The URL can be used to link to this page

SDR2006-00009 WITHDRAWN SDR2006 00009 AMBER WOODS TOWNHOMES • • Planning Division TIGARD Request for Permit Action or Refund TO: CITY OF TIGARD Permit System Administrator 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: 503.718.2430 Fax: 503.598.1960 FROM: El Owner ❑ Applicant ❑ Contractor ® City Staff (check one) Name: Dartmouth Townhomes LLC (Business or Individual) VO I DMailing Address: 8790 SW Turquoise Loop City/State/Zip: Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone No.: 503-740-2235 PLEASE TAKE ACTION FOR THE ITEM(S) CHECKED (✓): ® CANCEL PERMIT APPLICATION. ® REFUND PERMIT FEES (attach receipt,if available). ❑ REMOVE CONTRACTOR FROM PERMIT (do not cancel permit). Permit#: SDR2006-00009/SLR2006-00009/VAR2006-00083 Site Address or Parcel#: 1S136DD-07500 and 1S136DD-07600 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes Subdivision Name: Amber Woods Lot#: • EXPLANATION: Originally set up as an SDR. It is now in land use as a Subdivision. Please transfer the funds from the voided cases to SUB2006-00012/SLR2006-00012/ VAR2006-00087/88. The balance of$403.50 should be refunded to Darmouth T/H LLC Signature: ditiAr Date: ..111.2,8496 Shirley Trea ///9/0 7 Print Name: • Refund Policy 1. The Director may authorize the refund of: a) any fee which was erroneously paid or collected. b) not more than 80 percent of the application fee when an application is withdrawn or canceled before any review effort has been expended. 2. Refunds will be returned to the original Payer in the same method in which payment was received. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Rte to Sys Admin: Date By Rte to t Admin: Date /17 07 By ''� Refund Processed: Date ///7/c B �' Invoice Processed: Date By Permit Canceled: Date // /o4 By '4,/, Parcel Tag Added: Date By Receipt#dg--V'/dr Date /Q//e4, Method (+f„, ,� Amount$ '+'S3 pi) I:\Citywide\Tidemark\Forms\RegPe [Action-Ping.doc Rev 02/27/06 w PAcxi t& r PRE-APP.MID BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISIQNVED LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION C' City nl Pemit Center 13125 SW Hall Blu1, Ti gard OR 3C ?Ililh Phone. 503.639.4171 Fax:503.598.1960 C■i-Y iii- 1GAkD BUILDING DIVISION File# 5�43.4,io(o-p030G\ Other Case# Per 2,60i -000/ 1-ex.?uo6 - c. o O T�To-Q Date ©o b By g I Receipt# -2-6t)L"Y7 U Fee `s Ys63 oU 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) ❑Planned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation(IV) ❑ Conditional Use(III) `Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑ Historic Overlay(II or III) Site Development Review(II) [' Home Occupation(II) ❑Subdivision(II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACIIVTIY WILL OOCUR(Address if available) n,o F O:cctire wed 1,�c e4 D��j o_ce44- +o Pe V--yrich bei- 1,940,-70-441 -TA . I S 1 ,& t2r7 Tao>< Lo+ -Soo d_ -7(a►v o TOTAL SITE SIZE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 41.o 2 5� -- O, 9 oLe_ir•e L4 + W P io..(y9.te V1 APPLIC ATTT° D ►� C=-rar.�(�✓� 4I,04_ Pc-1\ ed tDeye-WPv►`►e v1�- MAILING ADDRESS/QTY/STATE/ZIP .87°70 51f) Tura vo► e Loa OGn.ucr-Eov, ®R 9-700-7 PHONE NO. FAX NO. 'S O ) - 74v- ZZ 3 PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON PHONE NO. U) PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) �c+tti�c_ N Q C o Q-e..r>r•■sae L. B --P aILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP PHONE�JC) S t_..� \d S :~�yQ \ \ 'J C 04 AX NO. cs ts, 3Sod F5c Cca-t\ 02_\� *When 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) i- Id (7� s AJer� - . • - . •A • •. Ca')l +In re e. a_-F+cLc in e d ( 3-k2 ecl room Z, 2.zo s -. 3-r e ve I ) 1 n d 1018 u tut c#rr e w &CL'e 55 5%4 -70+t-+ ,4,/e.,4 r v e a- ��l-� -6:1‘) r bed- ro.o vin 2.10A0 . 44- , I&1)4 T �� dr►P 30 r a�G9 55 -'V Svc C1--}-h e- i 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 • • r 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. Qom- o je... ci-os -cx Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date E� Applicant/ ''IRepresentative's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date CITY OF TIGARD 10/4/2006 71 • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 9:08:17AM Tigard,Oregon 97223 TIGARD (503)639-4171 Receipt #: 27200600000000004780 Date: 10/04/2006 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 4,934.00 SDR2006-00009 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 728.00 SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 480.00 SLR2006-00009 [LANDUS]Application-Type II 100-0000-438000 1,027.00 SLR2006-00009 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 151.50 VAR2006-00083 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 17.00 VAR2006-00083 [LANDUS] Special Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 Line Item Total: $7,453.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES KJP 2015 In Person 6,136.72 LLC Check DARTMOUTN TOWNHOMES KJP 2018 In Person 1,268.50 LLC Check VIC ACCOMANDO KJP 4168 In Person 47.78 Payment Total: $7,453.00 cReceipt.cpt Page 1 of 1 PPI/OT/ oN S/TE E & RECEIVED FOR oCr D 2 2DIj6 DVEL OP MENT ctirqriaeAD SEN Sl T/VE NHS RVi F�V AM?ER WOOOS T O TNj UNAODR wN HOM ES 1 1S1 3600 ESSEO S/ T T/G TAX LOTS E ARD ORE 754° c 7s 00 OOJy g,2�� sEp rEMBER 29 2006 Pr CITY OF T/GqR Presented to.' PLANN/NG 0 13125 S.V! HALL / pN /S/ TIGAI�p OREGON pN 9223 V/C I4CCpMgN Prepared by.' gyp, CO 86,50 Sw TINIB CONSUL_TING EN EAV ERTpN R�NB�R/�E I VEER OREGON 9 7007 V/ ,,cco Contact Phone: 503 ando, P.E. Fox: 503,259 0.-5483 9548 TABLE OF CONTENTS City of Tigard Planning Division Land Use Permit Application (signed) Vicinity Map Written Summary of Proposal Affidavit of Mail/Posting Neighborhood Meeting Notice Narrative for Sensitive Lands Review and Site Development Review Impact Study Clean Water Services — Service Provider Letter Natural Resource Assessment for Vegetated Corridor per Standard Site Assessment Method Alternatives Analysis for Vegetated Corridor— Description of why Encroachment is Needed Natural Resource Assessment Preliminary Storm Drain Report Pre-application Conference Notes Pre-application Conference Notes — Engineering Section Arborist Report Preliminary Sight Distance Certification .4rI r •110111.11..).. * ZiVe 0 LI c Utig e I ':obi 62nti.A./ie 1, .0 (1,; il, 511 _,t tl re, Sw Rant St m Villa Rid!g r r <,. -4, Sw Spruce St ' 4c g g o ''' 5w Thom St ci? s 414 k 2 0 q 6 ....1 St .. , to ,-- • um ... — 4 r f Rit '...44.• ,p ■Ii. PkV.S*Ilidia ,-, '6 0 s " JP 214 z I ...0 Ai CO .0 A ....: • la = ti) ---.■Fig . . - .. ... . .1. -It1it St Sw Memos a ..,.. .,........, • ... • 2•3 . , ,v.i. rt:r..ii Of Y:t Sw Gtirtitter In §-1 SITE g a 40 . s ... em Multnomah s 1 61 Sw L3 tutm;...t, t tii 1:k q LI '7 X sw Etrrititnt St et la 41 0 -xi v J t., 4 $w Herr 1,..s,.. VV.I y a. r. .,i'.■• I r u•ik 111 St} ..- !...' r 11 .-$ Svi Bow Ind P.ri .7.1 14:-Ia 4 z 46 I■. •;.. -,■r,s; , il.". Trace $w Gonzega St z to. te -,r 5- s.,,, i.., SW Hampton St 4 " Suntwook Dt T: ....: , . ,.. Mitt ur.iwurtelt Ct t —Nei 4 217 4 ..1 &mink Ot .4t. •‘,1 it so v., ::,t t leNNvi t. t VICINITY MAP NO SCALE AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE I IMPORTANT.NOTICE :.THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL-THE CITY OF TIGARD A COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGNOTICE THAT_PERTAINS.TO`THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THESAME TIME PROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE,TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division _ 13125 SW`Hall.,Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION, THE'APPUCANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT&COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILI G ,, being duly sworn,depose and say that on the 2-O 4'�ay of WI G , 20 o C7 , I caused to have mailed toleach f Ale persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at(or near) l 1k- a,44-tvt,0044. , 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 with postage prepaid thereon. r Signature (In tha- "sence of a Notary Public) OS\ Ge 64,450-\-- do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest Ina proposed "at.o - affecting a land located at (state the proximate location(s) IF no address(s)and/or tax lot(s)currently registered) �, 4&-12).4-1,4v.000, -7/944. t4-1.1.001/44A_ and did on the •ay of OA...r . ,20 06 personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a _ ` application,and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal.The sign was posted at 64'.pk �r Ulla�k r. (state location you posted notice on property) _ Signature (In tl esence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETEJNOTARIZE) STATE OF cpry ) County of tv-.D1Ar it5Tzr`-1 ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the r,C day of Drt t , 20 Oki; . OFFICIAL SEAL MA GO MC COY t t M; NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON 9 COMMISSION COMMISSION F(PI FEBRUARY 14,2010 1 NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON My Commission Expires: / t 1 Applicant, please complete the information below: NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Address or General Location of Subject Property: Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): i:Voginlpatty masters\affidavit of mailing-posting neighborhood meeting.doc WRITTEN SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL For AMBER WOODS I 7 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 SEPTEMBER 29 , 2006 The proposed site, adjacent to SW Dartmouth Street, spans two tax lots: Tax Lot 7500 is a 14,530.62 sq. ft. ( 0. 33-acre) parcel located at the west side of the site along SW 70th Avenue. Tax Lot 7600 is a 24,132.20 sq. ft. ( 0. 55-acre) parcel at the east part of the site along SW 69th within the city limits of Tigard, Oregon. The total site is 0.89 acres. The existing use of the parcels is undeveloped urban forest. The City of Tigard has designated the parcels as within the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district and applies the "Tigard Triangle Design Standards" criteria to this application. SW 70" Avenue is aligned with the east edge of zoning district C-G, General Commercial with a Planned Unit Overlay. A Type II Site Development Review application and a Sensitive Lands Review is submitted proposing to build ( 7) seven 3-story attached multi-family townhome units, with front garages. A Type I Adjustment to minimum residential density requirements seeks approval for seven units in lieu of the required 13—units comprised of four (4) units (2,080 sq. ft. each) access SW 69th Avenue and three ( 3) units (2, 268 sq. ft. each) have individual access on SW 70th Avenue. No access is proposed to SW Dartmouth Street. Half-street improvements along the frontage of SW 69th Avenue, SW 70th Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street have been completed under a separate permit. Page 1 of 1 NARRATIVE for SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW and SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW "AMBER WOODS I" 7 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 SEPTEMBER 29 , 2006 INTRODUCTION The proposed site, adjacent to SW Dartmouth Street, spans two tax lots: Tax Lot 7500 is a 14, 530. 62 sq. ft. (0. 33-acre) parcel located at the west side of the site along SW 70th Avenue. Tax Lot 7600 is a 24, 132.20 sq. ft. ( 0.55-acre) parcel on the east part of the site along SW 69th within the city limits of Tigard Oregon. The site prior to dedication is 38, 662.52 sq. ft. (0. 89-acres) . The developed site after dedication (2,406. 92 sq. ft. ) is 36,255. 60 square feet ( 0.83-acre) . The existing use of the parcels is undeveloped urban forest. The City of Tigard has designated the parcels as within the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district and applies the "Tigard Triangle Design Standards" criteria to this application. SW 70th Avenue is aligned with the east edge of zoning district C-G, General Commercial with a Planned Unit Overlay. This project proposes to build (7) seven 3-story attached multi-family townhome units, with front garages. ( 4) four units access SW 69th Avenue and ( 3) three units access SW 70th Avenue. The 69th Avenue access is a single 30 ft. shared access and the units on SW 70th Avenue have 16 ft. wide individual driveways. No access will be provided to SW Dartmouth Street. 36% of the net parcel area is impervious area (roof and paved) with 59% designated as landscaping. 5% of parcel area is perennial stream and wetland. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS The property is located 380 yards west of Interstate 5 and 700 yards southeast of Pacific Highway ( 99W) . SW Dartmouth Street, is presently a 91 ft. wide right-of- way with a 44 ft. wide curb-to-curb collector street and bike lanes, borders the site to the south. 70th Avenue is presently a 47.5 ft. wide right-of-way with an 18 ft. wide half-street improvement. 69th Avenue is at ultimate 60 ft. right-of- 1 of8 way width an 18 ft. half-street improvement. All three streets bordering the site were recently widened and improved with curb, storm drain infrastructure, sidewalk and street trees in anticipation of this development. On-site analysis reveals a gently sloping plateau (-6%) at the northeast section of the property breaking to a steep ( -16%) downgrade to a stream channel. The west half of the site continues a 16% percent slope to the stream. The portion of the site south of the stream slopes from SW Dartmouth to the watercourse at a +20% grade to the channel. The site exhibits no history of development or building. The unnamed perennial stream, with headwaters near SW 67`h and Clinton, traverses the site from SW 69`h Avenue southwestly to a ditch inlet near the SW Dartmouth ROW line and flows westerly 2,400 ft. to Red Rock Creek. The 25-year flow is =2 .2 cubic feet per second (cfs) draining 2.75-acres as it enters the site. A Natural Resource Assessment conducted on the project site by Pacific Habitat Services in December 2005 defined a wetland along the stream banks. The site is populated with three distinct plant communities, identified as Community A, located south of the stream adjacent to SW Dartmouth; Community B, also located south of the stream near 69th Avenue; and Community C, extending along the north side of the stream. Community A has a 30% tree cover (Oregon white oak) with 35% native shrub cover (serviceberry, hazelnut, snowberry, one-seed hawthorn and Pacific ninebark) . Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and Himalayan blackberry) cover 35% of the area. Community B has a 20% tree cover (Oregon ash, hawthorns and less mature white oaks) with 50% native shrub cover (serviceberry, hazelnut, snowberry, one-seed hawthorn, Pacific ninebark, cherry laurel and snowberry) . Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and blackberry) inhabit +20% of the area. Community C has a 30% tree cover (Douglas fir and Oregon white oak with aged cherry trees and hawthorns) with a 95% tree canopy. Native shrubs (serviceberry, hazelnut, snowberry, one-seed hawthorn and Pacific ninebark) cover 30%. Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and blackberry) infest 35% of the plant cozmuunity with vines standing 15 ft. high. Observed fauna include native bird and raptor populations with limited numbers of ground mammals (squirrels, chipmunks and mice) . No reptiles or amphibians (frogs ) were monitored. PLANS REQUIRED COVER SHEET & VICINITY MAP A computer generated set of 24"x 36" drawings, including a Cover Sheet 1 with vicinity map, accompanies this narrative and application. EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP Sheet 2 depicts an existing conditions map with one-foot contours, trees 8" and larger, and perimeter streets with existing underground utilities. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Sheet 3 displays a site development plan indicating building and access patterns with dimensions and clear vision areas. 2of8 Ashbrook Townhomes Project 04-220 PRELIMINARY GRADING/EROSION CONTROL PLAN Sheet 4 depicts existing grade contours and proposed finished grades with spot elevations and surface drainage paths and catch basin placement. Sheet 5 also directs the erosion and sedimentation control measures to be implemented prior to and during construction activities. PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE PLAN Sheet 5 characterizes the proposed storm drain on-site drainage system with water quality and water quantity structures. PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN Sheet 6 illustrates the existing and proposed utilities including sanitary sewer and domestic water resources. Existing fire hydrants are also displayed. NATURAL RESOUCE ASSESSMENT BASE MAP SITE PLAN EXHIBIT "A" Sheet 7 features a copy of the base map site plan submitted to Clean Water Services (CWS) as part of the tier 1 analysis (see attached "Natural Resource Assessment for Vegetated Corridor per Standard Site Assessment Method") crafted for the service provider letter. The drawing indicates the three areas of on-site Plant Communities A, B and C within the required ( 50) fifty feet water quality buffer. Also displayed are the two areas of buffer encroachment caused by development and the buffer mitigation area. TREE TRESERVATION/REMOVAL PLAN Sheet 8 depicts a tree protection plan and identifies trees in fair or poor condition as described by the project arborist with trees marked for removal. A separate arborist report (included with this application) provides a guideline for protection of trees on construction sites, LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet 9 delineates the planned planting plan for revegetation of the vegetated corridor from "marginal" or "degraded" to "good" condition per requirements of CWS Chapter 3, Table 3.2 Vegetated Corridor Standards. Street tree requirements for SW Dartmouth, SW 69th and SW 70th Avenues were satisfied with the street improvements performed under a previous phase and are not a part of this project. On-site landscape improvements are shown indicating placement of trees, shrubs and lawn ground cover. Also, proposed buffering and screening elements are portrayed with elementary details. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS/STREET PLAN Sheet 10 depicts plan view and typical cross-section of improvements in the public right-of-way (ROW) pertaining to ROW dedication and driveway accesses. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS AND FLOOR PLANS Sheets Al and B1 illustrate the front (street) , rear and side elevations of each of the ( 3) three story buildings with front garage entrance. Sheets A2, A3, A4, B2, B3 and B4 depict floor plans for ground floor with garage, second floor living and third floor bedrooms. CODE CHAPTER RELEVANT CRITERIA Chapter 18. 360 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & CHAPTER 18.775. 70 SENSITIVE LANDS 3 of 8 Ashbrook Townhomes Project 15202 REVIEW This Type II application requests a site development review for new construction per TABLE 18. 390. 1 "SUMMARY OF PERMITS BY TYPE OF DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURE" with reference to 18. 360. 090. The application also requests a Sensitive Land Permit Review, a Type II Procedure application, per TABLE 18. 390. 1 with reference to 18.775. Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments Chapter 18.370 provides standards for granting of variances from code requirements that cause undue restraints on development when it can be demonstrated that the hardship is not self-imposed, will not be detrimental to other policies and standards, and permits reasonable use of the land. As stated above and in conformance with 18.370. 02.C.2. , a variance, processed as a Type I procedure, for adjustment to minimum residential density requirement is a part of this land use application. . ,t"(1' The requested variance to reduce the minimum density recognizes the density �J calculations as: Gross area of site: 38,662 sq. ft. Subtracting sensitive lands: 16,631 sq. ft. Subtracting Public right-of-way: 2,406 sq. ft. Net development area: 19,625 sq. ft. = 0.45 acres Minimum lot size in R25 = 1,480 s.f. Maximum units = 19, 625 net acres divided by 1,480 s .f. = 13 units Minimum units = maximum ( 13 units) x 80% = 10 units Due to the inordinate area allocated for vegetated corridor, a maximum of ( 7 ) seven units is proposed for this site. Chapter 18.390 DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES In accordance with 18. 390.020, Table 18.390.1 SUMMARY OF PERMITS BY TYPE OF DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES, Site Development Review is a Type II Procedure. A pre-application conference was held with City of Tigard Planning representatives and Engineering Section personnel on March 7, 2006. As a result of the neighborhood meeting handout, a meeting was conducted at Landmark Ford on April 5, 2006 from 6:30pm to 8:30pm with approximately 20 in attendance. This narrative accompanies a completed Land Use Permit Application for Site Development Review, a Sensitive Lands Permit Application and a Variance, Special Adjustment, Reduction of Minimum Residential Density request. The required fee based on City of Tigard Land Use Applications Fee Schedule, effective date 06/07, citing $5, 662 + 6.00 per 10, 000 over 1 million; Preliminary Engineer's Estimate $1,800,000 = %5, 662 + $6.00 per each $10, 000 over $1,000, 000 = $6. 00 x 80 = $480.00 = $6,142.00. In addition, a Special Adjustment, Reduction of Minimum Density in accordance with 18. 370. 020.C.2, a Type I application will be processed along with the site development proposal with a fee of $132.50 (265.00/2) and A Sensitive Lands Review Fee of $1, 178.50 (2,357.00/2) for a total fee of $7,453.00. Once the application package is deemed complete, the required (2) two sets pre- stamped and pre-addressed envelopes for all property owners of record within 500 ft. radius of the site and CPO 4B as provided by City of Tigard supplied database will be submitted. 36(.- /32. >`v Page4of8 4/ 6g. a-v This application includes an Impact Study under separate cover addressing the elements defined in 18. 390. 040.B. (e) . This paragraph shall serve as notification of concurrence with the requirements to dedicate ( 11) eleven feet of right-of-way on SW Dartmouth Street to provide 92 ft. ultimate row width. No dedication is required on SW 69th Avenue or SW gr.t05/01, Avenue. Chapter 18. 520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS The proposed /931k:It'f# p p sed 7 unit multi-family project maintains the purpose of the Commercial. Zoning District to ensure more opportunities for mixed use, including residential in new and re-developing commercial areas. Adhering to 18. 520.020. (F) MUE Mixed Use Employment District. and TABLE 18.520. 1, USE TABLE: COMMERCIAL ZONES, this project is a permitted use in an MUE zone subject to special development standards contained in Section 18. 620.030 SITE DESIGN STANDARDS and 18. 620. 040 BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS. /46,5-2 Chapter 18. 620 TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS The dedication and improvement of public streets (SW Dartmouth Street, SW 69th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue) were completed prior to this application. All residential units will be served by public sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage. In response to 18. 620.020 Street Connectivity, this proposal will address the Demonstration of standards by electing the "Design Option" preference exhibiting ( l .a. ) Local street spacing at 278 feet between SW 69th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. ( 1 .b. ) Bike and pedestrian connections provided with installation of a 8 ft. wide sidewalk along the frontage of SW 69th Avenue. An 8 ft. wide sidewalk is also provided along the frontage of SW 70th Avenue. SW Dartmouth includes a 6 ft. wide sidewalk with a bike lane. In response to 18.620.030 Site Design Standards, this development meets the following site design standards: 1. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials. Not applicable - 69th Avenue and 70th Avenue are not arterials. 2. Building setback. Per Table 18. 520.2, 0 ft. from public street right-of-way required; building placement shall be 20 ft. from row. 3. Walkway connection to building entrance. A 6 ft. sidewalk concrete walkway will be provided at each building entrance to the public sidewalk. 5. Parking location and landscape design. Parking will be in the rear of buildings; interior side and rear landscaping conforms to L-2 landscape standard. 18.630. 040 Building Design Standards addresses only non-residential buildings. 18.630. 070 Signs In accordance with Section 18.780. 130.B, if this residential project elects to install an identification monument, the sign face will not exceed ( 32) thirty-two 'As defined in Code Chapter 18.120.030(62)c. "Apartment" or"Multiple-family dwelling" Page 5 of 8 square feet. 18.630. 090 Landscaping and Screening This application recognizes the two levels of landscaping and screening minimum standards defined in the L-1 Low Screen with plantings provided within parking lots and along rights-of-way of 69th Avenue and 70th Avenue. In addition, per L-2 General Landscaping, minimum 21" caliper trees will be placed at maximum 28 ft. spacing throughout the site. Chapter 18. 705 ACCESS, EGRESS, AND CIRCULATION The preliminary design of the site conforms to all aspects of 18.705.030 General Provisions. The site plan fulfills the access plan requirements by displaying access to a public local street, egress and circulation of traffic to front garages and on-site parking spaces requiring no backward movement onto the street. Access Management Report - The single driveway access for the (4) four units facing SW 69th Avenue provides adequate sight distance as indicated on the site plan with the driver's eye offset 15 feet behind curb and line-of-sight at 250 feet (25 m.p.h. design speed x 10 ) . The 30 ft. width of the accessway provides adequate turn-in and turn-out movements. Influence area of intersection - The minimum driveway setback from a collector is 150 ft. measured from the right-of-way line. The driveway for this project is 303 ft. measured from the nearest edge of the entrance along the right-of-way line to the mid-point of the intersection radius. In conformance with TABLE 18. 705. 2 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE, the geometry of the 4-unit project access is 30 feet wide with a 24 ft. two-way driveway approach to the garages. The paved access extends to the far unit with two-car garages and the layout provides for turning of fire apparatus. Chapter 18. 715 DENSITY COMPUTATIONS Net development area - The gross area of the site is 38, 662. 52 square feet or 0. 89 acres. Sensitive land areas do exist (See Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter, a part of this application) and subtraction is calculated as 16, 631 sq. ft. , determined by using computer-aided drafting "area" command, or 0. 38 acres. Land dedication for public right-of-way has been calculated using the same "area" command resulting 2,406 sq. ft. or 0.06 acres. No land is proposed for private streets. The density calculations is: Gross area of site: 38,662 sq. ft. Subtracting sensitive lands: 16, 631 sq. ft. Subtracting Public right-of-way: 2,406 sq. ft. Net development area: 19, 625 sq. ft. = 0.45 acres Minimum lot size in R25 = 1,480 s.f. Maximum units = 19,625 net acres divided by 1,480 s.f. = 13 units Minimum units = maximum ( 13 units) x 80% = 10 units Page 6 of 8 Implementing 18. 370.02.C.2. , a variance, processed as a Type I procedure, for adjustment to minimum residential density is allowed. The development proposee units. Chapter 18. 725 Environmental Performance Standards No activity associated with this multi-family development will compromise the performance standards for noise, visible emissions, vibrations, discernable heat emissions, glare or odors. All units will maintain individual waste containers stored in garages to mitigate insect and rodent concerns. Chapter 18. 745 Landscaping and Screening Table 18. 745.2 "Buffer Combinations for Landscaping and Screening" requires a buffer level "A" , 10 ft. wide lawn/groundcover area for this development. As depicted on Sheet C9 Landscape Plan, minimum 4 ft. high Emerald Green Arborvitae will be placed at 5 ft centers along the north property lines to enhance sight screening. Home Owners through the conditions, covenants and restrictions will be held responsible for the maintenance and appearance of all landscaping and screening including ground cover. Street trees have already been installed and are established. Screening and landscaping will also be provided for parking areas as demonstrated on the landscape plan. Chapter 18. 755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage The project intends to demonstrate compliance with the "franchised hauler review and sign-off method. Chapter 18. 765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements The proposed asphalt parking layout conforms to 18.765.030 General Provisions and Table 18. 765.2 Minimum and Maximum Required Off-street Vehicle Parking Requirements. Minimum parking space count, relevant to this all three-bedroom 7 unit multi-family development, is 1. 75 spaces per dwelling unit for a total of 1. 75 x 7 = 12. 3 or 13 spaces. Each unit includes a double car garage for a total of 14 spaces. The remaining required 3 on-site spaces comply with Figure 18.765. 1 OFF-STREET SURFACE PARKING MATRIX dimensions for parallel parking. Bicycle hooks will be provided in each garage fulfilling the requirements of 18.765. 050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards. Chapter 18. 775 Sensitive Lands ,er- Ca/10 This development requires a Stormwater Connection Permit to comply with 4V40 j Water Services (CWS) Ordinance 04-9 and Tigard Municipal Code 18.775.020 Lt�yL �� dc� An unnamed perennial stream with adjacent riparian wetlands has been identl'-�ried I on the site flowing from the east right-of-way line southwesterly approximately 170 linear feet to an existing ditch inlet at the south right-of-way line. A Natural Resource Assessment, conducted by Pacific Habitat Services, Inc. (PHS) in December 2005 was referenced in "A Natural Resource Assessment for Vegetated Corridor per Standard Site Assessment Methods" submittal to CWS with a Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis (see attachments) . Subsequently, a service provider letter was issued August 22, 2006 for development of this site. Page 7 of 8 Chapter 18. 790 Tree Removal The tree preservation/mitigation plan (Sheet C8) identifies all trees on the site per a field survey conducted September 22, 1999 and a site investigation by David Hunter, Certified Arborist on August 15, 2006. The arborist issued a Tree Inventory and Guidelines for the Protection of Trees report on August 29, 2006 wherein he describes the condition of each tree along with recommendations for either removal or protection measures. Chapter 18. 795 Visual Clearance Areas SW 69th Avenue is considered a collector and SW 70t° Avenue is a local street. The visual clearance standard for this project is defined in 18.795. 040.B. , Non- arterial streets for a non-arterial street and a driveway >24 feet wide. The visual clearance required is a triangle with 30' legs measured along the right- of-way line and the access centerline on either side of the entrance. As indicated on the site plan, the project achieves this standard. Chapter 18. 810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards This application conforms to all aspects and elements contained within 18. 810 "Street and Utility Improvement Standard" . Half-street improvements for SW 69th Avenue, SW 70th Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street have been completed and street trees were installed. Utility improvements for this development include constructing roof drains and storm drain infrastructure for the (4) four units accessing SW 69th Avenue along with a catch basin to intercept parking/driveway runoff. Roof drains for the ( 3) three units at SW 70th Avenue will drain to the stream. Private on-site storm water improvements will conform to the Oregon Plumbing Specialty Code and flow to approved storm water quality and storm water quantity facilities prior to draining to the perennial stream. Adequate sanitary sewer and water mains exist and will not be modified other than installation of sewer and water taps. An 8 feet utility easement will not be described along the interior sides of the 70th Avenue and the 69th Avenue right-of-way due to conflict with the sensitive areas. Franchise utilities will be required to underground services near or under the public sidewalk. Cluster mailboxes will be installed as directed by the Tigard Post Office. END OF NARRATIVE Page 8 of 8 ti David Hunter,Consulting Arborist 8/19/2006 Project Name: Amber Wood Townhomes SW 69th and Dartmouth Tigard, Oregon Vic Accomando, PE 7250 SW Ashdale Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 Rhone: 503-890-5483 Fax: 503-452-0910 Email: acomando 1 @msn.com Here is the Tree Identification and Report for Amber Woods Townhomes. This document is a supplement to the Tree Inventory and the Guidelines for the Protection of Trees on Construction Sites. Tree Identificatioq Common Name Code Scientific Name Bigleaf Maple BLM Acer macrophyllum Oregon Ash OA Fraxinus latifolia Oregon White oak OWO Quercus garryana Douglas Fir DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Hawthorn H Crataegus monogyna California hazelnut HZ Gorylus cornuta White birch WB Betula populifolia English Ivy EI Hedera helix Serviceberry SB Amelanchier alnifolia Poison oak PO Rhus diversiloba Willow W Salix lasiandra Cherry CH Prunus species Mountain Ash MA Sorbus aucuparia Inspection Date: August 15, 2006. This report is a companion to the tree inventory data collected. The data collected is on an excel data sheet document. Trees or shrubs not noted on the excel sheet were noted as to being on site,and adding to the site characteristics. DBH: This is a measurement of tree diameter at breast height,a standard measurement taken at 4.5 feet above ground. Tags: Tags were placed on the trees for aid in location and identification. Tags should be removed once the project has been completed. Pink ribbon was placed with the tags. Condition. Good: Trees rated as good are in apparent good health and appear structurally sound. No apparent problems or immediate concerns. DDH/06-298 1 • David Hunter, Consulting Arborist 8/19/2006 Project Name: Amber Wood Townhomes SW 69th and Dartmouth Tigard, Oregon Fair: Trees rated as fair are in a state of decline. It can be possible to remedy some of the trees' problems, but the fact is,once tree decline starts it is difficult to remove/remedy all aspects of the tree decline. Poor: Trees rated as poor are in poor health or have structural problems that it difficult, if not impractical to save the tree. Removal is recommended. Dead: These trees are dead and may pose an immediate risk due to the extent of decay in the main trunk, stem or larger branching. See hazardous. Hazardous: Trees rated as hazardous are not in good shape either structurally or health condition. Some of the hazards can be taken care of by proper pruning, if practical. Usually,REMOVAL IS RECOMMENDED as soon as possible to avoid injury to life or property. Trees that are in poor health usually have a low landscape value or even a negative value. The mitigation value for these trees should be similar value of low or none. The Tree Protection Plan is finalized with exact markings of where the site and development will be on the ground. An accurate assessment of protection measures can be done for the trees to be protected,with the consulting arborist on site for tree protection fencing placement,and during the removal of trees in the work area, and during the construction activities as needed or required. I inspected the site on August 15,2006. Observations and conclusions are as of that date. This narrative is to add additional information to the tree survey data. The site located off SW 69th and SW Dartmouth. The area is north of SW Dartmouth. The tree mix is Oregon white oak,Oregon ash, Douglas fir,cherry,and willow with a mix of hazel nut, hawthorn,mountain ash, sword fern, English ivy,poison oak,and black berries as the main understory. The inventory started on the west side,worked north and around the perimeters,and then through the middle of the site. The creek bed was dry at time of inventory. Poison oak and English ivy vines are adversely affecting the canopies of many trees, and this is many of the reasons the trees ratings are fair or poor. Recommendations. Follow the Guidelines for the Protection of Trees in Construction Sites,work on some eradication of the English ivy and other noxious weeds, and the site would be enhanced compared to what the site is now. DDH/06-298 2 David D. Hunter, RCA#408inventory-amber wood townhomes Tigard, OR8-19-2006 2 Tag # Species DBH Canopy Condition Remove Remarks 1 SP 12 10 Poor X 10 degree lean 2 OWO 10 0 Dead X English ivy 3 OWO 20 0 Dead X English ivy 4 OWO 20 5 Poor X English ivy 5 OWO 20 5 Poor X English ivy 6 OWO 18 20 Poor 3 stems, 1 base 7 OWO 14 30 Fair 8 OWO 28 10 Poor English ivy 9 0A 6 10 Poor X 10 OWO 13 20 Poor 2 stems at 8' 11 CH 10 20 Fair ? property line? 12 CH 12 10 Poor X 15 degree lean to north 13 OA 12 15 Fair X 14 CH 14 10 Fair X English ivy 15 OA 15 15 Fair English ivy 16 H 8 5 Poor storm damage 17 OWO 10 10 Poor one-sided 18 OWO 10 5 Fair 19 OWO 14 10 Poor 6 stems, 1 base 20 OWO 6 5 Poor English ivy 21 OWO 12 5 Poor English ivy 22 OWO 18 20 Fair 23 W 10 5 Poor 4 stems,90%dead, hazard 24 DF 28 20 Fair 25 DF 28 15 Fair 26 DF 18 15 Poor understory 27 OA 9 10 Poor 2 stems, 1 base 28 OA 6 10 Fair 29 OA 17 20 Fair English ivy 30 OA 12 15 Fair 31 OA 12 15 Fair creek bed 32 OA 16 20 Fair creek bed 33 OA 8 15 Poor 2 stems at 3' 34 OA 11 15 Fair 3 stems, 1 base 35 OWO 11 20 Poor X 3 stems, 1 base 36 OWO 11 20 Poor X 37 H 6 15 Poor X disease 38 OWO 20 10 Poor X English ivy and P. oak 39 OWO 22 20 Poor X English ivy 40 OWO 12 20 Fair X 3 stems, 1 base, E. ivy 41 OWO 14 15 Poor X English ivy 42 H 6 15 Poor X 43 OWO 10 0 Dead 44 OWO 22 20 Fair English ivy and P. oak 45 OWO 16 20 Fair 3 stems, 1 base, E. ivy 46 OWO 6 0 Dead 47 OWO 12 20 Fair 2 stems, 1 base, E ivy 48 H 8 15 Poor 3 stems, 1 base 49 OWO 13 20 Poor 2 stems, 1 base 50 H 6 10 Poor 51 OWO 13 10 Poor diseased inventory-amber wood Townhomes Tigard, OR 8-19-2006 Page 1 David D. Hunter, RCA#408inventory-amber wood townhomes Tigard, OR8-19-2006 2 52 OWO 16 20 Fair X 2 stems, 1 base 53 OWO 21 20 Fair X English ivy 54 WB 6 10 Poor X 55 OA 7 15 Fair X 56 W 8 15 Poor X 2 stems. 1 base 57 OA 12 15 Poor 3 stems, 1 base 58 OA 10 10 Fair 59 OWO 15 20 Fair 60 H 7 5 Poor 61 OA 13 15 Fair 3 stems, 1 base 62 HZ 6 10 Poor multiple stems 63 HZ 6 10 Poor multiple stems 64 H 6 10 Poor 65 H 7 10 Poor Total DBH 65 trees 807" Total canopy 815' Significant Trees: Trees removed 22 Canopy remove d 280'/34.35% Significant trees removed % % of Significant DBH Total Percent removed 33.85 % Total Percent retained 66.15 % Canopy retaine d 535'/65.64% 0-vme C 41:e-4 Ate`IdeT 3c,,,,m7 r Is /At 0 ti--eda 7 R-", v/31f 0 lirtletv rrAivv.ei ? 1 2 P'3 if Itectmioneot ply l �/.2.',A/3f/A—Le,ei .. /U( 4 ?1,414 inventory-amber wood Townhomes Tigard, OR 8-19-2006 Page 2 David D. Hunter,Registered Consulting Arborist#408 1 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes August 19, 2006 SW 69th and Dartmouth Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Guidelines for Protection of Trees on Construction Sites To preserve certain mature trees within a construction site some precautions must be taken to assure that neither the trunk, limbs,nor root system of the tree are excessively damaged. The root system of a tree is the most vital, the most delicate part of the plant, and the most easily damaged. The root system extends far from the trunk, often beyond the drip line of a tree. The fine absorbing roots,those that collect water and nutrients for the tree,are located primarily within the top eight to twelve inches of the soil. The roots and soil in this surface layer must be protected from injury. Any encroachment, disturbance, or compaction of the soil around the tree will damage or destroy the fine absorbing roots. Injury caused by cutting, crushing, suffocation, poisoning, or moisture stress by inundation or dehydration can result in the death of the tree. Injuries caused during construction projects may not be finally apparent for many years after completion of the project,but can ultimately kill the tree. The following guidelines are minimum standards recommended for the preservation of trees. These guidelines should be incorporated in construction contracts, and details made available to all parties involved with the work on the site, including equipment operators. Other guidelines and protective measures may also be appropriate, in addition to those listed below. 1. Protection Barrier: A protection barrier shall be installed around the tree or trees to be preserved. The bather shall be constructed of durable fencing material such as chain-link fencing. This project: the fencing should be chain-link fencing. The bather shall be placed as far from the base of the tree(s) as possible,preferably at the drip-line. The fencing shall be maintained in good repair throughout the duration of the project, and shall not be removed, relocated,or encroached upon without permission of the arborist involved.There shall be signing on the fencing that states who the project site arborist is and a contact phone number, and that no encroachment occurs without the written consent of the site arborist. 2. Storage of Materials: There shall be NO storage of materials or supplies of any kind within the protection barriers. Concrete and cement materials,block, stone, sand,and soil shall NOT be placed within the drip-line of the tree. 3. Fuel Storage: Fuel storage shall NOT be permitted within 150 feet of any tree to be preserved. Refueling, servicing, and maintenance of equipment and machinery shall NOT be permitted within 150 feet of protected trees. 4. Debris and Waste Materials: Debris and waste from construction or other activities shall NOT be permitted within the protected areas. Wash-down of concrete or cement handling equipment, in particular, shall NOT be permitted within 150 feet of protected trees. DDH/06-297 Tree Protection Guidelines and Construction Sequence David D. Hunter,Reeistered Consultine Arborist#408 2 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes August 19,2006 SW 69th and Dartmouth Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 5. Grade Changes: Grade changes can be particularly damaging to trees. Even as little as two inches of fill can cause the death of a tree. Lowering the grade can destroy major portions of a root system. Any grade changes proposed should be approved by an ISA Certified Arborist or a Registered Consulting Arborist of the American Society of Consulting Arborists before construction begins, and precautions taken to mitigate potential injuries to trees attempting to preserve. 6. Damages: Any damages or injuries to the trees should be reported to the project arborist as soon as possible. Severed roots shall be pruned cleanly to healthy tissue, using proper pruning tools. Broken branches or limbs shall be pruned according to International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)Pruning Guidelines and ANSI A-300 Pruning Standards. 7. Preventative Measures: Before construction begins,fertilization of the affected trees is recommended to improve the tree vigor and health. Soil analysis testing should be completed to assure fertilization with appropriate fertilization products. Pruning of the tree canopies and branches should be done at the direction of the project arborist to remove any dead or broken branches,and to provide the necessary clearance for construction equipment. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership's to any property are assumed to be good and marketable.No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear,under responsible ownership and competent management. 2. It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes,or other governmental regulations. 3. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however,the consultant can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 4. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report,unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement. 5. Loss or alteration of any of this report, invalidates the entire report. 6. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any other than the person to whom it is addressed,without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser. 7. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report,nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client,to the public through advertising,public relations, news, sales, or other media,without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser—particularly as to value conclusions, identity of the consultant/appraiser, or any reference to any professional society or institute or to any installed designation, conferred upon the consultant/appraiser as stated in his qualifications. DDH/06-297 Tree Protection Guidelines and Construction Sequence David D. Hunter,Registered Consulting Arborist#408 3 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes August 19, 2006 SW 69th and Dartmouth Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Construction Sequence 1. Before: Before work is started,the tree protection fencing must be installed,with guidance of the project arborist. Any pruning to avoid conflict with the fencing can be done by the project arborist during installation. 2. During: The tree protection plan is to save the adjacent trees in the project area, and to have as little impact as possible. Any pruning or removals should follow the Guidelines for the Protection of Trees on Construction Sites must be followed. Large roots over 2" diameter should be dug under or around instead of shear cutting with equipment. If larger roots must be cut the Guidelines must be followed. The project arborist will be notified of the cutting of larger roots over 2" of diameter. Project arborist can be on site,with reasonable notice,to be able to aid in the pruning of tree limbs or roots. Project arborist will write report(s)to document tree protection work done. 3. After: Project arborist to verify that tree protection standards were met as pertaining to the Guidelines for the Protection of Trees,and write report as needed to document results. DDH/06-297 Tree Protection Guidelines and Construction Sequence • . # 1. Z oOP$ aw 11 ' 1s f un. . - . . • .• ... . ........:.. r .. . . . . . . . . . . . �f. -- :.:1.-...:-,..-• .1'1 --T-RE...r/vu Ai-to•K:y. gb glac, \\ _ _ _ l, 0 4 \ i. :__._,.._. : - 1.,„... .. 1. bquzb Hau,--R-,,, Rc/1 4/5/d s" ' -, \N____ _—_—____ t 1 Po Box -3Z V ,} 280--\ —\ '+ cl 1-ST(y2 C/uP, aZ 9'?-/ 4' - 6o --31 q A 26 Ce/f • . • 4- - -- i. . . . i. L. ....: . fit„,„(diyha-ieti7-# 4:4:- . . . ., friHi ai..,-\ ,>cl: . . A ON 418/0"1.. \ ( \ 2 l'7� ...Mr lr� `3`� ..1.4.. .• \ - , -I Ve�a/'�.`04 /L fa A'`-,y�!�tl F .APre-1-- t , ,- 4 -0 "T- ill, (K.- • Apaittr, : • zwioef �.0is" L 270— „tsNi \ 7 1� > aripiA6V, r V !f.r , '' -is "II \---- .,4 •sil-Bli (Al copi,',,, Or a 7 "I/ i'. • ill AIL: . . - „...... --, , p._ :gm, .0.1• 1,........_ A . 'IP •.r'4., A do. . 1)&4 411111P. i ,,,, (1/ ( ifit....V :'' . .- �i� wr �Ir '''.'-,--- ---• ------...,...--1. --, ."------_, z 011" 4 f.', f.,/ / --1.:-(i.-47,40 .. AI / ---7- -----"1 ---- .b ■Z L.: *V / / >/:'4.4-' A*74 n ---, n /--/_---____N A./ir,V/ drat,•• 4 (5, Asti vm, --... ...7 774mt-si ..1.7 -4-7-4. ., . .7. i , r./ . :. :. . .1 / jam ` ' • ,: �` �.�, \ : - - ) . . . 121 . A a • • - - - :- ft .v..C.. . -... .-. C,-.-. .\.-.-. 4©. ! . 114' t 'I � _ der , - - - - `- r __ _ . :___ _ _________._ ,,..„ •... . i . Regulated buffer for the proposed road widening on SW 69th I FIGURE $2041.1 Avenue and. SW Dartmouth in Ti Oregon Tigard, (base ma ;;; 9 9 ( map provided F.r. T AA D:wwas. 9[1f1R 1 1 . . 1 I 0 . -\{ iq in eee tAi C 0-019-..C1 ike5. • II 70th AVE NOT A PART OF THIS PROJECT \ 1 \ ? - . os. i' 17 it& IP 1 hii'l'i: 22' W1 x 40' FA 103 INSTALL .9r-SR..4 I A* 141111 1 1 i.T.428.3.00 AL ,0%.• OCTAL 4-1 l . i AU"--.4....___N C-1 c.1 Z w ( ) • rx-----F !•I F).:et, ) i MININIIIIIII MI MONO l■ 2 282 *4■"54i I r0 • I i 20 0 20 40 L 22' W x 40' Ns 4, II u3 \ - ,//////i i i .--- ' ' 1., r.r..28100 LA ::::. C lilt tl4 il 0 0 rn-6 Ft. . • .c. A. ikStAl 7,7. 4d 0 I 22' W x 40' . . Ill a „A,s/: „..<. . ,. i,. ,,,\,mum:7: .47,,,....f.,\L.. miror.......,22_4:4,x4s_...,4,-.....:_tur.:::2 --1•.,i..617::.5'' .,....: ;0..., : fil f::r.-\6 \::,,\\ \:::,,e....; -...1c...:1 •i 1 F„ie. 144.; 16i1 ill PM N 1 ' YAs4 111 ills 111 . , <,- / z__„,e?,i <‘.,,,, .. • T.T..280.75 .4 , ' . 1 , .., \ V\......,N. \. 124 SQ. . DICit011. CI4MCIT 1.070 In FT.`isfr• . T .!, - 4;:`... ---%saIN,...- .1)1./Piaills.F.-ATTA.414ii-W7.i OM riorl ;.,.- -...--... rell \t..r\ qt- Tw.265.0 Tviw2.•7 , ,, - M.,,m,.,,,„. ,-•••,-••N,,•,, ..owilik inr.. ....41.1,ME - ' 11; -.4. •. . ..- w. -...... ,--...4.,. \ . - - -- -- - A _.-ri,.. .. 4 ..... "10PrITO. . - .... % . Tw 26 6 6 ----- \I A 1 -- I,.mii truly- \\ ,-- 111 r ilitip '• '41;imis 7 ° ---\:". --. ilk . ,e011' En ' \ A I "...* lifis. A 2,4„..tax60 40' h icir .: : . . .. .. ., \ .. ; ..., j /41,,,,„. . . , . 1 ..... i...,,, „.. . ,\„\ .„ ,., ..,... .%),„1,4 A 1 \ \J 1,‘“ .;_illwa. a q., 41. AN 41 /I%I 1 \ A I■ 4 :I L.. A 2t, W x 40' I . , . --„,.. ,_ .., .;,,,,'4,711 4e ! 4 0.256.50 is . , • - . "1/4‘..... VI=- 5 1::§11 kk , . 4"14 ,•14,14',.1', 1 s r. 47 11 _.•••7 -.63747 7 1111 V. .4;=ior-- ' ' ,-., .'I1A : ,*. .,4 1094,t111.• 131 -A1 , All "ir 24 W x 4 sA4ce .tc.—... e‘,----- - -• , ;. 2 -•:*.-4--:;-,p.44A.,---ai kt, . ,,,..1, n 9-rjr,, „I 40..„di,: ,,e lor.■ 0 • 1, 'f1)7,.-',.1 -cf`' '• '.Aivi"?.'-'4;•,•"40: It 1 N um - A F.,....20mip,,1 7...!'"/ '?c ' . . '. 1■ ''''';MI6 zi 4%.3itibL.'•Wap.i*:76: ..,/ ' ... ....,\0 if • •'‹.....' / (41 • le p .,r •, 1 1 . •I ''*,74 ziAlft, ,•• No.. 1 1 I \ I ■ ' - i 7 - %'-. d \ EP .7 -4## ,, ,• i,o". • /or "N . ::1 •4, ....„ ....:.',.\' \,.,, 7,-.4....„.., ,, ; ) n ,iw,v, rr.;.. .1,l' .!o.' ill . ,, n‘,0,...erdA, 471- .•,c. II 0 Ell \ \zss •..1, '..,, ,s, swilx, ,-vi/ ., , ..N0 ,0..0Jugil ,1 n c, • - . ... \,,..\ (‘)..) /I) I \ , ' • , -so . ..-: \. A c.\\>/ III •,' ilk ----.2 / -1,\ , ... ..-ir. ••• "„. ., #,.., aiw tic._ hi: •I,- ,. ...,/ Irwin! l'' , Airm ,r.: : '' (... L 0,,4,,■%## \ i - -,10 ip■lip 1 o'-••...-al ! / 7:1711 \ 4p-IumownsmawilTilixasimmitraliWiswwir iimessowairliiiiiiiimmiliimwsurinow• 4, 0 r___ 1 f 1 40 411M11:1111111 EMMA MUICI,OMMIVINO AUMM .111 ILM MMEAMOLN MU MOW•MO 1 I / -TAO 1111111MOMMINNIMMIO■ ... MN 11111 7= 1 \/ _ „...\10: ' / L.. // li.Te . anci _ . r, __is_ (ss ... ..._ ____t_ss, 1 .....—_ s /' \it Iss is.: 0 ' r i•..00, 1 % , ,sw D TIA0yTH GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN R _ \ . t( ,1, , N, I-113 ..■ .....0,,,' , iq 2000 \ PRELIMINARY SIGHT DISTANCE CERTIFICATION For AMBER WOODS I 7 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 SEPTEMBER 29 , 2006 There are two proposed accesses for this site. Three single-family attached townhomes are located at SW 70th Avenue and have individual sixteen ft. wide driveways with ten ft. length each and eight ft. separation. The southerly most driveway is 65 ft. from the Dartmouth north roadway curb. Four single-family attached townhomes are provided access with ( 1) thirty ft. wide access from SW 69th Avenue. The thirty ft. wide access offers entrance to a thirty-four ft. wide maneuvering area and three guest parking spaces. The 69th Avenue access is 234 ft. from the Dartmouth north roadway curb. Both 69th Avenue and 70th Avenue are local streets with design speeds of 25 MPH requiring two hundred-fifty feet of sight distance in both directions, in accordance with City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, modified by the distance to intersection at SW Dartmouth Street. As required by the referenced standards, sight distance from the proposed site access to SW 69th Avenue is clear to the intersection at SW Dartmouth to the south and was measured in excess of 250 feet to the north ( 320 feet measured) . Sight distance from the northerly most driveway on SW 70th Avenue is clear to the intersection at SW Dartmouth to the south and was measured in excess of 250 feet to the north (430 feet measured) . Sight distance of the southerly most driveway was measured at 390 feet. The standards require that measurement be based on an eye height of 3. 5 feet and an object height of 4.25 feet above the road; and assumed to be 10 feet from the near edge of pavement to the front of a stopped vehicle. In conclusion, I hereby certify that intersection sight distance for access to SW 69th Avenue and access to SW 70th Avenue conforms to the requirements for sight distance as set forth in the City of Tigard design standards for this development. Q9 \GIN4.P ROFESs Sincerely, �', .7 3 2 4� 16,221 Exp 12-31-0 tukriptILItij Vic Accomando, P.E. L/C 0- 1,A Page 1 of 1 • \�CleanWater File Number Services 06-002386 Our commitment is clear. Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter Jurisdiction Washington County Date August 22, 2006 Map & Tax Lot 1S136DD-07500, 07600 Owner Pacific NW Properties LTD Site Address Applicant VIC ACCOMANDO CONSULTING ENGINEER Tigard, OR 97223 Address 7250 SW Ashdale Dr Portland, OR 97223 Proposed Activity Residential development Phone (503) 890-5483 This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (R&O 04-9). YES NO YES I NO Natural Resources Alternatives Analysis , i Assessment (NRA) X Required X Ti Submitted (Section 3.02.6) District Site Visit X Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis X Concur with NRA/or X Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis X i submitted information Sensitive Area Present On-Site X I Tier 3 Alternatives Analysis X Sensitive Area Present Vegetated Corridor Off-Site X Averaging X Vegetated Corridor i Vegetated Corridor Present On-Site X Mitigation Required X Width of Vegetated Feet On-Site Mitigation X Corridor (feet) ; 808 sf Condition of Vegetated Marginalroegraded Off-Site Mitigation Corridor X Enhancement Required X I Planting Plan Attached X Encroachment into ' - Enhancement/restoration Concurrent with site I Vegetated Corridor X completion date development I (Section 3.02.4) j Type and Square Footage soa sf.total ! Geotechnical Report of Encroachment Lot sf. � required X Outfal —l 24 sf. q Allowed Use X X X 1 (Section ) ___ _ 'Duffel! Lot I Conditions Attached Section 3.02.4 L_..---._._._.._._.__._._. L._._ �. • 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 4 File Number 06-002386 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. No impacts currently proposed. 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. 13. The vegetated corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum of 50 feet wide, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive area SPECIAL CONDITIONS 14. 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). Page 2 of 4 File Number 06-002386 15. 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. 16. Enhancement/restoration of the vegetated corridor shall be provided in accordance with R&O 04-9, Appendix D. 17. 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. 18. 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. 19. Performance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2 20. For any developments, which create multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership, the District may 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. 21. The water quality swale and detention pond shall be planted with District approved native species, and designed to blend into the natural surroundings. CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS 22. 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. 23. 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). 24. 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. 25. Protection of the 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 ( 1 ) Page 3 of 4 _ - t ♦ •_ I ✓ I/ \ f — — 111 t, • . OREGON `1�� , I... 1, !i 11930 5W - —1� \1:. I' 1. 70th AVE I' NOT A PART OF THIS PRO.�CT; il INSTALL C� S I II 1 Ia�\ 22' W x 40 g ENTRANCE qER� i, 2p.$ II�I F.F.=283.00 0,'1 DETAIL 4-lI I �4 II �� J . 6� ` n - I N9 16150 SAINT IMBERLAND DR rk„..jr . ' j' 1 262 �Q . ii . O(0 ._ BEAVERTON,OR 9'1007 - , 40 4080 L j 2 • iiii g4 y I C( p4roved g 503& O 54e3 �' j 22' W X 40'" g1 C �I al} aL�r S FAX 503-259-9508 `� 4 I ,�I� F.F,.28300 . 1`60 i n VIrq l�tlHl M,,T accomando1omen.com I ■ III 3 C �� c D 4h Rt 1i..e § R' ' \�� II 22' w x 40'1 4..,''• �� _ 1 SQL 1 ate-.......1 .2 -o(v § § g I O F.f.•280.75 g - ■■ =_3 ACL r FF.-280.75 �M C ,■ .. 3 1 `ol Ci(t > > > 0 1 I A V ® 127---�7.5 !■ VT I N I o ENCROACHMENT I.144e�"V. ■ 4 ' ♦-I ._ ■■ 282 ...1‘I 1 �y��•4��-C�� 22' W x 40' ��jK�►,�j� :!■ �� (RIP-RAP wee II '1i ti)�:J..43►•t�1 �■ I 3 1 0 .fit tv •"•* .4-"VS•Se • V L•4 t� -e�iii /% 1.n` 2}. 1 124 SO.FT. ENCROACHMENT 660 50. FT. ENCROACHMENT �•• _ � `. �1 1B7N / I IA \I 608 SO. FT. TOTAL ENCROACHMENT® ►VV�� !!_�'��'ly _,` ,;"■■ ? ` TW.26S0 \ \—.Lt., `. �� : ? �Aii • A r � TMI'z' 7 \� � I':' �r4{ , i 1 O Ji1 L' �w ,_ '`�■ 26 ■! =2 -1.5 ','�`J A 1�♦, \`lam ^ a p ...; TV/ 261 6 tru1A. ati a'/ \``_^� l'i' t 0 7L I I� '24� W x 40 �� \ ,fir i.":• `� N 4444...4444. .` -�. ' F.F.=z58.6o ' `. .✓ O 4...10• 1 D5 4444' ..11 \ �l� �. !i� \ �`' �7Y li:',❖.❖..mo qq V 1z' „ill',111,1r/ f + '.i Q►�*• 00 JO♦if�` r►+' It 6 � 11 � 24� W x 40 I •g-•� `� ♦4 4i•P. r 400'0✓Oi ►6.•� ■■ � 3 v d♦ ♦f ► ♦♦444.41. wr, o. F.F.=256.50 `. ��i♦i •i'� ♦��.♦i•O• J�i►n��•Ntw - s,\* ..,... .4•f♦♦•• - v i t :t1! , I n cf• �.♦� O .,_ .-♦•••• ♦� i '16i♦♦♦•2� Hal i 1 3 i Ir 24' W x ■.,,•�l ` . a o ••. .o. . •.' .. ,0,,••• ■■ ' it 1 \\./ //1 F.F.•254.20 H j0;.-,/ ` (41,30i14', 7•,16;',%"44, 4:":;:::::::.:111.;,i,„.4” -►i,„:9♦♦• \ �t� �:�l ” '4. 1/ ' ,� , U t1♦• � ? # ■■ \ 1 .�„ _� fir...7.04., :x7. •0/ U..f • ` � ,' '\' \ I NW 1 iw��■i■►��1�■��I.�A�u■��In��u��i�lunuir��unT�� G'� .' N .w■��■ �� u■I�a^��r�■`■ u..■ ■a,. ■��■l, •.. ■■ ■.0 ■��u r l / 6 1 1 �w w 1 Vii.. _ ,} 7 )-- T 'z,k . I 1 _ ___--lt- \— —. / / / i _ ,4 ____1\...1, .1 .00 (/1 i , \SW DA TMo11TH T 1 1 \ 1 i� I i ( I� I `� „, r154:1? i� 1 \ 1 /t 1 GRADING Sc EROSION CONTROL PLAN NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT NOTES 1. OWNER OR DESIGNATED PERSON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER INSTALLATION 4. IF THERE ARE EXPOSED SOILS OR SOILS NOT FULLY ESTABLISHED FROM OCTOBER 1st THROUGH APRIL 30th, • AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES, EN ACCORDANCE THE MET HEATHEN EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES MILL BE IN EFFECT. SEE THE EROSION PREVENTION WITH LOCAL. STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS. AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL (CHAPTER 4) FOR REQUIREMENTS. AMBER MODS I CONDOMINIUM 2. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING LIMITS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED 5. SITE TO COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF CMS DESIGN 6 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS (R6O 04-9). TOAN1-1OME5 IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. NO DISTURBANCE BEYOND THE CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE MARKINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY 6. REMOVAL OF HIMALAYALAN BLACKBERRY VINES AND ENGLISH IVY SHALL COMPLY MITH THE THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR FOR THE OURA TION OF CONSTRUCTION. RECOMMENDATIONS OF CLEAN MATER SERVICES' "INTEGRATED VEGETATION AND ANIMAL MANAGEMENT "n-,x"110' GUIDANCE” BOOKLET. TL 1'500 4 TL 7600 3. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL TM 151 36DD CLEARING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES, AND SUCH A MANNER AS TO INSURE ThAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN MATER DOES NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. ROADWAYS OR VIOLATE TIGARD,OR 11223 APPLICABLE MATER STANDARDS. PRAM Iry O.raam.r VJA J5 re, 15202 . >� 2 DA.. Vic Accomando, P.E. 7250 S.W. Ashda/e Drive Portland, Oregon 97223 accomando 1 @msn.corn 503-890-5483 Natural Resource Assessment For Vegetated Corridor Per Standard Site Assessment Method For Amber Woods Townhomes Seven Unit Development Tax Map 1S1 26DD Tax Lots 7500 & 7600 Tigard, Oregon 97223 By Dartmouth Development, LLC 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton, Oregon 97007 Contact Dennis Grayson 503-740-2235 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This analysis of sensitive areas precedes a Site Development Review and Sensitive Lands Review Application to the City of Tigard, Oregon. The development proposes to integrate (2) two tax lots, 1S1 36DD07500 & 07600, into (1) one tax lot with (7) seven condominium units (see attached site plan). An unnamed perennial stream with adjacent riparian wetlands has been identified on the site. A Natural Resource Assessment, conducted for the proposed widening on SW 69th and SW Dartmouth Street, by Pacific Habitat Services, Inc. (PHS) of Wilsonville, Oregon is applicable for this site. While this assessment is valid, it does not attempt to address on-site requirements for site development or the process to secure a service provider letter prior to land use permit application. The referenced Natural Resource Assessment prepared December 2005 is hereby made a part of this analysis and a copy is attached. This Natural Resource Assessment investigates the perennial stream traversing the 0.91-acre site from the east at a storm culvert outfall and recently constructed retaining wall at SW 69th Avenue, 170 linear feet southwesterly to an existing storm ditch inlet, approximately 24 feet beyond the midpoint of the south right-of-way line. The stream and vegetated corridor is displayed on an attached Exhibit"A". STANDARD SITE ASSESSMENT METHOD Because development will add more than 500 square feet of impervious area, this report will conform to the fundamentals of the Standard Site Assessment Method, Appendix C, 4.2. as follows: 4.2 b. Step 1: Conduct a reconnaissance of the project area and complete the Sensitive Area Certification Form. 1. Determine presence of Water Quality Sensitive Areas on the site... Response: An inspection of the site concurs with the December 2005 PHS report that a perennial stream with wetlands does exist. Step 2: Delineate the boundaries of the Sensitive Area Response: As a part of the PHS assessment, the wetland limits were established and flagged and subsequently the flags were induded in a survey as depicted in the Sensitive Areas Map, Exhibit"A", a 24"x 36"drawing included with this report. Step 3:Determine the vegetated Corridor width... Response: Per Chapter 3, Table 3.1 Vegetated Corridor Widths, Figure 3.1 — Graph 2 determines that streams with perennial flow shall be (50) fifty feet per side. The regulated vegetated corridor is (50) fifty feet wide on the site with slopes 15% to 20%. Step 4: Determine the existing Vegetated Corridor condition Response: The PHS Vegetated Corridor Plant Community commentary acknowledges (3) three distinct plant communities identified as Community A located south of the stream adjacent to Dartmouth Street, Community B also located south of the stream near SW 69th Avenue and Community C extending along the north side of the stream. Vegetated corridor Plant Community A has a 30% tree cover (Oregon white oak) with 35% native shrub cover (serviceberry, hazelnut, snowberry, one-seed hawthorn and Pacific ninebark) and 5% native herbs (cascade Oregon grape, Sword fern and California dewberry). Invasive/noxious plants were present (English ivy and Himalayan blackberry) occupying 35% of the area. Vegetated corridor Plant Community B has a 20% tree cover (Oregon ash) with 50% native shrub cover (serviceberry, hazelnut, one-seed hawthorn, Oregon ash, Pacific ninebark, cherry laurel, rose and snowberry). Sword fern exists on 5% of the Community B space. Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and Himalayan blackberry) inhabit 21%. Vegetated Plant Community C has a 30% tree cover (Oregon white oak) with a 95% tree canopy. Shrubs (serviceberry, hazelnut, one-seed hawthorn, Pacific ninebark and snowberry) cover 30%. Herbs (cascade Oregon grape, Sword fern and California dewberry) cover 5%. Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and Himalayan blackberry) cover 35% of Community Plant C. The following table summarizes the condition of the (3) three plant communities per Chapter 3, Table 3.2 Vegetative Corridor Standards. TABLE A - SUMMARY OF PLANT COMMUNITIES Corridor Community Conditions A B C Good >80% cover-native plants and 95% tree >50% tree canopy canopy. 50-80% cover-native plants 59% native 60% native 59% native Marginal and 26-50% tree canopy cover and 30/o cover cover tree canopy <50% cover-native plants and 20% tree Degraded <25% tree canopy canopy _ Plant Community A is in marginal condition and there will be no impact due to development of this project. Plant Community B is in degraded to marginal condition and no impact will occur due to development. Plant Community C is in a marginal to good condition, however with non-native Himalayan blackberry so dense and pervasive (30 to 35% of Community C area), manual removal is not practical. Therefore, a non-selective mechanical removal with hydro-axe or dozer with blade will be required. With anticipated encroachment due to development, Plant Community C requires a Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis which follows. Step 5:Additional assessments .1. If development is proposed closer than 35'from the break in slope at the top of the ravine, a geotechnical analysis is required. Response: No development will occur closer than 27 feet from the break in slope at the top of bank. A Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis is not proposed. Step 6: Prepare the Natural Resource Assessment Report- Response: This report is accompanied with a scaled 1 inch equals 20 feet base map site plan showing: Property lines and dimensions Location of proposed buildings, decks and driveways Existing and proposed conditions for property and surrounding area Location and dimensions of roads, driveways, utilities, parking areas and buildings Location of yards Locations, boundaries and conditions of existing Sensitive areas and drainageways Locations, boundaries and conditions of the Vegetative Corridor including Plant Communities, contours and notation of slopes TIER 1 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Plant Community C is considered in a marginal condition due to only 59% native groundcover and populated with a dense cover of Himalayan blackberry. A development of (4) condominium units at the north end of the site with a common access to SW Dartmouth Avenue and (3) condominium units at the site's west side along SW 70th Avenue necessitates an encroachment on the 50' wetland buffer. As the base map site plan depicts, the 1,070 sq. ft. north encroachment and the 124 sq. ft. west encroachment (1,194 sq. ft. total) is mitigated with a 1:1 replacement area of 1,197 sq. ft. As a result of discussions with Environmental Review staff, it has been determined that the development and the resultant mitigation for encroachment minimizes incursion into the vegetative corridor. With conformance to the criteria explicated in CWS Design & Construction Standards R&O 04-9, Chapter 3, Appendix C and Appendix D, it is likely a Storm Water Connection Permit will be issued based on the proposed plans. NATIVE PLANT REVEGETATIVE PLAN A July 7, 2006 telephone conversation with Damon Reishe suggested that a revegetation plan conforming to requirements of Appendix D, Landscape Requirements appropriate to the site conditions and restoring the Plant Communities to"a good corridor condition"could be submitted after a Service Provider Letter is issued. The design team will coordinate with Clean Water Services and the City of Tigard to propose a landscape plan for the development that recognizes the screening and buffering and revegetation requirements. END OF REPORT s , IMPACT STUDY For AMBER WOODS I 7 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 SEPTEMBER 29 , 2006 INTRODUCTION The proposed site, adjacent to SW Dartmouth Street, spans two tax lots: Tax Lot 7500 is a 14, 530. 62 sq. ft. ( 0. 33-acre) parcel located at the west side of the site along SW 70th Avenue. Tax Lot 7600 is a 24,132.20 sq. ft. ( 0. 55-acre) parcel at the east part of the site along SW 69th within the city limits of Tigard, Oregon. The total site is 0.89 acres. The existing use of the parcels is undeveloped urban forest. The City of Tigard has designated the parcels as within the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district and applies the "Tigard Triangle Design Standards" criteria to this application. SW 70th Avenue is aligned with the east edge of zoning district C-G, General Commercial with a Planned Unit Overlay. A Type II Site Development Review application and a Sensitive Lands Review has been submitted proposing to build (7) seven 3-story attached multi-family townhome units, with front garages. Four (4) units access SW 69th Avenue and three ( 3) units have individual access on SW 70th Avenue. No access is proposed to SW Dartmouth Street. Half-street improvements along the frontage of SW 69th Avenue, SW 70th Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street have been completed under a separate permit. IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT Transportation system The Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) , adopted January 2002, addresses traffic related improvements in the vicinity of this project. The TSP identifies future improvements to SW Dartmouth Street to five lanes and SW 72nd Avenue to five lanes. The Dartmouth improvements were accomplished prior to this application, as were half-street improvements along SW 69th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue and required right-of-way dedication. An additional ( 11) eleven feet of dedication along SW Dartmouth Street is provided with this project. The project is within TriMet's boundary. No bus stops are available along Dartmouth or 69th Avenue. The closest service is Stop ID 7846, located 0. 13 mi. at 68th Avenue and SW Clinton and Stop ID 7849, 0.12 mi. at 68th Avenue and the Freeway entrance. The TSP identifies Dartmouth Street and 68th Avenue as alternative bike routes. Drainage System Presently, storm water runoff along the northern side of the site meanders southerly as overland sheetflow approximately 90 ft. to 120 ft. down a 16% slope to a perennial stream. The southeast quadrant of the site drains northwesterly at 20% to the stream from the other side. Provisions for street runoff was accomplished with curb inlets installed along SW 69th Avenue, SW 70th Avenue and both sides of SW Dartmouth Street. For purposes of water quality and water quantity, the site was divided into two basins; 69th basin for the 4 units with parking area and 70th basin for the 3 units on 70th Avenue. Using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph analysis method, the 25- year runoff for each pre-developed basin was calculated. The 25-year developed runoff was then calculated to arrive at the individual detention requirement. Water quality requirements were analyzed per the provisions set forth in Clean Water Services ' "Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management", Appendix B: Water Quality and Quantity Facility Design. Sewer System An existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line is located near the centerline of SW 69th Avenue flowing south to Dartmouth Street. A new 8-inch sanitary sewer was constructed in SW 70th Avenue with a terminus at the project's northwest property line and flowing to Dartmouth Street. Individual service tees will be installed to provide sewer service to each unit. Water System The TVWD maintains an 8" water main in SW 69th Avenue and a new 8" water main was constructed in SW 70th Avenue to serve the project. The proposed development will tap the existing water lines for domestic water needs. School District The project is served by The Tigard-Tualatin School District. Student residents of this development will attend Metzger Elementary School located at 10350 SW Lincoln and Fowler Middle School located at 10865 SW Walnut Street. High School students will attend Tigard High School, located at 9000 SW Durham Road with over 2, 000 students. Garbage Hauler Pride Disposal will service the project. Parks Potso Dog Park and Bonita Park are located within 1 mile of the project. Metzger Park, located at 8400 SW Hemlock Street, is a seven-acre fully accessible park with a variety of outdoor play equipment and indoor rental facility for weddings, parties, memorials and meetings. Environmental Impact Sixty-two vehicle trips' per day will be added for a 7-unit townhome multi-family project. Ambient noise level for multi-family units are estimated to be below single- family noise levels due to closer proximity of neighbors and less yard maintenance tools (mowers, trimmers, etc. ) Site Impact Traffic Evaluation Handbook, US Govt. Printing Office, 1985 Oil trap catch basins and a proprietary water quality feature will intercept point source pollutants from driveway and parking areas. CONCURRENCE WITH DEDICATION The applicant concurs with the dedication recommendations set forth in the pre- application conference notes and submits preliminary design with ( 11) eleven feet of right-of-way dedication along the frontage of SW Dartmouth Street. END OF IMPACT STUDY Page3of3 VIc Accomando, P.E. 76750 SW Timberland Drive Beaverton, Oregon 97007 accomando 7Oa msn.corn 503-890-5483 Alternatives Analysis For Vegetated Corridor Description of why Encroachment is Needed Amber Woods Townhomes Seven Unit Development Tax Map 1S1 26DD Tax Lots 7500 & 7600 Tigard, Oregon 97223 By Dartmouth Development, LLC 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton, Oregon 97007 Contact Vic Accomando 503-890-5483 SITE REQUIREMENTS In conformance with the requirements of the City of Tigard Community Development Code, side yard setback (10'), front yard setback (20') and rear yard setback (20') dimensions must conform to the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district. Accordingly, positioning of the attached residence buildings resulted in constricted space while recognizing minimum floor space needs. Several iterations were performed with varying size buildings. As a result, building footprint dimensions were reduced from 24 ft. wide to 22 ft. wide along SW 69th Avenue to minimize encroachment in the vegetated corridor. Additionally, parking area and access to garages was reduced to minimal functionality. Implementing a retaining wall further reduced trespass into the buffer area. To minimize impact to the buffer near SW 70th Avenue, a decision to place (3) three units at 24 ft. wide was selected instead of (4) four 22 ft. wide units, which would be possible, if not for the buffer. DESCRIPTION OF WHY ENCROACHMENT IS NEEDED The major force driving the encroachment into the vegetated corridor is the density of development mandated by the City of Tigard, demonstrated as: Gross area of site: 38,662 sq. ft. Subtracting sensitive lands: 16,631 sq. ft. Subtracting Public right-of-way: 2,406 sq. ft. Net development area: 19,625 sq. ft. = 0.45 acres Maximum units = 0.45 x (R25) 25 units per acre = 11.26 = 11 units Minimum units = 11 units (maximum) x 80% = 8.8 units = 8 units The minimum units for this site are 8 units. A variance has been requested to reduce the number of units to (7) seven units, due to the inordinate area allocated for vegetated corridor. GRADING IN THE VEGETATED CORRIDOR As discussed in a meeting with Environmental Review staff Friday August 18, 2006, any grading activity within the buffer will only entail removing invasive/noxious plants without disturbing native plants and will only occur at natural or native ground level. Mechanical brush cutters or hydro-axe will be employed without any herbicides due to the close proximity of the drainage way. CWS staff will be notified 72 hours prior to any brush cutting. END OF REPORT Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street 1 in Washington County, Oregon _1 (Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Section 36DD Tax lots 7500 and 7600) 11 !1 ,1 Prepared for Mildren Design Group Attn: Gene Mildren 7560 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 �J Prepared by John van Staveren Shawn Eisner Amber Wierck Pacific Habitat Services, Inc. 1 9450 Commerce Circle, Suite 180 1 Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 (503) 570-0800 1 (503) 570-0855 FAX PHS Project Number: 3254 1 December 19, 2005 • 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT 1 2.1 Regulatory Jurisdiction 1 2.2 Natural Resource Assessment Methodology 1 2.2.1 Delineation of Sensitive Areas 1 2.2.2 Determine Vegetated Corridor Width and Condition 2 I3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS 2 4.0 VEGETATED CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT 3 1 4.1 Vegetated Corridor Width Determination 3 4.2 Vegetated Corridor Plant Community 3 4.3 Vegetated Corridor Plant Community Condition 5 4.4 Vegetated Corridor Discussion 6 5.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 6 J 5.1 Site Plan 6 6.0 CONCLUSION 6 7.0 REFERENCES 7 APPENDIX A: Figures .l . 'i 1.0 INTRODUCTION I Pacific Habitat Services, Inc. (PHS) conducted a Natural Resource Assessment for the proposed road widening on SW 69th and Dartmouth in Washington County, Oregon (Township 1 South, Range 1W, Section 36DD, Tax lots 7500 and 7600). The generalized location is shown in IFigure 1. All figures are in Appendix A. PHS identified a perennial tributary of Red Rock Creek with small areas of adjacent creek-side wetlands on the site. The field work for this natural resource assessment was conducted by PHS staff on September 23, 2004. The site was revisited on November 21, 2005, to verify the wetland boundary and document current site conditions. 2.0 NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT '1 2.1 Regulatory Jurisdiction I Clean Water Services (CWS) as part of their Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order 04-09 (R&O 04-09)requires that natural resource assessments be conducted for Sensitive Areas within their jurisdiction. Sensitive Areas include intermittent and perennial rivers, streams, l and springs, existing and created wetlands, and natural lakes,ponds, and in-stream impoundments (CWS, 2004). CWS requires a wetland determination/delineation and a vegetated corridor assessment on projects that contain or are within 200 feet of a Sensitive Area. IThere is a perennial tributary on the western portion of the property which necessitated the completion of this natural resource assessment prior to site development. Ill 2.2 Natural Resource Assessment Methodology The NRA contains two components: a delineation of the water quality sensitive areas and a vegetated corridor evaluation. A detailed discussion of the methodology is included in Chapter 3 and Appendix C of R&O 04-09 (CWS, 2004). A brief description of each component is included below. 2.2.1 Delineation of Sensitive Areas A delineation of water quality sensitive areas (wetland, intermittent/perennial streams, springs, and natural lakes or ponds) must first be conducted. For wetlands, the required criteria and suggested methodologies of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Technical Report Y-87-1, (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) must be used to delineate the boundaries. This manual defines wetlands as requiring indicators of hydric soils, a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology. A determination as to whether streams are intermittent or perennial must be made. The extent of all streams, springs, and natural lakes or ponds must also be determined. Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 1 - 2.2.2 Determine Vegetated Corridor Width and Condition IThe vegetated corridor width can range between 15 and 200 feet and is measured horizontally from I the outer edge of the water quality sensitive area. The boundaries of the sensitive areas and their vegetated corridors must be staked, surveyed, and mapped within the site and within 200 feet of the i property line on a base map. The vegetated corridor width is based on the type of water resource (wetland, lake, stream), the size and nature of the water resource(acreage and/or lperennial/intermittent), the size of the watershed, and the adjacent slope. i The existing condition of the vegetated corridor must be determined. This is accomplished by 1) identifying the plant community types present in the vegetated corridor, 2) documenting Irepresentative sample points, 3) characterizing each plant community type, 4) determining the 1 cover by native species, invasive species, and noxious plants, and 5)based on this information determining whether the existing vegetated corridor condition for each plant community is good, 11 marginal,or degraded. 7I 3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The site is forested and undeveloped. A perennial tributary of Red Rock Creek flows east to west -. across the southeast corner of the study area. Adjacent land use includes residential development f to the north and west. In addition, there is industrial development across SW Dartmouth to the south and a vacant parcel across SW 69`h Avenue to the east. Upslope groundwater sources contribute to the perennial nature of the tributary. The primary source of hydrology that influences water levels within the study area is seasonal water level fluctuations in the perennial drainage. The drainage flows from a culvert at the east side of the property, and then traverses the property to continue off-site under Dartmouth Street to the south. A wetland area in the vicinity of the culvert is apparently the result of ponding and scour that result when the culvert grate becomes blocked with debris during periods of high stormwater runoff. Existing site conditions are shown in Figure 2. The forested riparian area adjacent to the stream is dominated by Sitka willow(Salix sitchensis, FACW), Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra, FACW+), and Oregon ash(Fraxinus latifolia, FACW). 1 Vegetation just upstream from the culvert inlet includes common cattail, (Typha latifolia, OBL), American speedwell (Veronica americana, OBL), swamp smartweed(Polygonum hydropiperoides, 'I OBL), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus, FAC), bitter dock(Rumex obtusifolius,FAC),bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamara, FAC+), small-fruit bulrush(Scirpus microcarpus, OBL), and Watson's willow herb (Epilobium watsonii, FACW-). IThe dominant vegetation in the forested uplands on both sides of the drainage includes Oregon white oak, (Quercus garryana, UPL), Oregon ash, snowberry(Symphoricarpos albus, FACU), I Saskatoon service berry(Amelanchier alnifolia, FACU), one-seed hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna, FACU+), cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus,NI), sword fern(Polystichum munitum, FACU), English ivy(Hedera helix, UPL), and Himalayan blackberry(Rubus discolor, FACU). Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 I - 2 - The Ordinary High Water(OHW) line was flagged as the P otentially jurisdictional limits of the tributary of Red Rock Creek within the study area. The limits of the OHW were identified by a combination of the following field indicators: topographic changes, scour, drift lines, and evidence of sediment deposits. Wetland benches along the edge of the channel are influenced by lateral groundwater seepage,but these areas appear to be below the elevation of OHW. ( 4.0 VEGETATED CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT 4.1 Vegetated Corridor Width Determination r J I The vegetated corridor is 50 feet wide on the site, except in the southeast corner, where the structural embankment of the street truncates the buffer. Project surveyors identified the toe of the slope west of the street as the limits of structural embankment west of SW 69th Avenue (Figure 3). The width of the vegetated corridor is measured 50 feet from perennial streams if the adjacent slopes are less than 25%. The slope within 50 feet of the creek averaged 15 to 20. Slopes increased to greater than 25 percent along the structural embankment of SW 69th Avenue, but the regulated corridor does not extend beyond the base of the embankment. _.i { 4.2 Vegetated Corridor Plant Community There are three plant communities present within the vegetated corridor on-site. Community A is located south of the tributary and it extends to the southwest corner of the site. This forested community is dominated primarily by native species. Community B is also south of the tributary throughout the eastern portion of the vegetated corridor. This forested community has less tree cover than Community A. Community C is on the north side of tributary and has a very high tree canopy cover. Each community was documented in one location as shown in Figure 4. The data from these sample points is presented in Tables 1 and 2 below. Figure 5 is photodocumentation of the vegetation communities. Table 1. Vegetated Corridor Community A Botanical Name Common Name Cover(%) Trees: 20% Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash 80 Pseudotsuga menziesii* Douglas fir 20 Shrubs: 40% Acer circinatum* vine maple 10 Amelanchier alnifolia* serviceberry 10 Cornus stolonifera* red-osier dogwood 5 Corylus cornuta* hazelnut 10 Crataegus monogyna one-seed hawthorn 15 Prunus laurocerasus cherry laurel 15 Prunus sp. cherry or plum 5 Rosa sp*. rose 15 Symphorica pos albus* snowberry 15 Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 3 - 1 Table 1, continued Botanical Name I Common Name I Cover(%) 1 Vines: 30% Hedera helix** English ivy 30 i Rhus diversiloba* poison oak 3 Rubus discolor** Himalayan blackberry 37 riRubus ursinus* California dewberry 30 Herbs: 10% Berberis nervosa* Oregon grape 15 Polystichum munitum* Sword fern 85 [71 % Cover by Natives 59% %Tree Canopy 30% 1 %Invasive/Noxious 20% *=Native species**=Invasive species or noxious weed(ODA) IiTable 2. Vegetated Corridor Community B Botanical Name Common Name Cover(%) Trees: 20% Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash 100 Shrubs: 50% ,� Amelanchier alnifolia* serviceberry 15 Corylus cornuta* hazelnut 10 Crataegus monogyna one-seed hawthorn 25 I Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash 10 Ilex aquifolium English holly 8 Physocarpus capitatus* Pacific ninebark 2 Prunus laurocerasus cherry laurel 5 Rosa sp*. rose 10 Symphoricarpos albus* snowberry 15 Vines: 25% Hedera helix** English ivy 20 Rubus discolor**r Himalayan blackberry 65 Rubus ursinus* California dewberry 15 Herbs: 5% Polystichum munitum* Sword fern 100 % Cover by Natives 60% %Tree Canopy 20% %Invasive/Noxious 21% • *=Native species **=Invasive species or noxious weed(ODA) Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 -4 - I ITable 3. Vegetated Corridor Community C I Botanical Name Common Name Cover(%) Trees: 30% Amelanchier alnifolia* serviceberry 40 Quercus garryana* Oregon white oak 60 Shrubs: 30% Amelanchier alnifolia* serviceberry 25 Corylus cornuta* hazelnut 40 Crataegus monogyna one-seed hawthorn 15 1 Physocarpus capitatus* Pacific ninebark 10 1 Symphoricarpos albus* snowberry 10 Vines: 35% i Hedera helix** English ivy 20 Al Rubus discolor** Himalayan blackberry 80 Herbs: 5% lBerberis nervosa* cascade Oregon grape 33 Polystichum munitum* Sword fern 33 Rubus ursinus* California dewberry 33 % Cover by Natives 59% %Tree Canopy 95+% 1 %Invasive/Noxious 35% *=Native species**=Invasive species or noxious weed(ODA) gI 4.3 Vegetated Corridor Plant Community Condition The following table summarizes the condition of the plant community present in accordance with JClean Water Services' standards. Table 4. Summary of the Plant Communities Community Corridor Condition A B C >80%cover of native plants,and 95+%tree Good >50%tree canopy canopy 1 50%-80%cover of native plants,and 59%native cover 60%native 59%native Marginal 0 30% cano cover cover 26-50/o tree canopy pY I Degraded <50%cover of native plants, and <_ 20%tree 25%tree canopy canopy Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 5 - 4.4 Vegetated Corridor Discussion jThe vegetated corridor adjacent to the stream, Community A has 59%percent cover of native species and 30%tree canopy coverage therefore it is in `marginal' condition. Vegetated corridor ,i Community B is in a `degraded' to `marginal' condition because there is 60%native cover and . only 20% cover provided by the tree canopy. Community C is in a `marginal to good' condition due to the large amount of cover provided by the tree canopy(95+%), however, the understory has 1 only 59% cover of native species. I 5.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1 5.1 Site Plan ilThe proposed road widening project at 69th Avenue and Dartmouth will employ a wall to retain fill material. This wall will be constructed without extending the existing culvert or otherwise impacting the drainage. There will be no need for permits from either the Oregon Department of State Lands or US Army Corps of Engineers for this project. . The current design of the retaining wall places it within the structural embankment of the lexisting road prism. Thus,there would be no impacts to the regulated vegetated corridor under the jurisdiction of Clean Water Services (CWS). Buffer mitigation would have been necessary for any portion of a wall or fill slope within 50 feet of the drainage located outside of the existing ! structural embankment. No buffer enhancement within the study area is proposed at this time since the proposed project corridor does not impact vegetated corridors and the proposed street widening does not constitute development of the site. 1 i 6.0 CONCLUSION A perennial tributary of Red Rock Creek exists on-site, flowing east to west. Seasonal water fluctuations in the perennial drainage are the main source of hydrology. In addition, a wetland area in the vicinity of the culvert is apparently the result of ponding and scour when the culvert grate becomes blocked with debris during periods of high stormwater runoff. The Ordinary High Water (OHW) line was flagged as the potentially jurisdictional limits of the tributary of Red Rock Creek within the study area. Three plant communities were found on-site and the condition of each community are as follows: Community A is in `marginal' condition. Plant Community B is in `degraded to marginal' condition and Plant Community C is in `marginal to good' condition. The wall for the road widening project is proposed to be within the structural embankment of the road and therefore there would be no impacts to the vegetated corridor. No buffer enhancement or mitigation is required as no impacts to regulated vegetated corridors are proposed. Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 11 - 6 - l 7.0 REFERENCES 1 Clean Water Services (CWS,Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order 04-09 Oregon Department of Agriculture, 1998. Noxious Weed Policy and Classification System. 1 r Pacific Habitat Services, 2005. 69th and Dartmouth Delineation Report. Prepared for Mildren Design Group. U.S. Geological Survey. Beaverton, Oregon topographic quadrangle, 1961,photorevised, 1984. 71 U.S. Geological Survey. Lake Oswego, Oregon topographic quadrangle, 1961, photorevised, 1984. ii II 71 . j .,1 II il .,1 1 I Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 7 - ' 1 • • I Appendix A I Figures 11 :.1 Y1'au. ! 17...44.1.114: ** ••je 1-- -- Da: k Q'+\ I it r p,fl6 f� � r• , I.- if �`',,i,r --f�:'J •!I 42 •t I i�,41 1 -- I►•.+�83C. ��•� TTT�� 4.'.` j\•a••Tu • •0 y— f, i i >. k t r s � ',r, :Alt f .,, • •• yr _ 111' 41 I '7'. 4,,,. i ••.1-:-. "n :�., • p :l .• SITE it.. . , / '.jr. (_, . " ':� . S4 ,r• ` ,+• •I (•.• .` •+ .,1•.. 4 :.'�i.'; ''`t'• .2 k 1 •..{_ 4 . *.i!-;/::•':'-',.' .'-:,x;' f ! +� n •? [' tt.4 _ _ •`1•14-111. N(t irtLEI -�. •+t•�/J 1 _ 1 ,.''4„..e N. ...,.../. 1 tie y, t99999iiiii.�=:l:1.; : f �•• •: J.•/ ' r :.,rill zb, �, •.�. a .ph' ,..„,it = i. . 4,'+• v• a l'.. • + M• `i i �,� „.4 , ••� y -1•'y F'Y•F y :• _^• ...�( *� � Jr.::: _ I . .:' te. AT••• . . , / • .ivii s ° :1• 1• t :v# t ,64 •v,. .•a Ieon. C'• •1S'b.'\O ( �” • ��; t,. ..• _1 57 r. f •t. 1 M /Y 10 - c••,, , 1 ""{r .• ( 1•'t''•• -j 4. t`'`� L7 . �' '. 4 1 t •14 • \4 il • •111r • ." iu. ,cq i1' X h:N,'.,. �,::a,rvtic}.' .rt1_•\f,, ti.. t�'c 5555 lb, ••il.v • 4 • •I ••`• •iY i• i• /1• .'p °h u ��y �; «. y i ,t, . 1 , • r_ �. .-•.c'\ Al .:,• 1..•+ `1 r +' e,, i 1 , ; .jI •.) . j• • { .l F�c• Sta + ( r pp 711 - �12 I " '�'�yP +' •r: , k.. f•1 —,.•-' 01, Ii . 1' •I • , ' ;I.:: ,. -.`i 1.: ••d l• 14'1:11 •• 1,+ !-. . s—`:ar,•`rr-.'`,, a , ! 'e tha A 1�` •?i h�. Cr I .1113 1'.:• •, , ;: 1 r a' .+. �' , .�r:. ', , fit cook, . • G: • : 10/3/05 3254 Location and general topography for the proposed road widening on 69th Avenue and FIGURE Dartmouth Street, Tigard, Oregon (USGS, Beaverton and Lake Oswego quadrangle, 1961 i photorevised, 1984). I 1 —Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. l . . _ 1 ....1, :,.e...7„,... i f . • \___ 1 \__. . . . . . . I ._ ii .,.. .. ..„4. _ _ ... ,..- -.\.... q ' , - ,, ) A < ___\ , 0 20 40 10 1 ■-----' \ r-s--, t 285A.\: / V\1\\ SCALE IN FEET \ \ �� ` I i - -III \\\__ - - - --�� '( •'� \_280 1 I .11 . -\\.___ __\ \ ._, . . . . — — \ \ 1 �14" •I K LN4,0.' \G\Z\ 6 N&..,---'-,-' ----,'4•4-'P-.1r-N--41---6-'k-1_-__.-_--_-.,-,--‘..,L—.-,----.,----,-' -- '----''-_k"-...---f-it , 4 18\ \ � \I - a•.i. , 1 1 18" `� . .Z . t, . 4D '.14'. 1 i \ \ 1 I ,A 27S � .14' .a . \6'c3` 14. 16. Z - 5" ,_-270— 4� l ( . 1 \ \ 14 �- — — — /. ,,_ L:6.4. ... . •. - ___)_-_-- -\- -----,_----- 443_ ,,,,,: -i , , ,„c1,- ._ 4^ �- �4_� ` 265 ``� �, 6) 1 r f 1,<,\•.•. I itl °\ y TEN LLB - // / . I-�' \\ '..' PRISDI TIO • �` �� i / / . f � \ ATER,F TH T� � , `'� r/j l I / '1 1 ) # . . . . ' ... \ 2 �, / / / . \ , ` ` some, ,,_ V �y�/ �/ . • , ie- -- - , „.. (�� /- !//// I . ‘,,,, .1... 00 " • - • \ .1. L i I J ,. / / /.< . 27 fi ./ —Li . Li\--/ .-7\'';'\ ---(N. ‘7''F.\\ . ,\...\ •.-.\• r 4 IA ./ AA /rvf • J.. .:`V .' 4' . ' ♦ .•�• • 41 16. Lg.,.N 1 �. F �. 1 i • •. /. (° •. / I • '•. SWl [7 RT .'t •-I ST E. : .4 \..c_t .,..\.. . .. r,. . ? r, 13:, i 4 ' " ....• .. . .\--7 \ ', A(51 • ' .\ ' . .... .' k . \ 1 ..j'a•4 .1' '3\1;4 \. .; .- S'. .., •\ \ 4'. \ . ' . • ' . . . , .. M1 . r , ,. 4. . .-\ ' . - - 4\ • ( r' r , _ 1 i Lz- 2- - ,_ '\ \‘ '. \ l I , _ ,. • 12/14/05 Existing conditions, sample points, photodocumentation points and FIGURE 3254 location of potentially jurisdictional waters of the state/US for the proposed road widening on SW 69th Avenue and SW Dartmouth in 7 ;, Tigard, Oregon (base map provided by T.M. Rippey, 2005). J� Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. • -I T. \ o 20 SO . /�\\ SCALE IN FEET \� ��/\ \ I ' 1 ∎\\__ _ - \� �1 I) \ _ � ill , _ �—280—\ \— -� \ l .,• il ---\\Vs._ ___.\ \ \ ---- --....\\ \ \ \ \ ti 1 • • • it / 1 ii I 18" 4ta\ ��1 . J I I \ ( c \ \ I -n. .. /"."—", , ��1 14., • • �s ,4� , 1s' �:,.-e- - 0,270 _.1 \ \ . ( .0" , 1-----411111.=_____,.... -4"-",,.._ .41...e,wor --____— –I-1r 1 .1.'i'42.• 1 1� �isw �— 14 - — , ■Cji @-- t-34t.)c -""\_ -------- ----- tql....4_,, / '14 ( . ' • i. t \1TR_, \ 4.. - 4 _ 26. f/--- --r 76/ i iii —4,i • / ' \(\ �� \,- f li�' 1 . . ,-44'6) ENTIA Y 1 / / ∎ 3 r � , ) 1.`.. ISDICTIONAL / J t `1� 2551 \ >- WATERS.O1T q I I rill' + • �TATEICJy(7 '/� , li \\,....._---- __II-------„,-8, ■ '-------/ / /-; ..„---"7 / 0 ••l, -- -1-Th„ ---- ; "/-/--z-- -/1)/( *** ( ' •IP / / TUCT L' .1 1 Ill(4 J .,1. f r ''''' irli \\. .. I . .c .. (ii. \ 1 \..,, .: 3 g.,, \ . ,. .� V T,.\.,,,, aI 'c /` 1D T1O1IST e " • t . \ ' r.' . . A i'F'AZ . 124-\Z_.. ti -5- t r'-L- '-'\.\ ess IC r ''( 1 i ;\''' • ' •\— j 12/14/05 Regulated buffer for the proposed road widening on SW 69th FIGURE 3254 Avenue and SW Dartmouth in Tigard, Oregon (base map provided rxs by T.M Rippey, 2005). - \ilivo I Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. - .,. •IM .. ' F� 1 1 ` i :15 il . } - � Q PLANT `0) ' NITY C (GOOD-TO-MARGINAL) • ••i •iii d•.•. a . \\ \\\\ , 1...i•;. plot...*•-'f ��r ... Iwo r�.�r �. Mlw rJ'�•—�++—.rrw .�.._ �i�• ��.�• '° `. C� . , . . �r 44 VIP", row, :• s BUFFER — - _i .� 1,6: i i i• 4i �,i• • :• w :40:0 w•w25w•L!f•a.w•w• •- o• 000144 :•❖i G •� ••!•� I" ..1 " `- • !.• ••• • •• i= -�*A • w•`•..•• 00. � ♦_ • /OVVV.W• T• • • • •: ' � .0 i ` i•• • �• 4,41.****** . • • • • • • :dr • 4.-0,, t -Ao f ' too• • •• • S •Un00000nL: • • ! : ■nODODOnaan e• : _ • •h! w oaauonanoon • 14,400:140:11: i• r 0nnOaaf]oounuourl+ • • • • • • 1 •tarn onui3nUUnaUOn61 • • ee4 Ana a 0ou,aaoau000nry •• `!� .•uon0 aan000aoUOan# •Oh •••:• • .UnaaonUaoci'anoUaUOnN iboannnnuonon00000aa• V NO*. 0* • .4-P natUUUn0U00000nanw 7n ianonanooaanannac/ , _ PLANT OMMUNITY A PLANT COMMUNITY B i ? ,�. SW'DARTMOUTH STREET ■ .- _ 0 20 +0 e0 mmilmilmmm SCALE 1N FEET 12/14/05 Plant communities at the proposed road widening on SW 69th FIGURE 3254 Avenue and SW Dartmouth in Tigard, Oregon (base map provided by T.M. Rippey, 2005). 4 • 4. .J' Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. N ..,--;,...--..w--...r- ---7J1 ... ... ... ..:- l' u . .,n tin -- \ /' ' t 285 SCALE IN FEET ��_ \R�!'/' NEW CURB . \I I. .. 0:21- 111-1 EXIS yNt �� —\� PAVEMENT \�— ' `I I�i i 1 � { 280- - —1 1 . . NEW ASPHALT 1 • NEW SIDEWALK �\ —^� \ 1 .�J� ''N.\1_,..., EXISTING ROAD \_ —\ `\ \— —, ' ✓ I. TOE OF EXISTING ` ROADWAY FILL \ ` \ I , )II 4 \ \I J I RUNNING WALL SECTION AT SfA 8.61 • 18" ,r.,jt", / '\ D• i N -'\T( _(■/(r,if : '/7\\ 3 e! ?J1" - 1 - . > bPO SEQ_WA _ _ \ - \ r,� / i fir'^ — o„ `P ' � 16" - 5" .. 270— ./ ..\, -�/ ( is �, g --I. II 1 o" ' - '..\ ,,,,.......--''":-.-11- ,?...,--.,/ — ------ ----- ,_____ — ---- --,, • --' / 111 ir i)1 \ 6> ,T t,. - 1 q-. '•_ — — ,-✓'j '16' • _ \ .' ----Apia---1 4 - 265 -� r ;� f ff i , _ rte,,' ---� ��` ( 1 1 }�. • 191/4 A ,\....„... ---1 .---„, -.. ' ,.....__-- ---:--!_ ---- _.--,.‹......------.....„*-) , / ( II c17:„ - }'I '- \ ..._____,- — „..___- __ -.4-- r7,--... ' ' , 260 _ i -' / �i' R/' I, ;,.,.)iI,,,,/ 1 2 5 5 1 �� if/ ) a,� ' "/ '/ /( 16 ( .II" 7 �irl1 j` "II Ili i -�-,/ � \ \ . -.1 .7 ) i., . , ..., 1_,r1.1 .-1, j. •-_-ii -7 7 7. , , 7. _, ..,-7/.:..fq • , . i? ,.. i s: 1' .C\i ,,. , . ., \ . \ (:-, 1.. S Q T H�TST E . \ ' O \ \ 1 \ A - \, . , , . \ • \ ,26- x ., \. \ '\ '\•• ._ , i_\ — r, \ 1 \ • \•___ IA -A • -- , ) i 1 I r r ''' \ ‘ 12/14/05 Proposed retaining wall at the road widening on SW 69th Avenue FIGURE 3254 and SW Dartmouth in Tigard, Oregon (base map provided by T.M. Rippey, 2005). 6 I !... Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Y _ - ,x? ry� ; 4 { e • i{. # y. r�3 .Y; !-.,i' f_ + ;} it; t .r•,-...• -:k,,- -. .. , _ •-• , i • iiiii*4''s r,*0 . , .",,„:t, r ',,r '. 1 Y !-' { r T .� t. i. Al {�. diyet '� -., .. _ ) .' ' ,:.�' • 4, ,a nt i 0,,, 4,w, ,� ti, ,� '''_1" ' -.s..,*'11�� r '� w rrr Y . - i , P. r .T _ �: 'ST .'+'f A.at.� {.f, : ... ;f- w►4 \„ `'«, p+ ,'T, 'J� .Y ` ' � '� `V•4Ct' �Y �t'--STTTII _ =Lj� .,� _ F. _sue y +^ - + , •.t, f t .1 41; v' :ti • 1.6,),71 •� ,^T �r l.. _. - 1. 1 , •!. .} ' ,. wl`- � .. '"� r 1 +7 j 1 ;' r•• 7 4,■ ."•i ` �y J S , ri • ' e b,'' F .s: v • ' Photo 1 �, /�f•}{�n�.E..--.4s., ' 'P' t• •,� X47.. -t s ' +'` �, .. f fli' ,^ • ,..• ••'gik 4+,, \''' `rt '-+ •i +. �-�+, ?• lt '. .� - k II r i t `.li„ 4iti - .., 'r•iis• „y"!, •• it, `/'.. ! .'\.. $ °'!! 'l . � !'. {{i a _ ..„ t S' ; ., •1`"' s ,. . • P -. � r', , C ' +• + ' �Z•t r, iy + - .� •f1. . , .I Photo 2 !:' •-•,� _ z - .' ., 4. . \ Photo 3 11/16/05 3254 L Photodocumentation of the Vegetation Communities at 691h Avenue and Dartmouth. Photo 1 depicts Community A looking northeast. Photo 2 documents Community B looking to the Figure ( west. Photo 3 shows Community C looking south. All photos taken 9/23/04. 5 [ i- —Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. AMBER WOODS TOWNHOMES UNADDRESSED SITE TM 1S1 36DD TAX LOTS 7500 & 7600 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PRELIMINARY STORM DRAIN REPORT SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 Presented to: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION 13125 S.W. HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 Prepared by: VIC ACCOMANDO, CONSULTING ENGINEER 16750 SW TIMBERLAND DRIVE BEAVERTON, OREGON 97007 Contact Vic Accomando, P.E. Phone: 503-890-5483 Fax: 503-259-9508 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1. Protect Description: The proposed site, adjacent to SW Dartmouth Street, spans two tax lots: Tax Lot 7500 is a 14,530.62 sq. ft. (0. 33-acre) parcel located at the west side of the site along SW 70" Avenue. Tax Lot 7600 is a 24, 132.20 sq. ft. (0. 55-acre) parcel on the east part of the site along SW 69" within the city limits of Tigard Oregon. The site prior to dedication is 38, 662. 52 sq. ft. (0. 89-acres) . The developed site after dedication (2,406.92 sq. ft. ) is 36,255.60 square feet (0.83-acre) . The existing use of the parcels is undeveloped urban forest. The City of Tigard has designated the parcels as within the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district and applies the "Tigard Triangle Design Standards" criteria to this application. SW 70th Avenue is aligned with the east edge of zoning district C-G, General Commercial with a Planned Unit Overlay. This project proposes to build (7 ) seven 3-story attached multi- family townhome units, with front garages. (4) four units access SW 69" Avenue and ( 3) three units access SW 70" Avenue. The 69" Avenue access is a single 30 ft. shared access and the units on SW 70" Avenue have 16 ft. wide individual driveways. No access will be provided to SW Dartmouth Street. 36% of the net parcel area is impervious area (roof and paved) with 59% designated as landscaping. 5% of parcel area is perennial stream and wetland. 2. Site Topography Information: On-site analysis reveals a gently sloping plateau (-6%) at the northeast section of the property breaking to a steep (-16%) downgrade to a stream channel. The west half of the site continues a 16% percent slope to the stream. The portion of the site south of the stream slopes from SW Dartmouth to the watercourse at a -20% grade to the channel. The site exhibits no history of development or building. The unnamed perennial stream, with headwaters near SW 67" and Clinton, traverses the site from SW 69" Avenue southwestly to a ditch inlet near the SW Dartmouth ROW line and flows westerly 2,400 ft. to Red Rock Creek. The 25-year flow is =2.2 cubic feet per second (cfs) draining 2.75-acres as it enters the site. A Natural Resource Assessment conducted on the project site by Pacific Habitat Services in December 2005 defined a wetland along the stream banks. Amber Woods Townhomes 2 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 3. Existing Site Specific Drainage Information: The area described, illustrated on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Community Panel Number 410238 0517B is identified as Zone "C", an area of minimal flooding. The National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey lists the on-site soils as Woodburn silt loam (Hydrologic group "C" ) and Quatama loam (Hydrologic Group "C" ) . The portion of the site south of the stream is listed as Cove silty clay loam (Hydrologic Group "D" ) . See attached exhibits. Clean Water Services has determined that sensitive areas do exist and, in response, a Natural Resource Assessment with a Tier 1 analysis was conducted and approved. A Service Provider Letter was issued August 22, 2006 and is a part of this application. 4. Proposed On-site Drainage System: The storm drainage system for the multi-family site will be designed in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management, March 2004 (Resolution and Order 04-09) and The City of Tigard Development Code Chapter 18. 810. 100, 'Storm drainage' . a.Drainage design — The drainage design recognizes two distinct areas of development or "basins", the west developed 3-units with individual driveway access and the east developed 4-units with a coluinon 30 ft. wide access and parking area. All roof drains and parking area runoff will be collected and conveyed by underground storm drain lines to a proprietary water quality structure manufactured by Stormwater Management, Inc. and referred to as a "Steel Catchbasin Storm Filter" . The storm flow will then continue to an oversized 36" diameter detention pipe with a controlled release rate manhole. The controlled release flow then continues to the stream with rip-rap outfall protection. Amber Woods Town homes 3 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 b.Hydrology and hydraulics - The surface water runoff quantity and characteristics were analyzed using the hydrograph method. The "HYD" computer program (developed by King County, Washington and described in their January 1990 Surface Water Design Manual) was used to generate, add and route hydrographs. A 24-hour, standard SCS Type IA rainfall distribution design storm was used to generate the hydrographs. Runoff parameters - The soil type and land use were evaluated, as described above, to determine the curve number, per the SCS soil- cover complex method. The curve number (used in the HYD program) or CN value for pre-developed conditions was set at CN 81, secondary growth forest. The CN value for the developed site was set at 86, landscape good conditions for pervious surface and CN 98 for impervious surfaces. Travel Time and Time of Concentration — The time of concentration, Tc, was evaluated for runoff to travel from the hydraulic most distant point in the basin to its corresponding catch basin at the end of the basin. Time of concentration for pre-developed surfaces was calculated by the travel time, TT, for flow segments through the basin. Travel time for developed conditions was set at 5 minutes. Travel time, calculated as sheet flow, was applied to a length of 106 feet, using Manning's Kinetic Solution: 0.42(n Lie s T k` (P )f 5�S l}°° (EQUATION C-1) 2 0 Where: ns = sheet flow Manning's effective roughness coefficient; 0.40 for secondary growth forest L = flow path length (feet) Pz = 2-year, 24-hour rainfall = 2. 5 inches So = land slope (ft./ft. ) Amber Woods Town homes 4 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 Conveyance system design - The conveyance system was designed to convey and contain at least the peak runoff for the 25-year, 24- hour storm with a total Precipitation of 3.9 inches. Design peak flows obtained from runoff hydrographs for each basin. Manning's equation was used to calculate the "Maximum Flow" rate for each pipe run, based on the proposed pipe slope and geometry (see Equation D-1 1.49 Q = AR 3 kSo�2 (EQUATION D-1) Where: Q =Peak flow (cfs) n = manning's roughness coefficient A =cross-sectional area of pipe (sf. ) R = Hydraulic radius (ft. ) So = slope of the energy grade line (ft./ft. ) The design velocities in each pipe have a minimum value of 3.0 fps. A Manning's roughness coefficient of 0.012 for PVC pipe was used in the conveyance calculation. 5. Developed Runoff Developed runoff was computed by calculating overland flow across landscaped yards and combining flow from the impervious area for roof, driveway and concrete walks areas. Results are tabulated in the attached hydrograph printouts (page 11 and 12. 6. Water Quality Water quality requirements are provided according to CWS Appendix B:Water Quality & Quantity Facility Design, 3.2 Proprietary Pre-treatment Devices and sized in accordance with Amber Woods Townhomes 5 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 the manufacturer's recommendations recognizing minimum treatment flow as : Water quality volume (cf) = 0.36( in) x area (sf) 12 (in/ft) Water quality flow (cfs) = Water quality volume 14,400 Seconds Water quality calculations are displayed for each basin on Sheet 5, "Preliminary Storm Drainage Design" of the drawing set. 7. Detention The hydrographs were routed through a 36-inch diameter pipe with three release orifices, set at increasing elevations designed to detain a 2-yr, 10-yr and 25-yr storm event creating a detention facility. Computer generated hydrographs and detention routing computations are included with this report. END OF REPORT Amber Woods Townhomes 6 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 HYDROLOGIC GROUP RATING FOR CLACKAMAS COUNTY AREA, OREGON; MULTNOMAH COUNTY AREA, OREGON; WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Soil Survey Map- Hydrologic Group i• a W "° a x K :: SW BAYLOR ST SW BAYLOR ST i it ilk I grogalCZIN g or i - ; illa { I iit. _ _ _ , ,,,..„ SW DARTMOUTH ST i , . SW 000GLAS OR 1 i Meters I I Feet 0 35 70 140 0 100 200 400 600 800 I'SDA rotund Rr.nmrr. Web Soil Survey 1.1 10/2/2006 %` '- t ve,rn.ULw*ten it National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 4 HYDROLOGIC GROUP RATING FOR CLACKAMAS COUNTY AREA, OREGON; MULTNOMAH COUNTY AREA, OREGON; WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Soil Survey Map-Hydrologic Group MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Hydrologic Group {Dominant Condition,81t;} Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov A A/D Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 e B/D Soil Survey Area: Clackamas County Area, Oregon Spatial Version of Data: 1 Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:20000 CID D Soil Survey Area: Multnomah County Area, Oregon Not rated or not available Spatial Version of Data: 1 Soil Map Units Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:20000 O Cities Interstate Highways Soil Survey Area: Washington County, Oregon ---- Roads Spatial Version of Data: 2 —/-4— Rails Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:20000 Water Hydrography Oceans Map comprised of aerial images photographed on these dates: 7/29/2000; 8/5/2000 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident I.SDA Natural Ne.o rte% Web Soil Survey 1.1 10/2/20106 r umer■atimn tier%irr National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Group Rating Soil Survey Map-Hydrologic Group Tables - Hydrologic Group Summary by Map Unit- Multnomah County Area, Oregon Soil Survey Area Map Unit Name Rating Total Acres in Percent of AOI Map Unit AOI Symbol 8B Cascade-Urban land C 5.8 6.7 complex,0 to 8 percent slopes 1 I B Cornelius-Urban land C 0.4 0.5 complex,3 to 8 percent slopes 55 Wapato silt loam D 0.1 0.1 Summary by Map Unit- Washington County,Oregon Soil Survey Area Map Unit Name Rating Total Acres in Percent of AOI Map Unit AOI Symbol 1 Aloha silt loam C 0.5 0.6 7B Cascade silt loam,3 to C 17.7 20.3 7 percent slopes 13 Cove silty clay loam D 11.3 13.0 22 Huberly silt loam D 2.8 3.2 37B Quatama loam,3 to 7 C 36.4 41.8 percent slopes 37C Quatama loam,7 to 12 C 1.0 1.1 percent slopes 4513 Woodburn silt loam,3 C 4.1 4.7 to 7 percent slopes 45C Woodbum silt loam,7 C 5.6 6.4 to 12 percent slopes t1SDA Naswal Rehearces Web Soil Survey 1.1 10/2/2006 com eraMie.lereire National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Group Rating Soil Survey Map-Hydrologic Group Summary by Map Unit-Clackamas County Area,Oregon Soil Survey Area Map Unit Name Rating Total Acres in Percent of AO1 Map Unit Symbol AOI 13B Cascade silt loam,3 C 0.8 1.0 to 8 percent slopes 25 Cove silty clay loam D 0.6 0.6 Description - Hydrologic Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential.Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation,are thoroughly wet,and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are placed into four groups A,B,C,and D,and three dual classes,A/D,B/D,and C/D. Definitions of the classes are as follows: The four hydrologic soil groups are: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate(low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet.These consist mainly of deep,well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands.These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B.Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture.These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D.Soils having a very slow infiltration rate(high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential,soils that have a high water table,soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface,and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group(A/D,B/D,or C/D),the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas.Only soils that are rated D in their natural condition are assigned to dual classes. Parameter Summary - Hydrologic Group Aggregation Method:Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: Tie-break Rule: Lower USDA Natural Ileeurces Web Soil Survey 1.1 10/2/2006 MEd commodity.swore National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4 Tri.-Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 17:53 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS DETENTION ROUTING DETENTION: 2-year flow (cfs) 0.2 • 0.2 0. 1 0.1 /) 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 time (hr) DETENTION TUBE (stage-volume calculated) diameter = 3.00'; length = 80.00'; slope = 0.25%; invert = 271.00'MSL STAGE VOLUME 271.0 0 271.5 62 272.1 165 272.6 283 273.1 400 273.7 504 274.2 565 OUTLET TYPE ELEVATION SIZE circ. orifice 271.0 dia.(in) a 1.13 inflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\2amberd.hyd outflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\2amberu.hyd peaks: inflow - 0.13 cfs @ 7.83 hr. outflow = 0.04 cfs 8 9.17 hr. stage: 1.42 ft. volume: 243 c.f. Tri-Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 17:18 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN HYDROGRAPH developed 2-Year Runoff - 4 UNIT total Time of Concentration = 5.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 2 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 2.50 in. pervious area = 0.07 A CN = 86 Gp C:landscp,good cond. impervious area = 0.17 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\2amberd.hyd peak flow = 0.13 cfs @ 7.83 hr. runoff volume = 1,693 cu.ft. Tn -Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 16:40 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN KYMOGRAPH Undeveloped 2-Year Runoff 2-year, 24-hour rainfall = 2.50" flow type description coeff. distance fall slope TIC 1 overland sheet woods (light) n=0.40 106.0 8.0' 7.55$ 15.0' total Time of Concentration = 15.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 2 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 2.50 in. pervious area = 0.24 A CN = 81 Gp C:sec.growth forest impervious area = 0.00 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\2amberu.hyd peak flow = 0.04 cfs @ 8.00 hr. runoff volume = 808 cu.ft. Tri-Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 17:59 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS DETENTION ROUTING DETENTION: 10-year flow (cfs) 0.2 • 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 time (hr) DETENTION TUBE (stage-volume calculated) diameter = 3.00'; length = 80.00'; slope = 0.25%; invert = 271.00'MSL STAGE VOLUME 271.0 0 271.5 62 272.1 165 272.6 283 273.1 400 273.7 504 274.2 565 OUTLET TYPE ELEVATION SIZE circ. orifice 271.0 dia.(in) = 1.13 circ. orifice 272.4 dia.(in) = 1.25 inflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\lOamberd.hyd outflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\l0amberu.hyd peaks: inflow = 0.19 cfs B 7.83 hr. outflow = 0.08 cfs e 8.83 hr. stage: 1.97 ft. volume: 366 c.f. Tri-Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 16:46 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN HYDROGRAPH Undeveloped 10-Year Runoff 2-year, 24-hour rainfall = 2.50" flow type description coeff. distance fall slope TIC 1 overland sheet woods (light) n=0.40 106.0 8.0' 7.55% 15. 0' total Time of Concentration = 15.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 10 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 3.45 in. pervious area = 0.24 A CN = 81 Gp C:sec.growth forest impervious area = 0.00 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\1Oamberu.hyd peak flow = 0.08 cfs @ 8.00 hr. runoff volume = 1,433 cu.ft. Tri-Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 16:58 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN HYDROGRAPB developed 10-Year Runoff - 4 UNIT total Time of Concentration = 5.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 10 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 3.45 in. pervious area = 0.07 A CN = 86 Gp C:landscp,good cond. impervious area = 0.17 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\lOamberd.hyd peak flow = 0.19 cfs @ 7.83 hr. runoff volume = 2,472 cu.ft. • Tri-Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 18:04 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS DETENTION ROUTING DETENTION: 25-year flow (cfs) 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 PIP 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 time (hr) DETENTION TUBE (stage-volume calculated) diameter = 3.00'; length = 80.00`; slope = 0.25%; invert = 271.00'MSL STAGE VOLUME 271.0 0 271.5 62 272.1 165 272.6 283 273.1 400 273.7 504 274.2 565 OUTLET TYPE ELEVATION SIZE circ. orifice 271.0 dia.(in) = 1.13 circ. orifice 272.4 dia. (in) = 1.25 circ. orifice 273.0 dia.(in) = 1.25 inflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\25amberd.hyd outflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\25amberu.hyd peaks: inflow = 0.22 cfs @ 7.83 hr. outflow = 0.10 cfs @ 8.67 hr. stage: 2.19 ft. volume: 411 c.f. Tri-Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 16:48 30-Sep-06 project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN HYDROGRAPH Undeveloped 25-Year Runoff 2-year, 24-hour rainfall = 2.50" flow type description coeff. distance fall slope TIC 1 overland sheet woods (light) n=0.40 106.0 8.0' 7.55% 15.0' total Time of Concentration = 15.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 25 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 3.90 in. pervious area = 0.24 A CN = 81 Gp C:sec.growth forest impervious area = 0.00 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\25amberu.hyd peak flow = 0.11 cfs 8 8.00 hr. runoff volume = 1,751 cu.ft. Tri-Land Design Group, Inc. VJA 16:56 30-Sep-06 project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN BYDROGRAPH developed 25-Year Runoff - 4 UNIT total Time of Concentration = 5.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 25 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 3.90 in. pervious area = 0.07 A CN = 86 Gp C:landscp,good cond. impervious area = 0.17 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\25amberd.hyd peak flow = 0.22 cfs @ 7.83 hr. runoff volume = 2,846 cu.ft. LAND USE APPLICATION Project: J4 ,)2 z(� 1i/1'ze296-te r Date: COMPLETENESS REVIEW . COMPLETE .INCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: ❑ Deed/Title/Proof Of Ownership ❑ Neighborhood Mtg.Affidavits,Minutes, List Of Attendees El Impact Study(18.390) ❑ USA Service Provider Letter ❑ Construction Cost Estimate ❑ #Sets Of Application Materials/Plans ❑ Pre-Application Conference Notes ❑ Envelopes With Postage(Verify Count) PROJECT STATISTICS: ❑ Building Footprint Size ❑ %Of Landscaping On Site Q % Of Building Impervious Surface On Site ❑ Lot Square Footage PLANS DIMENSIONED: ❑ Building Footprint ❑ Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible&Bike Par1dng)0 Truck Loading Space Where Applicable ❑ Building Height ❑ Access Approach And Aisle l Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: ,.-❑ Vicinity Map ❑ Architectural Plan ❑ Tree Inventory ,0 Existing Conditions Plan ❑ Landscape Plan ❑ Site Plan ❑ Lighting Plan TREE PLAN/MITIGATION PLAN: ^ ❑ E T, ❑ -h),7 ❑ //4 tsi7i.4.4,-w ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.620(Tgard Triangle Design Standards) Er 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) ❑ 18.340(Director's Interpretation) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) 9 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) ❑ 18.350(Planned Development) ❑ 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) ❑ 18.780(Signs) ❑ 18.360(Site Development Review) ❑ 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) ❑ 18.370(Vanances/'Adjustments) ❑ 18.715(Density Computations) ,❑ 18.790(Tree Removal) ❑ 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) ❑ 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) ❑ 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) ❑ 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.797(Water Resources(WR)Overlay District) ❑ 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) ❑ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) ❑ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) ❑ 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) ❑ 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 Stations) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: I:\curpin\masters\revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 17-Jan-o1 City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 October 20, 2006 ' - ` • Dennis Grayson ;=T I GARD: Allied Development 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton, OR 97007 RE: Completeness Review,Amber Woods I (SDR2006-00009) Dear Mr. Grayson: The City of Tigard received your application for site development review on October 2, 2006. The proposed 7-unit attached multi-family residential townhome (condominium) project is located on a .33-acre property bounded by SW 69th Avenue, 70th Avenue, and SW Dartmouth on tax lots 07500 and 07600,Tax Map 1S136DD. Staff has had an opportunity to review your application submittal. The purpose of this completeness review is to establish that the required elements of the application have been submitted. There has been no attempt to comprehensively evaluate this material for its adequacy in addressing the relevant criteria. Staff reminds the applicant that the burden of proof in meeting the standards rests with the applicant. If the information cannot be gleaned from the narrative or the plans, and the shortcoming cannot be resolved with the imposition of a feasible and non-discretional condition of approval, staff will have no alternative but to deny the project. Once an application has been deemed complete and public notices sent, additional evidence may constitute a significant change and may not be considered. 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. Ownership Information: Please provide a Deed, Title, or other proof of ownership to the subject property. 2. Neighborhood Meeting: You have submitted an affidavit of mailing/posting a neighborhood meeting. You must also submit the meeting notice, an attendance sheet, and minutes of the meeting. 3. Site Development Review: Your plan set shows property lines proposed as if for a subdivision proposal. Please revise your plans to be consistent with the site development and sensitive lands reviews applied for and for which fees have been paid,and consistent with your narrative. 4. Sensitive Lands Review: Your narrative does not address the sensitive lands review standards for drainageways. Please revise your narrative to address the standards in 18.775.070.D. 5. Administrative Variance: You have applied for a special adjustment to the minimum residential density requirements. However, since the subject property is located in the MUE zone, and not the R-25 zone, you must apply for an administrative variance, which is a Type II review. Please Phone: 503.639.4171 • Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 revise your narrative to address the standards in 18.370.010.0 and submit an additional payment of$168.50. 6. Development Standards: Your narrative does not address the base development standards for the MUE zone. Please revise your narrative to address the lot size, setbacks, height, and coverage standards in Tab lel 8.520.2. 7. Tree Removal Plan: You submitted an arborist report which includes a survey, inventory, and protection measures. However, the arborist's inventory map, dated 8-19-06, appears to approximate the location of trees. The Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan (Sheet C8) includes notation for trees to be removed which is unclear and inconsistent with the inventory table that identifies trees to be removed. The Landscape Plan (Sheet C9) identifies protected trees,but the inventory numbers are missing. In addition, mitigation for trees removed is not addressed. Please summarize in the inventory table the total number of trees >12" DBH, number of trees >12" removed, % of trees >12" retained, and the caliper inches of those trees >12" removed. Please provide a mitigation plan and state whether you intend to pay fee-in-lieu for any mitigation required. 8. Narrative: You submitted a narrative that minimally addresses most of the relevant standards. As noted above, some of the standards have not been addressed. To improve the findings in your narrative, I suggest that you first state the standard, and then apply the facts of the proposal to demonstrate the standard is met. 9. Public Facility Plan Checklist: Please review the attached checklist for completeness and incorporate your responses in a revised plan set and narrative. Once this additional information is submitted, staff will review the additional information to determine if the application is substantively complete. Once the application is substantively complete, you will need to submit 10 full set, collated, and bound copies of your revised and new materials (plan sets may be printed at 8 '/2 x 11 or 11 x 17 size as long as you include three (3) copies of large set plans), seven (7) additional copies of your reduced plan sets only, and one (1) 8 1/2 x 11 copy for our records. In addition, you will be asked to provide two sets of pre-addressed (no return address), stamped (not metered), #10 size envelopes. Addresses of property owners located within 500 feet must have been obtained from the City of Tigard within the previous three months from the date of application completeness (contact Patty Lunsford at 718-2483). Once the copies have been received and the application is deemed complete, the formal comment and review process will begin, which typically takes 5 to 6 weeks. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application,please don't hesitate to contact me at 503-718-2434. Sincerely, Gary Pagen tec er Associate Planner C: SDR2006-00009 Land Use File 2 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: Amber Woods COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 10/20/06 GRADING ® Existing and proposed contours shown. _ ❑ Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? ❑ Adjacent parcel grades shown. ❑ Geotech study submitted? STREET ISSUES ® Right-of-way clearly shown. ® Centerline of street(s) clearly shown. ® Street name(s) shown. ® Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. ❑ Street profiles shown. ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo on adjacent parcel(s), etc. ® Traffic Impact and/or Access Report ❑ Street grades compliant? _® Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate? ❑ Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width appropriate? ❑ Other: 1) Planter strip, 2) 18.705.030.H.2, 3) Street 1) The existing planter strip must meet the trees Triangle Standards (ground cover must be planted), 2) The driveway on nth Avenue was not approved under the previous land use and therefore is non-conforming. The driveway must be removed, reduced to a shared drive or the applicant should address the code section adequately. 3) Streets trees are required on 70th Avenue. SANITARY SEWER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown. ❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? WATER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? ❑ Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? Show existing and proposed hydrants ❑ Proposed meter location and size shown? Show typical meter size. Provide easements for private water lines or move the meters to front of each parcel. ❑ Proposed fire protection system shown? Provide a letter or e-mail from TVFR approving layout for hydrants and fire protection STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown? ® Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention REVISED: 10/20/06 provided? ® 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 COMPLETE ® INCOMPLETE By: Date: 10/20/06 REVISED: 10/20/06 Gary Pagenstecher-Amber Woods , Page 1 I C' .. •4. From: "D G" <allieddevelopment©hotmail.com> To: <dick©tigard-or.gov> v-765 L./l) Fog 60 &A-slits Date: 10/25/2006 4:42:30 PM 3/7 Subject: Amber Woods 7/7 Lsv4m iir�6 ia�Z) RE: Amber Woods Townhomes Completeness Review (SDR2006-00009) Dear Mr. Bewersdorff As a representative and member of Dartmouth Townhomes, LLC, the owner of the above-referenced property, I would like to address a discrepancy regarding the City of Tigard's review and handling of this file. From the early stages of this project, we intended to develop the property as a single-family townhome subdivision with seven units (one set of four attached units with zero-lot lines and one set of three attached units with zero-lot lines). After many visits to the city planning office, including frequent consultations with city personnel, including Gary Pagenstecher, a member of your review staff who attended the initial pre-application conference in March 2006 and who has been intimately involved with our project throughout, we have been told that we are required to file another application (including another round of pre-application conference, application, completeness review, and final review). All of this is based on Mr. Pagenstecher's determination that the application should be for a planned development as opposed to a subdivision. At the initial pre-application conference, we were told that the subdivision was considered a condominium, despite the fact that the end product would be a townhome-style building. No codes or regulations were cited for this determination. We were simply told that the development would be a condominium. We consulted with attorneys at Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, who said that we should challenge the city's condominium decision. Our engineer, Vic Accomando, designed the subdivision lots to meet the minimum lot requirements for developing a single-family townhome-style product. Based on this legal advice and technical expertise, we approached Mr. Pagenstecher about lifting the condominium "distinction" prior to our submittal of the final application with the city. We purposefully delayed submitting the application until we received this determination from the City of Tigard. After reviewing our proposed minimum lot requirements, 'Gag Pagenstecher-Amber Woods Pag • Mr. Pagenstecher informed us (me in person and Mr. Accomando via the phone) that we were not required to treat the subdivision as a condominium. After receiving the city's "blessing" we revised the lot lines on the site plan and submitted it, along with the final application, within three weeks of the city's determination. Based on the timing and our justified reliance upon the city's determination and Mr. Pagenstecher's thorough knowledge of our file and circumstances, we see no reason to have to re-submit as a planned development (and to endure all of the conferences, applications, additional fees, reviews involved therewith). Just as before with the condominium distinction, no legal or other justification has been provided. Springing this new requirement on us at the eleventh hour seems rather arbitrary and subject to the whim of the city. For these reasons, we seek to (a) challenge the proposed planned development distinction, and (b) continue moving forward with our completeness check and final review of our existing application for a seven-unit townhome subdivision. Thank you for your time and we are hoping to meet with you tomorrow at 9:30am Sincerely Dennis J. Grayson Dartmouth Development LLC 8790 SW Turquoise LP Beaverton Oregon 97007 503-740-2235 //,v*- AECEIL ED 2 1 2006 j p CITY OF TIG Nov ANNINGIENGINEEA ING (?-4t 1-4 '311 e (7j Al" e., e 4•11,7t-• it e G-1 Aie (7/ ,Seel c* -2 Ji- it; or.0 47--rAra94e1.--- JPe //z/ a(. /ill 7fraw 4/i ve.„ (e—L ' (—D40--.-5 r 04,4-(Da v4i.tei-Wc v / V��/0rsQ e% tx..1 — ye- 7 To6 7 • MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Gary FROM: Shirley .,hk RE: Amber Woods Fees DATE: 11/29/06 Gary, There seems to be some misunderstanding of the fees involved with this project. Below I have listed what was paid when this project was submitted as an SDR and the fees now that they have resubmitted this project as a Subdivision. Please check these over and let me know what is correct. Thank you. SDR SUBMITTAL SUB SUBMITTAL SDR $6,142.00 SUB $5,606.00 SLR 1,178.50 SLR 1,178.50 VAR (Spec. adj.) 132.50 VAR (Spec. adj.) 132.50 VAR (Dev. Adj.) 132.50 TOTAL: $7,453.00 TOTAL: $7,049.50 DIFFERENCE: $403.50 In the narrative, they show a difference of$235.00. Thus, the confusion. Thanks. Shirley CITY OF TIGARD 11/28/2006 IIg �� 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 3:15:30PM Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt #: 27200600000000004780 Date: 10/04/2006 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 4,934.00 A SDR2006-00009 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 728.00 /017" SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS]SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 480.00 50 SLR2006-00009 [LANDUS]Application-Type II 100-0000-438000 1,027.00\ 7 SLR2006-00009 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 151.50 J VAR2006-00083 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 17.00 3 2 .50 VAR2006-00083 [LANDUS] Special Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 Line Item Total: $7,453.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES KJP 2015 In Person 6,136.72 LLC Check DARTMOUTN TOWNHOMES KJP 2018 In Person 1,268.50 LLC Check VIC ACCOMANDO KJP 4168 In Person 47.78 Payment Total: $7,453.00 to .1l cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 saloN DNEflI4MOD lNiOI ,I,VDI'IddV ilild s v-it. :;',- t.- , ,,-:,--:=, ,.,, - ,:*-cwt.:OF TIGARD . 4 . . .-- .4L1::- . 4 a i. F ;;l a�^y 1 `.'Y r;. • t•C .'t' +. T . ' - • .c C i � .X a f d kr w� • x '_ "4...!` PRAPPLtCATN CO FER NCE N TES mot,, . I X ,..a: p V i T `+/�Ty C"' �.w9�1S :„�`Z" �` '�*� i �' � ,{�5� A+� Q [fie � Y - T � �T !: s � •; .� �kri 1:sy'R ,Pam P., � � '-, ,�� 3. ,�` "�? �� :: ; P� fl Noes alb Valid f Si (6) Months X' �� .:� �,tmunity i'PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: /7/66 - STAFF AT PRE-APP.: r+`H? /°� // � RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: 6 7' ov d ` LL c- AGENT: / ;�r�fs 61/{irS / 1 Phone: (. -17) 7,-/(9 • 2 z 3 c Phone: S ) PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: 4q - v- a, TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): /5 /3/-, b b e7Q9r7 /cflôO NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: S(W EicfmI-iv r 22Ftil -to 's& 5 17W` LA NA( 'IEZUI (SI. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 7 pU''rl �f /Lti c0ro r n in/ 2 6l6s y3 r if 0AJt7S q. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: in r' 0-SE 2vzO o ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: M(JF ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.5;20 ) MINIMUM LOT SIZE: - 3- sq. ft. Average Min. lot width:-8- ft. Max. building height: 41-5- ft. Setbacks: Front.2C) _ft. Side 10 ft. Rear 20 ft. Corner 2O ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: " o Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: .2t' %. GARAGES: 20 ft. '2 NEIGHBORHOOD 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 pano i ,i r) Residential Application/Planning Division Section 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 AN IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at 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. N. ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.7651 Minimum number of accesses: / Minimum access width: 3D Minimum pavement width: ,ZK' WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7051 Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING AREA, COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION (Refer to Code Chapter 18.715)-SEE EXAMPLE BELOW. The NET RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net area of the developable land by the minimum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from the gross site area: All sensitive lands areas including: ➢ Land within the 100-year floodplain; ➢ Slopes exceeding 25%; ➢ Drainageways; and ➢ Wetlands for the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts. Public right-of-way dedication: ➢ Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities; or • Multi-family allocate 15% of gross acres for public facilities; or ➢ If available, the actual public facility square footage can be used for deduction. EXAMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE(3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE)WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS Single-Family Multi-Family 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 8,712 sq. ft. (20%)for public right-of-way 6,534 sq. ft. (15%)for public right-of-way NET: 34,848 square feet NET: 37,026 square feet 3,050 (minimum lot areal 3050 (Minimum lot areal 11.4 Units Per Acre = 12.1 Units Per Acre *The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. *Minimum Protect Density Is BO%6 of the maximum allowed density.TO DETERMINE THIS STANDARD,MULTIPLY THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS BY.8. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Pane 7 of Residential Application/Planning Division Section _01 SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.7301 STREETS: feet from the centerline of FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures. ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained between each dwelling unit or garage. MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential developments. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size. Five (5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. (See applicable zoning district for the primary structures'setback requirements.] 1 FLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 1% STORIES or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 2% stories, or 35 feet in R-7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.C.2 are satisfied. '� BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.145) 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. The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFERS applicable to your proposal area is: Buffer Level tr " 00) along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. Buffer Level along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: 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. X' 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. Lenny Hing is the contact person and can be reached at (503) 625-6177. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Paoe 3 of 9 Residential ApplicatoruPanning Division Section PARKING [Refer to Code Chapters 18.165&18.7051 ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. Single-family Requires: One (1) off-street parking space per dwelling unit; and One 1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. Multiple-family Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms; and 1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms. Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of the total required parking. NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: 9 Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet, 6 inches. 9 Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet, 6 inches. 9 Handicapped parking: All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. r] BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.165) 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/2.I u 14 SENSITIVE LANDS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7751 The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive 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. RI STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Code Section 18.775.070.C1 When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. CLEANWATER SERVICES(CWS) BUFFER STANDARDS [Refer to R&0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3) LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Pane 4 of 9 Residential ApplicatiorIPlanning Division Section TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION 8 ORDER 96-44 r .... .I.i• ,`... .".vas\]"iI^iT. W' RS � , SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTI Q�?,V.FGETATED . , ,4 SI�NSIT1Vg A►RE DEFINITiQN TO SENSITIVE AREAL CORRIDOR PER SIDEZ ♦ 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% 10 to <50 acres 30 feet 4 >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 ravine3 Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. 2Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 3The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet,if a stamped geotechnicai report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the USA 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. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the 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. ZkSIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7801 SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.0.) A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes pare c n+a Residential Application/Planning Division Section THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size, species, and condition of all existing trees greater than 6- inch caliper. ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: • Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; • Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. IQ MITIGATION [Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.E1 REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. ➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. CLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 183951 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. The applicant shall show the clear vision areas on the site plan, and identify any obstructions in these areas. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section 9 FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREETS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.030.F.1 A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 200 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed. n ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0601 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 21/z TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. ❑ BLOCKS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0901 The perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED 1,800 FEET measured along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development. When block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. CODE CHAPTERS 18.330(Conditional Use) 18.620(Tgard Triangle Design Standards) ✓18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) 18.340(Director's Interpretation) _ _ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) s r 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) 18.350(Planned Development) k! 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) 18.780(Signs) k--18.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) _ 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) t! 18.715(Density Computations) _1 18.790(Tree Removal) 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) - _ 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) _.k 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) -i)8.798(Wireless Communication Fadliles) 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) - _ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) t 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) - 18.740(Historic Overlay) 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.742(Home occupation Permits) 18.430(Subdivisions) -✓_ 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 131 tl E V 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) _t" 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recyding Storage) _ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 Residential Applicatior.'Planning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: 14"' _,. 4 , .M 18.775: 67' . . MillatiMMILLMWAINMPW' V2:..-.41117411W, *WO s e , s t -ZeAVEMIFEITOYAIWWPWAErf 4a .0155/ 1Plii./•.112111 • 71704e-43 1 1 Imo'/yiv A A..6 /r 6Z(5) PROCEDURE i Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. 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. Mass submitted with an as •lication shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2" x 11". One 81/2" x11" ma• o a •ro•ose• •ro ect s a a so s e su•mitte• or attac ment to t e sta' resort or a.mtnistrative •ecision. App 'cations with un o •e• maps shall not se accepte.. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 Residenfial 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, follows al and use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard ,-� .7n t$ n tc� . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available fr 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. SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION (County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-88841 PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicants are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyors Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. 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 THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). • , i • : e con erence ant notes cannot cover a ose requirements ant aspec s re ate• 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). PREPARED BY: CITY OF TIGARD LA NIN DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-639-4111 FAX: 503-684-7297 EMAIL (star's first namel@ci.tigard.or.us TITLE 18(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNET ADDRESS: www.ci.tigard.or.us H:lpattylmasters\Pre-App Notes Residential.doc Updated: 15-Dec-04 (Engineering section:preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 Residential Application,Planning Division Section PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES IrA ENGINEERING SECTION Coity of 1Tigarrd,D�on tt Shaping A Better Community PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map(s): 1S136DD Tax Lot(s): 1500&1600 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: ® SW 69th Avenue to 30 feet from centerline Z SW 70th Avenue to 30 feet from centerline 7 SW Dartmouth to 35 feet from centerline plus 11 feet of preserve ROW I 1 SW to feet Street improvements: X Half street improvements will be necessary along SW 69th and 70th Avenues, to include: ® 18 feet of pavement from centerline, but not less than 24 feet of paved width ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 12-foot concrete sidewalk OR 8 foot sidewalk and 4 foot planter strip ® street trees sized and spaced per Triangle Standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Engineering Department Section Z Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Dartmouth, 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. Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: feet of pavement ( I concrete curb ( I storm sewers and other underground utilities ( ( -foot concrete sidewalk ( I street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. n Other: ( street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: [� feet of pavement n concrete curb ( storm sewers and other underground utilities n -foot concrete sidewalk street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. [ ( Other: ( street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: feet of pavement ( ( concrete curb storm sewers and other underground utilities { -foot concrete sidewalk ( I street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OF TICARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 Engineering Department Section 1 1 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: NJ 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 69th Avenue. 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 69th Avenue and in the intersection of Dartmouth and 70th Avenue. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to extend the public sewer line to the north edge of their property frontage in both 69th and 70th Avenues. 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. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 Engineering 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. I ( 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) May want to install water services along both 69th and 70th for future use. 2) 18.705.030.H.1 Provide preliminary sight distance certification for proposed access points with Land Use application for completeness. 3) 18.705.030.H.2 The proposed driveway on 69th Avenue must be 150 feet north of Dartmouth Street (collector). The proposed driveway on 70th Avenue must be placed as far north as possible since the frontage is less than 150 feet. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIE) 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 CITY OMTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 Engineering department Section 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. PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for any final design-related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building 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 cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section 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. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: ti(�.�--- 3 - 0 62 ENGINEERING DEPART ENT STAFF DATE Phone: [503)639-4111 Fax: (503)624-0152 document2 Revised. September 2,2003 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 • IN TIGARD February 6,2007 Dartmouth Townhomes LLC 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton,OR 97007 Re: Permit No. SDR2006-00009,SLR2006-00009,VAR2006-00083 Dear Sir/Ms.: The City of Tigard has canceled the above referenced permit(s) and enclose a refund for the following: Site Address: 1S136DD-07500 &1S136DD-07600 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes Job No.: N/A Refund: ® Check#49684 in the amount of$403.50. ❑ Credit card"return" receipt in the amount of$ . ❑ Trust account"deposit" receipt in the amount of$ . Notes: Originally submitted as Site Development Review and resubmitted as Subdivision. All fees transferred from original cases referenced above to land use cases SUB2006-00012, SLR2006-00012,VAR2006-00087 and VAR2006-00088;balance of$403.50 refunded to applicant. If you have any questions please contact me at 503.718.2430. Sincerely, Dianna Howse Permit Specialist E nc. I:\Building\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 paid by all methods. Receipts,documentation and the Request far PemitActionorR 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: Dartmouth Townhomes LLC DATE: 1/17/07 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton, OR 97007 REQUESTED BY: Dianna Howse ST TRANSACTION INFORMATION: ,/ ,,- Receipt#: 2006-4780 Case#: SDR2006-00009,SLR2006- 00009,VAR2006-00083 Date: 10/04/06 Address/Parcel: 1S136DD-07500&07600 Pay Method: Check Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes EXPLANATION: Originally submitted as SDR,and resubmitted as SUB. Transfer all fees from above listed cases to SUB2006-00012,SLR20p6-00012,VAR20 00087/88;refund balance. REFUND INFORMATION: Fee Description From Receipt Revenue Account No. Refund Example: [BUILD]Permit Fee - Example: 245-0000-432000 $Amount [LANDUS]SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 $403.50 TOTAL REFUND: $403.50 APPROVALS: If under$500 Professional Staff If under$5,000 Division Manager - •P • 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: l Date: 0',7/0 2 1 By. 1 �" a f LCR/LE"b ivc TES' I:\Building\Refunds\RefundRequest.doc 09/15/06 ��Y CITY OF TIGARD 11/28/2006 I iii 7 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 11/28/2006 Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt #: 27200600000000004780 U 12,1&&i& ' - Date: 10/04/2006 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 4,934.00 SDR2006-00009 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 728.00 ol qa, SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 480.00 50 SLR2006-00009 [LANDUS]Application-Type II 100-0000-438000 1,027.00\ 11 1�, SLR2006-00009 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 151.50 VAR2006-00083 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge - 100-0000-438050 17.00 2 r 50 VAR2006-00083 [LANDUS]Special Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 Line Item Total: $7,453.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. . How Received Amount Paid Check DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES KJP 2015 In Person 6,136.72 LLC Check DARTMOUTN TOWNHOMES KJP 2018 In Person 1,268.50 LLC Check VIC ACCOMANDO KJP 4168 In Person 47.78 Payment Total: $7,453.00 -- 90'6% .5 z) r74,):AGr; fri 3 CO /CeFA 4S Page 1 of 1 ritrrrmt mt CITY OF TIGARD 1/17/2007 - IIr 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 9:43:23AM Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Refund Receipt #: 27200700000000000198 Date: 01/17/2007 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2006-00009 Refund- [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,0 100-0000-438000 (4,530.50) SDR2006-00009 Refund- [LRPF]LR Planning Su 100-0000-438050 (728.00) SDR2006-00009 Refund- [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,0 100-0000-438000 (480.00) SLR2006-00009 Refund-[LANDUS]Application- 100-0000-438000 (1,027.00) SLR2006-00009 Refund-[LRPF]LR Planning Su - 100-0000-438050 (151.50) . VAR2006-00083 Refund- [LRPF]LR Planning Su 100-0000-438050 (17.00) VAR2006-00083 Refund- [LANDUS]Special Adju 100-0000438000 (115.50) Line Item Total: ($7,049.50) Refund: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check Refund DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES 2015+ In Person (7,049.50) • Refund Total: 1 ($7,049.50) .` 1 • ° -d w .0 Z W, V d as p4 o . G z; v • i }` 4) (3) ,f, t, , ,,, '43 b- u 4., 0 u ./.4 , 1 Ts rg x ai u v `q s cd N. --3 o W a „ V o W ti R, ., 44 NN3 ii ci) P, t Q V v0 ~'Q F+1 c:4 V a� V+ V u cReceipt.cpt i] 2 aj cu A CITY OF TIGARD 1/17/2007 11,11 i 2 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 9:46:10AM Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt #: 27200700000000000199 ..-Q-144-7--. . Date: 01/17/2007 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SUB2006-00012 [LANDUS]Prelim Plat w/o PD 100-0000-438000 616.00 SUB2006-00012 [LANDUS]Prelim Plat w/o PD 100-0000-438000 4,366.00 SUB2006-00012 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 624.00 SLR2006-00012 [LANDUS]Application-Type II 100-0000-438000 1,027.00 SLR2006-00012 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 151.50 VAR2006-00087 [LANDUS]Special Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 VAR2006-00087 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 17.00 VAR2006-00088 [LANDUS]Development Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 VAR2006-00088 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 17.00 Line Item Total: $7,049.50 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES DEB 2015+ In Person 7,049.50 LLC Payment Total: $7,049.50 cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 .. ,4114)3Ft ,,zi„G _ e„07 (;? �r- *- to l Department of State Lands ai �� ® 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 , j/ Theodore R.Kulongoski,Governor Salem,OR 97301-1279 (503)986-5200 FAX(503)378-4844 www.oregonstatelands.us. January 27, 2010 State Land Board Greg Berry Theodore R.Kulongoski City of Tigard Governor 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Kate Brown Tigard, OR 97223 Secretary of State Ben Westlund State Treasurer Re: Wetland Delineation Report for Triangle LID Project located at Intersection of SW 69th St. & Dartmouth St., Tigard, Washington County; T1 S R1W Sec. 36DD, Tax Lot: Portions of 7500, 7600, and ROW; WD #09-0450; App. #43313 Dear Mr. Berry: The Department of State Lands has reviewed the wetland delineation report prepared by Zion Natural Resource Consulting for the site referenced above. [Please note that the study area includes only a portion of the tax lots described above (please see the attached map)]. Based upon the information presented in the report and additional information submitted upon request, we concur with the wetland boundaries as mapped in revised Figure 6 of the report. Please replace all copies of the preliminary wetland map with this final Department-approved map. Within the study area, one wetland (totaling approximately 200 sq. ft.) and was identified. The wetland is subject to the permit requirements of the state Removal-Fill Law. Under current regulations, a state permit is required for cumulative fill or annual excavation of 50 cubic yards or more in the wetland. This concurrence is for purposes of the state Removal-Fill Law only. Federal or local permit requirements may apply as well. The Army Corps of Engineers will review the report and make a determination of jurisdiction for purposes of the Clean Water Act. This concurrence is based on information provided to the agency. The jurisdictional determination is valid for five years from the date of this letter, unless new information necessitates a revision. Circumstances under which the Department may change a determination are found in OAR 141-090-0045 (available on our web site or upon request). In addition, laws enacted by the legislature and/or rules adopted by the Department may result in a change in jurisdiction; individuals and applicants are subject to the regulations that are in effect at the time of the removal-fill activity, or complete permit application. The applicant, landowner, or agent may submit a request for reconsideration of this determination in writing within six months of the date of this letter. \\santiam\Documents\wetdet12010 01\09-0450.doc � Thank you for having the site evaluated. Please phone me at 503-986-5321, if you have any questions. Sincerely, Approved by 11111° AA,: �N( / A Anna Buckley Jane. C. Morlan, PWS Wetland Specialist Wetl. ds Program Manager Enclosures ec: Eric Henning, Zion Natural Resource Consulting City of Tigard Planning Department Brian Villalon, Corps of Engineers Damon Reische, Clean Water Services Carrie Landrum, DSL 1\santiam\Documents\wetdet\2010 01\09-0450.doc 1 ----I I.. rr �+ 4 i1 air '—SW *t )Dkkkrnso�'st Vei��illa"DGSw i . —, __- r. 19 r,... -tr t __ 1 I�. LSw ap f 11___. ii �)� P m ._r, St L -�L�( ---— f^ - s'w Oak, I_+ .a (__ 'r - �!LJ 1j 1 it I. I _ . r C Plnel,$t ____.._I Ir J _ L-_, vo._i_f_lc. -' '` j , ____I 6" -aka _ `-- to lc" °t „ -v.--f IL. S z'ip .1„.,-', .-.1....ic2 lo) — -- -- fir _ d"''Il I.I 0_ __i\ .,.._..7..... [ 11 i 11 Swu mhurst .t_ 2.1.. -0-,:, -\:-...„ L, '' L ' \.,,,,,0 %qr.:Haifa_ ;Si' [ 1 1 , . 2 Sw nza aSt _ \ . '... `�-''-.- n SW ,mpban_Sti L _ 1 ' '\ ,,,-...N -\-\,.. . r,..\-) • k..,,,-_ :-__ _„..,Trr,Y: -DLLs ff , • I _....f.__- .,h\' . 1 r / , Temple W ay i *" f w eVa s , As*,■M6,,„,./ O. (*roost-7_4% . ..,1Z........S.........._II-Olhe—ri$:_Dr__ L i , ____J �1 ``. � SYf TQdf C r Der E 223 ,.. . , `—i 9\11r-,,-ftil.ct 4,1A....N --... -.... i SW Lantff3 . r_y IC: ;NI FIGURE 1 ! N ., Vicinity Map V■*-E 7,1/ 11: Natural Kesourcea Consulting \.. Project: Triangle LID S J . , . --- , • ....'1 a.„ 'ii, 5__1 o__ z 5_ TL 7600 „ro ......= __E._ __ _ _ __ ., _ ____ I 2:---..Lr-..--.. --... ■ ---. - •-- --- --- --__ -, • .... --- . -... -.."... STUDY AREA: 1,362 SF __ _ EXISTING WETLANDS ,---. -- - - - -- -- - WITHIN STUDY AREA: 200 SF ...__. _ 5..,.._ - - ._ _ --\_ _ ......„__— __. --- -- \ / ___ 5 ,. ., -- ____ _---- - ----- ---- -- - .. . '- _- --- - -___ /-_ -- __-- -- _ __ _--- --- / --/ - _ .._ -- / ------" ,--- - -- --- --- -___ - ---- - ---- ---- '''' --- _____ ,f 1 Study Area -.... r., r -- ___....----,e_ri / in 1 ; - - ,.. -----_, E'XISTIN.,Q ,-),t, / / / ......,.. „,....-w,FTLA ,ne.,...... __ , „ , , . )1 , PROPOSED R ..... ---. --. • ' ' ---....._ ./ / ,SP-3 / / : ........ -... wa it / , / / /Illi -...,... .......,../,` .t_41Ini II , i ' - ,' 1--..-::-..._ ''' ;:: xtE(SP-1 i/ / / / ---..- . ...., ,,, ., ...., ...".../ . / / • . ,- /. / -EXISTING-' 1 i ---- ._......—-,--------- - -5=f------4-- ---„.7.1-77----r- --I-- / ROW ,.."- _.. ' ‘ -..------:-_=- ---t_-, -----i 1 I EXISTING koDUL}AR , / / ix) BLOtK RE,TAINING WALiL / / / / `.....„.......__ 1 4' ' 22 EXISTING-- -j:- _LSW-11111ARTMOUtiti-ST— 1 WIDTH_ • ( i ‘ ,, F_ ____. / _ - \ ...... _ . ,..... _-___ -- 4,-7_.r-: _ -- - -- - -- -- 1 N 1- k 1 k . \ l I k i \ 1 k ‘ I / , k k :AI , , A V _ ii_ _ _ _ __.„._ ..._., ___-_,,,_-_,--- --,-------'•--,--= -__,}_.. , --.447--,.--,3---- -,-=-:--_---_I --• 7,1 _ ._ _.,,, __ ___ • - ‘.C.-;:), —\ — 1: 7.7-. .-_.... -- •• — 1— —- —I- — --- ---— — — \. 1--- --- ... - •■...... -....'''''-- • _. ____,... --__...,. ■_ .---; rovised ,... 1.1! FIGURE 6 N Wetland Site Location Map Wili•E `1'.--.°"7—.'",,nr "-----7,77.• ' Project: Triangle LID atural Kesources onsulting Approval Issued i '2-1 . /0 Approval Expires -