW MEDALLION REPORT/RECOUMENDATON CHANGES. 11. THE PERMIT HOLDER OR MS CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITYS INSPECTOR AT 13. EACH EIRE HYDRANT SHALL BE INSTALLED UPON A PRE-FORMED CONCRETE BLOCK WTH 134 B. IF SPRINGS OR GROUND WATER ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION,THE 639-4171 TWENTY-FOUR(24)HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCNG WORK. TWENTY-FOUR CUBIC YARDS OF CRUSHED 2 - Y DRAIN ROE(. TARPAPER MLL BE LAID ON TOP OF THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY TIE SOILS AND CAL ENGINEERS OF THE CONDITIONS (24)HOURS PRIOR TO ANY STAGED INSPECTION(SEE ATTACHED LISTING)AND AFTER DRAIN ROO(TO SEPARATE THE ROCK FROM EARTH COVER. FOUND AND COORDINATE MS ACTIVITIES IN A MANNER THAT HILL ALLOW THE COMPLETING WORK COVERED BY T11E PERMIT. I4. ALL SANITARY SEWER LINES WITHIN 10 FEET LATERALLY OR 3 PUT VERTICALLY Cr A WATER ENGINEERS TILE TO RENEW THE SITUATION AND PREPARE A PLAN TO PROPERLY 12. A COPY OF THE PERMIT AND ALL ATTACHMENTS.AND A COPY OF THE APPROVED MAIN SHALL BE ENCASED IN A REINFORCES CONCRETE JACKET 6'TINIER FOR A DISTANCE OF MITIGATE THE WATER ENCOUNTERED. CONSTRUCTION PLAN AND ALL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE AVAILABLE AT THE WORK AREA. 10 FEET ON BOTH SIDE OF THE CROSSING. WHERE CROSSINGS ARE NECESSARY,THEY MUST 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE THE SOILS ENGINEER TAKE COMPACTOR TESTS. A ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE PERMIT TERMS.CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS AND BE MADE AT APPROXIMATELY 90 DEGREES WITH AT LEAST 16"OF SEPARATION BELOW THE MINIMUM OF THREE TESTS WILL BE REQUIRED FOR EACH 2 FEET OFF FILL TO THE CITY APPROVED PERMIT PLANS,AND APPROVED PLAN AMENDMENTS AND TO WATER U . ID. EXCAVATOR MUST COMPLY MIN ORS 757.541 TROUGH 757.571 (UTUTY THE CITES STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND TO THESE GENERAL CONDITIONS 15. ALL MAINS NTH A STATIC PRESSURE UP TO 100 PSI(POUNDS PER SQUARE NCH)SHALL BE PRE-NOTIFICATION,ETC.). CHANCES TO ANY OF THE AFORESAID MUST BE APPROVED BY TIE CITY,W ADVANCE TESTED AT 150 PS FOR I HOUR MTH A MAXBIUU LOSS OF 5 PD. WATER MAINS NTH A OF WORK PERFORMANCE. STATIC PRESSURE GREATER THAN 100 PSI SMALL BE PRESSURE TESTED AT 1.5 TIMES THE 13. MAINTENANCE OF THE YORK AREA AND APPROACH ROADS IS THE RESPONSIBILITY Cf STATE PRESSURE FOR 1 HOUR MTH A MAXIMUM LOSS OF 5 P9. THE PERMIT HOLDER. THE WORK AREA AND APPROACH ROADS SHAT BE MAINTAINED 16. UPON SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF TESTING.THE NEW MAINS AND CONNECTIONS TO IN A CLEAN CONDITION,FREE FROM OBSTRUCTIONS AND HAZARDS A COPY O THE EXISTING MAINS SHALL BE CLEANED AND FLUSHED MTH POTABLE WATER PRIOR TO PERMIT HOLDERS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE SHALL BE AVAILABLE AT THE WORK DISINRCTON. RUSHING VELOCITIES SHALL BE AT LEAST 2.5 FEET PER SECOND. AREA. DISINFECTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWWA STANDARD 0651-92,THE STATE 14. THE SPREADING OF MUD OR DEBRIS OR STORAGE OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION AND CITY REQUIREMENTS. THE CONTINUOUS FEED METHOD OF DISINFECTION ANY KIND UPON ANY PUBLIC ROADWAY IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED AND MOUTON SHALL SHALL BE USED. DISINFECTING MIXTURE SHALL BE A CHLORINE-WATER SOLUTION HAVING A BE CAUSE FOR IMMEDIATE CANCELLATION OF THE PERMIT. THE CITY MAY AT ANY THE FREE CHLORINE RESIDUAL OF 40-50 LEGA(MILLIGRAMS PER LITER). THE DISINFECTION ORDER I4MEDATE CLEAN UP AND STOPPAGE OF WORK TO ACCOMPLISH CLEAN UP. MIXTURE WILL BE PREPARED BY INJECTING A CALCIUM/SODIUM NYPOCHLCRIIE AND WATER 15. EFFECTIVE EROSION CONTROL IS REQUIRED. EROSION CONTROL DEVICES MUST BE SOLUTION INTO THE PIPELINE AT A MEASURED RATE WHILE FRESH(POTABLE)WATER IS INSTALLED AND MANTMNED MEETING THE D.E.O.REQUIREMENTS. THE CITY MAY AT ALLOWED TO ROW THROUGH THE PIPELINE SO THAT THE CHLORINE-WATER SOLUTION IS OF ANY T4E ORDER CORRECTIVE ACTON AND STOPPAGE OF WON TO ACCO4Pl15N THE SPEARED STRENGTH. TREATED(CHLORINATED)WATER SHALL BE RETAINED IN THE EFFECTIVE EROSION CONTROL PIPELINE LONG ENOVGN TO DESTROY ALL NOISPORE-FORMING BACTERIA_TYPICAL RETENTION 16. PROPERTY DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTp1 ACTIVITY SHALL BE SEEDED PITH A STANDARD PERIOD IS 24 HOURS. AT THE END OF THE 24-HOUR PERIOD,THE PIPELINE IS TO HAVE A GRASS MIX: SHRUBS.ROWERS,BARKDUST,EREINST SIGNS,PAVEMENT ACE ,MTH URI FREE CHLORINE RESIDUAL.OF A LEAST 10 YG AFTER SATISFACTORY CHLORINATION. APPENDIX G - COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS KID ANDS.ETC.SHALL BE REESTABLISHED,REINSTALLED OR REPLACED,MTH LIKE FLUSH THE WATER FROM THE LINE UNTIL THE WATER THROUGHOUT THE PIPELINE IS EQUAL KIND TIE DRAINAGE CHEMICALLY AND BACTERIOLOGICALLY TO THE PERMANENT SOURCE OF SUPPLY. 17. EFFECTIVE SITE AND SOA SHALL B IS RENTED. AT AJA SHALL BE COPROPERT BI1HIN DISPOSE OF THE DISNFECTION WATER IN AN APPROVED MANNER. DO NOT ALLOW STRUCTURAL LOT FAIL PUB WORK OEE YNA THE BE EI ROUTED THAT ADJACENT SELYTI PROPERTY, DISINFECTION WATER TO FLOW INTO A WATERWAY WITHOUT ADEQUATE DILUTION OR OTHER PUBLIC MAY AND THE RCERRE SYSTEM I$NOT ADVERSELY IMPACTED. THE SATISFACTORY METUOOS OF REDUCING CHLORINE RESIDUALS TO A SAFE LEVEL AS MANDATED MINIMUM PERCENT COMPACTION REQUIRED 905 ACC MAY AT ANY TAE DR IN CORRECTIVE ACTON AND STOPPAGE OF WORK TO BY DEG AFTER DISPOSAL AND FLUSHING OF THE D19NFECTKON SOLUTION,THERE HILL BE ACCOMPLISH EFFECTIVE DRAINAGE CONTROL. TEST METHOD REQUIRED TO DETERMINE MAXIMUM DENSITY T-180 18. EXCAVATOR(S)MUST COMPLY WITH O.R.S.757.541 THROUGH 7.571;E%UVATOR(S) ANOTHER 24-HOUR RETENTION PERIOD PRIOR TO BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTING. GH BACTERIOLOGICAL TESTS HILL BE TAXER BY TPw. FREQUENCY OF DENSITY TESTING In LOTS B.RFTS 3 TEST SHALL NOTIFY ALL UTILITY COMPANIES FOR LINE LOCATIONS 72 HOURS(IAN.)PRICK ILA 17. PROVIDE AN ECLIPSE NO.88 SAMPLING STATION MANUFACTURED BY KUPFERTE FOUNDRY,ST. FOR EACH2 FEET START OF MIRK. DAMAGE TO UTUTES SHALL BE CORRECTED AT THE PERMIT LOUIS,MO 63102. THE SAMPLING STATION SHALL BE 2-0'BURY.MTH A Y FIPT(FEMALE OF FILL HOLDERS'EXPENSE. IRON PPE THREAD)INLET,AND A T'UNTHREADED HOSE NOZZLE. ALL SAMPLING STATIONS ROAD SECTION-EMBANKMENT- 19. CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL EXISTING UTILITIES FOR BOTH VERTICAL ELEVATION AND SHALL BE ENCLOSED IN A LOCKABLE.NON-REMOVABLE,AUIMNUM-CAST HOUSING. WHEN HORIZONTAL LOCATION PRIOR TO START OF WORK(POTHOLE BEFORE DIGGING F OPENED,THE SAMPLING STATION SHALL REQUIRE NO KEY FOR OPERATION,AND THE WATER MINIMUM PERCENT CLMPACTICN REQUIRED 90%BELOW 3'OF NECESSARY). SHOULD CONFLICTS ARISE AND REDESIGN OR RELOCATION OF FACNTIES PILL ROW IN AN ALL-BRASS WATERWAY. ALL WORKING PARTS BILL BE OF BRASS AND BE OF SUBGRADE SUBGRADE 95% BE NECESSARY,IT SHAT BE DONE AT THE PERMIT HOLDERS EXPENSE. CHANGES REMOVABLE FROM ABOVE GROUND NTH NO DIGGING. A COPPER VENT TUBE(STANDARD) WITHIN 3' MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY N ADVANCE OF MIRK PERFORMANCE. CONTRACTOR WILL ENABLE THE SAMPLING STATION TO BE PUMPED FREE OF STANDING WATER TO SHALL COORDINATE THE WORK MTH AFFECTED UTILITY AGENCIES. PREVENT FREEZING.AND TO MINIMIZE BACTERIA GROWTT4. THE EXTERIOR PIPING BALL BE 20. A TEMPORARY HARD-SURFACE PATCH(CO.D MX AC OR HOT MIX RASE PAVING)SHAD _ TEST METHOD REDLINED TO DETERMINE MAXIMUM DENSITY T-BSI OR T-1B0 BE PLACED ON TRENCHES WHIN ROADWAYS AT THE END OF EACH DAYS WORK. NO BRASS,AND.A X BALL VALVE SHALL BE FKNUNUtU IN PLACE OF THE OL"PET COCK ON TRENCH,ON SITE OR OFF-SITE,SHALL BE LEFT AT ANY TAE W AN UNSAFE THE TENT RIB' FREQUENCY OF DENSITY 1ESTING O EMBANKMENT B'LIFTS 3 TESTS CONDITION. THE PERMIT HOLDER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR AND IS LIABLE FOR HAZARDS 18. TRW HI LL AND LL INSTALL A COPPER SERVICES A SALPLING STATIONS PRIOR TO SURFACING OF FOR EACH 2'OF OR DAMAGE RESULTING FROM THE PROSECUTION OF THE WORK. STREETS. WATER METERS PALL OF INSTALLED BY TPW UPON WED TO AN REQUEST AND Eu BANKUENT PAYMENT BY OTHERS(OWNERS). ALL WATER METERS CONNECTED TO AN IRRIGATOR SYSTEM 21. WORK PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE PERMIT SHALL INCLUDE REPAIR OF EXISTING ROAD SECTOR SINGRADEL FACIIJTES(ROADS.DITCHES,ETC.)AS MAY BE NECESSARY.IN THE CITY INSPECTORS MUST HAVE THE PROPER OREGON STATE APPROVED BACKFLOT PREVENTION DEVICE, OPINION.TO OVERCOME DETERIORATION OR DAMAGE WHICH OCCURRED RI CONJUNCTION MINIMUM OF A DCVO(DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY)INSTALLED ON THE PROPERTY SIDE MINIMUM PERCENT COMPACTION REQUIRED 95% VAN THE WORK AUTHORIZED BY THE PERMIT. CORRECTIVE WORK SMALL BE DONE AT OF THE WATER METER. W ADDITION,EVERY METER FOR C01111F.RHAL,MULTI-FAMILY, THE PERMIT HOLDERS'EXPENSE. INDUSTRIAL,AND INSTITUTIONAL SERVICE,REGARDLESS OF SIZE,SHALL HAVE THE PROPER PERCENT COMPACTION REQUIRED TO WHAT 1 FOOT 22 ONE AS-BUILT MYLAR ORU4NG 9HOBING ALL FEW PUDUC MPROVCMENIS,INCLUDING OREGON STATE APPROVED BACKROW PREVENTION DEVICE MINMUM OF A DCVO INSTALLED ON DEPTH BFI OW SUBORADE ANY RENDON MADE TO THE PREAOUSLY APPROVED CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND,ALSO, THE PROPERTY SIDE OF THE METER. THE OR THE RESULTS LILTS FORWARDED DEVICE SHALL BE ANY IMPROVEMENT ANKH MAY IMPACT AN EXISTING PUBLIC SYSTEM OR FACIUTY, INSTALLED AND TESTED BY THE OWNAN,BEGIN. THE RESULTS FORWMDED TO TRW WATER TEST METHOD REQUIRED TO DETERMINE YA%IMW DENSITY AASHTO T-99 SHALL BE PROVIDED TO DE CITY BY A REGISTERED ONE ENGINEER ALONG VAIN AN DIVISION.ON BEFORE WATER SERVICES CAN BE(7N. ENGINEERS CERTIFICATION OF INSTALLATION COMPLIANCE(FORM ATTACHED). 19. UPON COMPLETION OF THE DC WATER SYSTEM, A CONTRACTOR OR 10%ER FREQUENCY OF DENSITY TESTING O SUOGRADE AS NEEDED ( ) SHALL PELT TS, A THE TOTAL E ,AD CONSTRUCTION COSTS TO WHICH HILL ETC.ADDED 2%FOR FOR 23. A SEWER SYSTEM NR-TEST AND(V.H.S.)TV TEST REPORT AND ONE SET OF BLUEIINE TRW INSPECTIONS,WATER LO55,OVERHEAD,ADMINISTRATION,SAMPLING,ETG AND.2X FOR ROAD SECTION-AGGREGATE BASE "AS-BOLTS-(OF EITHER OR BOTH THE STORM AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS)MAY ENGINEERING RENEW,INCLUDING'AS-BUILTS DRAWINGS.UPDATING MASTER MAP. BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONNECTION OF ANY INTERSECTION MAPS.ETC. MINIMUM PERCENT COMPACTION REQUIRED 95% BUILDINGS TO THE SEWER SYSTEM. 24. THE PERMIT HOLDERS ENGINEERANSPECTOR SMALL SUBMIT ONLY INSPECTOR REPORTS, OPERATION OF VALVES IN THE TIGARD WATER SERVICE AREA IS TEST METHODS REOIINED TO DETERMINE AAUMU4 DENSITY OSHO TM ION ON A MEEKLY BASIS,TO THE CITYS INSPECTOR.(SEE DEVELOPER-ENGINEER PROHIBITED OR T-99 AGREEMENT NOTE/5.) 25. THE OTYS INSPECTORS MAY,AT THEW DISCRETION.REQUIRE PROVISION OF TESTS AND FREQUENCY OF DENSITY TESTING OF AGGREGATE BASE AS NEEDED OR REPORTS FROM T#PERMIT HOLDER,PERMIT HOLDERS ENGINEER OR CONTRACTOR ROAD SECTION- ASpHN i PAVEMENT: TO VALDATE CLAMS OF MATERIAL OR CONSTRUCTION ADEQUACY/COMPLIANCE SUCH TESTS/REPORTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE PERMIT HOLDERS EXPENSE. 26. E PERMIT HOLDER SHALL PROMOS A COPY OF A PROPERLY EXECUTED RELEASE AND MINIMUM PERCENT COMPACTION REDLINED 92% DC WAIVER DOCUMENT TO THE CITY FOR EACH OWNERSHIP DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION TEST METHOD REQUIRED TO DETERMINE MAXIMUM DENSITY OSHD TM 306 ACTIVITY.AS EVIDENCE OF DISTURBANCE RESOLUTION AND OWNER SATISFACTION. 27. EXISTING MONUMENTS,PROPERTY CORNERS.AND SURVEY MARKERS SHALL R FREQUENCY Cr DENSITY TESTING OF AGGREGATE BASE 5 TESTS MINIMUM• PROTECTED. REPLACEMENT SMALL BE AT 114E PERMIT HOLDERS'EXPENSE. AVERAGE DENSITY 28. THE ENGINEER SHALL NOTIFY THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEYOR MIEN ME INITIAL AND FINAL LIFT OF ASPHALT HAS BEEN PLACED. FULL THE INSPECTION OR SPOT DECKING CF COMPACTION SPOT 29. THE PERMIT HOLDER SHALL PROVIDE TO THE CITY INSPECTOR,IN WRITING. TIE NAMES I° AND 24 HOUR EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBER Cr TWO(2)PERSONS WHO HAVE MITT TTY TRENCH RACYFLJ (BENEATH PAVEMENT OR SIDEWAI KO m AUTHORITY TO RESOLVE PROBLEMS.TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND.IN GENERAL PALL BE RESPONSIBLE IN CASE OF ANY EMERGENCY. THE PERMIT HOLDER SHALL NOTIFY MINIMUM PERCENT COMPACTION REQUIRED FOR BEDDING 90% THE CITY INSPECTOR,N WRITING,OF ANY/ALL ASSIGNMENT CHANGES °ul° 30. THE PERMIT HOLDER SHALL CAUSE HIS CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE TO THE DEC Ua INSPECTOR,IN WRITING,THE NAME AND 24 14193W EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBER OF MINIMUM PERCENT COMPACTION REQUIRED FOR PPE ZONE 90% A DESIGNATED"COMPETENT PERSON'RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION SAFETY AS PER MINIMUM PERCENT COMPACTION REHIRED ABOVE PPE ZONE 95% OR-OSHA,CHAP.437,DIV.3 CONSTRUCTION.SUB-DIVISION P-EXCAVATIONS THE aa9 CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTFY THE CITY INSPECTOR OF ANY/ALL ASSIGNMENT CHANGES TEST METHOD REQUIPED TO DETERMINE MAXIMUM DENSITY T-99 o I 31. IT IS DE SOLE RESPONSIBIITY OF THE PERMIT HOLDER TO PROVIDE FOR PROPER RI :- GHGHT-OF FOR-ENTRY AND/OR EASEMENTS PRIOR TO STARING WORK. PROOF OF DIFFERENT REQLAREMENT F PVC NO RIT-OF-ENTRY CR PROPERLY EXECUTED EASEMENTS.SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE S w�°' CITY. THE CITY SHALL IN NO WAY BE CONSTRUED TO BE LIABLE FOR THE PERMIT IN LANDSCAPE AREA 85% --ti HOLDERS FAILURE TO OBTAIN OR PROVIDE FOR PROOF OF RIGHT-OF-ENTRY OR EASEMENTS ADOTONAL NFORJAA¶ON/COMMENTS: 32. BEFORE PLACEMENT OF DIE FINAL LIFT OF ASPHALT,THE PERMIT HOLDER SHALL N. CLEAN AND HAVE THE CITY COMPLETE A PRE-ACCEPTANCE VIDEO INSPECTION OF ALL •WHEN USING NUCLEAR GAUGE.TRIO READINGS AT EACH SOE,THE SECOND AT RIGHT ANGLES w`l� NEW SEWER LINES. THE PERMIT HOLDER SHALL PROVIDE THE CITY WTH 30 DAYS OF TO THE FIRST. THE TWO READING HILL BE AVERAGED TO OBTAIN TEST DENSITY. gA NOTICE FOR THE VIDE0 INSPECTION. ANY DEFICIENCIES SHALL BE REPAIRED BEFORE �� PLACEMENT OF FINAL LIFT. la .Ji Q .VV`,N. og DESIGNED ISM 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER P" A DRAWN ISM ! , Oregon City,OR 97045 12/22/06 OTEgon55.T34zIc503sss.T3so RED ROCK CREEK STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS 06914 �� CHECKED BDLEE TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER ScAIE AND NOTES SHEET NAME 06914602 ' APPROVED BY Civil Structural Planning Slxvey 00 SYM REVISION DATE BY APP'D IAErPM41ipSwimsC4Rp41M paceengrSEXIT AS SHOWN SHEET OF 2 -' ,. .\ \ \ `' ‘%•••` ,jI[,.,r;` ■ :PARCEL Tll .i , \ _+.e •.\ \�\\\, \ \R .T -DONAUi�_ ,JI11JA vPCLC00'' .. I� 1 .?, 1! -- .\ \ ` .T ''.I .1k eoprA0-L''CARPENTER..ii s.' "..! I pAKEC tit • S, ".,• 1-_ `1.1.-57."-__::::.-1"— —�_' "'.1"`-_ _12-ST ..=„'-• = - — 1 .. *'• "1 - fU Il7FG! r r' r i' Y P i• �L 411 S W. DARTMOUTH - , , ` _ _ .$ ;: ' \-- �3 � r EASEMENT{191 I •ik !. �" '16-4 - - y9zxS"""` " .n�!=b 1 \ ''ems.°r r :I t .f I S F 47:7 r -^}.I `VI �. f , , - I PROJECT LEGEND ,I-. i / t ;-5 .'.ri ' I , / ' `' • i,' ! ,; I ' . •)',1 j, 1 r •••' I I ® EXISTING TELEPHONE MANHOLE +1 ... 1 /'.;1 /1 j / f/ I f ' •• f 1l t ® EXISTING MANHOLE J;r ' ( /'/ f / ' 1 t• q r�, ( I r t �\�� e EXISTING POWER POLE 'f: %; -, J ! i I` t 1 J ' - 1/ 0 E%ISTINC CATCH BASIN I L- ', . ';, .4:-"�''�'� f i/ I E 1 I J f / �' I {� O� >? EXISTING LIGHT POLE• r•^- -/ '�/,., �' ''p / / �� ,,' !, / / ,� /`. r O EXISTING BOLLARD OR PIPE ' , ! //.' .f - /' / --' f / r• ' 14 , / • ,!'.7 / ` , "` e EXISTING WATER VALVE• ii il.I/ I„ •�, 't• . . /j / , './ / i .,--- ;' fN y ,•' '.., /./! i ® EXISTING WATER METER / `' 5 `F /. —S .• J / / / ,'../,/,/ 0 EXISTING GAS VALVE \.„; 0 EXISTING GAS METER•,I 1 ON MOM�17 '' "_- // r`./, ',/1/',F/ / ' ''%' • ' / BLOCK 20 A EXISTING MAILBOX '/ '`,- A EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT -`� •"' , / i , i i / T EXISTING STREET SIGN z..),.. F ,�ym''.r . /� `� ! i' I a EXISTING SIGNAL POLE , -'t.} _- ., // / / �// ' ;, I I ES EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL Ydf •'" y-� f•_,• • / /./ / I; 4" r 0 EXISTING CONTROL BOX -j--__ -_ ',,.,4 . .,.'....!•� .�?A- • ^ t ' ''_ ';',,./ J~t,/',/'y/ I w_ EXISTING WATERLINE . I , / �. / / ' .t. ` yl 8—--—--— EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER I oa rte, Y , ' f I &w- ----•--- - EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE +"�i ST--------- EXISTING STORM SEWER LINE 'T \ i f --. ,� z+ G� C---- -------- EXISTING CAS LINE i1 • j .� / ?� !, I:�; ��\ T—..-..-..-..-•-- EXISTING TELEPHONE LINE 1 ON 88008549 I DN 98024848 ON 92082029 ' /! !/./', / I�I I ROAD CENTERLINE•N\ j Ti ao9 III, I I ` y= I I -- EXIST. FENCE I I , _ ,_/ a16 AC.�� d, — —— PROPERTY LINE 3 i i iI I — EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT I NOME 1 •� .- / II t eo9- - EXISTING EDGE OF GRAVEL � y l / / ' 11 1 1 1 i / I� 0* p� G EXISTING TREES I \ \ I L_I I - .. /' O EXISTING SHRUB J / _, .-`B+/ e P WETLAND I SW ELMHURST STREET �` —/�0'ROADWAY 64 EMENT(1988)• 1 .__ �rK / WATER RESOURCE RESTORATION 1 4 -- -- -- �. ,. I I WETLANDS PIT I BLOCK 21 e I I 0 NEW MANHOLE I N .. NEW CATCH BASIN II ai PLAN SCALE: 1".= 50' ‹e IV 0 0 7 25 \Qs ix E (e ms Q w6 00 t.RI DESIGNED BLS 1300John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER 5% DRAWN ccc /� � � Or50365ry,421f.55 CITY OF TIGARD 05/30/07 06914 aQ p 503 655 1342 /503.655-1360 RED ROCK CREEK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN SHEET NAME oe9„G, ' CHECKED BDl SCALE APPROVED BY Civil�5tructurallFlarwo !Survey _ TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN SHEET Cl of 13 g;..." o SYM REVISION DATE BY APP'D MEnryes*SWAMI Cam.; paceengrs.com 1.;;;,,i mac-' DN 8001 1 1 ,, 0 40 N w ____ —— SITE AREA 1— 4 \;�•,;'" F .4.S;_ .�i.y_...�-�:=1`_L.:_:_��.._�� ;:'..nTe" .-. ..,..__..a_--� ! TAX LOT 100 STREET .– _ Ph EXISTING .^ - i DARTMOUTH -• _.. .—. __ . . — ---- -- " 5A _' --"(17.---7 - --! .. NE ROW DEDICATION 0.08 ACRES _ ._.u` qAI,-• - r..... ---' --__ _ ._.._. b �,._.. ;, �� w li— —.___ _._— _._= --- BUILDABLE LAND 2.99 ACRES �v 1 ! R < ._ TAX LOT 300 I ----- `--- 7-711.- k 7:;,,-.; ... -- . EXISTING SITE 0.76 ACRES ---- _._-_-' - •. -.._—..`i._...—.-... - F DEDICATION - sti;.-- -. ,� � '�LTG �:'L,i � -- _ ~� •ma i- --�-�--",`.� NEW ROW O.tl ACRES sc' t� 38w't'7�.i-c 4.wt 3f. 0 31��� • ::i".__ . y ..it-.$ 4 .'��-. F "i�'L' �'°'� �� ��y�� 1 I BUILDABLE LAND 0.65 ACRES sna__ ¢ I �S�• �` 4Apl�/ __ 1� 1.1--- i TOTAL !, EXISTING SITE 3.83 ACRES !{{ •• s f 1 f NEW ROW DEDICATION D-19 ACRES '� k'} • AMA ,*,'�' 4 � 11 FOOT RESERVE STRIP BUILDABLE LAND 3.64 ACRES ,.c1 ; # ,i WETLAND - 1 _ REMOVAL • Q Q .+4.' BUILDING A 4 1,•1 T.t_BrET //// .11 I /I �' W o ' Xjj% BUILDNG B .,-:-...4.• ;; S re II , i " `.' I �� �� . �--ac PARKING 7:.: rf�' �:•WETLAND ----t-1 .. RESTORATION °) I • o— ' ROME 60 FT Cc._ NEW RETAINING WALL— - { - 1 0• '\ Et W 18 FT { -- `- BUILDING C — �_� / BLOCK 20 • t . 1 ( ,\,.I n.11 I -t -- - ,' -S I r^—, Lial.. \ ,:-.4.... \ 'RC I ( _ • — \8\/\Y' I NEW RETAINING WALL 1' '\(h C) 1 A 1 DN 8600854 ' — \ .. 1 • - ----r DN 98024848 ON 92082029 1 X \ . 1 : ��4 + Si \ \ 1 ' ;- MONS911T.M5;Ti;77711,011K0 i ! 1– I , _m, to ii , I I -- -- -- --- -- i' I _ , u — ' ---+""J g,rc S W ELMHURST STREET = _ °` I BLOCK 21 01, „, \ I I 1 ▪x PLAN SCALE: 1"= 40' \P Z ?0 40 0 00 ��� sa �(Ci Q d▪H DESIGNED BLS /� - T 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER O R DRAWN BLS Oregon CGty,OR 045 CITY OF TIGARD 05/30/07 06914 i– p.503.655.134214.503.856.136D �� CHECKED BDL PE RED ROCK CREEK SCALE PROPOSED SITE PLAN SHEET NAME 0614C2 _ APPROVED BY Civil,SWdurallPlalliplSlsvey TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN C2 13 o SYM REVISION DATE BY APP'D A"E'ylnee""ys°^'®'D°"'rom paceengrs.com SHEET OF r_ . 'I . =s _ + _ EROSION CONTROL PLAN NOTES 1- IT IS THE INTENT OF 1HESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO ENSURE THAT it ♦•+` +•++ >I' `' 2` - +,♦.♦ SEDIMENT LADEN WATER DOES NOT LEAVE THE WORK SITE. THE 11� ��♦ t�. ♦`�. , +•'� '`~,+> ` -� _EO-" _ p,,, CONTRACTOR SHALL USE ALL AVAILABLE MEANS 70 ACHIEVE THIS RESULT. r +? FURNISH AND INSTALL" I ++♦ E- ;1 ', r;+ i 41; 3` 'c + + SILT FENCE AROUND,.. , ' ••'.fit, - _ r'ii''"i ; II i L ::::,..,,, ,,,_ C......,. • I S , ,,„•,......,..._ ,, a 1 tiw / ' .`, \ TREE REMOVAL .. I c1 -_- o - 1.-. e,, ti r x x - _ - - - __-- --- ---- ------- o Na TYPE CALIPER NORTHING EASING• - -"- ----12"ST----- U ---5' ST---�--r-'- 1 DDUGLAS FIR 22' 0000.00 0000.00 -,s• ST N is ST s.w DARTMOUTH STREET j- L . O -y 8' SAN - -- Q -;y - - - . -B- SAN - - - - --1_,,- - --l� '- 6' SAN- - _ _ -• -(-} y - • I ; 2 DOUGLAS FIR 20' 0000.00 0000.00 1 N - - ]�7F i�. iv� .Y.. - .. ,_ .( �---�---16•,sL, - -_ O _ 3 DOUGLAS BR 16' 0000.00 0000.00 .> „ W. �'i i`+ ice. -i c` .{- . . . . . __ ��� 5��1 t� e�i1ri.�t'- �-�a��i7E'�a4� �• o -- - } 4 DOUGLAS FIR 16 0000.00 0000 DD # ,~' ��� �,� rwi�A k: I I L S DOUGUS FIR 16' 0000.00 0000.00 -- - `' r '..4 .n , I 6 DOUGLAS BR 16' 0000.00 0000.00 2a ST ' _ • 4.Q i''' I ': 7 DOUGLAS FIR 14' 0000.00 0000.00 ,I 8 DOUGLAS FIR 14' 0000.00 0000.00 II �' ... S b :• - '1 ,! P1 = 9 DOUGLAS FIR 14' 0000.00 0000.00 •1 _ 1 ,' •t i \ ei �� , ( ,i TREE PLANTING SCHEDULE ..• i. �,,y" f i! •,„.•! - 1 NO TYPE CAIJPER NORTHMC FASTING ■ 1 w. +• - o- I \\\� 1 CALIFORNIA WAX YYTLE 5 G.C. 0000.00 0000.00 '' � 2 WNE MAPLE 6/10•(B&B) 0000.00 0000.00 • • r M3.*• '- .rt• t O �Q 0Q-----'\\/ 3 DOUGLAS FIR 6/8'(BRB) 0000.00 0000.00 II O • I,0i 4 TRIDENT MAPLE r CAL(B&B) 0000.00 0000.00 , 5 TR,0O T MARE r CAL(BBB) 0000.00 0000.00 \ I Ej ti•., -i 6 TRIDENT MAPLE r CAL(B&B) 0000.00 0000.00•X11 I ' ` r • �,z.. mod" , 7 TRIDENT MAPLE r CAL(BBB) 0000.00 0000.00 1 ',--•-p 2 © '� - . _ • • -:'_ 8 TRIDENT MAPLE r CAL(R&B) 0000.00 0000.00• 1.., _ I I a TraDENT MAPLE z'CAL(ease) 0000.00 0000.00 LL r^ tea - K� - -- - i - '•- I 1 ' � " • y a I • W1 .1t, ,. asp " I ! y� 1 1 J .: \ ..1 i '..s,..III • ; '.1---:-.. •0• St ICI i \ , V., " ,,,,NIR.,.....-- h I I flu 1.. -,t1, • . . • I I I 'Fit = ' Q I I;I I House 1 X I\ > 1 I 1 ' I Vj tL • • ' Of; li,! ti 1 __ .. if I -ti i I -- -- -- -- >. - - S.W. ELMHU4ST STREET - .111111.11 li :.'4- \ \ 1------- I I Li PLAN \-\P i?1 _ P-40' \� el Q 4 _ r- d 8 DESIGNED BLS A 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER s� DRAWN BLS /�" Oregon City,OR 97045 CITY OF TIGARD o5/3o/07 o. .s�.,3az I c so3.ss,.136D 06914 J� CHECKED BDL RED ROCK CREEK SCALE TREE REMOVAL/MITIGATION PLAN SHEET NAME os,aca o APPROVED BY - MENiroennqumcacone" G" rs ,'� ""�I °"�' TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN C4 13 SYM' REVISION DATE BY APP'D - SHEET OF • ;� ,l.rrtr.,.. �, CURB RETURN DATA •-��; DN 80010140 -� .. . - - 1r • ;'' NO- RADIUS LENGTH DELTA BCR ID D OA 221.08 ECR E • - CR-I 25' 39.2T 90 221.00 8 �;• 1- .'•,` L�.-_-J:-• -- ;-- - -..t„ _ --- - - - - CR-2 25' 39.27 90-00'00 227.00 S 226.44 126.32 226.23 224.54 W s ! __. - _.__ > «-- ,_-- -__ o ._. _._ - ''S` CR-3 40' 38.93' 6913'25" 244.04 S 246.00 216.46 240.03 243.50 E i•�• ; i °, , , CR-4 40' 39.61' 90'46'51' 256.00 S 254.38 252.91 249.76 248.65 W ; _ DART -. _ � • ' �. , �: S.W. DARTMOUTH STgEFT ' _ ' :8• _� T -._ '_-,r�i— '• - ._ __ .—• �R -. _ _ -• ,I,. _t/_,_,7 rlay i D+'pp ILA N07E: ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS IN TABLE REFERENCE TOP FACE OF CURB. - _-- -�-- � _ ' - _ -T� - i :` '� — _ LOW POINT OF CURB RETURNS SHALL BE AT PROPOSED CATCH BASIN r- I ' ,® :-'.._-1-4..,Z.,;,r j :1i ��'I5I5 r + K ice► qi Y TI, I III • y" •I 1 gm PLAN BUILDING ij.,, PLAN `42! I 4 m►saf • c,• I• a STA: 6+81.56, 22.5' RT • END CR-4 AT EXISTING SIDEWALK I - 1 I i , i ' N 4 I i '- • i _- I F I .4. .......r _�_F i_ _j __ „' �'_- __..!_ -9 N- f .L—1_ _; .__1__.Y.__ '... ; s__..-_.j_.� I t __. I : I f I , N3 , € j t i I M 1 I t i ' _'�____' 1 + I _1-__ 260. t i < },.__._-_...... N i.. -..L _ -. : f.--}-.___._._ -_-._.a_.-____;_— _.. A 4 — i I i -- - ` i i N 3 N i O I -'r ___I� •I____.L_.___. �_;_aa ' _d --- EXISTING Rtl iiw _ I { N , I 3 ; u- I '__-n- ---- ._ _- CENTERLINE' .__. .-_I --- _ --' -- I -1' I I [ n 3 I i I I -.�_t_...-._` n 47 I I I 2 I + I I -4----4_ :- } _. _ rr_''_- __ I I - ._~- I i - I I i I z i i I z'a ' I----i--III `------- I I I I I I I. -._..__- I - -4---:.-__ .. - ' I 220 I- —1 — - - — - - I I I ' I � I I� ---+----, -�--- j i i I I f 1 I j I i I 4 I : I [ i I I i ' I I i I l , 200':- 1 - I -'_.---.- i 1 ! - ----7- .--__... I _.I-__...+_..�j ■i ' i I { i I I I ' I DATUM ELEV I i I I I -- i i ! - III { I __.-___ _— - ---- i , I I 3 ` ,• 190.00 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 �~ 5+00 T^� 6+00 7+00 8+00 DARTMOUTH STREET PROFILE' 1' - 40' HORIZ., 1' - 20' VERT. • 47' EXISTING STREET STREET IMPROVEMENTS •• ti t.= - c s•vii-. RAW 22' 22' RAW J 7' 6' 1 1' ? 1 •1-. —2.5% 2.5%-..-- EIMs m 1• \\ �-7;. . a.s.� t-----RESERVE STRIP Tt 12" OF 2"-0" -3" CONCRETE SURFACE CRUSHED ROCK BASE !,Z4. SW DARTMOUTH ST. SECTION: N.T.S. P` � 4 !\ Ql1V Yn `C- N DESIGNED BLS ^ 1300 John AdangS6ee1 DRAWN BLS Oregon City,OR 97045 CITY OF TIGARD DA�05/30/07 JOB NUMBER v.503.655.1342IL503.655A360 DARTMOUTH STREET 06914 �4 CHECKED BDL RED ROCK CREEK SCALE SHEET NAME 0614C5 w APPROVED BY Civil lswcturall911' TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER As SHOWN PLAN AND PROFILE C5 13 3oc SW REVISION DATE BY t1PP'D AnEnpiowing&miaCo Company paceengrs.mm SHEET OF 1 ,, Gnv.7IVII vvn I 1v1 r t.nl• n•✓,1_v 1 le- i 1 • • tUHNISH ANU INSTALL' �.�`l: ' �) SILT FENCE AROUND_ - 2. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION, , I CONSTRUCT. DISTURBED AREA. MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF THESE EROSION CONTROL•i--71:--I CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. �/•�•�'•;'' PUN (ECP)FACILITIES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR UNTIL ., 'z_ PER DETAIL - '•t �C* ALL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED AND APPROVED, AND VE CETATION/LANDSCAPING•` 9r` S ESTABLISHED.ED 111" • 4tea. . r ! �< t ;_r__.__.14-- _ {NtA1NNtrt JI]I[M Uri Ynn_n■C NYYLn.nlilC wniGn JrN�UnM1UJ. �y y DARTMOUTH t r _ i' gyp• •,. +� '- C.C _.i°" :is(J -: . .:r....__. ..., _,., {...._, 1�' 1 +.> I r +{ t� t, +i Tr + 4. THE ECP FACILITIES'rrn SHOWN ON THIS PLAN 1 DI ARE THE MINIMUM r.J Dritt)(1 I r • � ' � r rrw •Nano arm 1 rwnlnnu IDINr NF rrWC VIIrTI . �. y � f .n - eTSx o .-: . .:d: '.'_� ., .. X- ' - _ __ e'R i.2:: S. MAINTAINED AS TNECESSARY OIENNSSUREE THEIR CCNTINUEDCFUNTCTIONIINNG.NO 1 . ." - - -'�.ite - �'¢ L�,t--r-a r " - '- T' 6. THE ECP FACRITIES N INACTIVE SITES HALL BE INSPECTED AND '�•`.:;•. - ` '- -' =fr;=_ . , ,-�a 1I ' I -its iy � �r r r F ) PROTECT NEW CATpi BASIN � x. t r - _1.- ti,-,:!. - + + m f01 ' -�—.11 I r +s, —F• PAVING. 114 (,'LLANIN(:U!'tHAIIUN SHALL NW FLUSH ]LUIMLN I LAULN• 111'• • Ji!. I : T..r/" r , j., t �_.L..__._�-. --• - it L! Itl + I t r- ..-:-. 'r + WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. . t •g :r n'1 r �pI., %--...,-41 . r hlr!tC. I .I w�rvNTS A 6 S�.>< r r °.,.__' -�.._—. -._-1-- :-- -( . 111., I li': .,i T‘t T,r• ,Y y!• !} B. A L L A R E A S D I S T U R O E D D T C O N S T R U C T J O N T H I S P R O J E C T:NOT I (!.i 4I:q{JF «'�'r�� + _._.� • fu /. +. )1 `.;, Y^ {' ♦• ♦ 1 BF;; '' v 7 '* r ,�..`' Ir, ' +/ r ' . ! I r RUT W,.. . r { + t' 4r' ' . ■ r , .r • ; ., r ../'.4-,‹ `,,(ref ;{ r.}',r 1' !rti rrI j 1",M r ' I .': RETAINING WALL .n cr.on rrcn rrv,■croirrnnu rNranNrrc nor orry corn eun cNerr x I 1':1 Al„ i �._ _ ,. _- , r • 1� �/r # .! ( : rr'Y'l ,' a �' I 1 \O r^ `� " FOR-7HE DURATION OF THE PROJECT..._.. .-- .. _ _ ..._•,',g/f1 '-I I- ,�r' _ / . . - 'y-_-.- r _ / /- r'l�'r 7 I' 'r- ! 1-41 ,' • 1 J I. , _\:r ' r. . ,r 1:4 f '��\ 11. TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL LS SHALL RA AND II TIIR MOVAIS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER THE I . I r•1. t StUIMRNI hCNGt ANWNU s + I �-• .,.�_ 'k'EJ DISTURBED CONSTRUCTION 8ULDNG C''' I -�'• r•1 _ A I AREA. SEE DETAIL - F� a ; E 12. ALL WATER WALITY FACILITIES SHALL BE VEGETATED PRIOR TO PLACING ` It" '' ''. r I '-i ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT. w S{t' '��" S _ SEt Ut I AIL ' r %{• ■ I 1 ' '-'- "' re , __-_= '` 1 1 , 1 Ise i . . ���` � t FURNISH AND INSTALL / r� j r ~'` I I SEDIMENT FENCE AROUND r' r DISTURBED CONSTRUCTION �:. 1 rr I I h AREA. REMOVE ONLY AFTER r I I t I I COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. rt 'L r. "';.;•'`�' , i'1 S 1 1 I ►' / � / II[ZZII „I y I 1 NDUSE r f '1 lik mY :rn 1 RETAINING MALL 'i- -- �+T '7'en: `(" I il ___ -- - __ ,-_-_______- ,._-r.-t.i.--..-:-.... ._.-....:-.•47,...1.-'......,f .,-. --im'- -•' „,-.-t ! XHALF ' P\ SZE cw Y r'nerrnarn IN c A i1r111.Inhn Manx Strad TAI: I JOB NUMBER I 1 \IR ���/ Civil Structural Planning Survey I APPROVED BY I SYM� REVISION I DATE BY IAPP'DI MEnpiroamgs.•.«:ebcarye+Y paceengrs.com I n9� 1 TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER 1 ;�'.�iWN I I SHEET C3 of 13 I CURB RETURN DATA I + I� NO. RADIUS LENGTH DELTA DCR 1 Q D Q 0 Q ECR ! !+ ,O CR-B _ 65.07 9000'00 xXX.%X S XXKX% XXX.%X XxX%% xxKXX W + 1 #�.•, !� - _ NOTE: LOW PDIMENSIONS DINT IOF CURB TABLE REFERENCE D CATCH BASIN CURB. CC r =, ; I \a'\�\� .PROPERTY BOUNDARY I S, {,t t °� \\\\\\\ n 100.t # I \\,.. \\\\\\\\� -- r BEGIN NEW '\ \ \. ~•'•- �': t =l'-.-- SID WALK ! 3 I + IS + + - ��it i +. ,'r /2 _- i- • .:__ 46 FT HALF - STREET I f;' si I .,.., _µ G.-='} + } ,. DEVELOPMENT DN 80010140 _jj ' ry`'h /y ,...... �,`....+z "�.,,.. '�- TL 101 •aaio. t FI " r lJ .` + } + + R/W °e a.-i 4-0° OF A.C. I+ C' ri Lr FURNISH AND INSTALL '-`'."A-'r err (A: + + �' + ' 13' 24' 9' "NEW 48' STANDARD • 1 + j'`� �"' •F + + ' TERMINATE NEW MANHOLE • ' <- _ SIDEWALK _.:. I + '- ' . .- ,y R- 0:. --_•' , t- ;$."-g,. ,T FURNISH AND INSTALL f-2.0%e { NEW 48' STANDARD -�""u� 7 ry1• ��5. _ I II II ,., MANHOLE 1 `9/ J.F 1 a /\ ,j os .. OS_ ..os �I' 0S O -t /� /� i — j i F' a.'----- -.51 ♦ 1 i / IMMIIIKASSEI i M d _ a, �.. h -- " : ��� --_ ':-7- - — - _ D ro Ti %_::: — lr-:.�. �•� �y .,. . CRUHED RK BASE + .— ._., .— — _ f �-=---- � , CRUSHED ROCK BASE ' SW 72ND AVENUE �_ r N LIMIT HALF STREET n j; ' 2+00 z+2& i; Ui , 1 DEVELOPMENT- t— t {'1 0 SW 72ND AVENUE SECTION: N.T.S. I , ` f t t 11 EXISTING GRADE ,tt `+`r--- �! \is ( ■ + _ 41--_. CONTOUR t i t v• 0 PLAN r•20' • - 1 220-- __�w_...._—:--__—._..:_.n< I N W ----. b ._ t 1 MATCH EXISTING °Z +w I GRADE DARTMOUTH r w�... a — , V w - � STREET tom N w + gs0•� - EXISTING GRADE AT Q + _ - ------------5°002---- I__--- ------ ------- --- s-ao2--_1__--- - ' -------- - 210 - -- T - '' 1 .12 I . DA TUX ELEV I 200.00 0+00 1+00 2+00 SW 72ND AVENUE PROFILE. 1' - 20' HORIZ., 1' - 5' VERT. P�J ;x il Q n f,' DESIGNED BLS A 1300 John Adams Sbeet CITY OF TIGARD DATE JOB NUMBER On:9onCty.OR97065 05/30/07 SW 72ND AVENUE 06914 DRAWN BLS p.503.655.1302 f.503.655.1360 aac0 Bol RED ROCK CREEK SCALE SHOWN PLAN AND PROFILE SHEET NAME 069140 APPROVED BY civil i structural i manning i survey TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER Bk.'o SW REVISION DATE BY APP'D An Engn.amp$amoaC°'p'y paceengrs.com SHEET OF ,... 4f. 1 I \ �o�I. �4iI I N I I I 1 I 1 \1 t ( p� X24. t_.• I 0-c'l d ea•3- 1.44 • 1 }. .r L42 r f I Q I = � 1. l• •. . 1 1 \ 11k,, + k k - 'T;i- t •� 24ap -`'---sip ' , o'°• .b' a- 7 'iji I 4 . � ^ ` 461'. �. ,. 1 I 0+� t�� I `+ a foD. taFI N N N N O TH 5+CP i _._� .. .^i... . .._ __-.`-• rss :r!�enre .olv•�,. r- .i.- N _ . A ..Epp ...►O } - _ 4+00 i1°` AV,�II/!lf ,,,t,..Z.: ,,),. S. HALF STREET , i• • DEVELOPMENT LIMIT '• tl . , '. �- ... , .. . . . ■ PLAN J PM STA- 1+10.66 T. PN ELEv=257.96 A.D._-3.e3 LOW POINT EIEV. 245.03 LOW PONT STA=3+65.74 100.0464 PN STA=5+31.76 PM ELEV. 242.66 A .= 10.13 '19;01 .25 95. '9 VC STA: 0+06.51 5.95' RT o /NISH ROAD AT Q ADJUST EXISTING MANHOLE - RIM TO MATCH NEW ROAD A n EXISTING GRADE AT Q 280, �+, • i - I ._.--...Sy.....ten...__ 1 .- .._....--+.'p ---- -- .. -_._ _..__...__ --_ �----' +--_-b-a_-_�-__._.-.._-_._�..___ - -1 oi g- . i 260 __ __ -;�_- .. z_ _ _ __ _.. - - {{ - -_ __. . _ _ _i _i.- ' t t I } I 1 -- - - - -_..- 1 -.... I 1 240 r-----'-- - - ......--- { ----- - 1---- ----... __._ I f ! t I rT ; t � . i i `� R t I I i I I 1 1 1 1 •t t 1 I ! } I i i I 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 STA 1+16.42 5.93' RT STA: 1+16.61 19.84' RT ADJUST EXISTING MANHOLE SW 70TH AVENUE PROFILE. 1' - 20' HORIZ., 1' - 20' VERT. RIM TO MATCH NEW ROAD TYP. A/ r ,',, -Lc 60' ROW EXISTING CONCRETE •" WALL ALONG ROW Q,ag... ',eeg•i 4-0" OF A.C. R/W 8' i 4 i 18' I 6' 24' I I i.� -.-2.0% `//,// /�/j� z, , �.��.���.����•���� 1� CURB RETURN DATA OA\'• '�"sei• •a. .19°1499• .4 NO. RADIUS LENGTH DELTA BCR I A DA 0 ECR 2 /� A 2:1 TO EXISTING GRADE CR-5 25' 39.27 90.00.00- 221.00 S 221.48 222.00 222.25 221.08 E I CR-6 25' 39.27' 90'00'00' 227.00 S 226.44 226.32 226.23 224.54 W --12" Of 2'-0" NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ANO ELEVATIONS IN TABLE REFERENCE TOP FACE OF CURB. ' 3" OF 3/4"-0° CRUSHED ROCK BASE LOW POINT OF CURB RETURNS SHALL BE AT PROPOSED CATCH BASIN a CRUSHED ROCK BASE \�` <x r� SW 70TH AVENUE SECTION: N.T.S. �`v/ N DESIGNED BLS A 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER =, DRAWN BLS n -" Oregon City,OR 97045 CITY OF TIGARD 05/30/07 0.503.655.1342Ir.5o365s.1360 70TH AVENUE 06914 „' CHECKED BDLE RED ROCK CREEK SCALE SHEET NAME 0614C7 _ gW APPROVED BY Gm'Ihra1l�'°ri1�1 TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN PLAN AND PROFILE SHEET C7 13 g - SYM RE V1510N DATE BY APP'D_ A^F1gireanrg SO^�C 7 paceengis.00tt1 OF TL 300 ,.. ` �.� I �f d I \�'`� W f # CR-7_..„ ., • . i i II II t I\.. l • _. ,..... . . , ,..., _....„_.„ . .. t i o �_ J ..�ti..1 \_ ,,...- 2 ADJUST MANHOLE y 1---- \� .\ ELEVATIONS TO NEW 1- b .__.__._.I I 4 i \N ,... • '_ ROADWAY GRADE �°_ .. „ _ _ ._ 1 ( .. . s. . ... 2 .... ‘777-- __ __ _ . 1 I 1 UMIT HALF STREET DEVEL 1 NT- ..._.-_� •• - -�ui -.1 SW ELMHURST STREET ELMHURST STREET • 11 —" __ CURB RETURN DATA x � � _ 1 I f•IO. RADIUS LENGTH DELTA BCR I Q D p 0 Q ECR --T - —T - I ---_-� I Cpf-7 30' Xx.XX' 90.00.00" XXX.XX S XXXXX XXX.XX XXX.XX XXXXX E ' CR-8 30' XX.XX' 90'00'00" XXX.XX S XXX.XX XXXXX XXX.XX XXXXX W PLAN NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS IN TABLE REFERENCE TOP FACE OF CURB. LOW POINT OF CURB RETURNS SHALL BE AT PROPOSED CATCH BASIN V•WV I` 3 • . MATCH NEW ROAD GRADE ;n END HALF - FINISH ROAD Ai TO 70TH ELMHURST AVENUE EAST eF u 'c^i 4-O OF A.C. STREET DEVELOPMEN T ` i 1^ R/W 8' 1 4 18' s. 260--- 1— " — .1 er f I -- — 1.1 I , I i I ± 2 1 Y— f / ` 250`—_ ...`-- - '---- - -_. .._ -- / at a. .rt rt°ri° �. I I I • DATUM 6'LB'V { ' 1 1 ! I . __1. L.__..___. _._ I 245.00 0+00 _.— .--_---..._.___..........__._.._...-.__._._.-._.....—. ...._.-.._.__....__--__...__._._.........._. � __ _ C '+� CRUSHED ROCK BASE CRUSHED ROCK BASE EXISTING GRADE AT 3' CF 3/4"-0"--- -- mo ELMHURST STREET PROFILE 1' - 10' HORIZ., 1' - 10' VERT. sw ELMHURST ST. SECTION: N.T.S. N �QQ, Q an DESIGNED BLS 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER DRAWN BLS /\ aegon cny.oR sT04s CITY OF TIGARD CHECKED BDL p 503.655.13421 I 5036551360 RED ROCK CREEK o5/30/0� ELMHURST AVENUE 06914 Civil Stn,aural Planning I Survey SCALE PLAN AND PROFLE SHEET NAME 0614C8 3.3 APPROVED BY An Iwo paceengrsmrn 1 TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN SHEET C8 OF 13 Srrn _ REVISION DATE BY APP'D 1 i I 1 I CURB ELEVATION 1 • 1 POINT NORTHING EASTING ELEVATION POINT NORTHING I EAS TING ELEVATION t I O 866L75 7551.54 230.95 ® 8603.75 7475.36 229.17 • z(:1 __ __ ® ' 8663.49 7642.53 236.20 ® 8613.54 7464.17 228.50 C3 -- _ _ - -- - 8645.49 7642.87 238.46 8597.04 7464.49 229.10 �- .12- sT----- {- - . J _15" Si o 15' ST -- 15' sT --•• --- DARTMOUTH I STREET W. 4 8645.85 7661.47 237.52 0 8813.72 7406.91 229.50 =8' SAN- ,•�:,.0 •�--� '- 4x�, - . .. -8" SANJO- - - - �1- - 0 .00W L--- - ..' SAN- -_- •• ti..S. . - -8' AN '♦Q O 8663.84 7661.13 237.24 ® 8659.71 7406.13 229.50 `V 864688 7753.09 242 6S 8667 3 7424.39- - -� --"-- -- _ --- 2 229.00 - 8' ST -f- O7 8619.88 7753.05 243.02 ® 8674.21 7405.75 229.50 ® __ >•, 14�3 / -- -- _ - _- I -- I -_ 10.33 7753.11 243.17 8711.71 7405.04 229.50 t t 1 " ' I I 9O 8598.82 7765.23 243.97 41 8713.67 7448.22 227.52 24- si " _ Q a(4. 4 6 i ; I 10 8572.81 7764.67 244.88 4® 8712.52 7463.53 226.54 1 � I , -\ .8. 1 II 14 I 11 8571.96 7720.50 242.07 4® 8722.69 7472.73 224.23 I a - V 11 't - - i i @ 8559.98 7708.95 242.13 44 8692.49 7463.91 226.52 t i WI 4 c - _ - ( , 13 1 8550.92 7708.98 242.58 @ 8692.33 7454.91 227.10 ♦ + i + + + ,,., G�, I � -� I . 1 O4 8544.89 7716.60 243.50 4� 8685.03 7450.05 227.43 1 •+4.+•+• ••°'� _ - I 15 I 8561.39 7716.86 242.40 4® 8640.03 7450.91 228.50 ♦ ' ® I 16 8560.80 7754.35 244.82 4 8633.08 7464.80 228.50 0. g. I11f11 } { IIII ,4. o O� ®j+ 17 6547.30 7!54.14 24562 8643.27 7474.61 22838 I - _ I I `Y��\v_ 18 8544.01 7772.59 247.31 ® 8634.31 7452.49 228.50 1 _- r+ �; _ 1 y' l 19 8291.88 7768.60 257.80 51 6682.69 7473.85 226.82 - (//� r Q I •�4 , r `- r�� I ^ C �i.� 8273.72 7752.03 257.87 ® 8666.75 7523.74 229.37 I_ fi �i ' 1 a ' 21 8271.83 7680.05 255.48 0 8643.25 7551.90 231.51 1 'I • 4 I -r+ $' N I 0 8290.61 7661,07 253.95 ® 8616.80 7528.74 231.41 I • ® 6542.58 7665.06 240.98 ® 8617.26 7552.79 23248 O _ ® I 6542.29 7663.55 241.83 ® 8598.77 7553.15 233.24 r`i_. I - 0 8570.79 7659.17 239.37 0 8600.23 7629.63 236.70 1 - _- ' I ® 6570.51 7644.35 238.72 + 8601.69 7706.12 240.68__ L,. -- 1 - I © 8552.01 7644.70 239.62 ® 8620.19 7705.77 234.39 7.t .�- - _---- _-- ---- -- -- -I - ® 8550.61 7571.72 236.41 ® 8609.86 7715.01 241.06 ! x I i 1 1 ®9 8569.11 7571.36 235.51 61 8597.64 7703.24 240.58 1 J' I - - �'l- i .t ® 8568.66 7548.05 234.49 ® 8596.12 7624.20 236.59 1 W I ,,,�, f h 31 8550.17 7548.40 235.39 0 8594.61 7545.16 233.07 - "JY. ,/\ �'\_/1 ® 6567.44 7484.06 230.88 ® 8613.05 7524.83 231.36 - i:1, NOTE, -- • ':I' ALL POINTS REFERENCE TOP FACE OF CURB. 2 N iI • HOUSE I I I•1 I Al ' , 1 1 p' I ,• 8: 1 , •, Oil \I -- --- -- . w 1 - V o S.w ELMHURST STREET - J CI LAN 44),<Z4* • DESIGNED BLS A 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER Oregon City•OR97045 05/30/07 E n DRAWN BLS A P 503655 1342�r 503 ss51360 CITY OF TIGARD 06914 CHECKED BDL RED ROCK CREEK PARKING LOT ELEVATIONS SHEET NAME 0614C9- APPROVED BY M me , Civi' Structural� �Ptarxun9��+"1'1' TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER SC AS SHOWN SHEET C9 of 13 v. SYAI REVISION DATE BY APP'D LI STA: 1+08.38 FURNISH AND INSTALL STA: 0+00 STA: 2+11.1 a NEW CATCH BASIN CONSTRUCT NEW 48" STANDARD _ CI - MANHOLE PER DETAIL XXXXX , -- -- " _- _ -- C __ LE 2ETAIL UT 1. 0 " 1 __ -- .c�c v K - _ I _ - ___ ,__ __- XXXXX I XXXXX BAST _�- __ --+ I INSTALL NEW CLEANOUT LE IN(N) 231.40 INSTALL NEW CATCH BASIN ---s. - =r� '77 _ ," �-_" __- PER DETAIL X I.E IN(5) 234.88 -15"57 O CS-5T= 5'Sl-•-�-'-'_err' 1Y 57- STREET •1 .I_ RIM 245.47 E OIJT OOO.QO PER DETAIL 91 S.W. DARTMOUTH - - _ • - -I- - y._" - .g• AT t. OUT RIM 236.91 . - • -e'sA - - - - SAN �O 250.-RI - FINISH GRADE E 00000 dill _ - TTt _ - _ _ _ _-- 240: 1 _- � - - _- - ' -- - ' . ' �,} .�' o: _.5.04 �...: _ _ _ _ _ i _• 2q•St _ ��Ni*-___ `J N8682.84. E7466.74 .�. �o o ' i _ --' -- _ ..�___ _ _ .°.- -:-. -r- _ .,.. _ _ FURNISH AND INSTALL e_ N8661.99, E7663.63 ' s i '_'.'�..�'- '""")-"' --'-�"".._I u u N8659.90. E7553.99 } _.._.i._.....-.-_ -_L. ` NEW CATCM.BASIN .- m FURNISH AND INSTALL FURNISH AND INSTALL TEMPORARY BYPASS SYSTEM I " _, i { I WETLAND NEW CATCH BASIN I I 1 i ---:- WESTORATION ►�� NEW CATCH BASIN I SEE NOTES FOR INSTALLATION 230 + - _-___,..__. _ ___ .: __ '-`---7'a--•4- ' -`(...___4 -�{ "-`+' I '� !' I SEQUENCE. i I 7 ---�`"-�--'` i 1 II . BUILDING B - <z •/ ; ! �! iii , „ .. o_ 4 _ _ ... _•-_ -__ --_ __ -_ ._-.-.�.._._._....._._.---'-'-__ t--•-•-4---•...i • . 741-/...,::, ' a - o j I DATUM AZEV ' i ' •i•-:.*:;%. ,\ a. 0, 220 00 0,00 1+00 2+00 �! J `-' 1 M8559.54, E7719.38 PROFILE t B �i� \\ 1 , FURNISH AND INSTALL 1 �,VER _ �r - " - NEW CATCH BASIN y. �` T. V. 20'Mph ---- �� O k. 0 IC 1 t==c-.-- _ ___-�,NEW 6° PVC - fie°3 i I�. II FURNISH AND INSTALL 1 y 1 a „ NEW 72" CONTECH STORMFILTER L=61.1 5=00.0 $ ' I 9 CARTRIDGE VAULT V STORMTECH®SC-740 DETENTION SYSTEM . r \ ' N8581.07. E7459.29 o _� FURNISH AND INSTALL &!<OIN�O U n_ - STA: 2+11.1 .' NEW 60" FLOW CONTROL I a _ CONSTRUCT NEW 72"FLAT TOP ca 1 MANHOLE I - �'.o_ t FINISH(GRADE AT MANHOLE PER DETAIL XXXXX• •I 'oo_ I LE IN 00°.00 L__1 T -- 1 ! RI OUT 614.73 z "- ' 2301- -�.,,_,_•_r- _ RIM 226.16 \ I _ x I S I ---. -- - _ -. --_, _.-__ ... i _ - ' I I Z I 1 I / 220, "MEW 4B" STORM BYPASS 1'0.3%%--"`-"!-7--176.9 Li- 1 '•? I W " N8456.15. E7665.54 ✓/� i3 FURNISH AND INSTALL \G _ i__ ! __ I 1 _.. �,H NEW CATCH BASIN. ' v, _' '--"_ F_ • t---•1 I', ��' .._ ` I I1 TUV El$Y _.._._.-.-..._.___._ I t N PLAN SCALE: 1" 50' i I - 41I 21O°° ,+oo 1 0 5 5B 125 N H I ^ - I iI; I - PROFILE C 1� I - I 1-- 10'VERT. 1'• 20'HORIZ. 'w I 'I - . . . ._ T_0. I I I Syr ELMHl1RST STREET _- _ _ ■53- STA: 0+04.0 CONSTRUCT NEW 48" STANDARD MANHOLE PER DETAIL XXXXX I.E IN(N) 219.32 STA: 1+50.1 I.E IN(NE) 221.42 INSTALL NEW CATCH BASIN I.E IN(E) 224.95 PER DETAIL XXXXX I.E OUT 000.00 FINISH GRADE AT RIM 219.47 RM 222.70 - - I . --.---- TEMPORARY STREAM BYPASS SEQUENCE' • • - -- - _ ! - I _ - 1. CONSTRUCT NEW JIKLAM 1W AND ADJOWGING 48"PVC STORM PIP�Q EXCLUDING I -�- s THE MANHOLE AND THE LAST 48"PIPE SEGMENT NEAR MANHOLE 1 PRIOR TO 230h __ _ __°- -- - -• ' ' ' STREAM DIVERSION. ••� ` ! r 1` I t 2. ONCE THE NEW STREAM AND 48"PIPE ARE IN PLACE AND READY TO BE USED Via, i _- +_ - AT FULL DESIGN CAPACITY, A TEMPORARY DIVERS SYSTEM LOCATED AS SHOWN u j____-=_,... "^-- - "R- -- o _ _ - ON THE DESIGN DRAWINGS AND IDENTIFIED AS°SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED. • " ! 0.1 2.2 L.F _ - - 3. FLOW TEMPORARY DIVERSION FROM THE EXISTING CULVERT, POINT©S ALL SECTION BE DoIVERTED THROUGH STA: 0+87.68 220 "_ T f -- - -- -_ - - _ SAL INSTALLATION OF MANHOLE QSHALLTALSO ISOLATE E PERFORMED WHI THE STREAM• • o+ NEW 48" BYPASS i € • IS TEMPORARILY DIVERTED. z 'z1 ee I.E 214.47 G_,.-.-----i..---------------.W-._._._.....____i _..._.. _-..._.j__ I EE� "-" ---- -- °' """ 1 4. ONCE ALL THE NEW 48" STREAM PIPELINE HAS BEEN INSTALLED AND IS READY �� i� j I j i ' I FOR UTILIZATION AT DESIGN CAPACITY, THE STREAM l BE RE-ROUTED BY sa DATUM ELEV i 1 i € ( •? - I CONNECTION OF THE NEW 48"LINE AT NEW MANHOLE x '210 00 0+00 1+00 5. THE TEMPORARY DIVERSION SYSTEM SHALL BE REMOVED AND THE SITE RESTORED `\�� . AFTER RE-ROUTING OF THE STREAM FLOW THROUGH THE NEW 48"PIPELINE. \` %g PROFILE A Q� n I'- 10'VERT. V- 10' HORIZ. a$ DESIGNED BLS A 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER Oregon City,OR 05/30/07 06914 DRAWN BLS - - _ CITY OF TIGARD 4 pE °503.655.13421 I.5036531360 RED ROCK CREEK SCALE / - STORM SEWER PLAN/PROFILE SHEET NAME 0614C10 - CHECKED BDL APPROVED BY CivilISWcturalI� �9IS�y TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER oo< SYM REVISION DATE BY APP'D An Engineering Services Carymy Pa 'XJ'S. n AS SHOWN SHEET �� OF 13 1. VEGETATED CORRIDOR RESTORARION WETLAND EXIS1140 WETLAND CHANNEL RESTORATION CHANNEL CENTERLINE , �I y — — — so FT a BAADE EL• fi— P� f_ -8 SAN._ . 12Ti _3T 2,D -- ---¢- —' i - - - : E ., EXISTING { ``p, ,', .,i' I ..__.__ .. ----- - �,, `l { I PROPOSER GRk3E -._.- -- - -- ---_. -. •_ �'r •.� _ ..r3c r w rc" s"' 200-- - --�t. 1 7t a�I[ i=.� .ill ;�� r i 4 f ! • I 'i�ff��!i7�ti�r7 f•si>t��lf�1�•>rPi�r> �>•�t-.Ty- i. I I; .. `_ I -• �• a ;.; A tSr '- DATUM ELE•V , __ ___ ___.--_____...-___• — - - • ` - ,: . - _'`' 195.00 0+00� 1-00 2+00 • y� I � " - CROSS SECTION A 1 = 40' HORIZ , 1 = 20 VERT. ,;.i (� � n. STREAM z �.^ 1J:y, -'"`%• .a.I r. ,;r. - ' RESTORATION •E'� 1 I WETLAND. ' ■ 'I _ .f t• . , +, RESTORATION .?• .. E'' .,' , • .n.n..w ` euaa,c wt•EXISTING ,i i t ;} f m `� _ WETLAND ENHACEMENT - ` *4 i I SCRUB SHRUB WETLAND ,i; ��,,'� %:�+ �+k0N ` ,' EXISTING GRADE ' BUILDING B z� -�— EI! I aY \ I >. a 1- E,t I + �- .'%. .,t. . t it I 210 r--< { ,T 'i p E ; t----i i■E r I'tr z. + + �' - - �: //. i PRO'OSED)GRADE I E f I d I -� -17 -F J ' E ` i ',/,'"".". r''i i _y_—_� : • E t r t I II 'Y a + + ' +'! - r _.- t ; t( 200: —T"—'_! ■ i E'_.�.'j _—y �•--y•}��j 1 E w T + E•` ._.. f`r, E I i 1 iiE I. WETLAND i� :'i r r j:: r .t rr' i r' ` D�T[/Y BL6't' -� 4 ;.,I. I f t '' r \I .*".k..:7';:l.'f + ;+RESTORATION �/ f t I I /1 , Re+ }- -1-i f-a t', f - + t'' ,' r 195.00 0+00 1+00 - _—_ __ _E... \ i s 'L s CROSS SECTION B. 1" = 40' HORIZ. 1" = 20' VERT. t r: ��_4. . Z. . i '`NEW'CONYOt1R'=-. ' ' --21:1:-::‘,': - + / , - - I • O .,�\. . - ' ..e.e,_. - I__- ... NOTES:■ VEGETATED CORRIDOR t t - ' '•'�' ' '�• • E 1. STREAM RESTORATION. CONSTRUCT NEW NATURAL CHANNEL AND BOULDER STEP POOL SEQUENCE.TRANSITION TO EXISTING STREAM CHANNEL RESTORATION '�' " i tom' 2. WETLAND RESTORATION. REMOVE EXISTING VEGETATION, EXCAVATE WETLAND BASIN, AND PLANT NATIVE EMERGENT MARSH VEGETATION. RIPARIAN FOREST , I,' ' ti`-�•0 ••. , `I { :�; ,� 3. VEGETATED CORRIDOR RESTORATION. REMOVE EXISTING NON-NATIVE VEGETATION, AND PLANT NATIVE RIPARIAN FOREST VEGETATION. / L` - I 4. EXISTING WETLAND ENHANCEMENT. REMOVE NON-NATIVE VEGETATION AND PLANT NATIVE EMERGENT MARSH VEGETAION. ryI{ 5. REFERENCE SENSITIVE LANDS RESTORATION PLANS ANS SPECIFICATIONS. f,. / .''1�J, f •`••{ r - - - - � •PREPARED BY ANDY HARRIS OF HARRIS STREAM SERVICES PLAN SCALE: 1"= 40' 0O 0 50 m' rc♦ i - L FURNISH AND INSTALL I • 1-6"x 6" FLG x MJ TEE WITH MEGALUGS ( I 1-6" FIG x MJ RSGV , WITH BOX AND LID I CONNECT TO EXISTING INSTALL NEW 2' (1.5' METER) —i 2 6' WATERLINE DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY INSTALL NEW Y (1.5" METER)•/.� I 1 CI DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY _ 7_1 _ --__ __ -J- } -=---,� -- -- =---'S-- ---- - --_1__ GENERAL WATERLINE NOTES _ . ----3-- ---fxr°. -- -- -- 12"ST-=—==- -- - r _ _ �_ _ I _ STREET _ _ —8- sue, L -15' ST OO 15' ST --'15" ST---�— DARTMOUTH — B" SAN— — — • - -0- 11— h; I 1 EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY AND ADDITIONAL S.W. —8' S N• — Q ,y — - — n —�� UTILITIES MAY EXIST. CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE UTIRTIES LOCATED IN ACCORDANCE MATH _8' SAN- �• "-n, 13 ORS 952-001-0010 THROUGH 952-001-0090 PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. LL _- — I 4 q� _-_ 1B 57—_1- 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL EXISTING UIIUTIES WHERE FACILITIES CROSS. IU �® . — — '"% --6 .!� T _ o -� - CONTRACTOR SHALL POT HOLE EXISTING UTILITIES 200 FEET AHEAD OF LAYING PIPE AT ALL CROSSINGS. - --,�,,,,, '-" ., `��.� i_ IF CONFLICTS ARISE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. -- ' I � � i _ _- --� T ��. .--. I �f 1 14 I _- I -- I 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL INFORM OWNER AND ENGINEER 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF CONSTRUCTION AND/OR .. 1 PLANNED DISRUPTION OF WATER SERVICE. I' • r 4. CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AS OUTLINED IN IHE OREGUN ADMINISTRATIVE RULES CHAPTER 333-61-050 1 y� ' �Ty I 1 ARE HEREBY REFERENCED THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBSERVE THE REOUIREMEN7S OF CROSSINGS-SANITARY 24' ST x ,..1 _ _ 1 - ' FURNISH AND INSTALL FURNISH AND INSTALL I SEWERS AND WATERLINES'AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 10 OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED CHAPTER. { NEW 4" D.I. VA_ 1-6"z 4" FLG x MJ TEE I 1-§"x 4" FLG x MJ TEE 5. EXISTING WATER MAINS AND SERVICES SHALL BE KEPT IN OPERATION UNTIL NEW MAINS ARE CONNECTED WITH MEGALUGS WITH MEGALUGS i I.,I AND IN SERVICE. I I l -- ' 1-4" FLG x NJ RSGV 1-4" FLG x MJ RSGV 'V•I < WITH BO% AND LID WITH BOX AND LID �, _ I j 6. PRIOR TO TIE-IN, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL TEMPORARY BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLIES FOR PRESSURE �' r I ® (- MI 3 0 I I `- TESTING AND CHLORINATION. ALL NEW WATER MAINS SHALL BE PRESSURE TESTED AND DISINFECTED '' I W BEFORE CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING SYSTEM AND BEFORE ANY SERVICE CONNECTIONS ARE MADE. ` , i la .-it it I Q PROVIDE 1" TEMPORARY TAPS FOR CHLORINE INJECTION AS REQUIRED. PLUG TEMPORARY TAPS WITH y a++ + _ r ' I NEW 6" D.I WL I BRASS PLUG UPON ACCEPTANCE OF NEW WATERLINE. NEW 6" DI WL p{y i + - Y1 I I ' rt`Y ,� I I I i. i I > I 7. THERE MAY BE SHORT SECTIONS OF THE PIPELINE THAT CONNECT TO THE EXISTING SYSTEM THAT ARE • +++++ m— `®I FURNISH AND INSTALL ` 1 DIFFICULT TO CHLORINATE. THE ENGINEER AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IDENTIFY THESE SHORT SECTIONS •+ + + + N FURNISH AND INSTALL. OF PIPELINE AND AN ALTERNATE METHOD OF DISINFECTION EMPLOYED. APPLICATION OF A 200 mo/L I J f 1-6'z 4' FLG z NJ TEE ' NEW 6" DOUBLE BACKFLOW CHLORINE SOLUTION SHALL BE APPLIED BY SPRAYING OR BRUSHING TO THE INTERIOR OF ALL PIPE VALVES I QI ►+++++ +. t'', FURNISH AND INSTALL 'M TH MEGALUGS PREVENTION VALVE WITH AND FITTINGS AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. THE CHLORINE SOLUTION SHALL REMAIN FOR THREE HOURS `�� t� 1-6" 90'MJ x NJ BEND • 1-4° FLG x MJ RSCV -3 VAULT AND FIRE HOSE BEFORE FLUSHING. ;-1- WITH MEGALUGS I II WITH BOX AND LID �' ; CONNECTION. SEE DETAIL W 1. I O I I I I , 1 o I. I I I I I I I. I �� 8. DUE TO THE AGE OF THE EXISTING WATERLINES AND VALVES,LEAKAGE OF EXISTING FACILITIES MAY OCCUR 1111 �( ( DURING CONSTRUCTION OF T1E-INS. CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE ON SITE PUMPS ADEQUATE TO KEEP I U TRENCHES DE-WATERED. 3 - - - - I 1^Y�,\� 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY THRUST RESTRAINT ON THOSE FITTINGS WHICH YNLL SEE•I r _ �' - - i �] ) SERVICE PRESSURE BEFORE CONCRETE THRUST BLOCKS DEVELOP FULL STRENGTH. I S __ lc �'\ -�- I I ' � I O Oil` VVV 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE 5-MIL PLASTIC SHEETING BETWEEN THRUST BLOCKS AND PIPE FITTINGS. I_ �: �-1 I I r I I R \ 11. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE REPAIRED IMMEDIATELY AND THE jW I,�I I I ` .* RESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANY NOTIFIED OF THE DISTURBANCE WITHOUT DELAY. I, x-- -- !I I .1 i 12. AALL VALVES A SHALL INCLUDE VALVE BOXES AND LIDS AS OUTLINED IN THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND , I I ) 1 l -I 13. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION - - .... CONFERENCE. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS SHALL COMPLY WTH THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF \- O -- TRANSPORTATION - SHORT TERM TRAFFIC CONTROL HANDBOOK TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL • COMPLY WITH THE"MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES"PREPARED BY THE FEDERAL • . HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, LATEST REVISION. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY MATH ALL CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN ROAD PERMITS ISSUED FOR THIS PROJECT. ~ I I 14. SHALL CONTRACTOR SHALL SIGNING AANDNBARRICA BARRICADES AS REQUIRSIDEWALK T SSURED AUTOMOTIVE VEE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. 1_, I • _ I 15. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT'AS-BUILT" INFORMATION TO THE ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. - -- ---- ---- x �f-- 16. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DAMAGE OR CUT EXISTING A.C. PIPE. EXCAVATE AND EXPOSE EXISTING X I A.C. PIPE UNTIL APPROPRIATE JOINTS ARE EXPOSED. DISCONNECT THE A.C. PIPE JOINT AND REMOVE THE APPROPRIATE SECTIONS OF A.C. PIPE WITHOUT CUTTING OR DAMAGING THEM. DISPOSE OF 1 `.] �I REMOVED A.C.PIPE IN A LEGAL MANNER AND IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF I _ I AUTHORITIES CONTROLLING AIR POLLUTION AND SCUD WASTE DISPOSAL_ ONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY I rr^^ WITH APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF OREGON REVISED STATUTES (ORS)468A.700 THROUGH 468A.760. ' 1 � I v, 17. OWNER WILL FURNISH SURVEYING AS REQUIRED FOR NEW WATERLINE CONSTRUCTION.• WI I C� / /�C) 18. OWNER WILL OPERATE ALL EXISTING VALVES TO ISOLATE WATERLINES FOR REQUIRED WORK. 11 I I \() \) ( A�\ 19. OWNER WILL PROVIDE NOTIFICATION TO AFFECTED WATER USERS FOR PLANNED SERVICE DISRUPTIONS. e I PLAN 1 -- - I I C\'v v ', r"4O, 1 I \ N. \ I 1 _ III _ .I ;i, 1 HOUSE 1 - - I 1, 2 1 .. 1 us \ I I I1 ri l' I I ta�► w< 1 ,:114 S W ELMHURST STREET , ..; -•In - QQ� P- , \ •5R% 4n a-I,..1 DESIGNED BLS DATE JOB NUMBER o A DR 05/30/07 DRAWN BLS /� CITY OF TIGARD i- P.503.655.134211.503.655.1380 06914 CHECKED BDL Civil� � g� RED ROCK CREEK SCALE WATERLINE AND FRE PROTECTION PLAN SHEET NAME 0614C12 APPROVED BY TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN C12 13 - _ SHEET OF o, SY I REVISION DATE BY APP.() A" Sawa Company 1 N8722.19, [8758.66 • GENERAL SANITARY SEWER NOTES N8683.16. ,8556-37 L CORE HOLE AND CONFIRM LOCATION CORE HOLE AND CONFIRM LOCATIUry N8715.81, E8424.72 I OF EXISTING 6' LATERAL BEFORE OF EXISTING fi' LATERAL BEFORE I I FURNISH AND INSTALL CONSTRUCTION OF NEW LATERAL I 1. EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY AND ADDITIONAL NEW 6" CLEANOVT PER CONSTRUCTION OF NEW LATERAL EXTENSION. TYP. CONNEC'. NEW 6" UTILITIES MAY EXIST. CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE UTILITIES LOCATED IN ACCORDANCE MOTH EXTENSION- TYP. CONNECT NEW 6' i I DETAIL ! LATERAL EXTENSION TO EXISTING. LATERAL EXTENSION TO EXISTING. s ORS 952-001-0010 THROUGH 952-001-0D90 PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. a€1 CONNECT NEW 6'LATERAL . 2. SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE AS NOTED ON PLANS OR AS APPROVED BY ENGINEER. STANDARD i C EXTENSION TO EXISTING.G. _ GRAVITY 5 -�"Il __ __ -x x x 4<>t -- _ 1i _ _ �-- _ _ _- —__ —=NT -—_-_-_ -__ _—___ 3 SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE PVC PIPE CONFORMING TO A 3034 ACCORDANCE__ I EW£ E 5 ALL E C E CO OR G 0 STM 0 303 SOR 35 STANDARDS. _ _ — _ _ - _ _ - - - F- r T GRAVITY SANITARY SEWER MAINLINES AND LATERALS SHALL BE AIR TESTED M 1 ALL _ __ __ - STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. UNIBELL 8-06.85, AFTER COMPACTION OF BACKFIII. ST O t5'SST -15 ST —`S W. —6. SAN - — ~ -- I ` 1 PLUMBING CODE AND ITS AMENDMENTS, EXCEPT FOR 8" AND LARGER PUBLIC SEVERS WHICH SHALL BE •� CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH DEQ STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC AND TO THE LINES, GRADES, AND DETAILS ' - PVC ASTM 3 " - ^ , ------1-18" S7--T- --- WIROEWINSTALLED PLANS.ATHE TRENCH FOR FUTURE LOCATING. E A M 034. ALL LINES SHALL HAVE TONING ----- --- - `�'��� ®� � �^� 5. ALL MANHOLE CONNECTIONS TO BE FACTORY CONNECTORS WITH NON-SHRINK GROUT OR A CORED HOLE r4rw ® s _. �� I WITH FLEXIBLE BOOT. IE KOR-N-SEAL.r i'ea :! O� - fh�� 1 1� ---- -------- -----�-- 6. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PREFORMED PLASTIC GASKETS IN ALL MANHOLE JOINTS. 1� 7. GROUT FOR TOP OF MANHOLE FRAMES AND BASES SHALL BE NON-SHRINK GROUT. 1-_;,.. I IS C.e � ST C.0 BUILDING A I B. USE COMMERCIAL CONCRETE BONDIN/G AGENT ON ALL CONCRETE TO BE GROUTED. 1 I ' - \:7-2 4 4 i I 9 YARDROF CONCRETE,W'TH A MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF NOT ESS THAN 3.000TPSI AT 28C a I DAYS WHEN TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C-39.86. �n f 11 I 10. WHEREVER SEWER LATERALS CROSS WATER LINES WITH LESS THAN 18` VERTICAL CLEARANCE. THE m ; i SEWER LATERAL SHALL BE C900 PVC OR DUCTILE IRON PIPE 9' MINIMUM EACH SIDE OF WATER LINE. BUILDING B n. MANHOLES NAIL BE TESTED ACCORDING TO 1990 AP WA STANDARD SPECIFICATION 306.3.03. WATER TO + +♦ + ' A , -' • iM� BE FILLED TO THE RIM. CONTRACTOR MAT VACUUM TEST MANHOLES VA 7H ENGINEERS APPROVAL. I + + + + !� ' 12. ALL MANHOLES SHALL SE 48" DIAMETER WITH CONCENTRIC CONES.•I + + + G�I "+ + + + I 13. NO FLAT TOP MANHOLES TO BE USED WITHOUT ROSEBURG URBAN SANITARY AUTHORITY'S PRIOR APPROVAL. 1 +�= 14. 12 GAGE STRANDED COPPER TONING WRE WITH GREEN THHN INSULATION SHALL BE PLACED IN ALL TRENCHES in WHERE II I . . O ` ` � 1 I I 1 l _I l l I I l :I I f O'� I PRIOR OE ACCEPNANCES BEEN LAID. CONTRACTOR TO TEST ALL TONE WIRE WITH LOCATING EQUIPMENT °� I � \� 15. DEFLECTION TESTING SHALL BE CONDUCTED ON ALL SEWERS CONSTRUCTED OF FEXIBE PIPE NO7 LESS• ,.. _—._.___—__._...._.__.______.....,._........�.. - __ _` I f THAN 30 DAYS AFTER TRENpi BACKFILI AND COMPACTION. TESTING WILL CONFORM TO AP WA SECTION\v 1 303.3.10 - C Esc oa n I O O� 16. LINE AND GRADE SHALL. BE MAINTAINED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS OR AS ESTABLISHED BY THE ENGINEER. IY == � ------ • '.�� i VARIATIONS OF MORE THAN 1/2 INCH FOR LINE AND 1/4 INCH FOR GRADE WILL NOT BE PERMITTED. Ts 17. REMOVE AND REPLACE OR ABANDON EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PIPE AS INDICATED. MAINTAIN BYPASS ll ^� J 1 PUMPING AS REQUIRED. LATERAL LOCATIONS ARE BASED ON T.V. LOGS AND FIELD LOCATES. EXISTING 1 it L C.0 _ �-'�:�� SESERVICES MAY AYICE L WYE E CONNECTIONS AFFECTING NEW TEE AND CLEANOUT LOCATIONS FOR CONNECTION TO . /0 18. ROSERURG URBAN SANITARY AUTHORITY HAS VIDEO TAPES OF THE EXISTING SEWERS FOR REVIEW. \ BUILDING C .4>, \__4 ��`� O �\� 19. LATERAL LOCATIONS AFE APPROXIMATE ONLY, VERIFY LINE SERVICES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.. _ ______ . . , ._,• • --t- , , . _ • _ _ •_ . PLAN SCALE: 1"= 40' 0 20 40 60 0 100 S QQ- a DESIGNED BLS n 1300 John Adams Skeet DATE JOB NUMBER I'. DRAWN BLS /� Oregon City,OR97M5 CITY OF TIGARD 05/30/07 A p.so3.655.13121/.503.655.1360 RED ROCK CREEK SANITARY SEWER PLAN SHEET NAME 0614C13 4C73 4 CHECKED BDL /JAY SCALE a APPROVED BY U M � paceen rs.coral�Plarlirg,Savey TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN SHEET C13 OF o� SYM REVISION DATE BY APP'D_ Ergiireng Senior Company Paceergrs.wm SC-740 CHAMBER - COMPACT IN 6 IN LIFTS TO 95R PROCTOR DENSITY. 21 CHAMBERS PER ROW = 150' - ----- --- - 2 INCH WASHED, SC-740 END CAP CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE \ PAVEMENT r 18" MIN ADS 601 GEOTEX7ILE OR EQUAL y 96' MAX • ( IIL , 1F I MI I C■I� I W _ _-_ _--- — -III Ir.T •• �'4vLg' _f.• t�-�,f.i� • •W� a 1 rr�_ W.r�� („e_t,• F�t� yr O ` a4� t II.: r: � � � ' y •r� irq.� ` ii IFE:11- - - I r!t f��1 y' n),'.�!( ^� ( II I•E 11=�!I III;I��HP I I � I I.III 1i _ II -. I� 6. L ll�L III I 'A-4w" ) -11 1- Ic11=1=.1,-I a-I .I��I I ul I - - MIN ) MIN 51•_ MIN MATERIAL LOCATION DESCRIPTION AASHTO M43 AASH TO M145 COMPACTION/DENSITY DESIGNATION DESIGNATION REQUIREMENT ® STORMTECH CHAMBER TRENCH BED AREA FILL MATERIAL FROM PEE PLANS FOR NA —NA PEE PLANS FOR 18. TO GRADE ABOVE PAVEMENT SUBGRADE (PAVEMENT SUBGRADE r CHAMBERS REQUIREMENTS IREQUIREMENTS SCALE: 1'=120' C FILL MATERIAL FOR 6" GRANULAR WELL-GRADED 3, 357, 4, 467, 5, A-1 COMPACT IN 6. LIFTS TO 18" ELEVATION SOIL/AGGREGATE 56, 57, 6, 67, 68, A-2 TO 95X PROCTOR ABOVE CHAMBERS MIXTURES. <3574 FINES. 7, 78, 8, 89, 9,10 A-3 DENSITY B EMBEDMENT STONE WASHED ANGULAR STONE WITH 3, 357, 4, 467, NA NO COMPACTION SURROUNDING AND TO THE MAJORITY OF PARTICLES 5, 56, 57 REQUIRED 6" ABOVE CHAMBERS BETWEEN i - 2 INCH A FOUNDATION STONE WASHED ANGULAR STONE WITH 3, 357, 4, 467. NA PLATE COMPACT OR ROLL BELOW CHAMBERS THE MAJORITY OF PARTICLES 5, 56, 57 TO ACHIEVE 95X BETWEEN i - 2 INCH PROCTOR DENSITY NOTE: THE LISTED AASHTO DESIGNATIONS ARE FOR GRADATIONS ONLY. THE STONE MUST ALSO BE WASHED. CRUSHED ANGULAR. 0 STORMTECH CHAMBER PROFILE VIEW >r EW E. 08 DESIGNED ISM A 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER 7.4 DRAWN ISM City.OR 97345 RED ROCK CREEK 12/13/06 11'�ff1.�.� } CHECKED BDL E F 50365513421(5036551360 SCALE - STORM DETENTION DETAILS SHEET NAME 1AYOUT1 APPROVED BY Civil I Structural IPlanning I Survey TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER E SYM REVISION DATE BY APP D MEngneenng&whamCmpay paceelgrs.com AS SHOWN SHEET D1 OF 4 FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL 36" t. PROVIDE STD. RUBBER RING MADE ROLLS. USE STAPLES OR WATERTIGHT MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. JOINT WITHIN 18" OF OUTSIDE WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC WIRE 24" MAX. TO SEE DETAIL DWG. NO. 8-2.03. i, FACE Of MANHOLE WALL 2%2%14 GAGE T MIRE IABRIC FIRST STEP . 211=1��p%,//„ --- TOP CONFORM TO ASTM SPEC.!WIGS SHALL A/" •�` , , 11 p .1 p. 0 21" MAXIMUM O. p p j p• T:lT = p Alie l / 1 ==__ __ _ - __ SET OVERFLOW ELEVATION TO PROVIDE lo���.`� / N `. .4 d 1\G" 1 � DETENTION AND OIL SEPARATION. i trri % \\ In i I nal ' I I p LIFT HANDLE BE; DWG. ' _OVERFLOW EL.= 225.05 Is -++ ____+}___- I , �t PIPE SUPPORT 3" X 0.080' ALUMINUM OR 3"X 0.079'STEEL. (SEE NOTE 1 & r, °1 � 6'-0" MAX. I STEPS OR Y` i f° DWG. 13-1.058). ` I I I . LADDER o; 1 �\ 23" MIN. STD. FRAME AND COVER \ , GROUT WHEN IN STREET R/W 2"x4" MOOD POSTS, STANDARD ...w,.p SHEAR GATE �� SIZE ET ORIFELEv CL 1 GROUT OR BETTER OR EQUAL ALTERNATE ' 8" MIN. DIA. O STEEL POSTS. INLET 4.0' 222.70 jj ;J�' ` 13" r I OUTLET 2.Y 2z4.t8 3" MAX. `�Mrm a �- CONC. RING FILTER FABRIC NOTE: w..� 7- y MATERIAL BURY BOTTOM OF FILTER GROUT-- N ■ .......b., KELOK JOINT OR EQUAL ALTERNATE MATERIAL IN 8"x12" TRENCH GALV. STEPS 8" X 12" WI IS ACCEPTABLE IN t 1 \-GROUT 2%2%14 GAGE WIDE, 2" DROP. s = l C-478-61T WIRE FABRIC T 30'MIN. � p •IMBEDDED 3 ON 12" �o gIPE REINFORCED CONC. T & G OR EQUIVALENT. °•CENTERS (TYPICAL) -- N D 5"--� I I ^' SLOPE 3" PER FT. 3"MIN.- p INVERT EL.= 220.0 ALL PRECAST BASESy�, o ANGLE BOTH ENDS OF FILTER FABRIC 3"-im- p SHALL HAVE A 6" (-1/2 TO 2/3 PIPE I.D. Nye, ", FENCE TO ASSURE SOIL 15 TRAPPED EXTENDED BASE. SEE ���,�� ( �oG. a SIZE AS SEPARATOR 8 CITY 7.02TA... DWG. NO. `� yJ>� 'N p I I 111 / 11' SIZE AS REWIRED /4<U N CL 8" ,,l�? / _ 4'-0' MIN. 6" INTERLOCK ANDRLOTACH MIDDLE POSTS J • p I 1 i A RESTRICTOR PLATE MINI 3 MATH ORIFICE. NOTES: (SEE NOTE 6 ). 1. ALL PRECAST SECTIONS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM C-478. — p ° p DWG. 8-1.088). ALL POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE SHALL HAVE 28 DAY STRENGTH OF 3.000 P.S.I. 6— _ i 1.4 DIA. = 3.4" AND 2" TO 4" SLUMP, I, " . II,2. MATERIAL: 3/4" DIA. STRUCTURAL STEEL CONFORMING TO ASTM A-36 AND GALVANIZED IN CONFORMANCE TO ASTM A-123, FOR STEPS. 1 p p NOTES: { p - N. 6.' N ' p - p ', . , - • p 1. ALL PRECAST SECTIONS SHALL CONFROM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF A ASTM-C-478. SEDIMENT FENCE BARRIER �. ALL POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE SHALL 0 FLAT TOP MANHOLE ® \ HAVE A 28 DAY STRENGTH OF 3,000 P.S.I. —Y AND 2" TO 4 SLUMP. 02 .._.._- N.TS. 6' 3" SECTION A 2. SHALL BE APPROVED BY.p OVERFLOW 1 SEE CITY S . DR. B-1.088 FOR ELBOW, UFT HANDLE.SHEAR GATE DETAILS& NOTES. PRECAST MANHOLE RING MANHOLE ACCESS FROM ABOVE y e__ne. S. e: GROUT INLET PIPE— . %:. OUTLET PIPE VIP, ..v't - I ,' �_c• �.4''4 1:l+ Rl4�nr -__�°�ANCE r y J a� Iti j 1rra 1!•i•�l''• �f -s1�3',a m 11'f"'} 8"MIN. '1V4 �,@+�,4.�'%."4 4 ��11'041'i�yA DEPTH egf-e-' l ' el I �l iO'''%t'• /.-.:,, 144^�rig :T '-���• V.� ver..•:01.W. �� , 7 ems • �t�p -fi��,► i" REBAR FOR BAG PLAN A4".1 "'U4 ' 4t�'-tiya N4L, ' - ` REMOVAL FROM INLET f x x WATER QUALITY MANHOLE ?*►�`�"i14�r 41 4i• 41�l�"• DUMP STRAPS ��� •'� � ® N.T.S. 4q"'PNya.• torr�i fq( �,SSG4 � SILTSACK 0 44;Vi 25 MIN. RADIUS •3‘• .<1:t .7 NOTES: -USE 4 - 6"DIA. QUARRY ROCK -USE SUOGRADE REINFORCEMENT GEOTEXTILE 0 GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE IS) FILTER BAG INLET ENTRANCE N.T.S. N.T.S. P DESIGNED BLSA 1300John Adana Sleet DATE JOB NUMBER DRAWN BLS /, Oregon 0.655.1 42f f.55 CITY OF TIGARD 12/22/06 PC1—k-----CHECKED BOL /� P.SD3.665.13�Ir.so0.855.T36o WATER QUALITY 06914 _ RED ROCK CREEK SCALE SHEET NAME 691402 APPROVED BY �' REVISION DATE BY APP'D M Civil i °IS`IVe'' TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN AND EROSION CONTROL DETALS SHEET DZ OF 4 _ + SAWCUT----------\ OUTSIDE PAVEMENT WITHIN PAVEMENT STREET SIDE CUSTOMER SIDE SURFACING z TOPSOIL MATCH EXISTING MATERIAL I 90'RENO MJ IM IH [ • T gl0pl(1W) MEGALUG WARIER OR AS GLANDS 1--90'REND MJ MTH w DIRECTED BASE MATERIAL 16" CAST IRON 910 BOX— D.I.P.� € MEGµIIG RETAINER PROVIDE VALVE OPERATING ,,IIIII� -i '�' NUT EXTENSION SEE DETAIL WS �-j - _ , Dlp 1 NEGµuG RE(AMEN Q.AND— SPOOL FLG.KPE 6"NO-HUB OUTLET J PLAN w ° FINISHED GRADE GATE VALVE MJeRG.--\II ° r12 wr �J MEGALUG RETAINER GLAND �� _ V r 29' _ e' xz' HEAVYDUTY m �_ v\ CAST IRON GRATE j io ina� I / ; ■1■ \., 1�\S\C/\\�/ /7 ES< I HAND TAMP BACKFlLL i u \!� ttE MJLC 6N +u AROUND TOP SECTION GATE VALVE hc. 6" A.S.T.M. A74 CAST 1, —,•,' f \ 1 i - SPODL FIG,.P.E. IRON SOIL PIPE I 4 i •°z -�i I HINGED ClEANOUT I z Q � asNA APPROVED LFODER i_ m t�. gym BUTTERFLY VALVE z 6" ASTM 3034 PIPE �m NOTES: �-BOTTOM SECTION 6" STORM PIPE 1141 NF ENDS AS SPECIFIED ry _....._,..147.t.._„ }? L CONTRACTOR TO SEAL ALL TO SWALE i«1� -Z- �a iS.' - t-- `.,', I � ^wS 256 NONNISHRINK GROUT. *4# VA TH 6- o «�•.e INVERT ELEVATION � Eo'0 PLAN 2. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL 9>♦y� �'• tO °:� CONCRETE BALLAST 3 ■I•111 mOCCncw•OE PIPE CALLED OUT ON PLAN INVERT • f��. CU. YD. MIN. AROUND BASE 12' '� II OF VAULT IN THOSE AREAS 6'MIN 6'MM �I WHERE FLOODING OR HIGH /V./V. / YJ 6" MIN BEDDING BELOW - --- ° /T /� �/ /,. FINISH GRADE TO GROUND WATER EXIST. / `/ \ �\/ SLOPE AWAY GRANULAROBACKFILL •I • I 1/4- STEEC COATED OUTSIDE OF PIPE BELL , : EC; NOTES: /`\/�i\'�\��/j��/\/ \/�\\//�/ SL FROM P VAULT LID�`� .■I I v" ��—� INSIDE OUTSIDE /�!. 'i�, v GEAR OPERATOR / // �, <.„4i n n< 1) VALVE BOX NOT TO REST `\\ /40 1 DRAIN TO CURB OR STORM DRAIN C��liyeQQ\C.� /�\\ ON OPERATING ASSEMBLY. ,'%.R',iTO�\w�\\ // 2) OPERATING NUT EXTENSION III I41 _ME. AL II' • �� REQUIRED WHEN VALVE NUT a-�ma via,i'w fir --: �- JJOTE: METAL CATCH BASIN FABRICATED TRENCH FOUNDATION �� I HIV. G-av �� BY LYNCH CO., OR OTHER APPROVED MANUFACTURER STABILIZATION, AS REQUIRED -- IS DEEPER THAN 3 FEET FROM T FINISHED GRADE. O CONCRETE � UTILITY ADDER,CANDOOR D`35 AOS EA`RPROVED SEE DETAIL W5. ® 24” BALLAST SEE '' 3) CENTER VALVE BOX ON `". CHECK VALVE AXIS OF OPER. NUT. 6' 3/4-0 CRUSHED STANOON PIPE STAND NOTE: ROCK LEVELING COURSE DRAIN TO DAYLIGHT OR SUMP 1. SURFACING OF PAVED AREAS SHALL COMPLY WITH STREET CUT STANDARD DRAWING. 4) PROVIDE 24' SQUARE BY 4' THICK PUMP 'CRUNDFOS" MODEL 'THE 2. JOINTS TO BE TACK AND SANDED. CONCRETE PAD AROUND VALVE BOX I 24'----I ELEVATION BOSS 200' I/3 HP STAINLESS OUTSIDE IDE OF PAVED AREAS AS STEEL SUMP PUMP WITH FLOAT 3. SAWCUT SHALL BE TACK COATED WITH BITUMINUS ASPHALT EMULSION. SHOWN IN CONCRETE PAD DETAIL ELEVATION CONCRETE PAD SWITCH AND 1-1/4W DISCHARGE ®CATCH BASIN DETAIL ®TRENCH BACKFILL ®TYPICAL BUTTERFLY VALVE LARGE METER W/ FIRE BYPASS N.T.S. N liwor FINISH GRADE ao6 CLASS 'C' NATIVE 0. _� o a•BACKFILL ti. z z o CLASS A- CRUSHED ROCK <S,:, N UNDER PAVED AREAS �� Z' . �+<co^ n i n } r z CLASS "B" PIPE ZONE MATERIAL .-NOMINAL DIA. PLUS NOMINAL DIAMETER OF PIPE 0 TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION v. ® FOR CONCRETE AND D.I. PIPE J P� � N.T.S. \ Qck 8:H DESIGNED ISM A 1300 John Adams Street DATE ,; DRAWN ISM A Oegon0i�0R97045 RED ROCK CREEK 12/13/06 JOB NUMBER -R CHECKED BDL /\ °' '1 IT' I 0 DETAILS (WATER AND STORM) 06914 APPROVED BY A CIA1I Structural I Planning TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER SCALE SHEET NAME LAVOU TI 30 a o SYM REVISION DATE _ BY APP'D M E�pn c ering Servi Co rp I� szom AS SHOWN SHEET D3 OF 4 STOP SIGN LOCATION (INSTALL 4" PVC SLEEVE UNTIL CROSSWALK PERMANENT SIGN INSTALLATION) STRIPING 0 45"-I---1 1 PC/PT CURB JOINT 5' MIN. SEE NOTE 5 ROW 0-Z I SIDEWALK e DRAINAGE BLOCKOUT CURBSIDE J � fir• EXISTING DRIVEWAY- 2R 3 1 D PLASTIC O 7 ROAD • :� 1• 6 PIPE W/COUPLING ` / f 5 MATCH WIDTH & GRADE =r=11117.1=1.1. !I IL IDIE. 1 BATTER 2 rr{�. ,� 5 A 1L �) =11=1 11 1_ t yry�`y',' R W LINE COMPACTED SUBGRADE —TA ROAD 1" 6•t" RI, _ TP.UNCATED DOME a 2' OF 3/4"^-0" BASEROCK .I J, - I DETAIL 4'\\ SEE NOTE 4. q VARIES 6" f.•• 1/2" b,`/\7 2• />.0 41 a SEE NOTE 3 • zj _ 1 SEE r SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO CURD BASE COURSE•• • • • • ® @ ® (z� y Je�P�S "rt 1 :,F,', EXPANSION S' MIN 12% SEE NOTE 2 NOTE 3 2Z SIDEWALK I• 24"— • B ® ® ® �� P�\J�� ,. .- '�'c r� JOINT (TYP) I_ _ 5'MIN. •1 ROW ® ® WI :.F. Y r --�'I fi^. CURB 0 ~ *..• 3 a¢ 71 PC/PT 6- A y-2% 1. FOR USE ALONG MEDIANS, GUTTERS MAY BE REDUCED 'NTH PRIOR RAMP a o-`'V'....:. 6' 30' MAX 6' ROAD ,mraa APPROVAL FROM THE CITY ENGINEER. YADTH— '°• v'3 I'"., 10' MIN ✓� _ =u=11=11=11= -11- WJI VARIES F 11 11=II'! I ..:11111- 2. CONCRETE TO HAVE A OREAKING STRENGTH OF 3000 P.S.I. AFTER 28 DAYS. RAMP TEXTURE PLAN . ' 2" OF 3/4"-0" BASEROCK 3. EXPANSION JOINTS: PATTERN DETAIL PLAN VIEW COMPACTED SUBGRADE-ill A. TO BE PROVIDED: 1) AT EACH POINT OF TANGENCY OF THE CURB. 3/4• 6" R/W SIDEWALK AWAY FROM CURB 2) AT EACH COLD JOINT. 1-•--- 4, ( 4, 6^ 3) AT EACH SIDE OF INLET STRUCTURES. - STREET t NOTES: 4) AT EACH END OF DRIVEWAYS. I 5) AT LOCATIONS NECESSARY TO LIMIT SPACING TO 45 FEET. II= FLUSH � ,��� .. . = ll-..11.=I>Hr s �z�a L -K Ii1=1"41 1. CONCRETE SHAL4 BE 3000 P.S.I. AFTER 28 DAYS, 6 SACK MIX, SLUMP RANGE B. MATERIAL TO BE PRE-MOLDED, ASPHALT IMPREGNATED, NON EXTRUDING, - v o° o°o I.=11# 11=1 1:=4- / / -II II 11-.11.J.lI_ �• °o°o o°o_' _• I 1- - 2 OF AGGREGATE OF 1-1/2" TO 3. WITH A THICKNESS OF 1/2 INCH. / ° rnr o o I. �I_ 0 11=1f. l L'= 11 11?'11 WIZ%'T, ' `• O,• co.o O O 4 4" P.C. CONCRETE `o o ° - - 3 4"-0" COMPACTED 2. PANELS TO BE 5 FEET LONG. 4. CONTRACTION JOINTS: I=111 ,1,. o° o oo�,•00000 -1= ( / ) A. SPACING TO BE NOT MORE THAN 15 FEET. 2" 3/4"-0" AGO. BASEROCK M1411=°0°0•o°oao°�_. 6" X 6" 10 GA MESH 3. EXPANSION JOINTS TO BE PLACED AT SIDES OF DRIVEWAY APPROACHES, 1 '.00 o.°O°ocC d• SECTION A-A SEE NOTE NO. 4 B. THE DEPTH OF THE JOINT SHALL BE AT LEAST 1 1/2 INCHES. - UTILITY VAULTS. WHEELCHAIR RAMPS, & AT SPACING NOT TO EXCEED 45 FEET. 5. BASE ROCK 2"-0 OR 3/4"-0. 95%COMPACTION. BASE ROCK SHALL BE TO SECTION A-A NOTES: 4. FOR SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO THE CURB AND POURED AT THE SAME TIME AS SUBGRADE OF STREET STRUCTURE OR 4" IN DEPTH. WHICHEVER IS GREATER. THE CURB, THE JOINT BETWEEN THEM SHALL BE A TROWELED JOINT WTH A NOTES: 1. CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH SHALL BE A MINUMUM OF 3300 PSI AFTER 28 DAYS. MIN. 1/2"RADIUS. 6. DRAINAGE BLOCKOUT - 3" DIAMETER PLASTIC PIPE: 1. CONCRETE SHALL ATTAIN A MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3000 P.S.I. IN 28 DAYS. 5. SIDEWALK SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 6 INCHES IF MOUNTABLE A. 3 I.D. PLASTIC PIPE WITH COUPLING. 2. CONTRACTION JOINTS SHALL BE SCRIBED 3/4' DEEP AND RAMP PANELS SHALL BE BE 2. CURB JOINT SHALL BE TROWELED WITH A MIN 1/2" RADIUS ALONG BACK OF CURB. EDGED ON 4 SIDES. CURB IS USED OR IF SIDEWALK IS INTENDED AS PORTION OF DRIVEWAY. B. DRAINAGE ACCESS THROUGH EXISTING CURBS SHALL BE CORE DRILLED 3. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE 1/2" ASPHALT IMPREGNATED MATERIAL OR EQUAL. 3. EXPANSION & CONTRACTION JOINTS SHALL BE 1/2" PREMOLOED ASPHALT IMPREGNATED OTHERWISE SIDEWALK SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 4 INCHES. OR CURB SAW CUT VERTICALLY 18" EACH SIDE OF DRAIN AND REPOURED 4. SURFACE SHALL HAVE A MEDIUM BROOM FINISH. MATERIAL OR EQUAL EXTENDING FROM SUBCRADE TO FINISH GRADE. 6. DRAIN BLOCKOUTS IN CURBS SHALL BE EXTENDED TO BACK OF SIDEWALK TO FULL DEPTH OF CURB. 5. COLOR OF DOME AREA SHALL BE SAFETY YELLOW. WITH 3^DIAMETER PLASTIC PIPE AT 2%SLOPE. CONTRACTION JOINT TO C. DRAINAGE ACCESS THROUGH NEW CURBS SHALL BE PLACED A MINIMUM 4. 6" % 6" 10 GA MESH REQUIRED FOR COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAYS ONLY. OF 2.0' AND A MAXIMUM OF 3.0' FROM PROPERTY LINES. STANDARD DRIVEWAY ®CONCRETE SIDEWALK ®CURB AND GUTTER ®WHEELCHAIR RAMP STANDARD CORNER ®WITH CURB-TIGHT SIDEWALK N.T.S. FOR CURB INFORMATION SEE CURB DETAL 0 R/W ROAD 2X Q 0 cc SECTION A-A J co D ENLARGED R/W OR EASEMENT 0_ AREA TO CONTAIN WHEELCHAR CONCRETE APRON RAMP AS REQUIRED STRUCTURAL SECTION ', TO CONFORM WITH , COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY DETAL ISEE DWG.NO.142! ' 4 • • A • - :A DRIVEWAY WIDTH S • 1E POSURE J •' ',�� FP FE 26'MN.RADIUS ITYPJ I FOR RAMP!FORMATION SEE WHEELCHAIR RAMP DETAL 04D.128) i FOR SIDEWALK FFOHMATION �� a SEE SIDEWALK DETAL INO.1201 y ®COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY N.T.S. Q e. dr DESIGNED ISM :::E12/13/06 JOB NUMBER 1300 J A _ __ John dams Sheep DRAWN ISM °`�9°"G",oR alas RED ROCK CREEK.WI SANITARY AND STREET DETAILS SHEET NAME LAYOUn". _.. TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER P APPROVED BY CiviIlSlructuDa1181Y ,,o _ SYM REVISION DATE BY APPD_ M Enlfwrrtq SrNns Comport/ paceengrs.cmn AS SHOWN SHEET D4 or 4 • i . 0 0 0 0 0 ci 0 MO STEEL CANTILEVERED CANOPY :T!AMWG _ I iA.STEEL T.O.FRAMING y �[ III M, 4 6A.CAT ■ -- MI I MI MN IN••••11111 ��/1•_=Mr �.M�ill•INI_��1 11 TY1 E;��� d T ' T— I _ ME-. !. .r , p Jr A. ,. F , f F '/ / , . d Y .0 _ _ _ - I _ I I.O.CANOPY ME ! �Ig/ I • y,( r` /// $ Ij/ / ♦ / '6 R /i�'/ s ' /{ / f.D.WIgOW —— - -- — F�_ 1 . PAD A NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:3132"=1'-0• 00 0 (rill 0 s 27-er.„,„, BY-1 cr -- T.O.FRAMING 22•_8• 1.._ _ : ' T.O.FRAMING 9 6 „< ., .. .:., .,,•.. r :, ...,,. ` T.O.FRAM NG - -- — ---- -- --- - - _._ i.O.FRAMING s 15'-6" y v T.O.WINDOW - - I T.O.FRAMING,L.L.; I 1®®� '` ®1�.© I-�, "=- --I': r i r I AN -wuiumi ;:: ®I,® � , thin f WHI®11 ._ B.O.CANOPY 'I F 1_E I I B.O.CANOPY vir I 10'-4" , , .-/ 3, . . I , 10'-4•ii a r.o.WINDOW �® _ Tn.WINDOW s r 7 7 a 1. / �/ �' `V' ,7 // �/ 1 r / yy * I / ,/ 1 / / I // 4�,,/ / fi ]] I Ce-0"Ala F.F. F.F. — 2. PAD A EAST ELEVATION 3. PAD A WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 118"=1•-0" - ----- -- ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANELS METAL COMPOSITE PANELS • D ® 0 I 0 0 1 O ----J At1■r1UM STOREFRONT Ma-0 _ _„ 19-P /ryy/�/,�7 f���%l✓„". ., ,,., ''7•; T.O.iRAMNG Y I TO.F1AA111Fi $,o�AM.1� j/ �; I I i 11 ( I ���` I I '�Fr!}�# II 11113111111111111 ■■yF1F M∎ I1 1t1t 111t1i11tG111i11 i n0111Z 1 II IIIIIIII I II IIII II/IIIIII iII £ 3> " E '` .i; I II I�mama© � ®��'I TA.WINDOW" L�1A.GNOPT ,,.,,,, ...�_ Sul 1.F.� .■� 17-0 #I#81AW11181•1; IISERISI ■EMOU I1111i1MISIMI SI■IN Mi■AAI F/11MINEIM UIPI 1IYIIIISI■ ISIS ■E@IMEDIRE IElt 1ivaramIl■I■1 _ • ILO CANOPY A,_ _____ ____ ___ ___ I ®®®�I ma I1I !I1JI1® mum NE EN mug Ima®� mmima ®ma® ma man maw© `mama® '.'�i®® ®©®I ma--�limaEa®lI IIII®©I� mama®II T.OWI1O' 4 as III 1 I � FF.__ ___ 4. PAD A SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 3/37=1•-0• DRAWING REDUCED RED ROCK CREEK RETAIL CENTER VA IM N. PD A7 O " -' TIGARD, OREGON W� June 2007 0A o /� 0 _T 0 o ? 0 22'-8' 27-8" T.O.FRAMING _- --- .T.O.FRAMING 0"TOP PARAPET r - IB B' ■-_---_---_---=_iiii iii—i_ii_=====�iii_--i—iii====_--i-i---w-iiiii--i_-t■ ■ w wii—ii.m..�....∎mwww�wwiwiw--∎ws....m. wiiii—w==wwiiwiwi■ MASONRY CHANGE i5== ===i=_+=+`=-c s�rr�: -1.--�i��W_i�i��M-=iiii•kiwi-IwiwwV-=i ■iiiiiiiiiiiiiii-iiiiiiii-iiiiiii■.iiiiiiiiiiiiii immou= Niii■■ ww___iiMMMMi=_M_iiiiwiiiiiiiii_ii_i-iiiiii_iiiii-iiii_iiiiii--..■ ■i=ii_=ii_i__.•. -._ ■_wii=ww__i_i_==C -i�iG=i--�rw-i==m_M__=iiiiiii-_wMM__w iMwM iM���ii_w__lI j�j�j/,j/j /�.I� -.I / /: /���� I■ irrwiiii�iiiiiiiiiiwiiwiiiiiiiiir■iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirii�■ / / / / / / / •/ r / ■ _iiii iiii-iiiiiii iiiiiii iiiiiiii-._w_=__ii____w_w_ i_--iii■ I 5"B.O.AWNING E _iiii-. _ ■iiii i-_iiii_iiiiiiii-iiiiiiiwiiwr■iiiiiwiwiwi-i i iiiiiiii _ i�iiii=i�iiii.l I • i-i-iiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii --iiii._iiii-iiiiiii•L_ULii-iii---ii■ •■M __=iiMim ■wii- .__� -■_MM iii==iiii--iiiiiiii--i=iii-iir.wwi-i-i_wii-iww-ii-iiii_- 7-d'MASONRY CHANGE M /� /✓ /r �- /�' Jv =iii■ -------------------------------w_.------------------- ___■ =i__iiii-!.■ Ali' fie r r AO SIP A' ,{' A* iY ■iiiiiiii=ii mommwo _iiii iii--iiiiirvii-i-ii--iiiiamemu i iiii -.2 9'-4' ■iii _=iiii. ■___w =Mw_iw=__iiii_=Maw=ii_wwiiMMMwMM_ iiiiiii-i_MM____ii iii■ z n iiii iiii_.-M. iiii■ _ ■_i_iiwwi__ii_iiiiiiiiii ii=wiii-w..-iiiii_iiii___i_iw__ _iiii 0 d' MASONRY CHANGE ii=i=iiiiw==_. _ -i■ - -�' imi-i__i-__i--w=-w____-i-iii-_i-_i-i.wi_=wi______i-iw--ii-____-__■ - 2 i===_ i L.ii ii ____ i i-w_iii-m-iiii_i _i iii iml_=i-m,mm==-iii--___i_w_-iii -_� W..' ..--...111MIMMIIMIM====M11•1111===1•11111•1==11•11111111111111111111111•1•14•■■••===•111•111=1•111111111•••111111110=MIMMIIIIIMMINIMIMIIIIIIN O ZNZ _ IMMUNISES OM MN i_ • i==__ ....1%—...11-1,1, _ w ■ _ '. ■ _i _=___i_i�__w�__ii_-ii_mii__i____�_i__ __ i_i■ F-O ■iZ_= iwMiiwM i=M �i■ _ _•li_.MMMMw_____ii_ i___i_M N h i_ii iMMMMM-. MINNIMM=====IMINIIIMIIIIi•IN .L um= w> _0'MASONARYCHANG'----- _ii • •---___ _=_'__:- __ =1'�I�Iilfi'�'s�E,E1®! Iii I --- uiE°------------------ --------------- ---------MIME y i ii_ 1---.-===�-===== :._.--===== ■■ __■ iiii=iii__-__iiii_wiii_ w==imiiiii____iL___ii_ _iii Iliw��__a1O---=• � __ _____ =_=_--__- ® '�����I I�i --„•----M--M-----IM-----IM---'- -------------'----- -MIME ■ , FINISH FLOOR 111=111111111111•1•11•111===IIMINIMMINIMM■••=11111====111.1•1111MIMMIll=====IMIIMIM111111=11111=111===== 1111•1111111111 I 1. PAD B NORTH ELEVATION 2. PAD B SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 118.=1'-0” SCALE: 1/8'=1'-0' 0 0 . 5 BRICK SPLIT FACED CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS SPANORAL PANEL ACCENTS 22'-8' T.O.FRAMING �M-=_ • _ 2a-0 T.O.PARAPET Mi wii-wiiiiMMMMwM-MMMM M_-w_____iiMMM-: �■_w__m.- i==i=w=_ii=_i___ ==ai===ii_____ii_ __-_iiii ii_w■MASONRY CHANGE �_:____iii i_______ __i___i_MM_i_______-■J_ _Mimi_ •• M_=_i_wi___wi__ii ==1 �i MM==i_∎-�_i ii___-_ =MOO= / •• i _-_M =E r _w_ ■i Vii• • 12-0" _i =iiii=i-II '11.:----X----1 11--liven III E_ --_. 12'-5" co •MASONRY CHANGE , // i _ iii■'. �-MMMMMM B.O.AWNING _i_i__i_--- /�/ �� /f/ _® /� yam/ �� /� �/ i- �j� /� //� /� /� ••1111•111111111111111•••••••• o MASONRY CHANGE MiiMM=MwMMi Mm •_w_Mi_w. 0••• 41 Rmootrimis 0 / Www SAM Li.• M..--=i_ --'- ��-_, N / _Z =• / / • ==•-• ---ii _-_-_- Vii - .i =Q 2-0• / / / ,r' r i / / ! / /MASONRY CHANGE -eiww -_Miw M = • • , iii. 1 w• iiiim _ • as F.F. 3. PAD B EAST ELEVATION SCALE: ire-=1'-0' 0 0 CI) z ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANELS O 0 FOR MECHANICAL SCREENING 22'-8" T.O.FRAMING' __ _ 2aET 7 IB'-8' ■_i_____w________i___i_ii_i_____-______-_i___-iiii-Z;zi4■_i_--i_-w_m-_i-i___i__i_IM_IMi-__i_-■-r_::_.7_-i_i___i-=_M_-_--IM IM___i_i_=_-Mw_IM_--IM--wwii_i_-_-i_-_m-i T.O.PARAPET MASONRY CHANGE ■w__-_w__w_i=w____wiw_i_i_=_== ===:2•ii--w--i_iw_i_i_M=iii_i_■:=�==iii-__=iii_i_iii_-ii_--i__ii-i-iiiiiii ___=_M=i_-M=iMiwM_=_=_=__w.i_•:Z.=IM=NM=MIN wiiii UMW IMw IMi--ii-ii-∎-����•■w_=wiiwi-_iiii_--=---iiii=MM-_==I M-ii-M■ ■r j// 1•°°=.=ter '■_=1=5■ •Ii-_i M=ii-i- ■ . r = _MIME - .•------'.� ,..., • 12'-0' ) IliivisCo I iavirir:il I7- l r:NW 111 -II_MMMM.7M_.—M B.O.AWNING m MASONRY CHANGE y Ar �r ,P y p �P �wi_■■ ■iM_■■gill ...========.11H. MASONRY CHANGE ■•■ A. A' i=? • - - ...m......1...IN r==__=°=• _ ■__ ��■ GALVANIZED METAL RAILING Ow' rijni-. Ce N ■• -- -_�� �_-_.----.■ .--iii.__=m■ -. I=NI iii IUM IMm = > 2'� I--- i-e v= >��.l�-g■I.-_�,_ __ -_ - --• o =-„.=-__� - - -- --� E.-,... .E._ .,--_-� - -- -- ..-===- --- -- w 1 •�MASONRY CHANGE __ i===ra=m-i - ==�i - ?- 3____ =.-..=�c= = _- = —5- _o _= _ _ ___ 5c= o l�=.T:-- _ :BMW i!� = - - - �= _ -==--__ =e = �=�_ ti e-= _ - i ,-u.A 4. PAD B WEST ELEVATION - - SCALE:1l8-=1'-0- DRAWING REDUCED RED ROCK CREEK RETAIL CENTER Eh um :,, PD A7 .T MI WI A IGARD, OREGON June 2007 ;A 0 1 . K STUCCO CORNICE I a 0 -$?O6"PARAPET 0 0 0 17'-6" TO.PARAPET 1 I-- -- 7 nN + + II II 19'-4" IIIIII M.■ III I II II 11lllll ILIIIIIIIII����u�aiiluiiiainnmuimi�mmimaaim =: tit ; -�i �_■11111111111111111111111111'11111I1111111111111111111I1I1II1II�III�II�III�I I'��III'II.I11I'II11IIII T.O.FRAMING w.- 14-1� .i ..■ STUCCO Tr T.O.PARAPET • ■1im■�11'd I I ■B.O.AWNING ■==� —w■ TIRE :INII CM Mal m.m - _ _ __ MI palm W.Ma if 1111IMEN de um li / —...NIONNINI 0. III 11 , i ... ....-- ■mao.w.. w..m B Ail .O.REVEAL ' .w� mow■www e-__-_:_m__—_—_-wa ■ . IIII Ram■... ■m.w ..0 ji p w..w■.:::= , ' Psi Iwwn .. awa wawa- ■:: 111.> w ■wawa■ ......... ar.Ra.-�i..m wr ■s.a ■ a■ i/ wai ■as■■w_ws■ w�■ e _ ■■wwwa • -.■T�-. .wawaw�■■�' ■ ■�i iC.� ��� / L �N■.a�r i,I I, ■Y�■■�w� ...'�a�r■L�e .��■■����' 4.O" F.F. B.O.REVEAL B.O.REVEAL 4,8° - CERAMIC TILE WITH• B.O.REVEAL • B.O.REVEAL 1 . PAD C NORTH ELEVATION SCALE 1/8"=1'-0" 0 U O 0 O O 2.5-6"k,_ 0 e T.O.PARAPET 19'4" j� Ill.' ____ ly I!iFj::L. Ii I III I T.O. RAMING PA IRAPET`( I III_ '.III .. 11111111 ..II Iii II.111 I I. .. III.1 IIII1-II.I .._ IIII ---1, ■.■ T.O.PARAPET im.■m■ -..mm-w-w.w.m l-Ra-aCG�iw.w..�wm■ �� I1'r -- �..�.-..mw.Ramm......ii �pp■C—ate wAAINA....m.wRa.RaRamwa■ c a■.rr....mww.w..wm�........w.mmm ... �. ■.wmm IIIIWI mmmo..MMIN MIIM II Iwwwwaw....m.■nim1cccca ■■�Ra.--.--.--wwww..RaRa.Ram..w.w.w.wwm wwm■ ■m B.O.AWNING �■ ..w...m......Ra-..m.w.--..-.Ra mw.m.......m-mm-.Raw■ as.w....-....m.m.m_Ramw....mw-m... .. ■mw-....w.w—.—..—.m.....wawa m....ww..m..—..wm.. ■Ra.Ramm--m--mwww..mmwm-.-mmww ENNIM wawa■ w■ .■ awaaawaa m-.-.-w-Ra_...ww.-mwmm.ww.mmw.m. ■. 64 ■w m.Raw..w.m..mRa-w-w.wm.mwwwm.w ..w.m.Ra.mmmw-Ra.m.mm■ wwaw---maw-----w-wwwm----------- ■.m mm. ---- --- _ ■a / B.O.REVEAL ■w aawwwwwwaawwaawwwwawwwwwwwwwawwaaaawwwwwawwwawww■ ■mm.....---mRa--m.w..amwmmm....m. Ram m.■ �■ S-4" m■ amm-wmmwwmmww.-mRa.-wmw.....m-w-m...w-w.--mm to mm .-..-m.-m.RaRaw.-.m-.mm.wmm..m.m men Rama -us mr_ ■m.mwa....mmm.mm....w..-Ra..- .wm.mw.wmw.mm mamm ■awa----.-Ra..---Rawwm.-.m-m.-w.ww-m- .m..= ?a■ ■mr --Ra....w..m.—m.—w..w.. w-mw —.Ra.w.w-.m.m-..m-.-■REVEAL T www.-.-mmmmwwwRa.--.-wm..mm.-..w... mmm.. ■.m■■. B.O. Ra■■.—w—■■■■■■awwawawa■■a■■■■Rawa■■■■Raa�■Raw EN aRa■■■■waRa■■wa■■wmmae■■■■■Ra .mwm--m-w.m-.wwwwm-.mwmmm.m.m.m... MIME •mm■■.■ •m■■mRaawwRaRamwmaawaRamamwwawaRaRaw Z■wma�r RaRaRawwwwmawmaRajwwaRa. wmm a.--mmm.-...a....m.-...mm-..ww-L ..--- ■-.■•. .••waw.■.--...m.w.w-m-a-...m.m-... ---..w......m wawa- - ------------------------------------ -■>,.■ m.••.■ VI" ■-nwmmm.m .m••m.m-m-m.ww.w.-..■ •• .ww.--m.-...m-..m..• m.ww.aa-.a..wa-wwa-.mw.....m.mm.. -..mom •.m••. ....mm-■■m--.MIIIIM (MINI wwaw.-.- .w-I-wm...MIMI w-...-Ra-- 0'-O' ■w.- ----- ----_■-Raw-w.Raww-w-wa-a-------- -■■w■ ..--- =MO■w■ B.O.REVEAL M:■�■�'�.��� mow.. 1 _ w.wwaw--■nw..w--aRa.w.w.wwwZa-.-.Ra.a■ _ .awm..--..Ra. RaRa..Ra..---a-..a.— - Ram..�'�■mRa■eRa .www Raww Raw ..a-..wwaw.-maw.aaw.ma- F.F. - 2. PAD C EAST ELEVATION Imor SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 3. PAD C WEST ELEVATION 158'-4" - -- - - - - _ SCALE: 1l&=1,0" - X I 4 O e O io 25'-6" _ O 1 101 T.O.PARAPET N. ARCHITECTURAL METAL PANELS 19•d IIII 4r T.O.FRAMING -- I1 . _ r '"r. 1 - i , ■ . 1 7•� OL14'-10' I, T.O.PARAPET I ___ - - - �-- ∎.--oniiiYfi'.a.Raw—w....—.—a.Raw.—w--.Raw.w.-waa.a.—mow.—awaaaaa..—a.aw--a..aww...---aw wwaw..aa aww......aww..ww.-...w...-.a.wa iimmusimc......mwm..m..........m..mMINMIMINIMUNIIIIIMMI•11MNPRININIMMEMOININIMMIIMMIMINMEMMINIIMMMIIMIIMINIIMM=IMINI=MINIMMOIFI■-..Raw--- ...Rawm .--- a . mmONwm mm .mw.. m=— w-waww-INIIM Mw — MENEN--.Ra..wwRaw- amaEMOMw.w.MUM NEu=MIN I L-4" ,1y c_-i-a- co w-a coac-c-a-a oo c-s-a�acoc-w-a-acac -�a-aco c-mo-a accc.-a- cac-c-a-acacc s-a-ac oc-c-a-acc-c-a-acac---a-acacc■ B.O.AWNING `r m--Ra-ww-m....-w...am.mm.m.mama.• w--........wa.-..a...a.-.w-a....mmmew.a.aw..-w.w...---wma.w--www...- ...m..1...m..m., .-aa--■■.■■■■■■1.■■■■■■.ww■■—a■■w—awww ■■mow ■■■■.....■■w■ .■■a■■Iw—■■■■■■a■■.aw—aa■■ww-■■a wwaw■■—■■.a.w•MINII ■ MIIIIINIM Raw■■Ram.■■■■w—■■■■ww.w■■ =M11•111M■w• ■-MENNI -mRa-wmw....wm-a....-MONNEN�mm—.mmw.m-.Raw.--.mw.Raw--w...---.-...m=MENE-m Raw.—w.m-m—mm. INME .—wm..m-.m.m.m..--.Ram- _ .--m-m- ENM--•.—RawM INP--m—m.mmEL— .m-...wm.m-.m.r-1.mm.-m.--a--...w---Nomm www.Rama Ra.-mma-..-r--I.-.w.-..-w.wm.. OMEINIm-■ ■.....mm-m..Rai r--.-....r ■mmm-.. ■.....w.m...w■ IN m.-.m..-.....-g r..mmmm..-a-..m-..a.... IM......m-.--.....w Rama••-. .---.mRa--mwRaIN NI.--w■■.w■ ---m.mm.-.m.--ma-Ra-mm.ml ■■■■■a■■■■-.wa-w--w■■a Iw.—a—w■■aw.■■w■■a-a.a■■—w-N r■■.ww■■aw--aw■■....■■..aaRa-■ ammo....m.....i ..w.-m-a ■..w...m-.-m.........w.■�.ww-aa.awww w--aa r.-.m..ww.m.-...m...m mow ...w..w....-....w SPOT FACED CONCRETE BLOCK -..-.w....... ..■......• ...■........w...w■....mi ■■■■w..w..ww-...a m.mm.■w..--m-..-w..-■�� �■.wNO■.-aam.aw.mw.w..s:_awe m=========mu ..■■..■■—ar EM NENOMO1======NOMMINME a a..m_.a■■■..-..w=MI rwa■■■■wawaw■■a■■.a..■■wam..= ■MENIM IM m■■.a..w—.waw-1 2=========EM IIIM=NOM EMEM===========NEIN MIME MEE========MEM MEMENEIMMEN=MOM=NO NNE EMNINEENENNIM MEM==NOM MEN= f1 f momm mma--...i M aM.aa■ MINO —.a...a i . — M. . .w.—..a.I —.... m a.—MoNo ma �w IE.EI.w�.�—a...=Raw .- —.—....im • 4. PAD C SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE 1/8"=1'-0" DRAWING REDUCED RED ROCK CREEK RETAIL CENTER , IM " Q ' TIGARD, OREGON MA June 2007 :A RQ?PDA7 •2 I • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i i 1 1 14 - LJ - W - W N. 61 llI I 0 - - mr-- - -W--- - T— - -k - - - - - - ---4- - —Iv- - —Jeri- - —so - ,�- r 1 I 1 I I 1 r E- -iji ---- . 1 I I I I 1 t' _ I Li L._ _ _ _ _I L_ _lit__ I 1 . PAD A FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 3/3r=1-0- - I I DRAWING REDUCED RED ROCK CREEK RETAIL CENTER BM ■1 MI WM' PD A3 . 0 �, TIGARD, OREGON M� June 2007 9 RO 9 o 2 0 0 0 _ . .._ -.__---- 135'4• - d - - � i -7 � - -_ CIF O1■1 1 1.1 1=1 / 1=1 X1 5 A �F h -h h f. 1 1 1 I I 11 I_ I T ,. in 0 Irj I I 1 I I I IMP i I I I I I 0 \ � I,II 1 . PAD B FLOOR PLAN SCALE 1/8'=1'-0' DRAWING REDUCED RED ROCK CREEK RETAIL CENTER w, IM /I MS' Mil OW ME WIN PD A3 . 1 TIGARD, OREGON .... June 2007 IA O' 0 0 0 0 EP 0 0 159i' 0 ; 11 I I I I I I I I I I 0 - • - - - - - -e - - - - -♦ - - - 4 - - - - - 19 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 i I 0 - WAMEMma•mm..■ ..,..=, .z.., I rg 0 - 1 . PAD C FLOOR PLAN CD SCALE: 118-=1'-0' DRAWING REDUCED Mil RED ROCK CREEK RETAIL CENTER PA _` TIGARD, OREGON P D A3 • 2 i„, June2007 Mo.' .' City of Tigard Sensitive Lands Permit Application For the Tigard Business Center In Tigard, Oregon 1ECEIVED Prepared for MAY 3 1 2007 Doug Fry CITY OF TIGARD 908 Deborah Rd. PLANNING/ENGINEERING Newberg, OR 97132 .ir Prepared by Andrew Harris Harris Stream Services 2270 Arbor Drive West Linn, Oregon (503) 866-0901 harrisstreamservices*comcast.net May 30,2007 Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application c-uJS Gcv/lCAS c tecui-ti,{ctitc6 e d-f>41 s I/7 6. chccolti Page 1 of 2 Andrew Harris From: Astrid Dragoy [DragoyA @CleanWaterServices.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 5:07 PM To: Andrew Harris Cc: Brad Pihas; Jon Anderson; Carla Staedter; Brian Lee; Kim @tigard-or.gov; Terry Keyes Subject: RE: Tigard Business Center Service Provider Letter Andy District staff has been working closely with you to get the Tigard Business Center project completed and issued under R&O 04-9. We were under the impression that the project was waiting on a Service Provider Letter(SPL) so it could enter Land Use at the City and therefore we felt that it was important to expedite the project. After issuing the SPL (May 2, 2007)we learned that the project was not ready to go in to Land Use and we tried to problem solve with the City as to how we could assist the project to get approved under R&O 04-9 One suggestion that we made (internally to the City) was that the June 1 2007 deadline be extended by 30 days to July 1, 2007. We believed this would give the project enough time to get into Land Use. We were wrong. The bottom line is that the language in Resolution and Order 07-20 is not flexible. The language states as follows: Resolved and Ordered that this Resolution and Order shall take effect for all development and construction permit applications received on or after June 1, 2007. More specifically: • New land use and building permit applications accepted by the land use authority on or after June 1, 2007 must be accompanied by a Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter dated on or after June 1, 2007 or one dated before June 1, 200 which specifically references compliance with this Resolution and Order. • Modifications to Service Provider Letters for land use or building permit applications which were accepted by the land use authority before June 1, 2007 will be reviewed and processed for compliance with the rules under which the Service Provider Letter was originally issued. • Construction drawings submitted for Site Development and/or Erosion Control Permits will be reviewed under this Resolution and Order if initially accepted by the District/City on or after June 1, 2007; earlier submittals will be reviewed under R&O 04-9. While District staff thought the language could be interpreted differently (allowing for 7/1/2007 submittals), it is ultimately up to the Land Use agency, not Clean Water Services to interpret this language. This is state law and we must defer to the City of Tigard to carry out this rule. If you have any questions on this, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Astrid Dragoy Plan Review Supervisor Clean Water Services 503-681-5157 From: Andrew Harris [mailto:harrisstreamservices@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:15 AM To: Astrid Dragoy Cc: Brad Pihas; Jon Anderson; Carla Staedter; Brian Lee 5/31/2007 Page 2 of 2 Subject: Tigard Business Center Service Provider Letter Astrid On May 15, 2007 at 10:00 AM,there was a pre-application conference with the City of Tigard for the Tigard Business Center. During the meeting Kim McMillan called you regarding the TBC/Hiteon Creek Service Provider Letter and the date it would be accepted with a complete land use application to the City of Tigard. We were informed that CWS is extending the Service Provider Service Letter acceptance date for this application to July 1, 2007. Would you please verify that this is true and accurate? Sincerely Andrew Harris CPESC, CPSWQ, & Stream and Wetland Restoration Practitioner Harris Stream Services 2270 Arbor Drive West Linn, OR 97068 (503) 866-0901 harrisstreamservices @comcast.net No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472/Virus Database:269.8.0/818-Release Date:5/25/2007 12:32 PM No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472/Virus Database:269.8.3/824-Release Date: 5/29/2007 1:01 PM 5/31/2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Background Information 1 1.2. Contact Information 1 1.3. Purpose- 2 1.4. Tigard Business Center(TBC) Location 2 1.6. TBC Project Area Description 2 1.7. Adjacent Land Uses 2 2.0 SENSITIVE LANDS BOUNDARY DELINEATIONS 2 2.1. Wetlands 2 2.2. Streams 3 2.3. Springs 3 2.4. Natural Lakes, Ponds, or In-Stream Impoundments 3 2.5. Vegetated Corridors 3 3.0 DSL,ACOE,& CWS REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 4 3.1. Regulatory Jurisdiction 4 3.2. DSL/ACOE Permits 4 3.3. Clean Water Services Permit 4 3.4. City of Tigard Sensitive Lands 4 4.0 CITY OF TIGARD REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 4 4.1. Section 18.775.20 Applicability of Uses 4 4.1.1. Section"A"CWS Stormwater Connection Permit 4 4.1.2. Section"C"Exemptions 5 4.1.3. Section"C"Jurisdictional Wetlands 5 4.2. Section 18.775.70 Sensitive Land Permits 5 4.2.1. Section"D" Within Drainageways 5 BIBLIOGRAPHY 8 Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background Information Harris Stream Services(HSS)performed sensitive lands assessment and design services on the Tigard Business Center(TBC)property for the property owner in preparation for the development of the proposed Tigard Business Center. Harris Stream Services(HSS)also performed sensitive lands assessment and design services on the Hiteon Creek Restoration site in Englewood Park for the City of Tigard Public Works Department in preparation for the restoration of wetlands and waterways in Englewood Park and for mitigation of impacts from the proposed Tigard Business Center. 1.2. Contact Information Owner: Douglas A. Fry 908 Deborah Road Newburg, OR 97132 (503) 538-1380 TBC Representative: Brad Pihas Tenant Advisory Group 22151 SW 55t. Ave., Suite 100 Tualatin, OR. 97062 (503) 638-2414 City Representative: Carla Staedter Surface Water Quality/Volunteer Coordinator City of Tigard 8777 SW Burnham Street Tualatin, OR. 97223 (503) 718-2788 Authorized Agent: Andrew Harris, CPESC & CPSWQ Harris Stream Services(HSS) 2270 Arbor Drive West Linn, OR. 97068 (503) 866-0901 Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 1 of 10 1.3. Purpose: The purpose of this Sensitive Lands Permit application is to show that the proposed Tigard Business Center development is in compliance with the requirements of the City of Tigard development code Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. The application will also provide documentation that the proposed development has received permit approvals from the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL)and Clean Water Services (CWS). Approval from the the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) is expected soon. 1.4. Tigard Business Center (TBC) Location Site Address: 1262 SW 70°i. Avenue, Tigard,Washington County,Oregon. Geographic Location: NW corner of Section 0 in Township 2 South, Range 1 West. Legal Description: Tax Map 2S101AB, Tax Lots 00100 & 00300. Geographic Position: Latitude: 45°26' 00"N , Longitude: 122°45' 00" W 1.6. TBC Project Area Description The geographic position of the project area is in the upper reaches of the Red Rock Creek drainage basin. The site slopes gently down from east to west. A perennial stream(as identified on Clean Water Services stream maps and verified on site) flows east to west across on the South side of Dartmouth Street from 70th Avenue and 72"d. The project area includes the undeveloped private property proposed for the Tigard Business center. It contains forested, scrub/shrub, and prairie meadow plant communities. The assessment investigation extended 200 feet onto adjoining property when applicable. 1.7. Adjacent Land Uses The land uses adjacent to the property include lightly developed residential on the north side of Dartmouth Street and on the south side of the property, undeveloped commercial property on the west side of 72"d. Avenue and high density commercial development on the east side of the undeveloped 70th. Avenue. There is also high density commercial development to the northwest across the intersection of Dartmouth Street and 72"d. Avenue. 2.0 SENSITIVE LANDS BOUNDARY DELINEATIONS 2.1. Wetlands Three wetlands were found on the project area. A wetland delineation was performed in the project area by Harris Stream Services. HSS submitted the Wetland Delineation Report to the Oregon Department of State Land September 6, 2006 and received a Letter of Concurrence December 27, 2006. The DSL wetland delineation file number is WD 2006-0550 Wetlands are shown on the Wetland Delineation Map included the CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report is included in Appendix "C". Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 2 of 10 2.2. Streams A perennial stream was found in the project area. The stream is a tributary of Red Rock Creek. Red Rock Creek is a tributary of Fanno Creek. Clean Water Services prescreening maps identify the stream as perennial. The stream is 619 feet long and flows east to west parallel to the South side Dartmouth Street from 70t to 72nd. Avenue. The bankfull (ordinary high water)channel width is 3 to 4 feet. The mean bankfull channel depth is approximately one foot. Channel incision has created a top of bank(TOB)depth on 3 to 5 feet and average TOB width of 10 to 12 feet. The stream is shown on the Wetland Delineation Map included in CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report is included in Appendix"C". 23. Springs The investigator found no evidence of springs on the subject property. 2.4. Natural Lakes, Ponds, or In-Stream Impoundments The investigator found no evidence of natural lakes,ponds,or impoundments on the subject property. 2.5. Vegetated Corridors The vegetated corridor width is 50 feet measured from the stream top of bank because it is a perennial stream and 50 feet measured from the boundary of wetland#3 because it is hydrologically connected to the stream. The vegetated corridor width is 25 feet measured from the boundary of wetlands#1 and#2 because they are hydrologically isolated from the stream. The existing slope adjacent to stream wetland areas is 15%. Existing site topography is shown on the Wetland Delineation Map. Vegetated corridor boundaries are shown on the Vegetated Corridor Map included in the CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report is included in Appendix"C". Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 3 of 10 3.0 DSL, ACOE, & CWS REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 3.1. Regulatory Jurisdiction DSL and ACOE have accepted regulatory jurisdiction over all wetlands and waterways on the Tigard Business Center property and the Hiteon Creek Restoration project site. These wetlands and waterways are therefore regulated in the State of Oregon by the Oregon Department of State Lands(DSL) under the"Removal-Fill Law"(ORS 196.800-196.990)and by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(COE)under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 3.2. DSL/ACOE Permits The property owner submitted the joint fill-removal permit application to DSL and ACOE on October 12, 2006. The DSL permit application number is DSL 37247-FP. The DSL issued their permit approval April 25,2007. The DSL approved permit and conditions of approval are included in APPENDIX "A". The AOCE permit application number is ACOE 2006 00629. The ACOE permit decision is expected any minute now. 3.3. Clean Water Services Permit The applicant submitted a Natural Resource Assessment Report to CWS on January 24, 2007. CWS issued their Service Provider Letter on May 2, 2007. The CWS Service Provider Letter is included in APPENDIX"B". 3.4. City of Tigard Sensitive Lands 4.0 CITY OF TIGARD REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS This section addresses requirements of Chapter 18.775 SENSITIVE LANDS in the City of Tigard Development Code. 4.1. Section 18.775.20 Applicability of Uses The proposed Tigard Business Center complies with Section 18.775.20 Applicability of Uses: Permitted, Prohibited, and Nonconforming as follows. 4.1.1. Section "A" CWS Stormwater Connection Permit Section(A) CWS Stormwater Connection Permit. HSS is pursuing a Storm Water connection Permit from the City of Tigard. The applicant has prepared construction plans for the Tigard Business Center wetland restoration and Hiteon Creek restoration projects. All Service provider Letter conditions are addressed by these construction plans. Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 4 of 10 4.1.2. Section "C" Exemptions Section(C) Exemptions. This section applies to the wetland and waterway restoration (mitigation)project proposed on Hiteon Creek in Englewood Park. The proposed Hition Creek Restoration(mitigation) Project satisfies the criteria in Subsection"C"and is therefore exempt from Section 18.775.20. The project meets the following criteria: ✓ It is being performed under the direction of the City Public Works Department in compliance with provisions of the City of Tigard Standards and specifications ✓ It includes work under the City stream and wetland restoration and enhancement program. ✓ It includes non-native vegetation removal. ✓ It includes planting of native species. ✓ It includes maintenance and replacement of existing public facilities. 4.1.3. Section "C" Jurisdictional Wetlands Section(D)Jurisdictional Wetlands. Under this section, wetlands on the proposed Tigard Business Center project do not require a sensitive lands permit because: ✓ They meet the jurisdictional requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Department of State Lands,and CES. ✓ They are not designated as significant wetlands on the City of Tigard "Wetland and Streams Corridor Map". ✓ No other agencies require permits. ✓ The project site does not contain areas within a designated 100-year floodplain. All other applicable City requirements for sensitive land permits are being satisfied. The project site does not contain slopes 25%or greater,unstable ground, or 100-tear floodplains. All drainage ways and wetlands are under state and federal jurisdiction. 4.2. Section 18.775.70 Sensitive Land Permits The proposed Tigard Business Center proposes drainageway impacts that are applicable under Section 18.775.70 (D). 4.2.1. Section "D" Within Drainageways The proposed TBC development complies with section as follows: 1. Impacts no greater than required for the use. This criterion by the City of Tigard is essentially the same as DSL,ACOE, CWS standards requiring the applicant to demonstrate that development disturbance or impact to wetlands, waterways, and vegetated corridors is unavoidable and that unavoidable impact is minimized. The TBC project site contains 619 lineal feet of stream channel as described above in Section 2.2. The proposed impact is to fill 571 lineal feet of the stream. This impact is unavoidable Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 5 of 10 because it is needed to satisfy City of Tigard requirement to provide for the widening of Dartmouth Street and to satisfy City of Tigard land use requirements for the proposed development. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report prepared for this project includes a detailed narrative that addresses the avoidance and minimizing impact criterion. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report is included in Appendix"B". 2. No adverse Impacts to life or property. The TBC development plan proposes to restore 38 lineal feet of the existing incised stream by constructing a new non-incised natural channel that provides a bankfull flood prone area connection to the existing protected wetland on the project site. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report includes detailed narrative and proposed restoration drawings that address this criterion. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report is included in Appendix "B". 3. Water flow capacity of drainageway is not decreased. The proposed development includes a drainage plan designed by PACE Engineers that assures designed flow capacity for the piped and restored stream sections are not decreased and satisfy City of Tigard storm water design criteria. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report includes a detailed narrative and proposed drainage plan that addresses this criterion. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report is included in Appendix"B". 4. Undeveloped surfaces replanted to prevent erosion. The proposed development includes a wetland mitigation and restoration plan for the protected wetland, stream, and vegetated corridor that restores native vegetation and satisfies CWS landscape requirements. The CWS Natural Resource Assessment Report includes a narrative,restoration plan,and planting plan that address this criterion. 5. Drainageway replaced with required master plan flow requirements. The proposed drainageway replacement is designed by PACE engineers to be a public drainage facility that satisfies the 1981 Master Drainage Plan. The design is addressed in the PACE Engineers drainage report provided in the development application. Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 6 of 10 6. Obtain permits from U.S. Army corps of Engineers,Department of State Lands, and CWS. The proposed development has received a Service Proved Letter from Clean Water Services and an approved permit from the Department of State Lands. An approved permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is expected to arrive in the very near future. The DSL permit documents is included in APPENDIX"A". The CWS Service Provider Letter is included in APPENDIX"B". 7. Open space dedication in 100-year floodplain. The proposed development is not adjacent to a designated 100-year floodplain. Open space dedication is therefore not required. However, the wetland, stream,and vegetated corridor area at the west end of the development is being protected by deed restriction. Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 7 of 10 BIBLIOGRAPHY Cooke, Sarah S. 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plans of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle,WA. Cowardin,L.M.,V.Carter,F.C. Golet,and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,Washington,D.C. Hitchcock, C. Leo, A.Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, WA. Pojar,Jim and A. MacKinon. 1994. Revised Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. B.C. Ministry of Forestry and Lone Pine Publishing,Vancouver,B.C., Canada Reed,Porter B.Jr. 1988.National List of Plant Species that occur in Wetlands: National Summary (including Region 9, 1993 supplement). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(24). Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Sensitive Lands Permit Application 8 of 10 APPENDIX "A" DSL PERMIT APPROVAL LETTER AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report D,,pa,tment of State Lands Permit No.: 37247-FP 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100 Permit Type: Fill Salem, OR 97301-1279 Waterway: Wetlands/Hiteon Creek 503-378-3805 County: Washington Expiration Date: April 25, 2008 Corps No.: NA TENANT ADVISORY GROUP IS AUTHORIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORS 196.800 TO 196.990 TO PERFORM THE OPERATIONS DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED COPY OF THE APPLICATION, SUBJECT TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS LISTED ON ATTACHMENT A AND TO THE FOLLOWING GENERAL_ CONDITIONS-. 1. This permit does not authorize trespass on the lands of others. The permit holder shall obtain all necessary access permits or rights-of-way before entering lands owned by another. 2. This permit does not authorize any work that is not in compliance with local zoning or other local, state, or federal regulation pertaining to the operations authorized by this permit. The permit holder is responsible for obtaining the necessary approvals and permits before proceeding under this permit. 3. All work done under this permit must comply with Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 340; Standards of Quality for Public Waters of Oregon. Specific water quality provisions for this project are set forth on Attachment A. 4. Violations of the terms and conditions of this permit are subject to administrative and/or legal action which may result in revocation of the permit or damages. The permit holder is responsible for the activities of all contractors or other operators involved in work done at the site or under this permit. 5. A copy of the permit shall be available at the work site whenever operations authorized by the permit are being conducted. 6. Employees of the Department of State Lands and all duly authorized representatives of the Director shall be permitted access to the project area at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting work performed under this permit. 7. Any permit holder who objects to the conditions of this permit may request a hearing from the Director, in writing, within twenty-one (21) calendar days of the date this permit was issued. 8. In issuing this permit, the Department of State Lands makes no representation regarding the quality or adequacy of the permitted project design, materials, construction, or maintenance, except to approve the project's design and materials, as set forth in the permit application, as satisfying the resource protection, scenic, safety, recreation, and public access requirements of ORS Chapters 196, 390 and related administrative rules. 9. Permittee shall defend and hold harmless the State of Oregon, and its officers, agents, and employees from any claim, suit, or action for property damage or personal injury or death arising out of the design, material, construction, or maintenance of the permitted improvements. NOTICE: If removal is from state-owned submerged and submersible land, the applicant must comply with leasing and royalty provisions of ORS 274.530. If the project involves creation of new lands by filling on state-owned submerged or submersible lands, you must comply with ORS 274.905 - 274.940. This permit does not relieve the permittee of an obligation to secure appropriate leases from the Department of State Lands, to conduct activities on state-owned submerged or submersible lands. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in civil or criminal liability. For more information about these requirements, please contact the Department of State Lands, 503-378-3805. Michael Morales, W Region Manager Wetlands & Waterways Conservation Div \ I� ' Oregon Department of State Lands y (� �,�, April 25, 2007 A thorized Signature Date Issued ATTACHMENT A Permittee: Tenant Advisory Group Special Conditions for Removal/Fill PLEASE READ AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH CONDITIONS OF YOUR PERMIT. This project may be site inspected by the Department of State Lands as part of our monitoring program. The Department has the right to stop or modify the project at any time if you are not in compliance with these conditions. A copy of this permit shall be available at the work site whenever authorized operations are being conducted. 1. This permit authorizes the placement of up to 190 cubic yards of compacted fill material in wetlands and 85 cubic yards of compacted fill material in waters, in T 2S, R 1W, Section 1, Tax Lots 100 and 300, Washington County, as outlined in the attached permit application, map and drawings, dated November 16, 2005. 2. This permit also authorizes removal and fill activities necessary to complete the required compensatory mitigation. 3. Issuance of this permit is contingent upon acquisition of the required local permits and approvals, including the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services. if the local permit(s) results in any modifications to this project relative to this permit, the permit holder shall contact the Department and request adjustments to this authorization. 4. The permittee is responsible for carrying-out the terms and conditions of this permit unless the permit is transferred to another party as approved by the Department. 5. TURBIDITY/EROSION CONTROLS. The authorized work shall not cause turbidity of affected waters to exceed 10% over natural background turbidity 100 feet downstream of the fill point. For projects proposed in areas with no discernible gradient break (gradient of 2% or less), monitoring shall take place at 4 hour intervals and the turbidity standard may be exceeded for a maximum of one monitoring intervals per 24 hour work period provided all practicable control measures have been implemented. This turbidity standard exceedance intervals applies only to coastal lowlands and floodplains, valley bottoms and other low-lying and/or relatively flat land. For projects in all other areas, the turbidity standard can be exceeded for a maximum of 2 hours (limited duration) provided all practicable erosion control measures have been implemented. These projects may also be subject to additional reporting requirements. Turbidity shall be monitored during active in-water work periods. Monitoring points shall be at an undisturbed site (representative background) 100 feet upstream from the turbidity causing activity (i.e., fill or discharge point), 100 feet downstream from the fill point, and at the point of fill. A turbidimeter is recommended, however, visual gauging is acceptable. Turbidity that is visible over background is considered an exceedance of the standard. Attachment A Attachment Mt— w��' r'"' n Peal 0 40 Page 3 of 6 k,/ UAre / — .S"c°""'"r•-t QO.G 3 The following erosion control measures (and others as appropriate) shall be observed: a. Filter bags, sediment fences, sediment traps or catch basins, leave strips or berms, or other measures shall be used sufficient to prevent movement of soil from uplands into waterways or wetlands. b. To prevent erosion, use of compost berms, impervious materials or other equally effective methods, shall be used to protect soil stockpiled during rain events or when the stockpile site is not moved or reshaped for more than 48 hours. c. Erosion control measures shall be inspected and maintained daily, or more frequently as necessary, to ensure their continued effectiveness and shall remain in place until all exposed soil is stabilized. d. Unless part of the authorized permanent fill, all construction access points through, and staging areas in, riparian or wetland areas shall use removable pads or mats to prevent soil compaction. However, in some wetland areas under dry summer conditions, this requirement may be waived upon approval by DSL. At project completion, disturbed areas with soil exposed by construction activities shall be stabilized by mulching and native vegetative plantings/seeding. Sterile grass may be used instead of native vegetation for temporary sediment control. If soils are to remain exposed more than seven days after completion of the permitted work, they shall be covered with erosion control pads, mats or similar erosion control devices until vegetative stabilization is installed. e. Where vegetative erosion control is being done on cut slopes steeper than 1 H:2V, a tackified seed mulch shall be used so the seed does not wash away before germination and rooting. f. Dredged or other excavated material shall be placed on upland areas having stable slopes and shall be prevented from eroding back into waterways or wetlands. 6. Erosion control measures shall be maintained as necessary to ensure their continued effectiveness, until soils become stabilized. All erosion control structures shall be removed when project is complete and soils are stabilized and vegetated. 7. HAZARDOUS, TOXIC AND WASTE MATERIALS. Petroleum products, chemicals, fresh cement sandblasted material and chipped paint or other deleterious waste materials shall not be allowed to enter waters of the state. No wood treated with leach able preservatives shall be placed in the waterway. Machinery refueling is to occur off-site or in a confined designated area to prevent spillage into waters of the state. Project-related spills into water of the state or onto land with a potential to enter waters of the state shall be reported to the Oregon Emergency Response System (OERS) at 1-800-452-0311. 8. All exposed soils shall be stabilized during and after construction in order to prevent erosion and sedimentation. 9. If any archaeological resources and/or artifacts are uncovered during excavation, all construction activity shall immediately cease. The State Historic Preservation Office shall be contacted (phone: 503-986-0669). 10.The Department of State Lands retains the authority to temporarily halt or modify the project in case of unforeseen damage to natural resources. Attachment A 37247-FP Page 4 of 6 MITIGATION Compensatory Wetland Mitigation 11.The following conditions apply to the actions described in the Mitigation Plan dated January 22, 2005 (revised). The issuance of this permit is contingent upon the successful replacement of compensatory wetland mitigation for the loss of 0.12 acres of wetlands and 571 linear feet of waterways according to the HGM classes and Cowardin classes shown in the mitigation data form. 12.Compensatory Wetland mitigation will be conducted off-site. Mitigation for the loss of 0.12 acres of wetlands (palustrine emergent/slope valley class) shall consist of restoration of 0.12 acres of wetland at Hiteon Creek. 13.Compensatory mitigation for the loss of 571 linear feet of waters shall consist of on-site channel restoration of 38 linear feet and off-site channel restoration of 533 linear feet on Hiteon Creek. Compensatory mitigation shall follow the revised mitigation plan submitted January 22, 2007 and shall meet the design objectives outlined in the plan. 14.Issuance of this permit is contingent upon long-term protection of the mitigation wetland areas by filing deed restrictions approved by the Department. A draft deed restriction has been approved by the Department. Any changes to the draft deed restriction must be approved by the Department prior to recording the document with Washington County. There shall be no wetland impacts until the approved documents are recorded with Washington County and copies have been sent to the Department. Copies of the recorded documents are due at the Department prior to wetland impacts and no later than June 1 , 2007. 15.Mitigation site construction shall be completed prior to completion of the wetland/waterway fill project. 16.No removal or fill of any amount of material shall be conducted within the compensatory wetland mitigation areas without prior authorization from the Department. 17.Prior to any site grading, the surveyed boundaries of the avoided wetlands and on-site wetland mitigation area shall be surrounded by silt fencing at all times during construction of the project. There shall be no heavy equipment in this area except during mitigation construction. 18.Removal or control of invasive, non-native plant species shall be done by hand, selective mowing, or chemical means. Only herbicides approved for near water use shall be allowed and shall only be applied by appropriately licensed persons. 19.The mitigation sites shall be irrigated as necessary to avoid water stress for at least two years after the completion of planting. 20.A contiguous 4'-6' fence (or other barrier) shall be installed around the surveyed mitigation and buffer areas, immediately following wetland grading. A locked gate will be provided to allow access for authorized routine maintenance and monitoring activities. The barrier shall be installed prior to grading any lots adjacent to the mitigation and or buffer areas. Attachment A 37247-FP Page 5 of 6 21 .Signs shall be posted around the buffer and wetland mitigation areas bearing the following message: MITIGATION WETLAND Protected under State and Federal Law PLEASE DO NOT DISTURB 22.If, in the judgment of the site monitoring agent or Department, planted shrubs and trees become adversely affected by herbivore or other damage so as to jeopardize compliance with success criteria, then shrubs and trees shall be physically protected from herbivory and other damage with heavy gauge wire mesh or other appropriate material. Mitigation Success Criteria To be deemed successful, the mitigation areas shall meet the following success criteria: 23. Hydrology in the compensatory wetland mitigation areas will be established in the first year following site grading and determined adequate for the proposed mitigation plant community prior to commencing site planting. 24.There shall be 80% survival of planted trees and shrubs for the duration of the monitoring period for both the wetland and waterway mitigation areas. Survival shall be determined through stem counts. 25.For both the wetland and waterway mitigation areas, there shall be 40% cover of planted and native recruits of herbaceous species after the first year of planting, 60% after year two, and 80% after years three, four, and five, as measured by aerial cover. 26.For both the wetland and waterway mitigation areas, there shall be no more than 20% cover of non-native, invasive species for the duration of the monitoring period. 27.The wetland mitigation areas shall meet the hydrology and vegetative criteria specified in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual by the end of the five-year monitoring period. 28.There shall be no perennial inundation within the compensatory wetland mitigation areas and inundation shall not otherwise be of depth or duration to adversely affect plant cover success criteria. Mitigation Monitoring 29.An as-built survey shall be provided to the Department of State Lands within 90 days of mitigation site grading. 30.The permittee shall monitor the mitigation site to determine success for a minimum period of five (5) years. The annual monitoring report is due by December 31 of each year and shall include the following information: a. Permit number, permitteee's name, project name Attachment A 37247-FP Page 6 of 6 b. Location of mitigation site: describe and show on current map. c. Location of impact site d. Description of all activities that have occurred on the mitigation site during the past year (i.e. grading, re-grading, planting, re-planting, weed eradication, etc.) e. Description of monitoring methods used and documentation that success criteria are being met. f. Recommendations for remedial actions, as appropriate. g. Photographs from fixed photo monitoring points. h. Qualitative discussion of mitigation site performance relative to the two identified reference sites. i. Other information necessary or required to document compliance with mitigation plan. j. Year 5 monitoring report shall additionally include a wetland delineation report documenting wetland acreage by Cowardin class within the defined mitigation areas. 31.The monitoring period will start when the permittee has demonstrated that hydrology has been established and initial plantings have been accomplished. Failure to submit a monitoring report by December 31 each year may result in an extension of the monitoring period, loss of the performance bond, and/or enforcement action. 32.A performance bond in the amount of $10,214 has been provided to the Department to ensure completion of compensatory mitigation in accordance with the conditions of this permit. The permittee shall file a written request with the Department for release of phases of bond. Portions of this bond will be released based on the following schedule: a. 25% release upon approval of the first year monitoring report for both mitigation areas, which demonstrates successful establishment of site hydrology through hydrology monitoring in March — April, following completion of grading and initial planting. b. 25% release upon approval of the second year monitoring report for both mitigation areas. c. 50% release upon approval of final monitoring report and demonstrated success of both mitigation projects based on success criteria. Contingencies 33.The Department retains the authority to extend the mitigation-monitoring period and require corrective action in the event the success criteria are not accomplished for two consecutive years (without re-planting for failure to meet survival or cover criteria) within the five-year monitoring period. Issued: April 25, 2007 G:\WWC\AttachmentAwestLAS\FP Fill Permits\37247-FP.doc APPENDIX "B" CWS SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report \� File Number CleanWater Services 07-000354 Our commitment is clear. Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter Jurisdiction Washington County Date May 02, 2007 Map & Tax Lot 2S101AB-00100, 00300 and Owner 1 S134BD-00200 Site Address Applicant Harris Stream Services Tigard, OR 97223 Address 2270 Arbor Dr West Linn, OR 97068 Proposed Activity Commercial Development on tax Phone (503) 866-0901 lots 2S101AB-00100,00300;Off-Site Mitigation on tax lot 1 S134BD-00200 This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction StandardslR&O 04-9).___ YES NO r YES NO Natural Resources Alternatives Analysis Assessment(NRA) X Required X Submitted (Section 3.02.6) District Site Visit Date: X Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis X I Concur with NRA/or Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis X submitted information X — Sensitive Area Present X Tier 3 Alternatives Analysis X On-Site Sensitive Area Present Vegetated Corridor Off-Site X Averaging - X Vegetated Corridor Vegetated Corridor Present On-Site X Mitigation Required X Width of Vegetated Variable 25 feet to 50 feet On-Site Mitigation X Corridor(feet) 1,445 sf Condition of Vegetated Good/Marginal/Degraded Off-Site Mitigation X Corridor 115,177 sf Enhancement Required X I Planting Plan Attached X Encroachment into Enhancement/restoration Concurrent with site Vegetated Corridor X completion date development (Section 3.02.4) Buildings/Parking: 45,376 sf Type and Square Footage Wetland Creation: Geotechnical Report X of Encroachment 16,157 sf required ROW: 1,676 sf Allowed Use x Conditions Attached X (Section 3.02.4) I I I This Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. Page 1 of 9 File Number 07-000354 In order to comply with Clean Water Services (the District) water quality protection requirements the project must comply with the following conditions: 1. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the sensitive area which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.3. 2. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the vegetated corridor which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.4. 3. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction the vegetated corridor and water quality sensitive areas shall be surveyed, staked, and temporarily fenced per approved plan. During construction the vegetated corridor shall remain fenced and undisturbed except as allowed by Section 3.02.5 and per approved plans. 4. Prior to any activity within the sensitive area, the applicant shall gain authorization for the project from the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The applicant shall provide the District or its designee (appropriate city)with copies of all DSL and USACE project authorization permits. 5. An approved Oregon Department of Forestry Notification is required for one or more trees harvested for sale, trade, or barter, on any non-federal lands within the State of Oregon. 6. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) for Erosion Control, in accordance with the CWS Erosion Control Technical Guidance Manual shall be used prior to, during, and following earth disturbing activities. 7. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from the District or its designee is required pursuant to Ordinance 27, Section 4.B. 8. The District or City/County shall require an easement over the vegetated corridor conveying storm, surface water management, and/or sanitary sewer rights to the District or City that would prevent the owner of the vegetated corridor from activities and uses inconsistent with the purpose of the corridor and any easements therein. 9. Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with Section 3.13 of R&O 04-9. 10. Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the greatest extent practicable. 11. Removal of invasive non-native species by hand is required in all vegetated corridors rated "good". Replanting is required in any cleared areas larger than 25 square feet. 12. Should final development plans differ significantly from those submitted for review by the District, the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and if necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider Letter. Page 2 of 9 File Number 07-000354 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 13. The vegetated corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum of 25 feet for isolated wetlands less than 0.50 acre and 50 feet for perennial streams and hydrologically connected wetlands, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive area. 14. For vegetated corridors 50 feet wide or less, the entire vegetated corridor shall be equal to or better than a"good"corridor condition as defined in Section 3.02.7, Table 3.2. 15. Clean Water Services shall be notified 72 hours prior to the start and completion of enhancement/restoration activities. Enhancement/restoration activities shall comply with the guidelines provided in Landscape Requirements (R&O 04-9: Appendix D). 16. Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the vegetated corridor shall be removed. During removal of invasive vegetation care shall be taken to minimize impacts to existing native trees and shrub species. 17. Enhancement/restoration of the vegetated corridor shall be provided in accordance with R&O 04-9, Appendix D. 18. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction, the applicant shall provide the District with the required vegetated corridor enhancement/restoration plan in compliance with R&O 04-9. 19. Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with Section 2.11.2 of R&O 04-9. If at any time during the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80% survival level, the Owner shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity and the two year maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting. 20. Performance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2. 21. For any developments, which create multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership, the District shall require that the sensitive area and vegetated corridor be contained in a separate tract and subject to a "STORM SEWER, SURFACE WATER, DRAINAGE AND DETENTION EASEMENT OVER ITS ENTIRETY" to be granted to the city or Clean Water Services. 22. The water quality swale and detention pond shall be planted with District approved native species, and designed to blend into the natural surroundings. Page 3 of 9 File Number 07-000354 CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS 23. Final construction plans shall include landscape plans. Plans shall include in the details a description of the methods for removal and control of exotic species, location, distribution, condition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preserved, and installation methods for plant materials. Plantings shall be tagged for dormant season identification. Tags to remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes. 24. A Maintenance Plan shall be included on final plans including methods, responsible party contact information, and dates (minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September 30). 25. Final construction plans shall clearly depict the location and dimensions of the sensitive area and the vegetated corridor (indicating good, marginal, or degraded condition). Sensitive area boundaries shall be marked in the field. 26. Protection of the on-site vegetated corridors and associated sensitive areas shall be provided by the installation of permanent fencing and signage between the development and the outer limits of the vegetated corridors. Fencing details to be included on final construction plans. This Service Provider Letter is not valid unless CWS-approved site plan is attached. Please call (503)681-3613 with any questions. Julie Wirth Environmental Plan Review Attachments ( 5 ) Page 4 of 9 VEGETATED CORRIDOR RESTORARION WETLAND EXISTNG WETLAND CHANNEL RESTORATION CHANNEL CENTERLINE I. -. .. _ -.. - -- -- _. 50 FT 42 FT E --FT - --BANKFULL BANK FULL ..__ Y' - EXISTING GRAD MEAN DEPTH DTMO 5 FT� 64 F 220 P --: -- �� i I f"- I !I I I I -r i 11 . 11 ' 3 I ! I I-c = - 0 OD +00 7 — 1 + — 210- _- I r ., _ I — I I I T—I 7— I- ii EXISTING .,� • SO I ' i I --i--1-_- I STREAM — -- — —- 0 ADE t --- - I' PROP SE GR —r i - - 200- - �- I --- -I��� I _ +—I !1 . '-' DATUM EDP' 1.---------i------ - - - _�_._--.-- ------ y� . ,._ - I • : -- - - ---��-- �� r -r--; 19300 0+00 1+00 2+00 r l —tiJ -i: I 34.37' •\ -. CROSS SECTION A: 1 " = 40' HORIZ., 1 " = 20' VERT. I p � � •�p p � I I p-p O p p' —. I . I' . •_p 0 7 p_ '. �a STREAM I _--. I RESTORATION _ ' V V V V V • - I WETLAND ENHANCEMENT i';---- , 0 V' p"p 0 Q' p-• .12.5 -. ------------- ------ — / MN MAIM Mt 1 I r j I - HI— I LND t p p — i— . j i i "j" : i \ . . - • p p D Q p-p N Appppppp BU DING B no I� — r l I + + + . I i + + + . . . f fLp I DA7iUI WV L I _--�- I I • 1+00 FkFkFk D VE L 0 P M E\ T 1 WETLAND CREATION _ •+ �`-� `� 1,436 SF .) i A t _ MIT I T L I \ E , . I CROSS SECTION B: 1 = 40' HORIZ., 1 " = 20' VERT. i `1 —� I •.:. . ? NEW cg\ \ / - - -- -- - - ( ` NOTES: ■ VEGETATED CORRIDOR - I ♦ ' ■ ' • . -\:. _'_._.�_._ __ - - RESTORATION • •. Mk RIPAR;'N FOREST 1, ��'� -- 1. STREAM RESTORATION. CONSTRUCT NEW NATURAL CHANNEL AND BOULDER VC I •A ' i ----- STEP POOL SEQUENCE TRANSITION TO EXISTING STREAM CHANNEL. 1 . 73.95' PInG►1Cc CJ Q -r 2. WETLAND RESTORATION. REMOVE EXISTING VEGETATION, EXCAVATE WETLAND �(�C� oY` be "�"`�`���� "~�" BASIN, AND PLANT NATIVE EMERGENT MARSH VEGETATION. PLAN SCALE: G. rm 11,1_e. 3. VEGETATED CORRIDOR RESTORATION. REMOVE EXISTING NON-NATIVE 00 zoo 40 1._..1S-1 VEGETATION, AND PLANT NATIVE RIPARIAN FOREST VEGETATION. I 4 4. EXISTING WETLAND ENHANCEMENT. REMOVE NON-NATIVE VEGETATION AND ,/'�� %�,1� (e e evtL�ccCf, - PLANT NATIVE EMERGENT MARSH VEGETAION. �''- �iA4..,rc) 5. REFERENCE SENSITIVE LANDS RESTORATION PLANS ANS SPECIFICATIONS. Approved *PREPARED BY ANDY HARRIS OF HARRIS STREAM SERVICES 4- el...,,--..,,v,.e.„...i.--.f pia,, ra a/ [ ct.-.: Clean Water Services °---- - - ~ By Date c- S 2-0 _.__._. ... . \�.,- S P(_ A4-1-4 c I,.n-�•_.t 3,y -- ��. !J REVISED 5/01/2007 Q� DESIGNED _- I 1300 John Adams Street DATE J013 NUMBER -- -- OregonCdy,0R97045 CITY OF TIGARD 1 12/22/06 WETLAND MITIGATION AND 06914 CHECKED - - _ - p-5D3.655.1'3 191 S03.655.1360 RED ROCK CREEK MODEL------ - b-Afr ' APPROVED BY -_- _-_ --- - ..-. __-_ ;,- i__�.-. PACE saw CNiIISlnlctural1PlanrirpISuiey AS SHEET_NC11of 13 TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER SHOWN RESTORATION PLAN._._.—__._._....._ �; � � -6Tl i c� riff. - °a'9 cmPrM PerRena6cam � ...-.. .a... ..._.".�.a......-.. . ..........-1 • -COMMUNITY "A" - GRASS DEGRADED CONDITION ° - - • a.. d a•. /� '� � A '1' 10' SLOPE EASEMENT 4, * 1, .1. y .� ..���.v� _.��ii%.. ,1` ��iii���IIIrA...__���i/ __ �i�/ iT. �-Iiiiii%//� �� ii//N////////// iiii+/I//�#4iiiiiiii�/////re RED ROCK CREEK TIGARD ROW , ' /o/%iiii�%///_����� ///// � 7 / i�i��„"”/////�.///i�i��U/i , ill V * y- y y y W y y SP-1 sk 126 LINEAL FEET % _ _ - < 0 0 0 0 0 ,�, . ,� y ,l, ,I, ,I, ,1, NI, .I, .I/ NI. NI. N NIL.... ir 522 SF, f 0.012 ACRES , _ �, �, �, y _,,,L, 2 ' �, �,st 1, STREAM DITCH TIGARD ROW 4 * SP-7 * * ♦ y y y y 682.35 SF, ± 0.02 ACRES SP-8 A 0 * y SP-4 111111111- x RED ROCK CREEK (TBC) WETLAND #1 •WETLAND ;3 TBC f * * a. (3 O • 571 LINEAL FEET 602 SF $ 0 T• 41 IF 3,585 SF, ±0.08 ACRES 0( 0 0 0 0 0 * i 5'70 13SACRES ± 0.01 ACRES i 1111 / * 0 7SP7A7-9101 TREE COMMUNITY "E" TREES SP-3 " 0 WETLAND ;3 TIGARD ROW _ DEGRADED CONDITION SP-6 x SP-10 .ASS DEGRADED CONDITION apk-Ams 0 * ? * Yox ' 6,717 SFF, ±0.150 ACRES Olt� * * WETLAND #2 4( 0 * 0.0 31 * * * 7 4,529 SF )1� - x SP-5 1 Cx * ± 0.10 ACRES COMMUNITY "C" - TREES ' �* 0 4 GOOD CONDITION TIGARD RIGHT-OF-WAY � ISE z03 * a COMMUNITY "B" - TREES ( � /03 * � GOOD CONDITION CJ . a I -o00 351' Approved _ , _Clean Wa-ter/Services o- • f BY JAI> Date •�-2-V PLAN SCALE 4R- A , ' 2›- 0 25 50 75 100 125 \\-\P e -__ DESIGNED — 1300 John Adams Street DATE JOB NUMBER DRAWN Oregon City,OR 91045 CITY OF TIGARD 03/12/07 06914 ��� p.503.655.13421(.503.655.1360 RED ROCK CREEK EXISTING VEGETATED CORRIDOR MAP SHEET NAME MDDEL CHECKED — SYM REVISION DATE BY APP�D Civil I Structural I Planning'Survey TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER SCALE_ SHEET _ OF APPROVED BY An paceengrs.com - _-�' •_� � - STA: 1+08.38 I • CONSTRUCT NEW 48" STANDARD STA: 2+11.1 I I I.__ I I • STA: 0+00 MANHOLE PER DETAIL XXXXX I I I.E INN 231.40 INSTALL NEW CATCH BASIN I _ INSTALL NEW CLEANOUT E H L ER DE PER DETAIL XXXXX I FURNISH E7 74.26 PER DETAIL XXXXX I.E IN(E 234.68 I.E 231.91 FURNISH AND INSTALL I.E 240.30 I. OUT ODD.DO RIM 236.91 - -- RIM 245.47 flNISH GRADE AT _-�- I NEW CATCH 'ASIN _ -- _ --- - - - _ _ _ -o-- - _..--_- •[-�C�- - _ --X 250 -T-.4 -----` A : I �- r�- I i• - --- a ET 7 _ I I __ - W ' DARTMOUTH _ _ .ar -. 7- 'sRk- s.po +_' �_r71 p _4 _- =k-_'�_-- --- I -{- �O .. I _ - - - - `'-`-ii.11C__ a- - 1._ -�.. N 'o -_ - I - - - - I I I-_._1- I --. - 1 - ao ° --w °- - -- 2 NEW 8 STORM 3 _ I J T- - - - --r- 40�_::;�� _ _ '108 38 _- - -- - - - - ! - i .__- - .'. _ _- �'- NEW 48 PVC. !=276.8 va0.030 �i. -- I -- --- __� L I?�' _ 1027 LF p. -� au" I ® e�-=V // I Ir- W6" SM L I - ;. 1 F v v o vvo`-.. Yl 18682 84 E-11-74{ _j 1 a _ Ii - I -j ---- M /./ ' 23D r---- `--- - --- •v v o v I'JRNISH AND INSTAL-� I I,-•' i N8659.90. E7553:J9 FURNISH AND INS63 � FURNISH AND INSTALL - NEW CATCH BASIN - o v o v v• - II < I N FURNISH AND INSTALL n FURNISH AND INSTAL TEMPORARY BYPASS SYSTEM L- - _ -.l I v v o 0 0 0 0 N -- o ` ( ' I NEW CATCH BASIN • I SEE NOTES FOR INSTALLATION _ _r--- --- -- - WETLAND -V00000• --' -- \ i NEW CATCH BASIN I SEQUENCE. I I I 111 ' ENHANCEMENT •v v v v v v o• I. I • • _ I L 1 - ---' -- - - -- . 11 • •,•, \ v.,,vovvvoo ----1,•v o v v v o v - - G f - - ' - I l // ■ ` DATUM ELEV I --.. I �- 2+00 • v .v. i BUILDING 8 .I '.--- •. ` 11 i I 1 I I I I I-.t-L'T ._ I-./._ 22000 -1+00 J-ir WETLAND - - �:. CREATION ,= - -. Q _ _ ;,•:.--, _ r PROFILE B irri 03 i •I '.'a't ' -' 1 20 VERT. 1 =40 HORIZ. . • I I \\ i yo ! - , I \' FURNISH AND INSTAL • _ _ -_., - NEW CATCH BASIN .fl - - +sr i ---a - ---- - I NEW 67 PVC _- ,, O 1 ! t _• __� . . _.. 'L= _ _ I STA: 2+11.1 •J LIMIT LINE __ �n -__ CONSTRUCT NEW 72' FLAT TOP •:�' ', I STORMTECH SC 740 o- _ MANHOLE PER DETAIL XXXXX :DETENTION SYSTEM `�- N6540.73.-._E7667.31- 3.E7667.31 FINISH GRADE A Cp >I�.--FURNISH-AND INSTALL T I E IN OU 21� ' ( N8581.07. E7459.29 BUILDING C a _ NEW - BA - _ M 226.16 :I. .- NEW 60 FLOW INSTALL --- - -- _-- -- -- -- -----_. N CATCH SIN "�: ! NEW 60" FLOW CONTROL 1 m m---- --- __.. L----1------11 - -- - -- Z-1 I MANHOLE 1 ,_' -.- _-- ; __ I 230 - -� - -1 - - - -- - - �- - •,I I , I FURNISH-AND 65:TA- 220 r----: NEW 48" STORM_BYPASS "_-----0.3% 7--17.-__:- 171.9 L.F FURNISH-AND INSTALL [I - 1I I t I � _-. NEW CATCH BASIN_ �i II --F + 1 f'---1- -a---- I 1 \ - - /� ..-_. jI� I ----- \I A� - DATUM ELEV II _IL__. 1 L_..-I.__.. ---i Q --' -_ 21Q DO 1+00 PLAN SCALE: PROFILE C h 0 ° 1 5 -_ i ` W 5 Ci 1r0�/Gd s F( 20`ARTaD'H ( pA• j W. n t ` I ). - - I a -J_ 3 ' $ -Pci- Ir'e yy► a t n i y1 at- 5i'� (�G G'I�t1S E�2 �c �- O o 03 s r L •`� iIIIII . Q I .ens v-e ,�Y.eas . Approved 1 J/ J Ciean V'Jater Services ,- _ __ -L �__ .� =. _- ' Sec Ci.�JS ��ra✓-�� 5 L- a � 1p $ �..w. ,�.r 91 t 2 I I _...- rm�rT �` � mt. Il `�^' By J-�3 Date .f 2-D�' I I• SON 0+04.0 y'/' s - L.V D 0.-I // CONSTRUCT NEW 48" STANDARD e �� 5 c'L /T i( .G�-L✓,'1-G✓1 ,z- 7,5 1 MANHOLE PER DETAIL XXXXX STA: 1+50.1 c4.Ed A // a I.E IN(N) 219.32 INSTALL NEW CATCH BASIN I /� �_ - {/� ��� (/ i a IN((NE) 221.42 PER DETAIL XXXXX J s y, //t.�/' I I.E 219.47 LE IOUT)000.00 5 FINISH GRADE AT f RIM 222.70 I ��s P t v i zoo�--------�-------- ---r ------- ----------- ------- --------i- --- TEMPORARY STREAM BYPASS SEQUENCE: I NG j _ 1---i __-- --- ---- -- ----� I. LAST 48 PIPE SEGMENT NEAR MANHOLE RIOR TO '- --�----- - THE LAS i •i I CONSTRUCT NEW STREAM 1O AND ADJOINGMG 48" PVC STORP�©EXCLUDI , I M DIVERSION. 1 ' + --- -_-- 2 ONCE THE NEW STREAM AND 48" PIPE ARE IN PLACED READY TO BE USED T 1 1- --- 1 -i I u h 230 f.-- =_-._-- - - ----- ---�----- --'-- AND I ENTI CONSTRUCTED.A. 1 I ! _------- . AT FULL DESIGN CAPACITY, A D TEMPORARY DIVERSION SHALL BE - _... � I THE DESIGN DRAWINGS! - ___.---_�!----" -' I-----�---'-"--; - - 3. FLOW FROM THE EXISTING CULVERT, POINT©SHALL BE DIVERTED THROUGH t' j I - I I FORMED ILE THE STREAM I TT THE TEMPORARY DIVERSION YSTEM TO ISOLATE SECTION Q4-FOR CONSTRUCTION NEW 8 STORM I I O.tx 1 _ 212.2 LF ' I - _ J_1 INSTALLATION OF MANHOLE(1)SHALL ALSO BE PER vm 220_ -- .- _ STEMPORARILY DIVERTED. STA: 0+87.68 i ! 1 I I 1 I 1 1 4. ONCE ALL THE NEW 48" STREAM PIPELINE HAS BEEN INSTALLED AND IS READY NEW 48" BYPASS , i I I I I -- -'_ -- FOR UTILIZATION AT DESIGN CAPACITY. THE STREAM BE RE-ROUTED BY LE 214.47 - ---- W -------- _-------•--_ '- _ _._- --- CONNECTION OF THE NEW 48' LINE AT NEW MANHOLE ' 5. TEMPORARY DIVERSION SYSTEM SHALL BE REMOVED AND THE SITE RESTORED I DATUM ELEV -_---__---_- I ---- `- -- - ------ - -----1+00 -_ --' . AFTER RE-ROUTING OF THE STREAM FLOW THROUGH THE NEW 48" PIPELINE. 210.00 X00 PROFILE A REVISED 5/01/2007 _-.- r=20'VERT. 1"=20'HORIZ. _..�. ..-- ._ a-._ I :LL_... - Civil I Structural I Planning 1 Survey M Eng naenng Sery Cmpr7 paceengrscom .�-REVISION •.BY AP Pi....�....,,- _ _i I CWS ER File No. 07-000354 Encroachments Required Off-Site Total Mitigation (square feet) Condition Activity On-site/Off-Site Tier 2 Required Mitigation Ratio Required 11,574 Degraded Buildings/Parking On-Site No 1:1.25 14,468 861 Good Buildings/Parking On-Site Yes 1:1.75 1,507 6,542 Good Buildings/Parking On-Site Yes 1:1.75 11,449 19,360 Degraded Buildings/Parking On-Site No 1:1.25 24,200 7,039 Degraded Buildings/Parking On-Site Yes 1:1.25 8,799 1,437 Degraded Wetland Restoration On-Site No 1:1.25 1,796 1,676 Degraded ROW Dedication On-Site No 1:1.25 2,095 14,720 Degraded Wetland Restoration Off-Site No 1:1 14,720 Mitigation Area Proposed On-Site/Off-Site Condition GPI) ER Fj p 7 - omgs-y New VC 1,445 On-Site Degraded Approved Existing VC 87,337 Off-Site Degraded Clean Water Services New VC "A" 21,676 Off-Site Good tA- �,1/0'a'^An 4 / ?lu., K-e • New VC "B" 2,324 Off-Site Good By dt✓ Date s-z-o New VC "C" 1,054 Off-Site Good .E- New VC "D" 2,786 Off-Site Good S7o °efl+tolr..vt��,1 TOTAL NON TIER 2 ENCROACHMENT MITIGATION REQUIRED 57,279 Square Feet TOTAL TIER 2 ENCROACHMENT MITIGATION REQUIRED 21,755 Square Feet , N crte, : 5„ cWS appr-oueI 5FL TOTAL MITIGATION PROPOSED 116,622 Square Feet / Final Calculation Breakdown 'r S `' ,?11 e-c- on- 4(egl o4S 116,622 -57,279 = 59,343 Total Proposed Mitigation minus Non Tier 2 Mitigation Required. 59,343 /21,755= 2.73 Remaining Proposed Mitigation divided by Tier 2 Mitigation Required. TIER 2 ENCROACHMENTS BEING MITIGATED AT A 1:2.75 MITIGATION RATIO Co/ ,j)e,py 6R DP-- Az'3sy A proved NEW VEGETATED CORRIDOR(NVC) Or GA C✓ea, teer Services 1 — By Date _s-z-07 ro 2 N gc14OU.s FED RO tat SOD WETLAND-1 NO SQL /t, uti ti'l tea,/ v S PARCEL'V "°""�' 4,595.5 SF VV/ is INCH CMP NVC"A" w c 21,676 SF TWO 48 INCH • - cl cuw�RTS RESTORATION WETLAND-2 4 It Y' + a 1,039.0 SF 101NCH CCP ,/r^ \ gC-ALE Z bTREJ1M IOHw) �i o' o 0:',,,./.:2::::.:........... 0 25 a0 75 100 TOPS OF BANK ` i,,/ CI IlaiiEEMII BOTH SIDES /i, arm ;"'::;K:k DITCH +i, %/,i. . , .:{:j •'•:;::•::i:K:i::::a::. 10 INCH CMP \,//,/ �"' � `' : : {vs. �j/'jA,,,,, i ::.. •' WETLAND I /i//i .'"'ri:{: r;: i:'i: RESTORATION pI ;s s DITCH j FOOT /ri,,,///i/ ,w,' N 8,177.1 SF TOPS OF WETLAND-6 I WETLAND-3 BRIDGE BOTH SIDES 3,816.4 SF 1,520.9 SF w /����'''' �,. STREAM ' x 15 INCH CCP�� 1 , _ I EXISTING r `� ♦ d°cP' d:: -i ASPHALT �. '°" • NVC"B" m 0 APPROX PATH " 2,324 SF —I Z PATH NVC"D" + • 2,786 SF \ •d°' M 73 n , STREAM(010N) \O wawN000 TOPS OF BANK BOTH SIDES \�XI L.�P ,/• ��� • RESTORATION 0 M WETLAND-4 , '% 3,073.4 SF• N 3,198.4 SF ° °''%.'; •4 WETLAND-6 iS%.,, �� •,:16.4 SF i A ry N NVC"C" %.�1/4‘‘.4.4" o0c- g 5 NOTE: 1,054 S w ! UR EY AND WE ''ND ����''' SQR�N` �, ` BOUNDA-Y PERFORME AS '0■ •3RD. ORDER SURVEY A 1 IN EXISTING 3a INCH 10,000 ACCURACY BY ASPHALT PATH CMP N RUSSEL A. LAWRENCE, PLS 1 '! TAX LOT T `uoi • • PARCEL 9' Nommmm RECEIPT 2270 ARBOR DR NO: 94946 WEST LINN OR 97068 License Type: Environmental Review License Number: 07 000354 ER Name of Licensee: HARRIS STREAM SERVICES (ANDREW HI Expires: May 1, 2009 Memo: 1 CLOZt-N. CS-1-Th-t6 G/L Account Paid 0 $750.00 Paid: $750.00 (Check)4- �l29 Received by: 0--. Date: May 3, 2007 (Signature) APPENDIX "C" CWS NATURAL RESOURCE ASSEMENT REPORT Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report Natural Resources Assessment Report For the Tigard Business Center In Tigard, Oregon Prepared for Doug Fry 908 Deborah Rd. Newberg,OR 97132 I !i Prepared by Andrew Harris Harris Stream Services 2270 Arbor Drive West Linn, Oregon (503) 866-0901 harrisstreamservices(&comcast.net ■11•41'411111111•S- April 26,2007 (Revised) Tigard Business Center Hams Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Background Information 1 1.2. Contact Information 1 1.3. Purpose- 1 1.4. Methods: 1 1.5. Study Area Location 1 1.6. Study Area Description 2 1.7. Adjacent Land Uses 2 1.8. Off-Site Research 2 2.0 SENSITIVE AREA BOUNDARY DELINEATIONS 2 2.1. Regulatory Jurisdiction 2 2.2. Wetlands 2 2.3. Streams 3 2.4. Springs 3 2.5. Natural Lakes, Ponds, or In-Stream Impoundments 3 3.0 VEGETATED CORRIDORS 3 3.1. Vegetated Corridor Width Determination 3 3.2. Plant Community Types 3 4.0 VEGETATED CORRIDOR CONDITION 4 4.1. Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment 4 4.2. Photos of Site Conditions 4 5.0 SENSATIVE AREA REQUIREMENTS 4 5.1. DSL/ACOE Permits 4 5.2. Wetland and Waterway Mitigation 4 5.3. Wetland and Waterway Function Assessment 5 6.0 VEGETATED CORRIDOR REQUIREMENTS 6 6.1. Impacts Permitted by DSL and ACOE 6 6.2. Proposed Vegetated Corridor Mitigation 6 7.0 TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 6 7.1. Submittal Requirements 7 7.2. Criteria for Acceptance 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY 10 Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background Information Harris Stream Services(HSS)performed the natural resource assessments on the subject property as a service to the property owner in preparation for the development of the proposed Tigard Business Center(TBC). The primary investigator was Andrew Harris,principal. 1.2. Contact Information Owner: Douglas A. Fry 908 Deborah Road Newburg, OR 97132 (503) 538-1380 Owner's Representative: Brad Pihas Tenant Advisory Group 22151 SW 55th. Ave., Suite 100 Tualatin, OR. 97062 Authorized Agent: Andrew Harris,CPESC &CPSWQ Harris Stream Services(HSS) 2270 Arbor Drive West Linn,OR. 97068 1.3. Purpose: The purpose of this Natural Resources Assessment Report is to document the location, width, area, and condition of sensitive areas and vegetated corridors on the study area. There are no steep slopes on the subject property. 1.4. Methods: The natural resource assessments in the study area were made using the"Standard Site Assessment Method" in Appendix"C"Natural Resource Assessments of the March 2004 Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management by Clean Water Services. 1.5. Study Area Location Site Address: 1262 SW 70th. Avenue, Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. Geographic Location: NW corner of Section 01 in Township 2 South, Range 1 West. Legal Description: Tax Map 2S 101 AB, Tax Lots 00100&00300. Geographic Position: Latitude: 45°26' 00"N , Longitude: 122°45' 00" W Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 1 of 10 1.6. Study Area Description The geographic position of the study area is in the upper reaches of the Red Rock Creek drainage basin. The site slopes gently down from east to west. A perennial stream (as identified on Clean Water Services stream maps and verified on site) flows east to west across on the South side of Dartmouth Street from 70th Avenue and 72"d. The study area is undeveloped private property that contains forested, scrub/shrub, and prairie meadow plant communities. The assessment investigation extended 200 feet onto adjoining property when applicable. 1.7. Adjacent Land Uses The land uses adjacent to the property include lightly developed residential on the north side of Dartmouth Street and on the south side of the property, undeveloped commercial property on the west side of 72"d. Avenue and high density commercial development on the east side of the undeveloped 70th. Avenue. There is also high density commercial development to the northwest across the intersection of Dartmouth Street and 72nd. Avenue. 1.8. Off-Site Research Prior to doing field work, information was reviewed to discover where potential wetlands or waters of the state may exist on the study area. This review included the Clean Water Services prescreen maps, U.S.G.S. topographic map,the Soil Conservation Service(SCS) County soil survey maps, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS)National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) maps,the local jurisdiction's Local Wetland Inventory (LWI), City of Tigard Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan,and aerial photography. 2.0 SENSITIVE AREA BOUNDARY DELINEATIONS 2.1. Regulatory Jurisdiction DSL and ACOE have accepted regulatory jurisdiction over the wetland and waterways in the study area. Wetlands and waterways in the study area are therefore regulated in the State of Oregon by the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL)under the"Removal-Fill Law" (ORS 196.800-196.990)and by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(COE)through section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 2.2. Wetlands Three wetlands were found on the study area. A wetland delineation was performed in the study area by Harris Stream Services. HSS submitted the Wetland Delineation Report to the Oregon Department of State Land September 6, 2006 and received a Letter of Concurrence December 27, 2006. The DSL wetland delineation file number is WD 2006-0550 Wetlands are shown on the Wetland Delineation Map included in APPENDIX"A". Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 2 of 10 2.3. Streams A perennial stream was found in the study area. The stream is a tributary of Red Rock Creek. Red Rock Creek is a tributary of Fanno Creek. Clean Water Services prescreening maps identify the stream as perennial. The stream is 619 feet long and flows east to west on the South side Dartmouth Street from 70th to 72nd. Avenue. The bankfull (ordinary high water) channel width is 3 to 4 feet and mean channel depth is approximately one foot. Channel incision has created a top of bank(TOB)depth on 3 to 5 feet and average TOB width of 10 to 12 feet. The stream is shown on the Wetland Delineation Map included in APPENDIX"A". 2.4. Springs The investigator found no evidence of springs on the subject property. 2.5. Natural Lakes, Ponds, or In-Stream Impoundments The investigator found no evidence of natural lakes,ponds,or impoundments on the subject property. 3.0 VEGETATED CORRIDORS 3.1. Vegetated Corridor Width Determination The vegetated corridor width was determined to be 50 feet measured from the stream top of bank because is perennial and 50 feet measured from the boundary of wetland# 3 because it is hydrologically connected to the stream. The vegetated corridor width was determined to be 25 feet measured from the boundary of wetlands#1 and#2 because they are hydrologically isolated. The existing slope adjacent to stream wetland areas is 15%. Existing site topography is shown on the Wetland Delineation Map. Vegetated corridor boundaries are shown on the Vegetated Corridor Map included in APPENDIX"A". 3.2. Plant Community Types Plant communities were identified and characterized in the study area in compliance with CWS design standards. Plant community boundaries are shown on the Vegetated Corridor Map included in APPENDIX "A". " Plant community data is in TABLE 4 is included in APPENDIX "D". Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 3 of 10 4.0 VEGETATED CORRIDOR CONDITION 4.1. Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment The results of the vegetated corridor condition assessment are in TABLE 4 included in APPENDIX"D" Plant communities were evaluated to determine its condition as required in the standards in Chapter 3, Table 3.2(page 20)of CWS design standards. Vegetated corridor condition determination data is in TABLE 5 included in APPENDIX"D". 4.2. Photos of Site Conditions Photos of representative site conditions for the Tigard Business Cent and Hiteon Creek are included in APPENDIX"F". 5.0 SENSATIVE AREA REQUIREMENTS 5.1. DSL/ACOE Permits A joint fill-removal permit application has been submitted to DSL and ACOE for impacts to sensitive areas in the study area. The DSL permit application number is DSL 37247-FP. The AOCE permit application number is ACOE 2006 00629. The DSL and ACOE permit decisions are scheduled for March 29,2007. Proposed impacts include filling of wetlands#1, wetland#2,part of Wetland#3, and the Red Rock Creek tributary. 5.2. Wetland and Waterway Mitigation The project proposes protection for most of wetland#3 (west end of site), enhancement of wetland vegetation and hydrology, restoration of adjacent wetland area, restoration of existing vegetated corridor,and creation of new vegetated corridor area to good condition per CWS design standards. Impacts to steams, wetlands, and vegetated corridors are mitigated as required to comply with standards set worth by DSL,ACOE, and CWS. Proposed on-site measures for stream, wetland, and vegetated corridor restoration and enhancement measures are shown on the TBC Wetland Mitigation and Restoration Plan included in APPENDIX"B". A series of TABLES providing data on existing conditions,proposed impacts,and proposed mitigation for the Tigard Business Center is included in APPENDIX Proposed off-site measures for stream, wetland, and vegetated corridor mitigation are shown on the Hiteon Creek drawings included in APPENDIX "C". A series of TABLES providing data on existing conditions,proposed impacts, and proposed mitigation at Hiteon Creek is included in APPENDIX"E". Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 4 of 10 5.3. Wetland and Waterway Function Assessment HSS performed function assessments and comparisons for existing wetlands and waterways and proposed wetland and waterway restoration for the Tigard Business Center and Hiteon Creek projects. Wetlands. The hydrogeomorphic (HGM)referenced-based method was used to assess wetland function capacity. Five wetland function assessments were done. They include: ✓ TBC Wetland#1 —existing conditions ✓ TBC Wetland#2—existing conditions ✓ TBC Wetland# 3 —existing conditions ✓ TBC Wetland#3 —proposed restoration conditions ✓ Hiteon Wetland—proposed restoration conditions The wetland function assessment forms are in APPENDIX"G". A wetland function comparison chart is provided in TABLE 1,APPENDIX"G". The wetland function assessments show that with the exception of"nitrogen removal", the restoration wetlands proposed for mitigation provide a considerable net gain for all wetland functions over impacted wetlands# 1 and#2. The proposed mitigation wetlands more than satisfy the requirement to replace lost functions and lost wetland area. Waterways. The Stream Visual Assessment Protocol (SVAP)was used to assess stream function capacity. Three stream function assessments were done. They include: ✓ TBC Red Rock Tributary—existing conditions ✓ TBC Red Rock Creek Tributary—restoration conditions ✓ Hiteon Creek—restoration conditions The stream function assessment forms are in Appendix"G". A stream function comparison chart is provided in TABLE 2,Appendix"G". The stream function assessments show that stream restoration proposed for mitigation provides a very considerable net gain for all stream functions over the existing Red Rock Creek tributary. The proposed mitigation streams more than satisfy the requirement to replace lost functions and lost wetland area. Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 5 of 10 6.0 VEGETATED CORRIDOR REQUIREMENTS 6.1. Impacts Permitted by DSL and ACOE Vegetated corridors impacted resulting from wetland and waterway impacts permitted by DSL/ACOE permits will be mitigated at the Hiteon Creek restoration project. The applicant proposes to mitigate impacted vegetated corridor area with newly created vegetated corridors and restored existing vegetated corridors in Section One of the Hiteon Creek restoration site. 6.2. Proposed Vegetated Corridor Mitigation Proposed vegetated corridor mitigation planting is shown on the Hiteon Creek Planting Plan and the Hiteon Creek New vegetated Corridor Map included in APPENDIX"C". A tabulation of the new vegetated corridor areas is in Hiteon Creek TABLE 4 included in APPENDIX"E". PLEASE NOTE that the new wetland restoration boundary adjacent to wetland-6 has been adjusted so that the 50-foot vegetated corridor is within the park property line. 7.0 TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS The TBC project applicant is includes an alternatives analysis because the proposed site plan does not meet the vegetated corridor standards outlined in Sections 3.02.4. A"Tier 2" alternatives analysis is included because the project applicant proposes encroachment greater than 40%of the length by 30%of the width into a degraded vegetated corridor. The existing vegetated is in degraded conditions as defined by CWS standards. There are two proposed vegetated corridor encroachments. The first vegetated corridor encroachment is along the East side of wetland#3. The existing perimeter of wetland#3 is 548 lineal feet. This includes all of wetland#3 within the TBC site and City of Tigard right-of-way. The length of the first proposed vegetated corridor encroachment 94 lineal feet. This is 17%the existing wetland perimeter. The proposed width of encroachment varies from 38 feet(76%of 50)at one point to 13 feet(26%of 50). The second vegetated corridor encroachment is for a created wetland area along the South side of wetland#3. The created wetland is proposed to satisfy recommendations by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to reduce stream velocity,stream energy,encourage infiltration, provide vegetative filtration of pollutants, and provide shade. The proposed vegetated corridor width adjacent to the created wetland is a minimum of 50 feet. All proposed vegetated corridors on the TBC site will be restored to"Good"condition with riparian forest planting in compliance with CWS Landscape Requirements. Please note that the vegetated corridor for wetland#3 includes private property to the south and public right-of-way for 72nd Avenue to the west. Vegetated corridor restoration is not proposed within the public right-of-way because the City of Tigard is currently working on a street improvement project will propose encroachment into the wetland and vegetated corridor along 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street. Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 6 of 10 7.1. Submittal Requirements a. Natural Resource Assessment: This natural resource assessment was performed pursuant to Appendix C: Natural Resource Assessment and Section 3.02 of CWS standards. b. Site Plan: Site plans showing encroachment areas,encroachment calculations, and a mitigation plan are provided in this report. c. Need: The need for encroachment is described below: The project applicant proposes a retail development and street improvements on Dartmouth Street. The retail development will provide a public, social,and economic benefit by fulfilling the retail development need of the community as defined,allowed,and regulated by the City of Tigard,Clean Water Services, state,and federal development and resource protection regulations. The City of Tigard has a need and is requiring the property owner to improve Dartmouth Street to provide for public safety. ✓ The City of Tigard requires Right-of-Way(ROW)dedication and side walk improvements on Dartmouth Street that would impact most if not all of Red Rock Creek on the site. ✓ Dartmouth Street Improvements provide a public safety benefit identified in City of Tigard municipal code Chapter 18.620—Tigard Triangle Design Standards ✓ The Tigard Business Center(TBC)development proposes to provide the ROW and side walk satisfying these standards. ✓ There is no cost to the public resulting from the proposed TBC development. ✓ The"Tigard Triangle Design Standards" is adopted into the City of Tigard municipal code (Chapter 18.620)The purpose of the design standards are to for"creating a high-quality mixed use employ area,providing convenient and pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle,and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area." ✓ The Triangle standards provide a future street design cross-section for Dartmouth Street. The City Code requires all new development to provide ROW dedication and partial improvements conforming to the standards. The City Code also requires that the Triangle standards shall govern over all conflicting City codes. ✓ The proposed TBC site plan shows the ROW and side walk improvement required by the City of Tigard. To build the required street improvement in the new Dartmouth ROW, fill slopes would cause the filling of most if not all the length of the Red Rock tributary on the site. This would be the case even without the TBC development. ✓ Therefore,the City requirements for Dartmouth Street improvements create the need for impacts to the stream. d. Function Assessment: A function assessment is included in this report. Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 7 of 10 7.2. Criteria for Acceptance a. Mitigation Ratios: Vegetated corridor mitigation by enhancement of new and existing degraded areas is provided at mitigation ratios that exceed 1:1 as required by CWS. b. Function Protection: The function assessment included in this report verifies that sensitive areas and vegetated corridors functions are protection and enhancement. c. Enhancement: Remaining vegetated corridor and mitigation vegetated corridors are being enhanced to"good"condition per Table 3.2 and Appendix"D"Landscape requirements of CWS design standards. d. Proposed Plans: This report includes proposed mitigation plans suitable for District approval. e. Minimizing Encroachment: A narrative with exhibits prepared by the applicant is included in appendix"H". The narrative and exhibits show that every possible effort is being made to minimize encroachment into the vegetated corridor of wetland#3. f. Avoidance: A narrative and exhibits explains the numerous regulatory constraints placed on the development of this property and demonstrates that there is no practicable alternative to the requested development further avoid disturbance of sensitive areas or vegetated corridors. All practical alternative development locations have been considered as described below: ✓ The applicant is proposing to avoid impacts to Wetland#3 at the west end of the subject property by locating buildings and parking outside the wetland boundary. ✓ The stream impacts are unavoidable due to City of Tigard requirements for the widening of Dartmouth Street. ✓ Wetland# 1 and#2 are very small and are located in the center of the site. The alternative site design that would avoid impacts would be a development located at the south end of the site. This alternative severely restricts access to the development,reasonable use of the property,and design options. ✓ Another alternative is to move the stream to an alignment south of the required street improvements. Assuming a width of 10 feet for a bankfull channel and flood prone area and a width of 50 foot on each side of the stream for the vegetated corridors required by Clean Water Services,the new stream alignment would need a total width of 110 feet. This would take 64,570 square feet(1.48 acres)from the area on the site.This is 35%of the total site area of 4.21 acres. This design alternative is also not viable. These avoidance criteria are accepted by DSL and ACOE as they apply to steams and wetlands. An alternative design showing no vegetated corridor impacts is included at the end of APPENDIX"B". Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 8 of 10 g. Public Benefit: The public benefits are described below: On-Site(Tigard Business Center) ✓ Increase runoff water storage and delay by diverting stream flow and on-site treated runoff existing and created wetland areas. ✓ Improve sediment stabilization and phosphorous retention by ✓ Improve thermoregulation by restoring vegetated corridors with native riparian forest vegetation. ✓ Improve Vegetative Primary Production by increasing the diversity and density of plant species and vegetative forms(trees, shrubs,and herbaceous). ✓ Improve support of native wetland and riparian plant communities by removing non-native species and by planting native species. ✓ Improve wildlife habitat for reptiles, amphibians, and bird species by providing seasonal inundation,herbaceous vegetation in flooded areas,woody plant species, hummocks, and local depressions. ✓ Improve Aesthetics by removing non-native vegetation, restoring native plant communities, and increasing wildlife habitat. Off-site (Hiteon Creek) ✓ Restore channel equilibrium and stability to sections of Hiteon Creek. ✓ Restore natural local water table elevation to restore wetland hydrology to riparian areas, potential wetland restoration areas and especially areas with hydric soils. ✓ Restore Natural Flood Storage Capacity while Preventing Flood Damage by restoring the bankfull stream channel connection to abandoned flood prone areas and by restoring channel bankfull flooding to adjacent isolated wetlands. ✓ Restore Native Riparian and Wetland Plant Communities. Restore Fish Habitat by providing riffle/pool habitat for cutthroat trout below the five-culvert foot path crossing and by providing fish passage at grade control structures. ✓ Restore Stream Water Quality Treatment by restoring and adding vegetated flood prone areas and riparian wetlands to filter stream flows during bankfull flooding events,by providing diversions of storm water outfalls to vegetated swales and flood prone areas, by improving macro-invertibrate species richness and diversity,by lowering water temperature toward standards set by the Oregon DEQ, and by increasing vegetative filtration of suspended sediment and associated pollutants. ✓ Reduce Park Maintenance Cost by establishing self-sustainable native riparian plant communities, wetland communities, and upland forest communities in area containing mowed grass areas. h. Buildable Lot: The application of vegetated corridor regulations on the property would substantially deduce lot size and imposed restriction on site access. These restrictions would severely restrict the ability to locate a development of the property and meet City land use regulations. The result would make the property not builbable. The vegetated corridors have therefore been reduced to assure the lot ii buildable while protecting vegetated corridors to the maximum extent practicable. Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 9 of 10 • BIBLIOGRAPHY Cooke, Sarah S. 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plans of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, WA. Cowardin,L.M.,V. Carter, F.C.Golet,and E.T.LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,Washington, D.C. Hitchcock, C. Leo,A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, WA. Pojar,Jim and A. MacKinon. 1994. Revised Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. B.C. Ministry of Forestry and Lone Pine Publishing,Vancouver,B.C.,Canada Reed, Porter B.Jr. 1988.National List of Plant Species that occur in Wetlands: National Summary (including Region 9, 1993 supplement). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(24). Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 10 of 10 APPENDIX A NATURAL RESOURCE MAPS WETLAND DELINEATION MAP VEGETATED CORRRIDOR MAP Tigard Business Center Harris Stream Services Natural Resources Assessment Report 7 • _g �- - '_� _ i. i•. + ' .. r• •^L_!.' ',., ( r. .r a. - ` Irp '.s :. ��- `� -^i' e _ '.t' .'•t• •' ', 4 t j ij .:, " :.\, -:.� -®. 15" ST � — t . ' T�. t` . . . fF• !' f � I +�r ' GB" SAN--L ff •I`•�. I' 8� SAN •. � . ...z�. .., ./ • �,'' r' r.. •_. s_. (py ..i '. .-a{ r li .� {, \ .s s S ,, ,u q, y •-'' \ '-�. .S r�.. ,,: �.: .{ O .. ... ~;• 8" SAN_ "• -'� !!,, ^`r"1-:,/'-"f; r7 , _ y \ . s ` �' s-All f•! (�.. •j_ •4. h'• c , :..t.• i �. �; s y .� .` •l ea ,r. `i. 1'. .t i S` a x� �s .; � t. '� DARTMOUTH ,- ',,. .,.. .. STREET, l is`. s •, _ t ,. .�. \' i }-E7 a7 e. i' \ 7{Ui �� r2 \ .. . . .. i!s!" i- �`:0• � 1 `t: s"3^r , r m a 1�'!;�fiif ii`"I—'•!/',- ''1 1j -- ,..�..� i!/!.sue r,�l Blii �3/>;.f f ! - . �• ( �, /r. 1••'�P,�P�i!!n. i / ` I ,.�^'I !!.7!°rr«r-«iii. lS�� ,- f rteZ//7,-, //%ll�fliissi f�!";;.-1.;1;;;;;'4'41"/'.6",e74.97:�' 6 �f' �7 f•°/} \ �1 . f !/. , � !/ 71!70 f1!�f� , Al V /'f` , i r ;' i / v �x 1 ) I 1 o I 2A. ST ,, J °1 RE♦S R[1CK �REEIi(TTA ) s t i r r'l ( / r +f I `lit ; .1.,..,_-_,„ t, r' 619 LI$EAI'FEES J II , ; I ` S j) / r l',',,I I .• ( t / 6256'SF r r f r ' f I I ' ' TlAND 2 1 ) VJETL9ND '1 I / STREAM (DITCH) t , `r .sip--1.13 ''- x5P=7 s' # 0.114 ACRES. , 1-- + 1 J' i 1 , 5 9 9,F ! r 02 5F f` i W 682.35 SF, t 0.02 ACRES ,,,I., m ,. ,. 1 1 j / i 1 1 f f .10 ACRES. SP' 0.�, CR S� e l') I / ; 5 1 ; / ; r// 1' Ir 3 ! r' 1 ( I 1 / f / / i , , , r • I /N' ';f t. . r' ' r+,,, , l t' J , ,I j ; +, i ` / •, / r , i E ? ' , I I•t ' p' i _g l ,/ !'r .` , ;°, ' /SP!6 f !' r S4-3! 'r i 1 I ROW UNDEVELOPED •Ii. - i ! xj j a, ep_in 1, J ' 1 '1 i t`r ,I 1 I i' il x,/ rr . c , I ' 1} J ,. ( , f' Ilp ' /' / r �+ I �- 1 ,j` 16' // , , . , j 1 / 1 (' f , I \ " / a �' 3` ( i j^ 4 5 I /• , / / (' ., i , ,° /r !r, ! , ' , f' r' / f / /,' ' a WETLAND #3 (TOTAL) trr J I.//• _/•,,,y!" '' .f- „ t ` ry ., 1` ' ., ,' ! 1 t i 1 r ' •' / / ', l'^{ Ilk, O 6,717 SF, 10.15 ACRES 1 d / / / / ! r ,% j' l /`,x , ' /' , , IJI. ,-'J, / ,, �/ ./ .._ J/'/• // i /'> / I 1 t� J.': /1 !J t f ,' /' /i' , 'J f/ I / .' .1� STUDY AREA �, ,✓ /'- f /'j /1` /'f ,' f %, I / c. /.' ,,, Q I �;/ ti '<e(V/' I J r / / ,I,I c:i n■ I I HOU/ } I I I I ; \ ,II 1 1 co \ c l \ \ I, .:'-'1::::: ' . , .-' ,—, N Spy ELMHURST STREET !, " - - - f_, 3 ■o I I I 5 PRIpP REGISTERED ,��\��J, PROFESSIONAL / y'a ACGIl1ACY STA /H ALF\j1 'ND SURVEYOR Sm PLAN SCALE: 1"= 40' TV2ACfrN 0 0 WAS N���/ RODU RUSSELL A. LAWRENCE 1570• o•.UM/. BE _ JOB NUMBER _ CITY OF TIGARD DA 08/30/06 06914 s".- DESIGNED BLS A , $ A R SERVICES RED ROCK CREEK WETLANDS DELINEATION MAP SHEET NAME MODEL DRAWN CGC ..,••-y, CHECKED BDL Q c' SCALE •� • Restoring TIGARD BUSINESS CENTER AS SHOWN SHEET C2 of a000m.rn ov -_..,--.• n.a ov• .00 n. _. - City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 ' j June 28, 2007 ':T I GARD Douglas Fry 22151 SW 55th Avenue Tualatin OR, 97062 RE: Completeness Review for Red Rock Retail Center (Case File No. SDR2007-00004) Dear Mr. Fry: The City has received your application for Planned Development and Site Development Review (SDR2007-00004) to create a new retail center on a 4.09-acre site in the Tigard Triangle at 12625 SW 70th Avenue. The application was received on May 31, 2007. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before the application can be deemed complete: 1. Proof of Ownership. Please submit a deed or proof of ownership for the subject parcels. 2. Pre-Application Conference Notes. Your application includes engineering notes but not planning notes. Please include both sets in your revised application. 3. Planned Development. The majority of your site has a planned development (PD) overlay zoning designation. Therefore,your narrative must address the applicable standards of the Planned Development Chapter (as amended October 24,2006).Your narrative does not address these standards. However, I have a reviewed a subsequent draft from Anderson Dabrowski Architects which does address some of the concept plan standards but none of the applicable detailed plan standards. As we have previously discussed,because of changes in CWS development standards and an ambiguous market position,you decided to apply for both a concept plan for the overall development and a detailed plan for the public facilities and sensitive areas located on site. Please revise your narrative to fully address the specific applicable standards in TDC Section 18.350 for Planned Developments. 4. Fees. The application states that you are applying for a Planned Development Review and Site Development Review. Conceptual Plan Review is $6,980;Detailed Plan Review is $4,314 under $1,000,000, or$5,662 + $6/each $10,000 over$1 million.Your application did not include construction costs for the project. Therefore, the fees you paid may need to be revised based on the projected project construction costs for the detailed portion of the project (public facilities and sensitive areas). A separate detailed plan, for review by the Planning Commission, and fees for the construction costs of proposed site buildings and improvements,would be expected at a later time. In addition, Sensitive Lands Review and fees of$1,178.50 ($2,357 x .5) are required for the drainageway located on your site. Phone: 503.639.4171 • Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 5. Narrative. Your narrative includes some of the relevant standards but does not provide findings of fact or conclusions as to whether the standards have been met. Please revise your narrative to include findings for all of the applicable standards for your proposal. Pre-Application notes outline the applicable standards. In addition to the Planned Development standards (18.350) above, you must include in your narrative findings for an impact study (18.390), and findings for the following chapters: Sensitive Lands (18.775) included in the Sensitive Lands Permit Application submitted by Andrew Harris,Tree Removal (18.790),Visual Clearance Areas (18.790), and Streets and Utility Improvement Standards (18.810). 6. Unified Application. Please collate all materials in your application into one bound document and submit 3 copies for our review. Once the information above is submitted, staff will review the additional materials to determine if the application is substantially complete. Once the application has been deemed complete, a hearing before the Planning Commission will be scheduled. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application,please don't hesitate to contact me at 639-4171,extension 2434. Sincerely, Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: SDR2007-00004 Land Use File 2 eEn RatKcewesk /w774I2. t7rt LAND USE APPLICATION Project: 50/i 2.00 7- C y /PPR 2 7 tf Date: 61 COMPLETENESS REVIEW COMPLETE INCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: Deed/Title/Proof of Ownership ❑ Neighborhood Mtg.Affidavits, Minutes, List of Attendees ❑ Impact Study(18.390) USA Service Provider Letter .�+ Construction Cost Estimate ❑ Envelopes with Postage(Verify Count) --H" #Sets Of Application Materials/Plans-"Paper Copies" ❑ Pre Application Conference Notes #Sets Of Application Materials/Plans-"CD's" &''''6-av7Tl-'L1, PROJECT STATISTICS: ❑ Building Footprint Size ❑ %of Landscaping On Site ❑ %of Building Impervious Surface On Site ❑ Lot Square Footage PLANS DIMENSIONED: ❑ Building Footprint ❑ Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible&Bike Parking)❑ Truck Loading Space Where Applicable ❑ Building Height ❑ Access Approach and Aisle ❑ Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: 2' Vicinity Map ❑ Architectural Plan ❑ Tree Inventory J' Existing Conditions Plan ❑ Landscape Plan I Site Plan ❑ Lighting Plan TREE PLAN I MITIGATION PLAN: ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ra. 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) ❑ 18.340(Directors Interpretation) ❑ 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) ❑ 18.780(Signs) ❑ 18.350(Planned Development) ❑ 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) ❑ 18.360(Site Development Review) ❑ 18.715(Density Computations) ❑ 18.790(Tree Removal) ❑ 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) ❑ 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) ❑ 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ❑ 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) Q 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) ❑ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) ❑ 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.740(Historic Oveday) ❑ 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) 0 18.430(Subdivisions) ❑ 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) ❑ 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) ❑ 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) ❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) ❑ 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) ❑ 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: /47/p4.-#Z-: on% ; 5c.,e #- S L.( Fm' fr.".t 44-vutew Ai fsr►sie.va i0+- L.d-" # 71C ef fear I:\curpin\masters\forms-revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 6-Jun-07 CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FILE NOS.: FILE NAME: CITY OFFICES _LONG RANGE PLANNING/Ron Bunch,Planning Mgr. _CURRENT PLANNINGfTodd Prager/Arborist _POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer _BUILDING DIVISION/Mark(residential)Brian(commercial) _ENGINEERING DEPT./Kim McMillan,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineer _HEARINGS OFFICER(+2 sets) _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder _PUBLIC WORKS/Rob Murchison,Project Engineer _PLANNING COMMISSION/GRETCHEN(+12 sets) _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs._PUBLIC WORKS/Steve Martin,Parks Supervisor _FILE/REFERENCE(+2 sets) CODE ENFORCEMENT/Christine Darnell,Code Compliance Specialist(DCA) SPECIAL DISTRICTS _ TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.•_ TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE* _ TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* _ CLEAN WATER SERVICES• Planning Manager North Division Administrative Office Marvin Spiering/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road John K.Dalby,Deputy Fire Marshall PO Box 745 155 N.First Avenue Beaverton,OR 97006 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 Beaverton,OR 97005-1152 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON * _ CITY OF TUALATIN * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager Devin Simmons,Habitat Biologist Melinda Wood(WLUN Form Required) Steven Sparks,Dev Svcs Manager 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue North Willamette Watershed District 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 — PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road Salem,OR 97301-1279 Beaverton,OR 97076 Portland,OR 97231 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&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 17160 SW Upper Boones Fry.Rd. _ Joanna Mensher,Data Resource Center(ZCA) _US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97224 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. Kathryn Harris(Maps&cws Letter Only) _ Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPNZOA) Mara Ulloa(Comp.Plan Amendments&Measure 37) Routing CENWP-OP-G _CITY OF KING CITY * _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946 City Manager _ C.D.Manager,Growth Management Services Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 15300 SW 116th Avenue King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY _ OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY)Powedines In Area) _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION(Monopole Towers) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,Planning 155 N.First Avenue _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * Routing TTRC–Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 _Steve Conway(General Apps.) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _Planning Division(zcA)MS14 _ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 #E _Brent Curtis(CPA) _CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify tor Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _Development Review Coordinator _Doria Mateja(zcA)Ms 14 Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section(vacations) _Sr.CartOgrapher,CPArzCA)ms14 1900 SW 4th Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,SurveyorizCAivS 15 Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 OR.PARKS&REC.DEPT. _WA.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A* _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION STATE HISTORIC Dave Austin(WCCCA)"911"(monopole ro..ersl Sam Hunaidi,Assistant District Manager (Notify if ODOT RJR-Hwy.Crossings Only Access to Land) PRESERVATION OFFICE PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road Dave Lanning,Sr Crossing Safety Specialist (Notify if Property Has HO Overlay) Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221 555-13th Street,NE,Suite 3 725 Sumner Street NE,Suite C Salem,OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES —PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Bruce Carswell,President&General Manager 1200 Howard Drive SE Albany,OR 97322-3336 _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _COMCAST CABLE CORP. — TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations Only) Gerald Backhaus(See WO to,Aeeeconla<u (If Project is Within Y..Mile ofa Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 —PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC —NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY —VERIZON (MC030533) _QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Ken Gutierrez,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. Brandon Kahler,Engineering Lynn Smith,Eng.ROW Mgr. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue 20575 Vonnewmann Dr.,Suite 150 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland.OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97075-1100 Portland,OR 97219 _TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J _BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC. Teri Brady,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist,Demographics Alex Silantiev ,se.M1wpt«nr.aconuco Brian Every Iwo Ea.wwaaw, 6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg.12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Beaverton,OR 97008 Tigard,OR 97223-4203 * INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h:\patty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED. 6-Jun-07) (Also update:is\curpin\setup\labels\annexations\annexation_utilities and franchises.doc,mailing labels 8 auto text when updating this documer City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 August 27,2007 II • Douglas Fry, Owner Anderson Debrowski Architects,LLC ^j'I G A R D 22151 SW 55th Avenue Attn:John Anderson Tualatin, OR 97062 1430 SE 3'd Avenue,Suite 200 Portland,OR 97214 RE: Completeness Review for Red Rock Retail Center(Case File No.SDR2007-00004) Dear Mr.Fry: The City of Tigard received your revised submittal on August 1,2007. The revised application is a significant improvement over the initial submittal. There are,however,a Urge number of items that need to be addressed. Please remember your application will be reviewed not only by staff but by the Planning Commission also. The Commission's expectations as well as those of staff are that the application provides conclusive evidence and findings that clearly show the application meets city code standards. Unfortunately,in some areas,that has not yet been done. While it is recognized that some of the following will require tedious work,it is especially important for you and your team to have an application that the Commission will find approvable. It is so that you can get approval that the following application improvements are expected prior to the application being deemed complete. First,the new submittal did not provide some of the material requested in Gary Pagenstecher's letter of June 28,2007: Deed or proof of ownership, a complete distinction between concept and detailed plans, fees,and findings. In addition the following is necessary: 1. The Planning Commission is adamant that the concept plan and detailed plans be addressed separately. These sections must be addressed completely in separate parts of the document. Do not reference other exhibits in other parts of the application. The Planning Commission will act on the two plans separately and wants findings for each to stand alone. In every case where there is a standard,provide facts,findings and conclusions as to how the standard is met. Do not respond that the applicant will comply with the requirements of a section. The response needs facts,findings and conclusions. 2. The application indicates a partially phased development but is not specific to the phases. If there are phases, be specific. 3. It is indicated that the elevations are conceptual in nature. You will be expected to follow the elevations provided in the detailed plan. At that point it can not be conceptual. A Planning Commission acceptance of elevation rendering can not be changed without going back to them for approval. 4. The application needs to specifically respond to the "Tool Box" for the Planning Commission's benefit. 5. Page 11 is an example of referring to a drawing. Explain with facts,findings and conclusions and then reference the drawing. The Commission will not thumb back and forth. Your present approach makes it easier for dissenters to move against approval. Pages that follow make this same error. Correct all such references with facts,findings and conclusions. Page 1 of 2 Phone: 503.639.4171 • Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 6. The detailed plan section 18.360 requires a methodical response to each criterion. Again,do not respond with just that you will meet the requirements. 7. The schedule is unrealistic and should be amended. 8. Section 18.350.060.0 must have responses to the parts that apply to commercial development. 9. The response to buffering and screening to "see landscape plan" is one of a multitude of instances that refers to a plan. Make special note how the development will meet buffering requirements and matrix for existing residential uses. Respond to all criteria. 10. The response to section 18.350.070.3 is not complete. Realize that the Planning Commission needs to be shown how you either meet the standards or how you are justifying modifications. 11. Respond in detail to all applicable standards of section 18.520;especially those of the MUE zone. Note-that your resent submittal which responds to 18.520.060 applies to the GC zone,not your project) 12. Section . responses need facts,findings and conclusions;not just reference to drawings. 13. Your proposal says all uses will be retail. Are you sure? Once the Planning Commission approves,you may not have flexibility to change tenants unless they have been planned for such uses as office, restaurants,etc. 14. Respond to Tree Removal Plan with description of facts,findings and conclusions;not just a reference that a drawing demonstrates compliance. 15. Engineering Issues: These reiterate some of the same issues as the other responses to code sections. See public Facility Plan attachment. Finally,unless you can show the Planning Commission that the location of"Building C' is preferable,you may find the Commission requiring moving"Building C' to front on 70th Avenue. I realize that the list above requires a tedious and time consuming response but the easier you can make it for the Planning Commission to definitively find the standards are met minimizes your risk of being sent back for revisions or disapproval. S ' Richard H Bewersdorff Planning Manager Attachment c: SDR2007-00004 Land use file Page 2 of 2 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: Red Rock Creek Retail COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 8/22/07 GRADING ❑ Existing and proposed contours shown. 1 Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? ❑ Adjacent parcel grades shown. Z Geotech study submitted? STREET ISSUES Right-of-way clearly shown. Provide 24 x 36 drawings for review. ❑ Centerline of street(s) clearly shown. ❑ Street names) shown. ❑ Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. 70th Avenue is to be constructed to full width, not half-width as shown. Revise plans. This issue has been discussed at every meeting between the applicant and City staff. Elmhurst is to be constructed to 3/4 width, which requires a minimum of 24 feet of paving ❑ Street profiles shown. ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo on adjacent parcel(s), etc. ❑ Traffic Impact and/or Access Report Not included. This is required for completeness. We will not accept a resubmittal with some of the incompleteness items while waiting for others to be done. The applicant shall wait until all items are ready to submit and turn them in together, replacing them in the packets or providing entirely new packets. ❑ Street grades compliant? ❑ Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate? 1 1 Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width appropriate? ❑ Other: 1) 18.705, 2) Sidewalk along Dartmouth, 3) 1) Narrative must address 18.705 with facts, Typical sections for Half-street Improvements findings and conclusions. 2) The sidewalk along Dartmouth shall be constructed at ultimate location. Revise plans. 3) The typical sections appear to be incorrect, check dimension strings. SANITARY SEWER ISSUES ❑ Existing/proposed lines shown. Narrative must address 18.810.090 with facts, findings and conclusions. It is not acceptable to refer to drawings so that staff and the Planning Commission must hunt down the information. ❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? WATER ISSUES REVISED. 08/22/07 ❑ Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? ❑ Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? ❑ Proposed meter location and size shown? ❑ Proposed fire protection system shown? STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES ❑ Existing/proposed lines shown? Narrative must address 18.810.100 with facts, findings and conclusions. Do not refer only to drawings. The supporting evidence must be presented in the narrative and then you can direct staff and Planning Commission to the visual representation. ❑ ' Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention A stormwater report with water quality and provided? quantity calculations is required for completeness. ® Water quality/detention facility shown on plans? ❑ Area for facility match requirements from calcs? ❑ Facility shown outside any wetland buffer? ❑ Storm stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? The submittal is hereby deemed n COMPLETE ® INCOMPLETE By: Cdr �� Date: 8/22/07 REVISED: 08/22/07 yr �jJV!,��z 7�1,,, .. y ,_ d,_ -_-`"' / . S° _ r AA-�► - ` --t' (5 z' 0 f �d .. .�,....) s Ct,Q,,,k.e,. ' r, — r Z3 k"r I\f v"4.41-4' --/•-' `Z - ',a-Lot) ,. Pa. cam. ,;..--.- I . C 4, c,.9-j iota- Pt Am 9 .4. •pf– t ru if,tlorrt — , . L o.. 0.,p, ,...h epee+ . to,-- . A *.../7---4-429,-/i."..""----..... -4---,...‘ —11.4, ) g,,..."),c) C..J12._,01/4...." c P.._ 07,,471%4,czy _ Q cam, %I is n►-= ° 4+ p . 1 7 Y m -. { . !ll ? _ . s ,, 1 ie. 3.5`6. 0 k v a,.` ,&, Q ) 8 . aj i-4.3 S h.�® bAir l; -.. ►r► ?rt.- 7`°""‹ "' - ? )` 4'7 &-p--r-a),.__,_AzT ems, of ..,4)--- ----\A 4.-1..... '''' ..51)"it-• C%)1/4 S .*i er.....)t. r , „,..,.., 0.4\7 s. ),,..„.•:, c,„„,,_. 1 k ',,..net.* S)9...4,4..3\ f -., 9,, il, .4......„.........„....,...... i,,‘„,,,„.„............. ,...,..... (-,,,,,,„,sL„,........4 .... t cY 9 ,, ._.,.m ..$ ,. k c....,,,..�.,� I. . ., .Vii--- _ `-►1 - - .c,0-7,-. Ag.,-- Ia.-aft.N- fer,a1A-1/4--°,r . ......*-)t ts.e.p...4... 0 --4- tt-3/4.1.`') 0.... — ‘-va ) .,...,._. e F ---- '3 i'4-" °' '....),^# 1 . e_41 r , .4.---.1.-- Iff,._ 4,"1"../C? . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • 18, s-e ) ,(9 o A. 1 -- - H - q,-) c9.1L.Ii--t-A.,5 S4P 'U CO 6r1 Gtokx-4, • If, (3°2. 0_ Seer --^-, ^ . 71_) u frp ‘1 P-J 410 p _ ‘ 27- 3 • Sept 4, 2007 City of Tigard Attn: Kim McMillon 13125 SW Hall Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Ms. McMillon: At the neighborhood meeting on Thursday,June 7 regarding the proposed development of the site located at 12625 SW 70th Street, it came to our attention that there is a desire to improve 70th street between Dartmouth and Elmhurst Street. This proposed improvement has potential to affect the quality of life of the residents of Elmhurst Street in a negative way unless executed in a manner other than that which was presented at the June 7th meeting. It is understood that development of our neighborhood within the Tigard Triangle is inevitable. The proposal herein is aimed at maintaining the livability of Elmhurst Street during the transition phase between residential and commercial land use. Specifically, the intent of this proposal is to prevent or minimize automobile and foot traffic on Elmhurst Street to satisfy the goal of the residents to keep the street as private as possible, both for reasons of general livability and for the safety of the numerous young children in residence. The alternate proposals outlined below are further intended to comply with the requirements set forth in the original neighborhood planning meetings. These requirements dictated that dead-end residential streets remain dead-ended until such a time as the entire street is non-residential. There should be records testifying to this fact in the minutes from these neighborhood planning meetings. Stakeholders on Elmhurst Street were involved during the penning of these requirements,and can be contacted if further details of these agreements are required. . ., Proposal Presented to Local Residents at June 7th Meeting 1 ,. ...._.,.....____ ..... 1 ) 1 dil 411 _ Ira • , ,,,, :::::-...- . • -:.41 b .i.- 6 fif t• • ' 1111 -:—,..p .. . .. 1 . i 1 - * IlLe-9.€044 . . .„ i 1 _ .re,rop...r.._.sr-vw-i ' 11 -- 4 .: - I.:,..! -- .p-_ _ . ! Entire street IIMI i!,.. .... 4 k i improved i 44 i . ! • --- —..---r--7---.F.:..4±::-.-:,*..7"--- 1 1 i 7i.:::-...7....„—,—_,_, ;.I 1 1 1 .... 1 1 1 I I ........... 4 II I I — I I — I No blocking to i i •I zi..... I.-...i — prevent through . 1 ii 1 i ■ ' 1 traffic on Elmhurst ' II III ,1 ._ . 10 ,IONVISLOP>AINT ''—•— .s.,--- ellYTTJUIST ST OSSICATON +City secures funding for improvement of 70th street -Does not comply with aforementioned neighborhood planning guidelines -Developer incurs higher cost -Does not maintain privacy of Elmhurst Street -Does not maintain the family-friendly safety of a low traffic street , Primary Alternate Proposal Presented by Elmhurst Street Stakeholders Improve 70th only between Dartmouth and the proposed primary entrance to the development at 12625 SW 70th Street. Iate... ...� 1 I I Y r . — . II - Improve only • as much of 70th m.,.r..,,,- �-r-.. ' , `,I : ' as is required 1 i •""'".......-- - 1 . , , - to access the i 1 1 --..._ ! .., proposed 1 i I i -- i . j development t I I .4s-�- - - - - ; i i I i .a,•_,..• — %NW Access between iii _ =- — — ( 70th and Elmhurst I I i -_. E; 1 and 70t limited by i I ! "� __ = t I lack of t _ improvement and 1a o omaM .�i1M0 road blocking if - - mown/ TON ., necessary +Maintains privacy of Elmhurst +Maintains family-friendly safety of a low traffic street +Complies with aforementioned city planning guidelines +Proposed developer minimizes costs - City loses sponsor for funding improvement of 70th N. of Elmhurst, S. of development entrance Secondary Alternate Proposal Presented by Elmhurst Street Stakeholders Improve the entirety of 70th between Dartmouth and Elmhurst Streets. Barricade the end of 706 street where it intersects with Elmhurst, similar to the fashion in which Elmhurst is currently barricaded. 1 • 1 1 � � i I 1 I i ' ..� BLS ' i Entire street i I1130021.{tK J improved � `I , 0 4#4614640 c =i T � i >i 1 a t I - I . . —- ' Barricade maintains -ow..- i = I privacy and safety of Elmhurst while = satisfying city's need � to fund and grow .��TE I I I 1 infrastructure for . .m , anticipated future development , Current barricade on Elmhurst St. (shown in blue Ai&%d■-. r•: ,, above) r..1.nirr.. +Maintains privacy of Elmhurst +Maintains family-friendly safety of a low traffic street +City secures funding for improvement of 70th street,which can be through-going at a later date +Complies with aforementioned city planning guidelines - Developer incurs higher cost, but no more than originally proposed ■ Thank you for your careful consideration of these proposals,their outcome will affect the quality of our lives. If you require further input or feedback,please feel free to contact us as a group, or individually at the email addresses below: Best Regards, Sarah and Josh Lau 7100 SW Elmhurst sarahbandjoshl @comcast.net JoAnne and George Nordling 7105 SW Elmhurst j oannenordling1952@hotmail.com John and Debora Scott 7085 SW Elmhurst Debi.scott@farmersinsurance.com Mark and Priscilla Ditter 7070 SW Elmhurst dancingpris @hotmail.com Clayton Hunt 7040 SW Elmhurst /2//Ar7 Pitk Apo ...,/ .5., S'A,,,4 zw Su vJe _ -7 j G Aake4L0 f.4coae: c 5pL 4 g ii — /inn i 01-, p014 is irl px4Gf`'L' f A t/3) /70-7,4 ad'i 2 i a,A 4 i* 4d/ L. 1-0A)71 1 & , CI * ..' d c/ d' / " er I _/i1 _ P LA7---c D,,,, #14644,ee. 5g, (,c r K ..,v r�. IC a)CeXia /4444-6("Aj +0 7104-'4+% 'if4 t T R A N S M I T T A L TO: City of Tigard, Oregon ADDRESS: 13125 SW Hall Blvd Gary Pagenstecher Tigard,OR 97223 FROM: Dale Bushnell DATE: August 1, 2007 RE: Red Rock Creek Retail Center SENT VIA: Courier Land Use Permit Application CC: AD File PROJECT NO.: AD 05183 THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE TRANSMITTED: ITEM # QUANTITY DATE DESCRIPTION 1 3 August 1, 2007 Land Use Permit Application Package 1 1 05/30/07 Project Map I] For Your Approval ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ For Your Use ❑ Urgent ❑ Please Contact Sender Upon Receipt ❑ Hard Copy to Follow by Mail REMARKS: I believe Jon Anderson has spoken with you about Exhibit 10, the Report of the Traffic Engineer, which will be delivered by Lancaster Engineering ASAP. Otherwise I believe the package is complete. Please contact me by phone if an item is listed but missing of if I need to make a minor correction. Yours, Dale Bushnell ANDERSON DABROWSKI ARCHITECTS, LLC 1430 SE 3rd Avenue, Suite 200 Portland, Oregon 97214 Tel 503.239.7377 Fax 503.239.7327 DI 50010140 1 -N STREET ACE -- -- - ,_.' --o-- _- - —_' —_---- ---- - - - ---- SITE AREA 3 DAR7AIG1UTf1 SrfIEET — R-s.M l- r— �wsr«is C 101 ACRES �'S ITL .A� _ 1 _ a Ai.... -- - -' I— MEw ROM GEUCA1ES1 0.05 ACRES 1.GY ACRES ( .�/^/�• -^- -,-....,-.1.- TAM COT]W ��(r-, ..-i i .>_-- G �A + / —� ST KM �C V)M"M" KG5 ACRES / __-��nor �_ M,. M.j 1`�X g-5 4'•M14l . . _ IJ// BIJIDIHLE.NN 0.85 AfAES 7Ma_ •\ it ,e; � -•` � R" ---� It FOOT RESERVE STRIP �..- __1 -- a � I I TOTAL �/ E NEW EXISTING SITE pEOM,ATiON 183 ACRES ACRES —`� } I J - M<f .-.�4�/ n- NEW ROW I.WD 18 ACRES,4- Yi 1 - Rva Q ,;,� NIRL•IB A '' LIBars I' 9 E j.' �// BULONO B "yll ,• '!1 �4 III.N. - - ••ii !' e I .� . C ral �AC 1.414[43'^? - f1 M[TLAW 6 ; o. . jijjj111'-1.HiirijjL �<�; ;. RCSTaATMN I ' y�w\�\v� - R B�E /,�/\\/1 C\ REM RETARIRIG MALI -il - '• ,ti._ L " ' ■ I� rs 1 11 Lit-..... 00,08040931 I' ., BUILDING C °4E/B1/.° O, ; BLOCK 20 --- -- -- _ E!. . /' -- p NEW IKTAIINB TEA{J ��6) \ 4t — 1 ON 0600551 I OR 400114400 011 8M5902f �` I� I _ - I I I �! II:MOM'i 3 i1 Ito z ' I I . - j , !. •�3i I - f i} .. -r 8 — — i GI i / I ' .r%6IJ 1 I -_ - -- ff- ,_.. — —- G"'— £W. ELMHURST STREET • II I BLOCK 21 Qy 1 PLAN SCALE: 1"= 40' P �� QQ IR NUMBER TES D eLS- �'�00�°"cq oR eiw�s CITY OF TIGARD DATE o5/30/0� pppu 'MECREO AA, l°50J1111f50' t1°0 RED ROCK CREEK x PROPOSED SITE PLAN s:,�vrT MANE oeucz ERR .�PROKC o. E ciwiibwmn��fal�a�a�.1R,• RED BUSINESS CENTER AS SNOM1. CE 19 S»i REVISION OAT[ By APP'0 MEy'�"•as^°'c°^^ pJSenPOmT SHEET R