Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDR2002-00018 SDR2002- 00018 SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00018 I'1 CITY OF TIGARD SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER Community laevetopment ShapingA Better Community 120 DAYS = 5/25/2003 (Includes a 30-day extension) SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2002-00018 Variance (VAR) VAR2002-00048 Variance (VAR) VAR2002-00049 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. APPLICANT: Yun S. Hong OWNER: Knez Realty Group LLC 17450 West Valley Highway Attn: John Knez Jr. Tukwila, WA 98188-5511 8185 SW Hunziker St., Suite A Tigard, OR 97223 APPLICANT'S Ed Murphy & Associates REP: 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97224 LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, CRITERIA: 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request for Site development Review and Variance approval subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 1 OF 27 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Planning Department (Mathew Scheidegger, 639-4171, ext. 2437) for review and approval: 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List" located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans. Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) will not be visible from any of the property lines. 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards (Section 18.745.040.C). 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 12. Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds, leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area, and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. 17. Provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.C. of the Tigard Development Code. 18. Provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. 19. Provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. 20. Provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 2 OF 27 Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 2471) for review and approval: 21. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street to increase the right-of-way to 31 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 22. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay $378.50 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $3,988.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The property has been zoned for industrial uses for many years. The building located on the site was originally built in 1960 by Irvington-Moore, which used it to manufacture machinery for plywood mills. In 1996, Knez Realty Group LLC acquired it. It has been used since that time by Power Rents (for storing and repairing equipment) and Safeway Scaffolding. It is now used by Knez Building Materials to store sheet rock. The property was zoned M-3, Light Industrial, in August 1977. In 1982 the M-3 zone was revised, and renamed I-L. Certain uses, such as offices, were no longer allowed in the I-L zone. In 1988, the adjacent property, (2S101 BC-00201), was rezoned from I-L to I-P at the request of the property owner. The building on that parcel, built in 1973 under the classification of a "public utility", became a permitted office use under the I-P zone. In 1997, the 2-story office portion of the building located on the subject property was completely remodeled and upgraded by Power Rents. The upgrade included handicapped accessible restrooms on the ground floor under (BUP97-0319.) At that time, Mr. Knez constructed a handicapped accessible walkway from SW Hunziker. Vicinity Information The subject property is bordered on the southwest by the 2-story office building mentioned above, zoned I-P and to the east and southwest by industrial buildings, zoned I-L. The area to the north of the property is zoned General Commercial (C-G) and is developed as a business park. There is a mix of industrial and office uses along SW Hunziker Street, zoned I-P and I-L. There are single-family detached homes on the west side of the property, zoned R-4.5, served by Knoll Drive. The closest home is approximately 250 feet from the building located on the subject property. Site Information and Proposal Description: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces. The second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening next to residential uses. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 3 OF 27 • SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET Two letters were received in regard to the impact that the proposed Sykart indoor racing center will have on the surrounding properties. The concerns of the letters were the impact of noise, pollution, security and parking. Staff Response: The first letter received was from a resident of the adjoining R-4.5 zone. The concerns of the letter are noise and pollution. The applicant has been conditioned in the decision to submit a noise study that measures the decibel levels of the proposed use. The findings of the noise study must be in compliance with the maximum decibel levels allowed for an industrial use abutting a residential use. The second issue is pollution. According to the applicant the race cars are fitted with mufflers and catalytic converters. The building will also have to conform to regulations set by the Uniform Building Code, and the Department of Environmental Quality. The concerns with parking and security are from the adjoining office building to the south of the subject site. According to the letter submitted January 13th 2003, the adjacent office building is experiencing a problem with having enough parking, and indicates that parking will become more congested with the addition of a indoor race center. The applicant has indicated that the peak time of use is in the evenings, when most of the employees of the office building will have left for the day. The author of the letter has stated that employee's do work well into the night. However, patrons of the Sykart Racing Center will be parking on the subject site. There should be no need for Sykart patrons to be parking on the office building's property. The second concern of the letter is security. Because the Sykart Race Center operates into the night, the fear is vandalism, and "teenage or older elements loitering on the adjacent property, in the shrubs, dark areas, etc." As discussed in the decision, the subject site has outdoor lighting on all four sides of the building. The Tigard Police Department was notified of the change of use and did not have comments. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Zoning Districts 18.520 (Commercial Zoning Districts) B. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.370 Variances and Adjustments) 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation) 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street parking and loading requirements) 18.780 Signs 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) C. Specific DR Approval Criteria 18.360 D. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 E. Impact Study 18.390 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 4 OF 27 SECTION VI. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS A. ZONIING DISTRICT Industrial Zoning District: Section 18.530.020 Lists the description of the Industrial Zoning Districts. The site is located in the I-P: Industrial Park District. Development Standards: Section 18.530.040.B States that Development standards in Industrial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.530.2 below: TABLE 18.530.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN IDUSTRIAL ZONES STANDARD I-P Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 179,445 sq.ft. Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 100 ft. Minimum Setbacks -Front yard 35 ft[11] 62 ft. -Side facing street on corner&through lots[1] - - -Side yard 0/50 ft.[8] 18 ft. --Rear yard 0/50 ft[8] 210 ft. -Distance between front of garage&property line abutting a public or private street. - - Maximum Height 45 ft 24 ft. Maximum Site Coverage[2] 75% 18% Minimum Landscape Requirement 25% 20% As demonstrated in the table above, the applicant's plans comply with the dimensional standards of the I-P zone except for the minimum landscaping requirement, which has been addressed under 18.360 Site Development Review and the western side yard setback, which is pre-existing. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Development Standards criteria have been satisfied. B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS The Site development Review approval standards require that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. Variances and Adjustments (18.370) The applicant is requesting to reduce the required minimum parking of 137 spaces to a total of 40 spaces. There are currently 90 parking stalls located on the site, 44 adjacent to the subject building (four of which will be removed in order to construct landscaped islands) and 46 spaces located closer to SW Hunziker. The applicant is also requesting a variance to the Buffering and Screening Standards for the western property line. The intent is to reduce the required buffer of 25 feet to an 8-15 foot buffer due to the placement of the existing building. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 5 OF 27 Minimum Parking: According to the applicant, the surrounding property owners have not objected to the proposed variance at the neighborhood meeting. However, Staff received a letter from the adjoining property owner to the south who is opposed to the proposed change of use. One of the main concerns that the property owner has is the lack of available parking. However, the property to the south utilizes parking located on the applicant's parcel. Therefore, by requesting a variance to the minimum parking standard, the applicant is not creating a detrimental situation to the adjoining property to the south; the property to the south has its own issues with parking that the owner of the subject parcel has helped alleviate by allowing joint parking with this adjoining neighbor. The applicant has stated that a majority of the cliental will visit the subject site in groups that use carpool/vanpool. A condition has been imposed that requires 5 percent of the parking stalls to be reserved for car/vanpool parking. Buffering and Screening: The subject site is required by Chapter 18.745 "Landscaping and Screening" to provide a buffer of at least 25 feet in width on the west side of the property, which abuts a single-family residential neighborhood. The applicant states in the narrative that a variance to the buffering standard will not be detrimental to the purpose of the Development Code, in that the public health, safety, convenience and welfare would not be compromised. Currently there is an existing chainlike fence with slats along the property line. The chain link fence sits on top of a concrete retaining wall that varies from one to four feet high. The single-family homes abutting the subject property are at least 20 feet higher in elevation than the subject site. The applicant is proposing to construct an 8 to 15-foot landscape planter along the base of the existing retaining wall and chain link fence. The proposed planter is 200 feet in length and will be planted with approximately 23 Lombardy poplar trees spaced 10 feet apart. However, there is ample room on the west side of the building to create a buffer that meets the minimum 25 feet and tapers to 18 feet at the shortest distance between the building and the property line. The City's Arborist has indicated that Lombardy poplar trees are a poor choice of trees to be planted in the required buffer. The Poplar tree is a fast growing soft wooded species that becomes weaker as it grows taller. Therefore, the applicant will be required to provide an 18 to 25-foot buffer with a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. The City's Arborist has recommended "Incense Cedars". The required 18 to 25-foot buffer along with the existing wall and chain link fence with slats is consistent with the "E-1" buffering standard excluding the width of proposed buffer. Therefore, Staff is convinced that if the buffering width condition is satisfied that the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the vicinity. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; Minimum Parking: The applicant has stated that the building is pre-existing and its location on the parcel hinders the amount of area available for parking. However, there is approximately 35 feet of clearance from the eastern property line and the existing building which provides access to approximately 73,600 square feet of unused space that could be configured to accommodate the required minimum parking of 137 spaces. Therefore, the location of the building does not constitute a variance to the required minimum parking. However, the majority of the unused area to the rear of the property is located within the 100-year floodplain, which clearly creates a special circumstance for the property. The area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be conditioned to be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. Buffering and Screening: The subject building was built in the early 1960's and the adjacent homes have been there, without buffering, for at least that long. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the minimum 25-foot wide buffer requirement to an 8 to 15-foot buffer due to the placement of the existing building and the use of existing roll-up doors for future tenants. However, the applicant has indicated in the narrative that there will be no activity on the west side of the property, and access to the west side of the property can be addressed when future tenants apply for land-use approval. The only circumstance that exists which is peculiar to the subject site is the NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 6 OF 27 placement of the existing building to close to the western property line. Therefore, the applicant has been conditioned to provide a minimum 25-foot buffer that can be reduced to 18 feet at the shortest distance between the subject building and the western property line. These circumstances are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district, because they do not abut a residentially zoned neighborhood except to the adjoining property to the south which was constructed under Tigard's Development Code. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land. Minimum Parking: The proposed use is indoor entertainment, which is a permitted use in the I-P zone. The applicant is requesting the required minimum parking be reduced from 137 spaces to 40 spaces. The reason for the requested variance is that it would be economically non-feasible to maintain 137 parking spaces for a use that according to other established sites will have approximately 20 cars at its peak time. However, the site is currently established with 90 parking stalls. Therefore, the minimum variance needed to the required minimum parking while still maintaining City standards to the greatest extent, is a reduction from 137 spaces to 86 spaces. Four of the existing 90 spaces will be removed in order to construct landscaped islands with parking lot trees. Buffering and Screening: The proposed use is permitted in the I-P zone. The standard for buffering is the same in the I-P and the I-L zones. Although different tenants have occupied the building since it was originally built in 1960, no additional buffering was ever provided. The intent of the City's buffering standard is to provide a separation between what may otherwise be incompatible land uses. The applicant argues that the separation is provided by the change in elevation, the distance between the existing building and the homes, the existing fence on top of the retaining wall, and the proposed 8 to 15-foot landscaped area. However, there is enough square footage on the west side of the building to create a 25-foot buffer that tapers down to 18 feet at the shortest distance between the subject building and the western property line. Because the tenant is not intending to use the western side of the building, the required buffer (18 to 25 feet) will not hinder the applicant from reasonably meeting the code to the greatest extent while permitting reasonable economic use of the land. The reasonable economic use of the land is considered allowing the use to operate inside the subject building while maintaining the intent of the "E" buffering and screening standards to the greatest extent. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage dramatic and forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title; and Minimum Parking: The existing physical and natural systems, including traffic, parking, energy systems environmental systems, would not be adversely affected any more than if the variance were not granted. In fact, granting the variance will have a positive impact on drainage, solar heat gain, and water quality. Buffering and Screening: A variance to the reduction in the required buffer width will not have an adverse effect on existing physical and natural systems. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Minimum Parking: The applicant has indicated that if the City requires the site to meet the minimum parking standards, existing parking_ would be disrupted, and the additional parking stalls would reduce the amount o-f land available for other uses. Based on a parking survey included in the Traffic analysis, other Sykart facilities were observed to have a total of 7 to 14 cars respectively during the PM peak hour. The Grand Prix Raceway in Fife Washington had a maximum of 20 cars parked during the facility's peak operation. The requested variance is to reduce the required 137 parking stalls to 40 parking NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 7 OF 27 stalls. However, the above criterion reads, "the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship." Staff is not convinced that reducing the required parking from 137 stalls to 40 is the minimum variance needed. There are presently 90 stall on the subject site. After removing 4-parking stalls in order to build landscaped islands, there will be a total of 86 parking stalls. The applicant has stated that the owner of the property may build another building on-site and may need the additional stalls for the future use. As the extent of the future use is unknown, that application will be reviewed under the standards in effect at that time. The Tigard Development Code does allow joint parking agreements which may be an available option for meeting the requirement. In any case, as the site contains 86 stalls, the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship to accommodate the present proposal is a reduction of 51 spaces to a total of 86 spaces. Buffering and Screening: The applicant states in the narrative that the hardship is not self-imposed. The site was developed before Knez Realty Group bought the property and before the zone was changed from I-L to I-P. Presumably, the property was allowed to develop as it did under the standards in place at the time. The variance requested (8-15 foot buffer) is the minimum necessary to alleviate the hardship. That is to say, the amount of buffering is the maximum practical without creating an additional hardship on the tenant, the property owner, and possible future users of the building. However, the tenant has indicated that there will be no activity on the west side of the property. Therefore, the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship of the buffering and screening standard would to allow the applicant to reduce the required buffer to 18 feet at the narrowest point between the property line and existing building. Because the required buffer is being reduced, the applicant is required to provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that addresses the City's Maximum Allowable Noise standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). FINDING: Based on the information above, the applicant has met the variance criteria for a reduction of the minimum parking requirement of 137 parking stalls to a total of 86 stalls. Staff is also satisfied that the variance criteria have been met for a reduction in the amount of buffering required along the western property line. The applicant has requested to reduce the required buffer to 8-15 feet. However, Staff finds that there is enough area to create a 25-foot buffer back to an 18-foot buffer. The applicant is required to provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). CONDITIONS: • Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List" located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans. Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. • Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. • Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. • Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). Access, Egress and Circulation (18.705): Access plan: No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 8 OF 27 No change to the existing access is proposed. Currently the site is accessed by one (1) 30-foot driveway connecting to SW Hunziker Street. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Joint access: Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City. The subject site's access is shared by the adjoining two story office building located at 8255 SW Hunziker Street and the adjoining properties to the east. The owner of the subject parcel and the adjoining properties to the east are owned by the same company. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. Public street access: All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.0301 shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. The subject site is accessible from SW Hunziker Street, which is a public street that will be maintained as a public street. Curb cuts: Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N: Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair, bicycle ramps i and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080: Concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required; except where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City Engineer approval and Asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shall be built to City configuration standards. No driveway approach shall be less than five feet from the side property line projected except in cul-de-sacs, without approval and written permission of the city. The end slopes may encroach within the five foot restricted area. No portion of any driveway approach, including the end slopes, shall be located closer than thirty feet to an intersection street right-of-way line. Commercial or service drives shall not be more than thirty feet in width and if located on the same lot frontage shall be separated by a minimum length of curb of thirty feet. Each residential driveway shall be not more than twenty-six feet in width includin end slopes, and if more than one driveway is to be constructed to serve the same lot, the frontage spacing between such driveways shall be not less than thirty feet measured along the curb line. Joint access driveways shall conform to the appropriate width standard for commercial or residential type usage. The driveway approach is pre-existing. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Walkways: On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; According to the plans, the existing on-site pedestrian walkways connect from the subject building to SW Hunziker Street. Therefore, this standard has been met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 9 OF 27 Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety . Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; The walkway from the subject building crosses a vehicular access for a total distance of 44 feet. However, because the walkway is pre-existing, this standard does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The applicant's plan shows the pedestrian walkway from the subject building to be paved. Therefore, this criterion has been satisfied. Access Management (Section 18.705.030.H) Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. A traffic impact report was prepared by CTS Engineers, Inc., dated September 9, 2002. CTS found that the proposed use of the site can be accommodated by the existing site driveway and will not create adverse impacts on the roadway system. There is adequate sight distance and stacking in Hunziker Street at present to meet the demands of the development. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater dependingg upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a roject has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The site access is not located within the influence area of a collector or arterial street intersection. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The site currently utilizes two 35-foot wide driveway aprons, with the easternmost driveway providing one inbound lane and the westernmost driveway providing separate left and right turn outbound lanes. The applicant proposes maintaining these driveways, which are separated by approximately 57 feet. Although the two driveway aprons do not meet the minimum separation of 200 feet, Staff believes that both aprons should remain in place to help separate the incoming truck traffic that flows into Tax Lots 101 and 100 (also owned by the same owner as the subject site). The westernmost driveway provides access to not only the subject site, but also to Tax Lot 201. Consolidating the two aprons into one location would be a hardship for the adjacent tax lots who now have access to the existing aprons. In addition, the heavy truck traffic would be NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 10 OF 27 • mixed with the passenger vehicle traffic that currently flows from Tax Lot 201 and the subject site, plus the additional passenger vehicle traffic that will be generated from the new use. The mixture of heavy truck traffic and passenger vehicle traffic seems to pose a safety issue that would outweigh any benefits the City may see if the two aprons are consolidated. Therefore, Staff recommends the two aprons be allowed to remain in place. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 provides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with 0-99 parking spaces is one 30-foot accesses with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. Access to the site is pre-existing. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. One-way vehicular access points: Where a proposed parking facility indicates only one-way traffic flow on the site, it shall be accommodated by a specific driveway serving the facility; the entrance drive shall be situated closest to oncoming traffic and the exit drive shall be situated farthest from oncoming traffic. The access drive is designed for two-way traffic. Therefore, this standard does not apply. The Director has the authority to restrict access when the need to do so is dictated by one or more of the following conditions: To provide for increased traffic movement on congested streets and to eliminate turning movement problems, the Director may restrict the location of driveways on streets and require the location of driveways be placed on adjacent streets, upon the finding that the proposed access would: • Cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or • Provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles; or • Cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a clear and present danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare. To eliminate the need to use public streets for movements between commercial or industrial properties, parking areas shall be designed to connect with parking areas on adjacent properties unless not feasible. The Director shall require access easements between properties where necessary to provide for parking area connections; To facilitate pedestrian and bicycle traffic, access and parking area plans shall provide efficient sidewalk and/or pathway connections, as feasible, between neighboring developments or land uses; The access to the subject property is pre-existing and is not considered hazardous or constitutes a clear and present danger to the public health. Standards for access as well as for fire and life safety are discussed elsewhere in this report (Section VIII. Agency Comments). Therefore, no access restriction is required. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Access, Egress and Circulation standards have not been met. CONDITION: • Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 11 OF 27 • Environmental Performance Standards (18.725): Noise: For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. The applicant has been conditioned under 18.370 (Variances and Adjustments) to provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). Visible emissions: Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack of other point- source emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340-28-070) apply. The applicant has not addressed visible emissions within the narrative. Therefore, the applicant must provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) will not be visible from any of the property lines. Vibration: No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. The applicant has not addressed vibration. Therefore, the applicant must provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. Odors: The emission of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. There are existing fans on the east side of the subject building that are used for ventilation. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. Glare and heat: No direct or sky-reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted and; there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or constructing equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. The proposed use is for indoor entertainment. Therefore, this standard shall not apply. Insects and rodents: All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. The applicant has proposed an enclosed waste area for the associated dumpster. The proposed use is for an indoor go-kart track, which does not attract insects or rodents. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Access, Egress and Circulation standards have not been met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 12 OF 27 CONDITIONS: • Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) will not be visible from any of the property Ines. • Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. • Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street or a private drive more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The subject site has approximately 150 feet of frontage on SW Hunziker Street. A total of 69 feet of the frontage is devoted to existing accesses, leaving an 81-foot planter strip. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards (Section 18.745.040.C). Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.080 states that no buffer is required between abutting uses that are of a different type when the uses are separated by a street. No buffer is required between a proposed office use and existing office use. The subject site is adjacent to a C-G zone to the north, requiring buffering to a "D" buffering level. Separating the two parcels is an 80-foot natural area Which exceeds the maximum required for a "D" buffering standard of 20 feet. The subject site's neighbor to the east is zoned I-L (light industrial) which does not require a buffer according to Table 18.745.1 of the Tigard Development Code. The property to the south is zoned I-P and is separated by a parking lot, both of which do not require buffering. The property to the west is zoned R-4.5, and is established with single-family homes, thus requiring a buffer equivalent to an "E" buffer. The "E" buffering standard allows three options, a 25 to 30 toot buffer consisting of either a 6-foot hedge or wall or a 5-foot burm with a combination of low lying and vertical Shrubbery. However, the applicant has applied for and has been granted a variance to the buffering and screening standards, which has been addressed above under 18.370; Variances and Adjustments. The applicant has requested to reduce the required 25 foot buffer to an 8 to 15-foot buffer along the west side of the property. Based on the findings, Staff has allowed the required buffer to be reduced to 18 feet at the shortest distance between the building and the western property line. The applicant has been conditioned to provide an 18 to 25--foot buffer along the western property line under 18.370; Variances and Adjustments. Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. Screeningg: Special P-rovisions: Section 18.745.050.E requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The subject site has a total of 90 existing parking stalls on site. The above standard requires a parking lot tree and a combination of low lying and vertical shrubbery to be planted in a landscape island distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for every seven (7) parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a plan showing existing landscaped islands planted with parking lot trees for every seven spaces toward the south end-of the property. The applicant is proposing to construct three additional landscaped islands at the front of the subject building on the basis of one for every seven parking stalls. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 13 OF 27 Screening Of Service Facilities: Except for one-family and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area; Screening of Service Facilities is addressed under Chapter 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage). FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have not been met. CONDITION: . Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards (Section 18.745.040.C). Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.755): Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The plans submitted by the applicant show a solid waste area proposed on the west side of the site. However, the applicant has not addressed the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable section of the Development Code. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. Location Standards: To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The refuse container facility has been proposed to be located in the side yard setback on the west side of the subject property, which does not abut a public or private street. The facility is visible from the subject building; therefore, this standard is satisfied. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 14 OF 27 • Design Standards: The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. The applicant has not addressed the design standards for the proposed refuse container area. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage Standards have not been met. CONDITIONS: • Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. • Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Location of vehicle parking: Off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwellings. Off-street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building with the following exceptions: a) commercial and industrial uses which require more than 40 parking spaces may provide for the spaces in excess of the required first 40 spaces up to a distance of 300 feet from the primary site; The 40 parking spaces which remain on the primary site must be available for users in the following order of priority: 1) Disabled-accessible spaces; 2) Short-term spaces; 3) Long-term preferential carpool and vanpool spaces; 4) Long-term spaces. Based on the proposed use, the total number of required parking stalls for the site is 137. According to the site plan, there are a total of 90 parking stalls, all of which are located on-site. The applicant has requested a variance to the total number of required parking spaces, reducing the required parking to 40 stalls. However, based on Staffs analysis, which has been addressed above under 18.370 Variances and Adjustments, the minimum required parking has been reduced to 86 parking stalls. Joint Parking: Owners of two or more uses structures or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same parking and loading spaces when the peak hours of operation do not overlay, subject fo the following: 1) The size of the joint parking facility shall be at least as large as the number of vehicle parking spaces required by the larger(est) use per Section 18.765.070; 2) Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the Director in the form of deeds, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; 3),If a joint use arrangement is subsequently terminated, or if the uses change, the requirements of this title thereafter apply to each separately. The applicant has not proposed joint parking. However, the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker are used by the existing office building located immediately south of the subject building. The applicant has indicated that the proposed use will only use the 46 spaces in the evenings and weekends, Sykart's busiest times. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 15 OF 27 Parking in Mixed-Use Projects: In mixed-use projects, the required minimum vehicle parking shall be determined using the following formula. 1) Primary use, i.e. that with the largest proportion of total floor area within the development at 100d10 of the minimum vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060. 2) Secondary use, i.e., that with the second largest percentage of total floor area within the development, at 90% of the vehicle parking required-for that use in Section 18.765.060; 3) Subsequent use or uses, at 80% of the vehicle parking required for that use(s) in Section 18.765.060; 4) The maximum parking allowance shall be 150% of the total minimum parking as calculated in D.1.-3. above. The applicant states in the narrative that the proposed building has a second story that will be used as an office, and has calculated the required parking based on a mixed use. The square footage associated with the primary use (Indoor Entertainment) has been calculated at 28,703 square feet. Based on the parking matrix, Table 18.765.2 of the Tigard Development Code, "Indoor Entertainment" requires 4.3 parking stalls for every 1,000 square feet. The secondary "office use" of the second floor is approximately 6,074 square feet and is calculated at 2.7 parking stalls for every 1,000 square feet. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide a total of 137 parking stalls. However, the applicant has requested a variance to the minimum required parking that has been addressed under 18.370 Variances and Adjustments. Based on the findings of the Variance criteria, the applicant has been approved to reduce the required parking of 137 spaces to a total of 86 based on the number of existing parking stalls located on-site. Visitor Parking in Multi-Family Residential Developments: Multi-dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces above the minimum required for the use of guests of residents of the complex. These spaces shall be centrally located or distributed throughout the development. Required bicycle parking facilities shall also be centrally located within or evenly distributed throughout the development. This project does not involve a multi-family use. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Preferential Long-Term CarpoolNanpool Parking: Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long-term parking spaces shall provide preferential long-term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5% of total long-term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool/vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpoolsTvanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated -for use by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The applicant has indicated that the primary mode of transportation to the site will be carpool by means of mini-vans and buses for organized groups. Therefore, the applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. Disabled-Accessible Parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The subject site has a total of 90 parking stalls. The applicant is proposing to construct landscaped islands over four of the existing parking stalls adjacent to the subject building, leaving a total of 86 parking stalls. According to ADA standards, parking lots with 76 to 100 parking stalls must provide 4 ADA accessible stalls that are 9 feet wide with an 8-foot access aisle. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 16 OF 27 • Access Drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. The access drive has been addressed previously in this decision under Chapter 18.705 (Access Egress and Circulation). Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. Pedestrian access has been discussed previously in this decision under Chapter 18.705 (Access Egress and Circulation). Parking Lot Striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The plans submitted show the associated parking stalls to be clearly marked with striping. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. There are two existing walkways on the south and east side of the subject building that has adjacent parking. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The applicant's plans show the associated parking stalls to be 9 feet in width and 15 feet in length. Therefore, the applicant will need to revise the plan to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 17 OF 27 • Bicycle Parking Location and Access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. The applicant is proposing to locate the required bicycle parking within the subject building. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area, and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has not provided a detail of the bike rack to be used; therefore, the applicant will be required to provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.C. of the Tigard Development Code. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. The applicant is proposing to provide bicycle parking within the subject building. However the applicant has not indicated how many bicycle parking stalls will be available. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. The applicant has requested a variance to the required minimum off-street parking. Findings are addressed under 18.370 Variances and Adjustments. Off-Street Loading Spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 18 OF 27 The applicant has stated in the narrative that the use will not generate truck traffic. However, the subject building is 34,777 square feet. According to the standard above, a minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet. The proposed use is indoor go-kart racing. Therefore, the applicant will need to provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have not been fully met, however, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be fully met: CONDITIONS: • Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds, leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. • The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. • Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. • Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. • Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area, and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. • Provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.C. of the Tigard Development Code. • Provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. • Provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. • Provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the MUE Zoning District. Signs are reviewed through a separate permit process administered by the Development Services Technicians. FINDING: Because signs will be reviewed and approved as part of a separate permit process, this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal (18.790): Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. No trees are proposed to be removed by the applicant. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the tree removal standards have been met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 19 OF 27 Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall- contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all ranches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right- of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. No modifications to the visual clearance at the access point of the site are being proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the vision clearance standards have been met. C. SPECIFIC SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.360.090(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (100-year floodplain); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses; 18.360.090.13 (Parking); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled). Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. According to the applicant, the subject building will have no impact on existing trees located on the site. Drainage is addressed later in this decision under Chapter 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards). The subject building is approximately 80 feet from the nearest building to the east, thus providing adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting access. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Crime Prevention and Safety: • Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; • Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; • Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; • The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and • Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed - at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 20 OF 27 The applicant is not proposing any outdoor public gathering space. The area along the west side of the building and the area behind the building are fenced off, preventing public access to these areas. The front (or south) side of the building, and the east side, are clearly visible from inside the building. Windows in the front and sides of the building give the manager good visual access to the parking area. There is no interior laundry or service areas. The mailbox is located at the entrance, off of Hunziker Street. Lighting is provided from the yard lights on the building, and illuminates all sides of the building. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: the location of other transit facilities in the area; and the size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: bus stop shelters; turnouts for buses; and connecting paths to the shelters. The Tri-Met bus stop for the #38 and #78 bus lines are located on Hunziker Street, directly in front of the site, with a handicapped accessible pedestrian path directly connecting the bus stop to the front door of the building. The applicant has indicated that he will work with Tri-Met to make any reasonable pedestrian or transit-oriented improvements that will encourage transit ridership. A request for comment was submitted to Trri-Met; however, Staff did not receive any comments. Therefore, no condition will be imposed. Landscaping: All landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745; In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. With the landscaping improvements shown on the proposed site plan, the percentage of gross area landscaped will be 20 percent, or 37,030 square feet and will be increased to meet buffering standards. Provisions of the Underlying Zone: All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall appl y unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. Dimensional Requirements: Provisions of the (I-P) Industrial Park Zoning District have been addressed earlier in this decision under Section 18.530.040.B. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the specific standards of the Site Development Review Section have been met. Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 21 OF 27 Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a collector street to have a 62-foot wide right-of-way width and a 34-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Hunziker Street, which is classified as a collector street and regional access bikeway on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant will dedicate additional ROW to provide a minimum of 31 feet from the centerline. SW Hunziker Street is currently improved with curb, sidewalk and streetlights. No additional improvements are required. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. Hunziker Street has existing sidewalks. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing 8-inch public sewer line located partly on this site, and presently serves the subject building. No additional sewer improvements are required. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no existing upstream public drainage ways that impact this site. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). Impervious areas will not be increased with this project; therefore, this criterion will not apply. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 22 OF 27 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. As was stated previously, Hunziker Street is classified as a regional access bikeway on the transportation system map. There are no bike lane markings on the roadway at this time. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. The applicant will need to contribute funds for the future striping of the bike lane along Hunziker Street. The amount of the striping would be as follows: • 145 feet of 8-inch white stripe, at $2.50/If $362.50 • 4 Mono-directional reflective markers @ $4.00/ea $ 16.00 378.50 Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. The future bike lane will be a minimum of 6 feet wide. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines,. but not limited to those required for electric, communication lightin and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 145 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $3,988.00. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 23 OF 27 ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET A ND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: CTS Engineers, Inc. submitted a report dated September 9, 2002 to address the previous zone change application. The CTS findings are still valid and are summarized below: The overall purpose of the report was to identify the intersections in the vicinity of this site that may be impacted by this zone change, compare the existing Levels of Service (LOS) during the PM Peak Hour with a variety of scenarios: 1) Maximum build-out under the current I-L zone, 2) maximum build-out under the proposed I-P zone, and 3) build-out per the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center (SIRC). The CTS report identified the following intersections as the most critical for analysis: • Hall Boulevard/Scofjins Street/Hunziker Street (signalized) • Hunziker Street/72" Avenue (signalized) • Hunziker Street/Site Driveway (unsignalized). Staff concurred with the selection of critical intersections. CTS determined that the current LOS for the three intersections during the weekday PM Peak Period are as follows: • Hall Boulevard/ScofJins Street/Hunziker Street: LOS C • Hunziker Street/72' Avenue: LOS C • Hunziker Street/Site Driveway: LOS B CTS then performed a comparison of the three scenarios mentioned above. For the worst case full build-out in the I-L zone, they used the Light Industrial category (ITE 110). For the worst case full build-out in the I-P zone, they used the General Office category (ITE 710). For the Sykart scenario, they used actual driveway count data obtained from other Sykart facilities in the state of Washington. The following is a comparison of the PM Peak Hour trip generation that could be experienced from the subject site, assuming a 70,000 sf facility: • I-L Zone, Light Industrial: 69 PM Peak trips • I-P Zone, General Office: 104 PM Peak trips • Sykart Project: 20 PM Peak trips. It can easily be seen that the Sykart project will not generate a significant amount of trips during the PM Peak period. However, it is still important to compare the worst case scenarios of the two zones. CTS then compared the expected LOS (Weekday PM Peak) for the critical intersections, based on the worst case trip generations mentioned above. The following is a summary of their findings: Intersection LOS (I-L) LOS (I-P) LOS (Sykart) . Hall/Scoffins/-iunziker C C C . Hunziker/72' D D C . Hunziker/Site Driveway C C B Based on that comparison, there would be no additional impact to the estimated LOS of the critical intersections by rezoning this site to I-P. To further bolster that opinion, it is interesting to compare the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios of the two signalized intersections under the same scenarios. When V/C approaches 1.0, a given intersection is near failing. Below is a comparison of the V/C ratios: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 24 OF 27 Intersection V/C (I-L) V/C (I-P) V/C (Sykart) Hall/Scoffins/J-lunziker 0.79 0.80 0.79 Hunziker/72' 0.86 0.87 0.85 Again, there is no significant change to the critical intersections as a result of the rezoning and proposed use of the property. Public Water System: This site is presently served from the public water line in Hunziker Street. No additional water line improvements are necessary. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. There will be no increase in the impervious area of this site. Therefore, this criterion will not apply. E. IMPACT STUDY (18.390) Section 18.360.090 states, "The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The applicant has provided an impact study addressing the project's impacts on public systems. The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $20,032 based on the use proposed. Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $62,600 ($20,032 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the collector and arterial street system. The unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $42,568. The applicant will be required to dedicate 145 square feet of right-of-way to meet current transportation system standards. The cost of the improvements is expected to be $1,740 (145 square feet x $12.00 per square foot for dedication) thus, the exaction is roughly proportionate to the level of Impact generated from this development. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 25 OF 27 • SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objection to it. The City of Tigard Water Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objection to it. The City of Tigard Permit Coordinator has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it, SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Washington County Land Use Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: 1. The proposed gates at the southwest and northeast corners of the building shall be made accessible to the Fire District in the form of a Knox brand padlock. Contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an application. Please contact me at (503) 612-7010 with any additional questions. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 27, 2003 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 14, 2003 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type Ill Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 26 OF 27 Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS AT 5:00 PM ON MARCH 13, 2003. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. A , ^'i February 27, 2003 .J �.:��► rY PREPAR. I P` !S- 45irgger DATE Assistant Planner ,tC/ Jl February 27, 2003 APPROVED B : Richard H. Bew r orff DATE Planning Manager I:\curpin 1m a th e w\sd r1S D R2002-00018.d e c.d oc.d of NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 27 OF 27 -__ .. ■o �� op,- AS, ` CITY of TIGARD GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION CYSTIC • • III VICINITY MAP IN 99.T1 si _ ► *Om. - SDR2002-00018 r i Ilk 1. 4 � •�♦ . VAR2002-00048 *� �� VAR2002- 4 �i I► 000 9 z,>_► � s� SYKART INDOOR m� RACING CENTER ■ r .L ,_ .o.` f . .04,A> k #4, :11111.11 i c* 1.1*. IMO-447# 4 gr*/ *0 it ■ B[i!P i,( \444#.' ill , 525.9-/ / D URL.. M F •3 f ' BE A• sy s` Tigard Area Map S,. L . p, ,<;,.,, lo % hikl 0 400 800 Feet 1=505 feet ': A City of Tigard Information on this map Is for general Vocation only and \ should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 (503)639-4171 httpRlwww.cl.tlgard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Dec 27,2002;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR �, ^is r , a t"----&,-- r _ --- 's � f3 r x rr t k? O 1. K` I�§ I t •- . _ ie r 1 •q y.rwn,o,�?, 'i y1y •(i,,, �•+�� a..toss-' s om uyq[S� j r �JY x, a ,t , i! l..,�„�, . , �. . vN UW NwI t o be'^:mod--• of Y ��fi4 w S y � ) 1• .,.' Z Existin,Buldin• - r .fin 3 • 5 e, ..-� ,°ri a + r �4 F 'y'r -•4f"4. t K h f Y . v l_ r y � ) 1 c j / b • •t { t 1: St� N d� r I- fi T.1 . ' [ r 1 � s s k• 'v l• JJ` i r .. f x I w rK 3 .� AA ApIL CITY OF TIGARD I SDR2002.00018NAR2002-00048NAR2002-00049 CITY Or TIGARD SITE PLAN N SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER (Map is not to scale) NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00018 111 CITY OF TIGARD SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER Community(Development Sltaprngf4(Better Community 120 DAYS = 5/25/2003 (Includes a 30-day extension) SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2002-00018 Variance (VAR) VAR2002-00048 Variance (VAR) VAR2002-00049 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. APPLICANT: Yun S. Hong OWNER: Knez Realty Group LLC 17450 West Valley Highway Attn: John Knez Jr. Tukwila, WA 98188-5511 8185 SW Hunziker St., Suite A Tigard, OR 97223 APPLICANT'S Ed Murphy & Associates REP: 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97224 LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, CRITERIA: 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II . DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (250 per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 27, 2003 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 14, 2003 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appli The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON MARCH 13, 2003. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Mathew Scheidegger at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. ' Ir`•'- 1 ` , CITY or IIGARG\*............l.. I I :\:' VICINITY MAP �� -." SDR2002 00018 t� VAR2002-00048 v " ( YAR2002-00049 .. - ` 1— SYKART INDOOR I 4- RACING CENTER p , ...1 •#,•-• ----L . __ NT #4, L-: '3 - ,/ 4( ,.. -1.- _ -.::: Ok:•' wk. .A.,‘,,,,r: ,z.....74" __ A.Vo,, 4 i :..,k, ,,,,,,,, Ali C■ry of Tlgnd ......i ,r !.,..„_ .,:V.',ill 1. ea I • .'/ I �� . � f" �' ` _'' r .t is .7,- y r _ ' A'� Y ', T e s<'^ ny`T PI n� 1 Y 7.Y Pr- T "ade 3�q d‘� . /'.. � :::: - �1, .: r l z , - II ...y '�- y 4 CITY OF TIGARD I SDR2002.O0018NAR2002.0004BNAR2002.00049 SITE PLAN N SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER (Map Is not to scale) RECEIVED r - , 7001 GUY ur t HARD PLIMINGIENGINEERING 4-4 ,p up '1 voJ-fan2r2- s ).\9)0 o � s ).h p o Z i -rvu °-F - o jozA 1-a �� otip NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER, NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development S1iaping. Better Community DATE OF NOTICE: December 30, 2002 FILE NUMBERS: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00018 Type II Land Use Application VARIANCE (VAR) 2002-00048 VARIANCE (VAR) 2002-00049 FILE NAME: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101BC, Tax Lot 200. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the City. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON JANUARY 13, 2003. All comments should be directed to Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at (503) 639-4171. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 6, 2003. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: • Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; • Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: • The application is accepted by the City • Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. • The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. • City Staff issues a written decision. • Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." 1 CITY 01 TICNRC 1/ _ I � fI I- /L VICINITY MAP ll V► _ ti .. SDR2002-00018 VAR2002-00048 j% 1/�� �> r' VAR2002-00049 ■ --- ` ----- SYKART INDOOR V ip RACING CENTER *(%A. p $. ■r� - \* 4 .sqkpii, .LS 4 14.A. . .4, , .„_, 0,\, � C�®�� ■ . N . ~w m wM REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: February 6, 2003 TO: Matt Scheidegger, Assistant Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SDR 2002-00018, Sykart Indoor Racing Center Access Management (Section 18.705.030.H) Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. A traffic impact report was prepared by CTS Engineers, Inc., dated September 9, 2002. CTS found that the proposed use of the site can be accommodated by the existing site driveway and will not create adverse impacts on the roadway system. There is adequate sight distance and stacking in Hunziker Street at present to meet the demands of the development. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The site access is not located within the influence area of a collector or arterial street intersection. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 1 The site currently utilizes two 35-foot wide driveway aprons, with the easternmost driveway providing one inbound lane and the westernmost driveway providing separate left and right turn outbound lanes. The applicant proposes maintaining these driveways, which are separated by approximately 57 feet. Staff is concerned about this proposal because the two aprons do not meet this provision. The arrangement was acceptable for the prior use because there were a large number of tractor trailer vehicles entering and exiting the site. The traffic for the new use will be predominantly passenger vehicles. With driveways that wide, it would be very difficult to control inbound and outbound traffic as before. Staff recommends the applicant be required to consolidate the two approaches. The applicant will need to continue to provide shared access to Tax Lot 201 (immediately west of site). Prior to construction, the applicant must submit a plan to the Engineering Department indicating how the two access points will be consolidated. A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this work. Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a collector street to have a 62-foot wide right-of-way width and a 34-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Hunziker Street, which is classified as a collector street and regional access bikeway on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW from centerline, ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 2 according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant will dedicate additional ROW to provide a minimum of 31 feet from the centerline. SW Hunziker Street is currently improved with curb, sidewalk and streetlights. No additional improvements, other than the driveway consolidation, are required. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. Hunziker Street has existing sidewalks. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing 8-inch public sewer line located partly on this site, and presently serves the subject building. No additional sewer improvements are required. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 3 There are no existing upstream public drainage ways that impact this site. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). Impervious areas will not be increased with this project; therefore, this criterion will not apply. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. As was stated previously, Hunziker Street is classified as a regional access bikeway on the transportation system map. There are no bike lane markings on the roadway at this time. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. The applicant will need to contribute funds for the future striping of the bike lane along Hunziker Street. The amount of the striping would be as follows: • 145 feet of 8-inch white stripe, at $2.50/If $362.50 • 4 Mono-directional reflective markers @ $4.00/ea $ 16.00 $378.50 Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 4 The future bike lane will be a minimum of 6 feet wide. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under- grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under- grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 145 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 3,988.00. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 5 ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: CTS Engineers, Inc. submitted a report dated September 9, 2002 to address the previous zone change application. The CTS findings are still valid and are summarized below: The overall purpose of the report was to identify the intersections in the vicinity of this site that may be impacted by this zone change, compare the existing Levels of Service (LOS) during the PM Peak Hour with a variety of scenarios: 1) Maximum build-out under the current I-L zone, 2) maximum build-out under the proposed I-P zone, and 3) build-out per the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center (SIRC). The CTS report identified the following intersections as the most critical for analysis: • Hall Boulevard/Scoffins Street/Hunziker Street (signalized) • Hunziker Street/72nd Avenue (signalized) • Hunziker Street/Site Driveway (unsignalized). Staff concurred with the selection of critical intersections. CTS determined that the current LOS for the three intersections during the weekday PM Peak Period are as follows: • Hall Boulevard/Scoffins Street/Hunziker Street: LOS C • Hunziker Street/72nd Avenue: LOS C • Hunziker Street/Site Driveway: LOS B CTS then performed a comparison of the three scenarios mentioned above. For the worst case full build-out in the I-L zone, they used the Light Industrial category (ITE 110). For the worst case full build-out in the I-P zone, they used the General Office category (ITE 710). For the Sykart scenario, they used actual driveway count data obtained from other Sykart facilities in the state of Washington. The following is a comparison of the PM Peak Hour trip generation that could be experienced from the subject site, assuming a 70,000 sf facility (current building size): • I-L Zone, Light Industrial: 69 PM Peak trips • I-P Zone, General Office: 104 PM Peak trips • Sykart Project: 20 PM Peak trips. It can easily be seen that the Sykart project will not generate a significant amount of trips during the PM Peak period. However, it is still important to compare the worst case scenarios of the two zones. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 6 CTS then compared the expected LOS (Weekday PM Peak) for the critical intersections, based on the worst case trip generations mentioned above. The following is a summary of their findings: Intersection LOS (I-L) LOS (I-P) LOS (Sykart) • Hall/Scoffins/Hunziker C C C • Hunziker/72nd D D C • Hunziker/Site Driveway C C B Based on that comparison, there would be no additional impact to the estimated LOS of the critical intersections by rezoning this site to I-P. To further bolster that opinion, it is interesting to compare the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios of the two signalized intersections under the same scenarios. When V/C approaches 1.0, a given intersection is near failing. Below is a comparison of the V/C ratios: Intersection V/C (I-L) V/C (I-P) V/C (Sykart) • Hall/Scoffins/Hunziker 0.79 0.80 0.79 • Hunziker/72nd 0.86 0.87 0.85 Again, there is no significant change to the critical intersections as a result of the rezoning and proposed use of the property. Public Water System: This site is presently served from the public water line in Hunziker Street. No additional water line improvements are necessary. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 7 frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. There will be no increase in the impervious area of this site. Therefore, this criterion will not apply. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover the consolidation of the two driveways onto Hunziker Street and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street to increase the right-of-way to 31 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. The applicant's construction plans shall show how they will consolidate the two driveway approaches into this site down to one. They must continue to provide joint access to Tax Lot 201 to the west. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 8 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay $378.50 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 3,988.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 1 1tig3331 usr1 depts\eng\brianr\comments\sdr\sdr2002-00018 doc ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00018 Sykart Indoor Racing PAGE 9 DATE: Feb 14, 2003 PLANS CHECK NO. PROJECT TITLE: - COUNTYWIDE Sykart indoor auto racing Ig TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE WORKSHEET APPLICANT: (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) MAILING ADDRESS: CITY/ZIP/PHONE: TAX MAP NO.: SITES NO.ADDRESS: LAND USE CATEGORY RATE PER TRIP RESIDENTIAL $ 239.00 X BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL $ 60.00 OFFICE $220.00 Estimate INDUSTRIAL $ 230.00 INSTITUTIONAL $ 99.00 PAYMENT METHOD: CASH/CHECK C• REDIT B• ANCROFT(PROMISSORY NOTE) USE LAND CATEGORY DESCRIPTION OF USE WEEKDAY AVG. INSTITUTIONAL ONLY: D• EFER TO OCCUPANCY 896 Vidio Arcade TRIP RATE 9.6 WEEKEND AVG.TRIP RATE BASIS: The applicant proposes construction of a 34,777 sq. ft. indoor race facility. CALCULATIONS: TIF = Week day Avg. Trips X T.G.S.F. X Rate Per Trip $20,032 = 9.6 X 34.777 X $60 Transit Amt. = Projected Trip Rate X $18 $6,012 = 334 X $18 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION: 334 FEE: $20,032 FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY ADDITIONAL NOTES: No credits assumed ROAD AMT. $14,020 TRANSIT AMT. $6,012 PREPARED BY S.S. Casper I:TIFWKST.DOC (DST) EFF: 07-01-98 TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE • SOUTH DIVISION COMMUNITY SERVICES • OPERATIONS • FIRE PREVENTION Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue January 9, 2003 Mathew Scheidegger, Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Skykart Indoor Racing Center Dear Mathew, I have reviewed the submittal for the above named project and have the following comments: 1. The proposed gates at the southwest and northeast corners of the building shall be made accessible to the Fire District in the form of a Knox brand padlock. Contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an application. Please contact me at(503)612-7010 with any additional questions. Sincerely, Eric T. McMullen Eric T. McMullen Deputy Fire Marshal 7401 SW Washo Court,Suite 101 •Tualatin,Oregon 97062•Tel.(503)612-7000•Fax(503)612-7003•www.tvfr.com CITY OF MAID SITE DEVELOPMENT DEVI ISIND2002-00018 VARIANCE IVARI 2002-00048 VARIANCE RIM 2002-00049 STUNT INDOOR RACING CENTER January 07,2003 Mr. Mathew Scheidegger Assistant Planner, Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Scheidegger, These comments are in response to the notice I received on the above related matter. I am absolutely opposed to the use of this property for this purpose. I find it hard to believe the planning board would even consider this business as a possible use for this property. I own the property at 12419 SW Knoll Drive. Knoll Drive is zoned residential and as such the residents are entitled to quiet enjoyment of their property. It's bad enough they have to put up with the increased traffic noise from Hall Blvd. Couple this with fact that many times during the day, TVF&R sends an emergency vehicle up Hall with their sirens blaring. Now, the city is thinking of placing a noise and air polluting business, requiring two variances, immediately adjacent to the other side. If the city allows this, what's next, nuclear waste disposal? I'm not opposed to these people starting their business. They just need to find a more suitable location. Sincerely, )`o Robert J. Kish • f M __�___ WESTEC AMERICA INCORPORATED TELEPHONE: Oregon (503) 639-9050 Kansas (620) 627-2554 8255 S.W. Hunziker Road RR #3 Box 389A Tigard, Oregon 97223 Independence, KS 67301 FAX (503) 639-1880 FAX (620) 627-2557 January 10, 2003 L / Mr. Mathew Scheidegger,Asst. Planner City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Reference: Notice of Pending Land Use Application File Numbers: Site Development Review 2002-00018 Variance 2002-00048 Variance 2002-00049 File Name: Sykart Indoor Racing Center Dear Mr. Scheidegger: I am sending you this letter in response to the notice sent to us reference the above file numbers. Westec America Incorporated will be the closest neighbor to this proposed site development/Sykart Racing Center. Our location is highlighted on the attached photocopy of your site map. We do have considerable concerns with regard to this activity being added into the industrial park district. Westec America Incorporated is an engineering and machinery design company. We own the property and building at 8255 S.W. Hunziker Road. We lease a portion of our building to other tenants. These tenants are import/export lumber brokers, insurance agencies, and a non-profit land protection political action group. In all cases, the activities that are on-going in this office building require people to work with high-level concentration applied to their work. Any noise and environmental impact (smell) will greatly affect our own and tenant staffs' working environment. The work is done on telephones, in front of computer screens, on drafting boards, and in direct contact with visiting clientele. If, in fact, the proposed activity in the 8205 Hunziker Road building causes additional noise (from its operations inside or outside the building) and if exhaust or fumes are emitted,then Westec will probably lose its existing renters as a result. The Westec building sidewalk and parking areas are directly adjoining the proposed Sycart Center. The tenant parking spaces at the Westec building, with approximately four (4) slots open for visitor parking, are completely utilized. The Sycart Center, I believe, will be short of off-street parking spaces, and we foresee problems of policing and separating our parking areas from use by their operations and their customers. SYSTEMS AND ENGINEERING FOR THE DEHYDRATION INDUSTRY i' I ) Mr. Mathew Scheidegger City of Tigard Planning Division-Tigard, OR January 10, 2003 - Page 2 Access to the proposed Sycart Center will be from an access roadway and a sidewalk directly in front of Westec's building (along a Westec row of parking spaces). This situation at best might be manageable during daytime hours, but after business hours where most of our office tenants have left, it will be impossible to police. We feel, particularly during nighttime operations that we will be exposed to a considerable threat of vandalism. This potentially includes theft, litter, willful damage, loitering and smoking (potential fires), and our greatest of concerns, which is graffiti vandalism. Our two-story office building is white in color, and we feel it will be a target from the clientele and the "hang- arounders"that this race car activity will draw. A concern from one of our tenants has already been expressed in that their business activities carry on into the evenings as they work on a world-clock time schedule. Their late night employees are often female, and they have expressed a concern for their safety when leaving our building and making their way to their cars when a teenage or older element might be loitering on the adjacent property, in the shrubs, dark areas, etc. There is no doubt in my mind that the operations of the Sycart Indoor Racing Center at the proposed property will cause Westec these and other new problems. Some of these at least are spillover to the City of Tigard in the form of the need for additional policing, time spent addressing damage from vandalism, and graffiti and loitering, and trespassing management. Having high cyclone fences with sliding gates, etc., I suppose, could mitigate these things, but this will also surely change our tenants and clienteles' feeling with respect to this location being a campus-like industrial park area. Should the racing center be implemented at the proposed site with the variances requested being approved, we will do our best to be good neighbors if they can impress us the same way. We have at meetings been promised by the developer that they would surely also be good neighbors, looking after their interests as well as our concerns. This is encouraging, but I do not believe there is anything about their use of the property that will be advantageous or an attribute to its neighbors. I hope this response is in tune with your request for commentary. I will be happy to discuss any of this with you if you call me at 503-639-9050. Sincerely, WESTEC AMERICA INCORPORATED o Westphal President JW:jb Attachment . Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; . Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAK;NG PROCESS: . The application is accepted by the City . Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. . The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. . City Staff issues a written decision. • Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." CITY of TIGARD L._, 1 ::-.7.\\ \\A \,--,A),*-74.....wi.)._ 1 VICINITY MAP 1Y )) V. 1 L� �! f SDR2002-00018 \ .. .-_ 1 VAR2002-00048 ` +! r' VAR2002-00049 � \-- - SYKART INDOOR •■ • RACING CENTER 4S,.. III Ali ' iii, 4 ' ot'...\ „ / \i'44b . i '',....„...„,,,.., i Ati ‘ ,, 1 i'\,..„...„,.., .. N\ • , REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CI„41 TIOARD Community Development ShapingA Better Community DATE: December 30,2002 TO: lim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner(x2431) Phone: (503)639-4111/Fax: (5031684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)2002-00018/VARIANCE[VAR)2002-00048&49 SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested . The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well- integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 13, 2003. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: / We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: Name & Number of Person Commenting: Fr X 2J4j J U REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY L' FTIGARD Community(Development ShapingA Better Community DATE: December 30,2002 TO: Dennis Koellermeier,Operations Manager/Water Department FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner 1x24311 Phone: 1503)639-4171/Fax: [5031684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISORT 2002-00018/VARIANCE[VARI 2002-00048 S 49 - SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and ' the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 25101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well- integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 13, 2003. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: pG We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: Name & Number of Person Commenting: 7 c›.7�07 01/02/03 07:50 FAX 5038463525 CLEAN WATER SERVICES • A re tiWat Services ,..,,,, Main Office REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY CFTIGARD 1 t Fint Avenue, Suite 270 Community(DeveCopulent III. ,CDireqon 97124 Shaping)Better Com»runrt DATE: December 30,2002 II T C' L- \} ,t' 1 came Lee Walker,CleanWater Services/SUN Program � � DE 3 T Z0oZ Il ` ,� yp, ar Q •Citvot Tigard Planning Division By---- STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner[x24371 Phone: [503111639-4171/Fax: (503)684-7i!! 1 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 2002-00018/VARIANCE IVARI 2111102-00048&49 > SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER c REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approv�� l to use an existing Indus vial building within the 1-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also b !en requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces Ind the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to reside tial uses. LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTN,tf 2S101BC, Tax Laic 200. ZONE: I-P: Indus rial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufactu ng, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, 1 a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, : ior, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design Ind development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be , ell- integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITIE :IA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18. 55, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. - Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information suppliE i by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommend ition will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future;:. If you wish to comment of this application, WEASIEEDOMWOWNIENWOMIQEWMAIIRMASTOM You may use the space pro ided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. if you are unable to rspond by the above date, p :ase phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as po5 ible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. s # a 1 r�y,��y�� t, �iyt/1{� l�'' ,,�I s� � sltj �f� JENf{'`ji�ft{!! 41f,h. !` !4.0#„F' si ,r I s 4r/ � F ..,. Y'1!V' fl rl'�"ig, „0 ' 1i,., 4I { i,� p�dfi1'.��{I#}';4����I�'`•�fi11�S,!0°,,1 r{li; We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our ffice. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: J. 4i.L-1.4.2Aimige4"-- - 1 - 2 - 03 . ll Name & Number of Person Commenting: I' —1 WASH CO LAND DEL). Fax:503-846-2908 Dec 31 9002 1057 P. 01 AliftWASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Department of Land Use and Transportation,Land Development Services 155 North First Avenue,Suite 350-13, Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 (503)846-8761 •FAX:(503)846-2908 December 31, 2002 Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planner City of Tigard Community Development 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 FAX: (503)684-7297 RE: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER (SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND VARIANCES) City File Number: SDR 2002-00018 and VAR 2002-00048&49 Tax Map and Lot Number: 2S1 01 BC Tax Lot 200 Location: 8205 SW Hunziker Street Applicant: Yun S. Hong, Sykart's Indoor Racing Center Owner: Knez Realty Group LLC 31.\-;--.,.,ik, .•:„. . ..__. „0„,.., \ ,,,,., „ .., \ 1 N-glow• .._ ..::„ Amaik V 14 ��. 111 'W "41114 L4.:::;. 2S101BC00200 i__._ Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation has received notice of the above noted application but will not be submitting any requirements/conditions. The project site is not adjacent to County-maintained road sections, nor is it expected to generate considerable off-site impacts to our nearby roadways. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please contact me at 503-846-3873, 4411 -c-iso Lalic Ch's,_ ft ssociat .nner F:SykartNoComm2lc • 414, REQUEST FOR COMMENTS c,T II6ARD RECEIVED PLANNI. ingA Bette` rCmmunity DATE: December 30,2002 JAN 7 2003 CITY OF TI � TO: Sherman Casper,Permit Coordinator/Community Developmen ment FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner(x24371 Phone: (5031639-4111/Fax: (5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ESDR)2002-00018/VARIANCE(VAR)2002-00048&49 r SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well- integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 13, 2003. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: Name & Number of Person Commenting: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: December 30,2002 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner[x24371 Phone: [5031639-4171/Fax: [5031684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR'2002-00018/VARIANCE[VARI 2002-00048&49 SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested . The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well- integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 13, 2003. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: Name & Number of Person Commenting: . CITY TIGARD REQUEST FOR COh :NTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS ,,,, 1p FILE NOS.: -A)K_,Z 601-00'04. FILE NAME:_ /-912T /4rJ)o f lid) CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS fL 14-DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO CIT AREA: ❑Central iliklEast ❑South ❑West El Proposal Descrip.in Library CIT Book CITY OFFICES :4 LONG RANGE PLANNING/Barbara Shields,Planning Mgr. _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs. 5'` POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer 4BUILDING DIVISION/Gary Lampella,Building Official ( ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineebr_WATER DEPT./Dennis Koellermeier,Operations Mgr. _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder _PUBLIC WORKS/John Roy,Property Manager PUBLIC WORKS/Matt Stine,Urban Forester PLANNER—POST PROJECT SITE IF A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM-10 BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING! <.D./Sherman Casper,Permit Coord.(sowcuP re:TIF) SPECIAL DISTRICTS y' TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.• iTUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE* ,J TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* CLEANWATER SERVICES Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Lee Walker/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N.First Avenue Beaverton,OR 97006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON * _ CITY OF TUALATIN * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue Jennifer Goodridge — — Irish Bunnell,Development Services 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue PO Box 59 775 Summer Street NE PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Salem,OR 97301-1279 Beaverton,OR 97076 OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE — CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 Bob Knight,Data Resource Center(ZCA) _ _ US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP Kathryn Harris _ Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPA/ZOA) Larry French(Comp.Plan Amendments Only) Routing CENWP-OP-G —CITY OF KING CITY * Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946 City Manager $ C.D.Manager,Growth Management Services Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 15300 SW 116th Avenue King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY _ OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY(POwedines in Area) _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION(Monopole Towers) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,Planning 155 N. First Avenue —CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * Routing TTRC–Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 _Brent Curtis(CPA) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _Gregg Leion(CPA) _ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT, REGION 1 * _Anne LaMountain(iG,vuRB) _CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) Marah Danielson,Development Review Coordinator _Phil Healy(IGA URB) David Knowles,Planning Bureau Dir Regional Administrator _Carl Toland, Right-of-Way Section(vacations) ,Steve Conway(General Apps.) Portland Building 106,Rm. 1002 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Sr.Cartographer icPazcAIMS Id 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 _Jim Nims(zcA)Ms 15 Portland,OR 97204 _Doria Mateja(ZCA)MS 14 _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A _WA.CO.CONSOLIDATED COMMUNIC.AGENCY(WCCCA)"911"(Monopole Towers) Jane Estes,Permit specialist Dave Austin 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 PO Box 6375 Portland,OR 97221-2414 Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE RJR,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern/Santa Fe RJR Predecessor) Robert I. Melbo,President&General Manager 110 W. 10th Avenue Albany,OR 97321 —SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _AT&T CABLE K TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations Only) Pat McGann (If Project is Within(4 M/e of A Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 X._PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC ,NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _VERIZON _ QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Jim VanKleek,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. Ken Perdue,Engineering Jeri Cella, Engineering 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue PO Box 1100 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97075-1100 Portland,OR 97219 —TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _ AT&T CABLE(One.Ea MAN 0199W) Marsha Butler,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist,Demographics&Planning Dept. Diana Carpenter 6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 3500 SW Bond Street Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Portland,OR 97232 * INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500' OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h/patty\masters/Request For Comments Notification List 2.doc (Revised 17-Dec-02) MAILING RECORDS AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF TIOARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community I, Patricia L. Gunsford being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specialist for the City of Tigard: County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appropriate Box(s)Below) © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR2002-00018/VAR2002-00048/VAR2002-00049 - SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A",and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", and by reference made a part hereof, on February 21,2003,and deposited in the United States Mail on February 21,2003, postage prepaid. (Person that Pr:.ar Notic: STATE OE oEGow ) County of`Was ington )ss. City of �gard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the c25 day of 4M--(...:e , 2003. I,.•or, OFFICIAL SEAL "�=* DIANE M JELDERKS lw:,�.n / NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. E //AL (61:4A.4)71 MY Y SEPT.COMMISSION EXPIRES SPT.07,2003 '1 93t a� 740:) My Commission Expires: • EXHIBIT, A , NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00018 CITY OF TIGARD SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER CommunityQDevetopment Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 5/25/2003 (Includes a 30-day extension) SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2002-00018 Variance (VAR) VAR2002-00048 Variance (VAR) VAR2002-00049 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. APPLICANT: Yun S. Hong OWNER: Knez Realty Group LLC 17450 West Valley Highway Attn: John Knez Jr. Tukwila, WA 98188-5511 8185 SW Hunziker St., Suite A Tigard, OR 97223 APPLICANT'S Ed Murphy & Associates REP: 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97224 LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, CRITERIA: 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request for Site development Review and Variance approval subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 1 OF 27 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Planning Department (Mathew Scheidegger, 639-4171, ext. 2437) for review and approval: 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List" located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans. Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) will not be visible from any of the property lines. 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards (Section 18.745.040.C). 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 12. Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds, leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area, and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. 17. Provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.C. of the Tigard Development Code. 18. Provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. 19. Provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. 20. Provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 2 OF 27 Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 2471) for review and approval: 21. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street to increase the right-of-way to 31 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 22. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay $378.50 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $3,988.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The property has been zoned for industrial uses for many years. The building located on the site was originally built in 1960 by Irvington-Moore, which used it to manufacture machinery for plywood mills. In 1996, Knez Realty Group LLC acquired it. It has been used since that time by Power Rents (for storing and repairing equipment) and Safeway Scaffolding. It is now used by Knez Building Materials to store sheet rock. The property was zoned M-3, Light Industrial, in August 1977. In 1982 the M-3 zone was revised, and renamed I-L. Certain uses, such as offices, were no longer allowed in the I-L zone. In 1988, the adjacent property, (2S101 BC-00201), was rezoned from I-L to I-P at the request of the property owner. The building on that parcel, built in 1973 under the classification of a "public utility", became a permitted office use under the I-P zone. In 1997, the 2-story office portion of the building located on the subject property was completely remodeled and upgraded by Power Rents. The upgrade included handicapped accessible restrooms on the ground floor under (BUP97-0319.) At that time, Mr. Knez constructed a handicapped accessible walkway from SW Hunziker. Vicinity Information The subject property is bordered on the southwest by the 2-story office building mentioned above, zoned I-P and to the east and southwest by industrial buildings, zoned I-L. The area to the north of the property is zoned General Commercial (C-G) and is developed as a business park. There is a mix of industrial and office uses along SW Hunziker Street, zoned I-P and I-L. There are single-family detached homes on the west side of the property, zoned R-4.5, served by Knoll Drive. The closest home is approximately 250 feet from the building located on the subject property. Site Information and Proposal Description: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces. The second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening next to residential uses. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 3 OF 27 SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET Two letters were received in regard to the impact that the proposed Sykart indoor racing center will have on the surrounding properties. The concerns of the letters were the impact of noise, pollution, security and parking. Staff Response: The first letter received was from a resident of the adjoining R-4.5 zone. The concerns of the letter are noise and pollution. The applicant has been conditioned in the decision to submit a noise study that measures the decibel levels of the proposed use. The findings of the noise study must be in compliance with the maximum decibel levels allowed for an industrial use abutting a residential use. The second issue is pollution. According to the applicant the race cars are fitted with mufflers and catalytic converters. The building will also have to conform to regulations set by the Uniform Building Code, and the Department of Environmental Quality. The concerns with parking and security are from the adjoining office building to the south of the subject site. According to the letter submitted January 13th 2003, the adjacent office building is experiencing a problem with having enough parking, and indicates that parking will become more congested with the addition of a indoor race center. The applicant has indicated that the peak time of use is in the evenings, when most of the employees of the office building will have left for the day. The author of the letter has stated that employee's do work well into the night. However, patrons of the Sykart Racing Center will be parking on the subject site. There should be no need for Sykart patrons to be parking on the office building's property. The second concern of the letter is security. Because the Sykart Race Center operates into the night, the fear is vandalism, and "teenage or older elements loitering on the adjacent property, in the shrubs, dark areas, etc." As discussed in the decision, the subject site has outdoor lighting on all four sides of the building. The Tigard Police Department was notified of the change of use and did not have comments. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Zoning Districts 18.520 (Commercial Zoning Districts) B. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.370 Variances and Adjustments) 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation) 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street parking and loading requirements) 18.780 Signs) 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) C. Specific DR Approval Criteria 18.360 D. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 E. Impact Study 18.390 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 4 OF 27 SECTION VI. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS A. ZONIING DISTRICT Industrial Zoning District: Section 18.530.020 Lists the description of the Industrial Zoning Districts. The site is located in the I-P: Industrial Park District. Development Standards: Section 18.530.040.B States that Development standards in Industrial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.530.2 below: TABLE 18.530.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN IDUSTRIAL ZONES STANDARD I-P Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 179,445 sq.ft. Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 100 ft. Minimum Setbacks -Front yard 35 ft[11] 62 ft. -Side facing street on corner&through lots[1] - - -Side yard 0/50 ft. [8] 18 ft. --Rear yard 0/50 ft[8] 210 ft. -Distance between front of garage&property line abutting a public or private street. - - Maximum Height 45 ft 24 ft. Maximum Site Coverage[2] 75% 18% Minimum Landscape Requirement 25% 20% As demonstrated in the table above, the applicant's plans comply with the dimensional standards of the I-P zone except for the minimum landscaping requirement, which has been addressed under 18.360 Site Development Review and the western side yard setback, which is pre-existing. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Development Standards criteria have been satisfied. B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS The Site development Review approval standards require that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. Variances and Adjustments (18.370) The applicant is requesting to reduce the required minimum parking of 137 spaces to a total of 40 spaces. There are currently 90 parking stalls located on the site, 44 adjacent to the subject building (four of which will be removed in order to construct landscaped islands) and 46 spaces located closer to SW Hunziker. The applicant is also requesting a variance to the Buffering and Screening Standards for the western property line. The intent is to reduce the required buffer of 25 feet to an 8-15 foot buffer due to the placement of the existing building. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 5 OF 27 Minimum Parking: According to the applicant, the surrounding property owners have not objected to the proposed variance at the neighborhood meeting. However, Staff received a letter from the adjoining property owner to the south who is opposed to the proposed change of use. One of the main concerns that the property owner has is the lack of available parking. However, the property to the south utilizes parking located on the applicant's parcel. Therefore, by requesting a variance to the minimum parking standard, the applicant is not creating a detrimental situation to the adjoining property to the south; the property to the south has its own issues with parking that the owner of the subject parcel has helped alleviate by allowing joint parking with this adjoining neighbor. The applicant has stated that a majority of the cliental will visit the subject site in groups that use carpool/vanpool. A condition has been imposed that requires 5 percent of the parking stalls to be reserved for car/vanpool parking. Buffering and Screening: The subject site is required by Chapter 18.745 "Landscaping and Screening' to provide a buffer of at least 25 feet in width on the west side of the property, which abuts a single-family residential neighborhood. The applicant states in the narrative that a variance to the buffering standard will not be detrimental to the purpose of the Development Code, in that the public health, safety, convenience and welfare would not be compromised. Currently there is an existing chainlike fence with slats along the property line. The chain link fence sits on top of a concrete retaining wall that varies from one to four feet high. The single-family homes abutting the subject property are at least 20 feet higher in elevation than the subject site. The applicant is proposing to construct an 8 to 15-foot landscape planter along the base of the existing retaining wall and chain link fence. The proposed planter is 200 feet in length and will be planted with approximately 23 Lombardy poplar trees spaced 10 feet apart. However, there is ample room on the west side of the building to create a buffer that meets the minimum 25 feet and tapers to 18 feet at the shortest distance between the building and the property line. The City's Arborist has indicated that Lombardy poplar trees are a poor choice of trees to be planted in the required buffer. The Poplar tree is a fast growing soft wooded species that becomes weaker as it grows taller. Therefore, the applicant will be required to provide an 18 to 25-foot buffer with a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. The City's Arborist has recommended "Incense Cedars". The required 18 to 25-foot buffer along with the existing wall and chain link fence with slats is consistent with the "E-1" buffering standard excluding the width of proposed buffer. Therefore, Staff is convinced that if the buffering width condition is satisfied that the requested variance will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the vicinity. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; Minimum Parking: The applicant has stated that the building is pre-existing and its location on the parcel hinders the amount of area available for parking. However, there is approximately 35 feet of clearance from the eastern property line and the existing building which provides access to approximately 73,600 square feet of unused space that could be configured to accommodate the required minimum parking of 137 spaces. Therefore, the location of the building does not constitute a variance to the required minimum parking. However, the majority of the unused area to the rear of the property is located within the 100-year floodplain, which clearly creates a special circumstance for the property. The area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be conditioned to be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. Buffering and Screening: The subject building was built in the early 1960's and the adjacent homes have been there, without buffering, for at least that long. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the minimum 25-foot wide buffer requirement to an 8 to 15-foot buffer due to the placement of the existing building and the use of existing roll-up doors for future tenants. However, the applicant has indicated in the narrative that there will be no activity on the west side of the property, and access to the west side of the property can be addressed when future tenants apply for land-use approval. The only circumstance that exists which is peculiar to the subject site is the NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 6 OF 27 placement of the existing building to close to the western property line. Therefore, the applicant has been conditioned to provide a minimum 25-foot buffer that can be reduced to 18 feet at the shortest distance between the subject building and the western property line. These circumstances are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district, because they do not abut a residentially zoned neighborhood except to the adjoining property to the south which was constructed under Tigard's Development Code. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land. Minimum Parking: The proposed use is indoor entertainment, which is a permitted use in the I-P zone. The applicant is requesting the required minimum parking be reduced from 137 spaces to 40 spaces. The reason for the requested variance is that it would be economically non-feasible to maintain 137 parking spaces for a use that according to other established sites will have approximately 20 cars at its peak time. However, the site is currently established with 90 parking stalls. Therefore, the minimum variance needed to the required minimum parking while still maintaining City standards to the greatest extent, is a reduction from 137 spaces to 86 spaces. Four of the existing 90 spaces will be removed in order to construct landscaped islands with parking lot trees. Buffering and Screening: The proposed use is permitted in the I-P zone. The standard for buffering is the same in the I-P and the I-L zones. Although different tenants have occupied the building since it was originally built in 1960, no additional buffering was ever provided. The intent of the City's buffering standard is to provide a separation between what may otherwise be incompatible land uses. The applicant argues that the separation is provided by the change in elevation, the distance between the existing building and the homes, the existing fence on top of the retaining wall, and the proposed 8 to 15-foot landscaped area. However, there is enough square footage on the west side of the building to create a 25-foot buffer that tapers down to 18 feet at the shortest distance between the subject building and the western property line. Because the tenant is not intending to use the western side of the building, the required buffer (18 to 25 feet) will not hinder the applicant from reasonably meeting the code to the greatest extent while permitting reasonable economic use of the land. The reasonable economic use of the land is considered allowing the use to operate inside the subject building while maintaining the intent of the "E" buffering and screening standards to the greatest extent. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur it the development were developed as specified in the title; and Minimum Parking: The existing physical and natural systems, including traffic, parking, energy systems environmental systems, would not be adversely affected any more than if the variance were not granted. In fact, granting the variance will have a positive impact on drainage, solar heat gain, and water quality. Buffering and Screening: A variance to the reduction in the required buffer width will not have an adverse effect on existing physical and natural systems. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Minimum Parking: The applicant has indicated that if the City requires the site to meet the minimum parking standards, existing parking patterns would be disrupted, and the additional parking stalls would reduce the amount of land available for other uses. Based on a parking survey included in the Traffic analysis, other Sykart facilities were observed to have a total of 7 to 14 cars respectively durin g the PM peak hour. The Grand Prix Raceway in Fife Washington had a maximum of 20 cars parked during the facility's peak operation. The requested variance is to reduce the required 137 parking stalls to 40 parking NOTICE OF TYPE H DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 7 OF 27 stalls. However, the above criterion reads, "the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship." Staff is not convinced that reducing the required parking from 137 stalls to 40 is the minimum variance needed. There are presently 90 stall on the subject site. After removing 4-parking stalls in order to build landscaped islands, there will be a total of 86 parking stalls. The applicant has stated that the owner of the property may build another building on-site and may need the additional stalls for the future use. As the extent of the future use is unknown, that application will be reviewed under the standards in effect at that time. The Tigard Development Code does allow joint parking agreements which may be an available option for meeting the requirement. In any case, as the site contains 86 stalls, the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship to accommodate the present proposal is a reduction of 51 spaces to a total of 86 spaces. Buffering and Screening: The applicant states in the narrative that the hardship is not self-imposed. The site was developed before Knez Realty Group bought the property and before the zone was changed from I-L to I-P. Presumably, the property was allowed to develop as it did under the standards in place at the time. The variance requested (8-15 foot buffer) is the minimum necessary to alleviate the hardship. That is to say, the amount of buffering is the maximum practical without creating an additional hardship on the tenant, the property owner, and possible future users of the building. However, the tenant has indicated that there will be no activity on the west side of the property. Therefore, the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship of the buffering and screening standard would to allow the applicant to reduce the required buffer to 18 feet at the narrowest point between the property line and existing building. Because the required buffer is being reduced, the applicant is required to provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that addresses the City's Maximum Allowable Noise standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). FINDING: Based on the information above, the applicant has met the variance criteria for a reduction of the minimum parking requirement of 137 parking stalls to a total of 86 stalls. Staff is also satisfied that the variance criteria have been met for a reduction in the amount of buffering required along the western property line. The applicant has requested to reduce the required buffer to 8-15 feet. However, Staff finds that there is enough area to create a 25-foot buffer back to an 18-foot buffer. The applicant is required to provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). CONDITIONS: • Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List" located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans. Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. • Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. • Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. • Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). Access, Egress and Circulation (18.705): Access plan: No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 8 OF 27 No change to the existing access is proposed. Currently the site is accessed by one (1) 30-foot driveway connecting to SW Hunziker Street. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Joint access: Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City. The subject site's access is shared by the adjoining two story office building located at 8255 SW Hunziker Street and the adjoining properties to the east. The owner of the subject parcel and the adjoining properties to the east are owned by the same company. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. Public street access: All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.0301 shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. The subject site is accessible from SW Hunziker Street, which is a public street that will be maintained as a public street. Curb cuts: Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N: Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair, bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080: Concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required; except where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City Engineer approval and Asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property fine shall be built to City configuration standards. No driveway approach shall be less than five feet from the side property line projected except in cul-de-sacs, without approval and written permission of the city. The end slopes may encroach within the five foot restricted area. No portion of any driveway approach, including the end slopes, shall be located closer than thirty feet to an intersection street right-of-way line. Commercial or service drives shall not be more than thirty feet in width and if located on the same lot frontage shall be separated by a minimum length of curb of thirty feet. Each residential driveway shall be not more than twenty-six feet in width including end slopes, and if more than one driveway is to be constructed to serve the same lo , the frontage spacing between such driveways shall be not less than thirty feet measured along the curb line. Joint access driveways shall conform to the appropriate width standard for commercial or residential type usage. The driveway approach is pre-existing. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Walkways: On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; According to the plans, the existing on-site pedestrian walkways connect from the subject building to SW Hunziker Street. Therefore, this standard has been met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 9 OF 27 Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety . Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; The walkway from the subject building crosses a vehicular access for a total distance of 44 feet. However, because the walkway is pre-existing, this standard does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The applicant's plan shows the pedestrian walkway from the subject building to be paved. Therefore, this criterion has been satisfied. Access Management (Section 18.705.030.H) Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. A traffic impact report was prepared by CTS Engineers, Inc., dated September 9, 2002. CTS found that the proposed use of the site can be accommodated by the existing site driveway and will not create adverse impacts on the roadway system. There is adequate sight distance and stacking in Hunziker Street at present to meet the demands of the development. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater dependin upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impaci report submitted by the a plicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The site access is not located within the influence area of a collector or arterial street intersection. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets alon an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The site currently utilizes two 35-foot wide driveway aprons, with the easternmost driveway providing one inbound lane and the westernmost driveway providing separate left and right turn outbound lanes. The applicant proposes maintaining these driveways, which are separated by approximately 57 feet. Although the two driveway aprons do not meet the minimum separation of 200 feet, Staff believes that both aprons should remain in place to help separate the incoming truck traffic that flows into Tax Lots 101 and 100 (also owned by the same owner as the subject site). The westernmost driveway provides access to not only the subject site, but also to Tax Lot 201 . Consolidating the two aprons into one location would be a hardship for the adjacent tax lots who now have access to the existing aprons. In addition, the heavy truck traffic would be NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 10 OF 27 mixed with the passenger vehicle traffic that currently flows from Tax Lot 201 and the subject site, plus the additional passenger vehicle traffic that will be generated from the new use. The mixture of heavy truck traffic and passenger vehicle traffic seems to pose a safety issue that would outweigh any benefits the City may see if the two aprons are consolidated. Therefore, Staff recommends the two aprons be allowed to remain in place. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 rovides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with 0-99 parking spaces is one 30-foot accesses with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. Access to the site is pre-existing. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. One-way vehicular access points: Where a proposed parking facility indicates only one-way traffic flow on the site, it shall be accommodated by a specific driveway serving the facility; the entrance drive shall be situated closest to oncoming traffic and the exit drive shall be situated farthest from oncoming traffic. The access drive is designed for two-way traffic. Therefore, this standard does not apply. The Director has the authority to restrict access when the need to do so is dictated by one or more of the following conditions: To provide for increased traffic movement on congested streets and to eliminate turning movement problems, the Director may restrict the location of driveways on streets and require the location of driveways be placed on adjacent streets, upon the finding that the proposed access would: • Cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or • Provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles; or • Cause hazardous conditions to exist-which would constitute a clear and present danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare. To eliminate the need to use public streets for movements between commercial or industrial properties, parking areas shall be designed to connect with parking areas on adjacent properties unless not feasible. The Director shall require access easements between properties where necessary to provide for parking area connections; To facilitate pedestrian and bicycle traffic, access and parking area plans shall provide efficient sidewalk and/or pathway connections, as feasible, between neighboring developments or land uses; The access to the subject property is pre-existing and is not considered hazardous or constitutes a clear and present danger to the public health. Standards for access as well as for fire and life safety are discussed elsewhere in this report (Section VIII. Agency Comments). Therefore, no access restriction is required. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Access, Egress and Circulation standards have not been met. CONDITION: • Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 11 OF 27 Environmental Performance Standards (18.725): Noise: For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. The applicant has been conditioned under 18.370 (Variances and Adjustments) to provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits). Visible emissions: Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack of other point- source emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340-28-070) apply. The applicant has not addressed visible emissions within the narrative. Therefore, the applicant must provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) will not be visible from any of the property lines. Vibration: No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. The applicant has not addressed vibration. Therefore, the applicant must provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. Odors: The emission of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. There are existing fans on the east side of the subject building that are used for ventilation. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. Glare and heat: No direct or sky-reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted and; there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or constructing equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. The proposed use is for indoor entertainment. Therefore, this standard shall not apply. Insects and rodents: All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. The applicant has proposed an enclosed waste area for the associated dumpster. The proposed use is for an indoor go-kart track, which does not attract insects or rodents. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Access, Egress and Circulation standards have not been met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 12 OF 27 CONDITIONS: • Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) will not be visible from any of the property lines. • Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. • Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street or a private drive more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The subject site has approximately 150 feet of frontage on SW Hunziker Street. A total of 69 feet of the frontage is devoted to existing accesses, leaving an 81-foot planter strip. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards (Section 18.745.040.C). Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.080 states that no buffer is required between abutting uses that are of a different type when the uses are separated by a street. No buffer is required between a proposed office use and existing office use. The subject site is adjacent to a C-G zone to the north, requiring buffering to a "D" buffering level. Separating the two parcels is an 80-foot natural area which exceeds the maximum required for a "D"-buffering standard of 20 feet. The subject site's neighbor to the east is zoned I-L (light industrial) which does not require a buffer according to Table 18.745.1 of the Tigard Development Code. The property to the south is zoned I-P and is separated by a parking lot, both of which do not require buffering. The .property to the west is zoned R-4.5, and is established with single-family homes, thus requiring a buffer equivalent to an "E" buffer. The "E" buffering standard allows three options, a 25 to 30-oot buffer consisting of either a 6-foot hedge or wall or a 5-foot burm with a combination of low lying and vertical shrubbery. However, the applicant has applied for and has been granted a variance to the buffering and screening standards, which has been addressed above under 18.370; Variances and Adjustments. The applicant has requested to reduce the required 25 foot buffer to an 8 to 15-foot buffer along the west side of the property. Based on the findings, Staff has allowed the required buffer to be reduced to 18 feet at the shortest distance between the building and the western property line. The applicant has been conditioned to provide an 18 to 25-foot buffer along the western property line under 18.370; Variances and Adjustments. Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. Screeningg: Special Provisions: Section 18.745.050.E requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The subject site has a total of 90 existing parking stalls on site. The above standard requires a lparking lot tree and a combination of low lying and vertical shrubbery to be planted in a andscape island distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for every seven (7) parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a plan showing existing landscaped islands planted with parking.lot trees for every seven spaces toward the south end of the property. The applicant is proposing to construct three additional landscaped islands at the front of the subject building on the basis of one for every seven parking stalls. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 13 OF 27 Screening Of Service Facilities: Except for one-family and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area; Screening of Service Facilities is addressed under Chapter 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage). FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have not been met. CONDITION: Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards (Section 18.745.040.C). Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.755): Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The plans submitted by the applicant show a solid waste area proposed on the west side of the site. However, the applicant has not addressed the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable section of the Development Code. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. Location Standards: To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The refuse container facility has been proposed to be located in the side yard setback on the west side of the subject property, which does not abut a public or private street. The facility is visible from the subject building; therefore, this standard is satisfied. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 14 OF 27 Design Standards: The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. The applicant has not addressed the design standards for the proposed refuse container area. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage Standards have not been met. CONDITIONS: • Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. • Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Location of vehicle parking: Off-street arking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwellings. Off-street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building with the following exceptions: a) commercial and industrial uses which require more than 40 parking spaces may provide for the spaces in excess of the required first 40 spaces up to a distance of 300 feet from the primary site; The 40 parking spaces which remain on the primary site must be available for users in the following order of priority: 1) Disabled-accessible spaces; 2) Short-term spaces; 3) Long-term preferential carpool and vanpool spaces; 4) Long-term spaces. Based on the proposed use, the total number of required parking stalls for the site is 137. According to the site plan, there are a total of 90 parking stalls, all of which are located on-site. The applicant has requested a variance to the total number of required parking spaces, reducing the required parking to 40 stalls. However, based on Staffs analysis, which has been addressed above under 18.370 Variances and Adjustments, the minimum required parking has been reduced to 86 parking stalls. Joint Parking: Owners of two or more uses, structures or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same parking and loading spaces when the peak hours of operation do not overlay, subject to the following: 1) The size of the joint parking facility shall be at least as large as the number of vehicle parking spaces required by the larger(est) use per Section 18.765.070; 2) Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the Director in the form of deeds, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; 3),If a joint use arrangement is subsequently terminated, or if the uses change, the requirements of this title thereafter apply to each separately. The applicant has not proposed joint parking. However, the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker are used by the existing office building located immediately south of the subject building. The applicant has indicated that the proposed use will only use the 46 spaces in the evenings and weekends, Sykart's busiest times. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 15 OF 27 Parking in Mixed-Use Projects: In mixed-use projects, the required minimum vehicle parking shall be determined using the following formula. 1) Primary use, i.e. that with the largest proportion of total floor area within the development at 100a/o of the minimum vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060. 2) Secondary use, i.e., that with the second largest percentage of total floor area within the development, at 90% of the vehicle parking required-for that use in Section 18.765.060; 3) Subsequent use or uses, at 80% of the vehicle parking required for that use(s) in Section 18.765.060; 4) The maximum parking allowance shall be 150% of the total minimum parking as calculated in D.1.-3. above. The applicant states in the narrative that the proposed building has a second story that will be used as an office, and has calculated the required parking based on a mixed use. The square footage associated with the primary use (Indoor Entertainment) has been calculated at 28,703 square feet. Based on the parking matrix, Table 18.765.2 of the Tigard Development Code, "Indoor Entertainment" requires 4.3 parking stalls for every 1,000 square feet. The secondary `office use" of the second floor is approximately 6,074 square feet and is calculated at 2.7 parking stalls for every 1 ,000 square feet. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide a total of 137 parking stalls. However, the applicant has requested a variance to the minimum required parking that has been addressed under 18.370 Variances and Adjustments. Based on the findings of the Variance criteria, the applicant has been approved to reduce the required parking of 137 spaces to a total of 86 based on the number of existing parking stalls located on-site. Visitor Parking in Multi-Family Residential Developments: Multi-dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces above the minimum required for the use of guests of residents of the complex. These spaces shall be centrally located or distributed throughout the development. Required bicycle parking facilities shall also be centrally located within or evenly distributed throughout the development. This project does not involve a multi-family use. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Preferential Long-Term CarpoolNanpool Parking: Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long-term parking spaces shall provide preferential long-term carpool and van pool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5% of total long-term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool/vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpoolsTvanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated for use by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The applicant has indicated that the primary mode of transportation to the site will be carpool by means of mini-vans and buses for organized groups. Therefore, the applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. Disabled-Accessible Parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The subject site has a total of 90 parking stalls. The applicant is proposing to construct landscaped islands over four of the existing parking stalls adjacent to the subject building, leaving a total of 86 parking stalls. According to ADA standards, parking lots with 76 to 100 parking stalls must provide 4 ADA accessible stalls that are 9 feet wide with an 8-foot access aisle. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 16 OF 27 Access Drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. The access drive has been addressed previously in this decision under Chapter 18.705 (Access Egress and Circulation). Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. Pedestrian access has been discussed previously in this decision under Chapter 18.705 (Access Egress and Circulation). Parking Lot Striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The plans submitted show the associated parking stalls to be clearly marked with striping. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel sto at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. There are two existing walkways on the south and east side of the subject building that has adjacent parking. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The applicant's plans show the associated parking stalls to be 9 feet in width and 15 feet in length. Therefore, the applicant will need to revise the plan to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 17 OF 27 Bicycle Parking Location and Access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. The applicant is proposing to locate the required bicycle parking within the subject building. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area, and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has not provided a detail of the bike rack to be used; therefore, the applicant will be required to provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.C. of the Tigard Development Code. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. The applicant is proposing to provide bicycle parking within the subject building. However the applicant has not indicated how many bicycle parking stalls will be available. Therefore, the applicant is required to provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. The applicant has requested a variance to the required minimum off-street parking. Findings are addressed under 18.370 Variances and Adjustments. Off-Street Loading Spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 18 OF 27 The applicant has stated in the narrative that the use will not generate truck traffic. However, the subject building is 34,777 square feet. According to the standard above, a minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet. The proposed use is indoor go-kart racing. Therefore, the applicant will need to provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have not been fully met, however, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be fully met: CONDITIONS: • Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds, leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. • The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. • Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. • Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. • Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area, and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. • Provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.C. of the Tigard Development Code. • Provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. • Provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. • Provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the MUE Zoning District. Signs are reviewed through a separate permit process administered by the Development Services Technicians. FINDING: Because signs will be reviewed and approved as part of a separate permit process, this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal (18.790): Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. No trees are proposed to be removed by the applicant. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the tree removal standards have been met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 19 OF 27 Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall- contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right- of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. No modifications to the visual clearance at the access point of the site are being proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the vision clearance standards have been met. C. SPECIFIC SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.360.090(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (100-year floodplain); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses; 18.360.090.13 (Parking); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled). Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. According to the applicant, the subject building will have no impact on existing trees located on the site. Drainage is addressed later in this decision under Chapter 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards). The subject building is approximately 80 feet from the nearest building to the east, thus providing adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting access. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Crime Prevention and Safety: • Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; • Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; • Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; • The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and • Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular trafic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 20 OF 27 The applicant is not proposing any outdoor public gathering space. The area along the west side of the building and the area behind the building are fenced off, preventing public access to these areas. The front (or south) side of the building, and the east side, are clearly visible from inside the building. Windows in the front and sides of the building give the manager good visual access to the parking area. There is no interior laundry or service areas. The mailbox is located at the entrance, off of Hunziker Street. Lighting is provided from the yard lights on the building, and illuminates all sides of the building. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: the location of other transit facilities in the area; and the size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: bus stop shelters; turnouts for buses; and connecting paths to the shelters. The Tri-Met bus stop for the #38 and #78 bus lines are located on Hunziker Street, directly in front of the site, with a handicapped accessible pedestrian path directly connecting the bus stop to the front door of the building. The applicant has indicated that he will work with Tri-Met to make any reasonable pedestrian or transit-oriented improvements that will encourage transit ridership. A request for comment was submitted to Tri-Met; however, Staff did not receive any comments. Therefore, no condition will be imposed. Landscaping: All landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745; In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. With the landscaping improvements shown on the proposed site plan, the percentage of gross area landscaped will be 20 percent, or 37,030 square feet and will be increased to meet buffering standards. Provisions of the Underlying Zone: All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. Dimensional Requirements: Provisions of the (I-P) Industrial Park Zoning District have been addressed earlier in this decision under Section 18.530.040.B. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the specific standards of the Site Development Review Section have been met. Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 21 OF 27 Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a collector street to have a 62-foot wide right-of-way width and a 34-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Hunziker Street, which is classified as a collector street and regional access bikeway on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant will dedicate additional ROW to provide a minimum of 31 feet from the centerline. SW Hunziker Street is currently improved with curb, sidewalk and streetlights. No additional improvements are required. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. Hunziker Street has existing sidewalks. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing 8-inch public sewer line located partly on this site, and presently serves the subject building. No additional sewer improvements are required. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no existing upstream public drainage ways that impact this site. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). Impervious areas will not be increased with this project; therefore, this criterion will not apply. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 22 OF 27 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. As was stated previously, Hunziker Street is classified as a regional access bikeway on the transportation system map. There are no bike lane markings on the roadway at this time. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. The applicant will need to contribute funds for the future striping of the bike lane along Hunziker Street. The amount of the striping would be as follows: • 145 feet of 8-inch white stripe, at $2.50/If $362.50 • 4 Mono-directional reflective markers @ $4.00/ea 16.00 $378.50 Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. The future bike lane will be a minimum of 6 feet wide. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines,. but not limited to those required for electric, communication lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, excep for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to a rove location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 145 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $3,988.00. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 23 OF 27 ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: CTS Engineers, Inc. submitted a report dated September 9, 2002 to address the previous zone change application. The CTS findings are still valid and are summarized below: The overall purpose of the report was to identify the intersections in the vicinity of this site that may be impacted by this zone change, compare the existing Levels of Service (LOS) during the PM Peak Hour with a variety of scenarios: 1) Maximum build-out under the current I-L zone, 2) maximum build-out under the proposed I-P zone, and 3) build-out per the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center (SIRC). The CTS report identified the following intersections as the most critical for analysis: • Hall Boulevard/Scofjins Street/Hunziker Street (signalized) • Hunziker Street/72n Avenue (signalized) • Hunziker Street/Site Driveway (unsignalized). Staff concurred with the selection of critical intersections. CTS determined that the current LOS for the three intersections during the weekday PM Peak Period are as follows: • Hall Boulevard/Scoffins Street/Hunziker Street: LOS C • Hunziker Street/72' Avenue: LOS C • Hunziker Street/Site Driveway: LOS B CTS then performed a comparison of the three scenarios mentioned above. For the worst case full build-out in the I-L zone, they used the Light Industrial category (ITE 110). For the worst case full build-out in the I-P zone, they used the General Office category (ITE 710). For the Sykart scenario, they used actual driveway count data obtained from other Sykart facilities in the state of Washington. The following is a comparison of the PM Peak Hour trip generation that could be experienced from the subject site, assuming a 70,000 sf facility: • I-L Zone, Light Industrial: 69 PM Peak trips • I-P Zone, General Office: 104 PM Peak trips • Sykart Project: 20 PM Peak trips. It can easily be seen that the Sykart project will not generate a significant amount of trips during the PM Peak period. However, it is still important to compare the worst case scenarios of the two zones. CTS then compared the expected LOS (Weekday PM Peak) for the critical intersections, based on the worst case trip generations mentioned above. The following is a summary of their findings: Intersection LOS (t-L) LOS (I-P) LOS (Sykart) • Hall/Scoffins/j-lunziker C C C • Hunziker/72" D D C • Hunziker/Site Driveway C C B Based on that comparison, there would be no additional impact to the estimated LOS of the critical intersections by rezoning this site to I-P. To further bolster that opinion, it is interesting to compare the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios of the two signalized intersections under the same scenarios. When V/C approaches 1.0, a given intersection is near failing. Below is a comparison of the V/C ratios: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 24 OF 27 Intersection V/C (I-L) V/C (I-P) V/C (Sykart) Hall/Scoffins tlunziker 0.79 0.80 0.79 Hunziker/72" 0.86 0.87 0.85 Again, there is no significant change to the critical intersections as a result of the rezoning and proposed use of the property. Public Water System: This site is presently served from the public water line in Hunziker Street. No additional water line improvements are necessary. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. There will be no increase in the impervious area of this site. Therefore, this criterion will not apply. E. IMPACT STUDY (18.390) Section 18.360.090 states, "The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The applicant has provided an impact study addressing the project's impacts on public systems. The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $20,032 based on the use proposed. Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $62,600 ($20,032 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the collector and arterial street system. The unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $42,568. The applicant will be required to dedicate 145 square feet of right-of-way to meet current transportation system standards. The cost of the improvements is expected to be $1 ,740 (145 square feet x $12.00 per square foot for dedication) thus, the exaction is roughly proportionate to the level of Impact generated from this development. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 25 OF 27 SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objection to it. The City of Tigard Water Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objection to it. The City of Tigard Permit Coordinator has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Washington County Land Use Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: 1. The proposed gates at the southwest and northeast corners of the building shall be made accessible to the Fire District in the form of a Knox brand padlock. Contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an application. Please contact me at (503) 612-7010 with any additional questions. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 27, 2003 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 14, 2003 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type Ill Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 26 OF 27 Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS AT 5:00 PM ON MARCH 13, 2003. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. .Y 4 ,�,�� _ Februa ry 27, 2003 PREPAR. ' : he S eictegger DATE Assistant Planner - /:Lu February 27, 2003 APPROVED BY Richard H. Bewer orff DATE Planning Manager I:\curpin\mathew\sdr\SDR2002-00018.dec.doc.dot NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PAGE 27 OF 27 .=w_.. _mot. or `�_I _ CITY of TIGARD L^-- - GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM �+ - VICINITY MAP IN i V 0 fai 'I / , trkt. SDR2002-00018 I , . ir•. - . VAR2002-00048 .' � ' � A VAR2002-00049 4■,s, ,■ 411■■ 1 ■� ti1► � AIM SYKART INDOOR �� m► RACING CENTER e�s ti 14 ,„ , -,,,, ,..♦ ■ bra %^f f„„...„--- , . ,. ...,:. < .+ -•■44\* \A;44, , * � IF x..:, wg Avo .. . . \ ` 6E�F BEND RO���ti��.?b.N.1�� • �� ELI• 'i .1:› S 0.4'-"I • ISAi4* ''' tit , N . ''',1"k•4, anaEveL. T4aA IVIw Map.„ 0, .0 k# 44 4 A 0 400 800 Feet 0, R 1�SOS feet City of Tigard I - Inlormatlon on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd • 1 \X — — Tigard,503)63 9171 (SD3)639.4171 http://www.cl.tigard or.us Community Development Plot date: Dec 27,2002;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR A f ,c i' �n 1 . is giiF ! Eft E h‘ Jr/ ~i`, 4`� _ `r „'� r h 61.14 ;y . j ' -r o.._ r "VW `� w +'' ' Sk- 4 } M.NYeI�.) C.cbn 6Wmn}rF- v�mveE f 'J �"1 3 `` _ y }'t swk.Mean Ya,.4 "` 4r l! ;, l • ] ,Aw. st.4 I14 ''. _ t �mnw.imi 4- 1 .. , 'c -- Existin Building 1 - is 1�' / _ `- . - to t J.. ..w�a M.sn Few - .y to be orode�ed ,.i — .fly <,. t T r .� �::,'.. • <3 ° / 7 t • -!'1' 1,0"44itii4 Ili -e. - _ _ s ii. r . , _, . ... , ..,. , ., , e... . . . .,„,, I .t < . - . - .a _ 1 .� .f0t CITY OF TIGARD I SDR2002-00018NAR2002-00048NAR2002-00049 CITY OF TIGARD SIT E PLAN N SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER (Map is not to scale) EXHIBIT A Yun S. Hong SDR2002-00018/VAR2002-00048 & 49 17450 West Valley Highway SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER Tukwila, WA 98188-5511 Knez Realty Group LLC Attn: John Knez Jr. 8185 SW Hunziker Street, Suite A Tigard, OR 97223 Ed Murphy & Associates Attn: Ed Murphy 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97224 Robert J. Kish 7510 SW Ashford Street Tigard, OR 97224 John Westphal, President Westec America Incorporated 8255 SW Hunziker Road Tigard, OR 97223 • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF T)GARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community I, Patricia L. Lunsforrl, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specialist for the City of Tigard Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Med<Appoprate Box(s)Below) © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR2002-00018/VAR2002-00048/VAR2002-00049 - SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Fde No/Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A",and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", and by reference made a part hereof, on February 27,2003, and deposited in the United States Mail on February 21,2003, postage prepaid. af,e/a4')OP- (Person thaLP •pa -. 'otice) /1 STATE OAF oGoN ) County of Washington )ss. City of Egan! ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the S41-clay of /" , 2003. s ' OFFICIAL SEAL w DIANE M JELQERKS ' .. �NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.326578 tf X_A-(MISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 My Commission Expires: '7 o FXHIRIT NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00018 CITY OF TIGARD SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER Community(Development SI:aping Better Community 120 DAYS = 5/25/2003 (Includes a 30-day extension) SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2002-00018 Variance (VAR) VAR2002-00048 Variance (VAR) VAR2002-00049 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. APPLICANT: Yun S. Hong OWNER: Knez Realty Group LLC 17450 West Valley Highway Attn: John Knez Jr. Tukwila, WA 98188-5511 8185 SW Hunziker St., Suite A Tigard, OR 97223 APPLICANT'S Ed Murphy & Associates REP: 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97224 LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, CRITERIA: 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II . DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25 ) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 27, 2003 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 14, 2003 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. A eal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. I THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON MARCH 13, 2003. I Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Mathew Scheidegger at (503) 639-4171 , Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. :— ;.—_RHc____._r---. ;_—'- CITY of TIGARC ' VICINITY MAP C °F a %�i SDR2002-00018 VAR2002-00048 II VAR2002-00049 \ , i\ \,`'. T SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER � r 1 \ --1--i ,,,j4:11 r .., „\-. ,, r > ,, ,� .�\ , \fv,, \ vo,_ 7 \ \ // -^ JCity of Tigard i____, i-N- ..._ 1 I . , .: ,,, \\\ \ / ,/, ..,=:,.. .., . ...,;.,, 4, „Et.. .;, ,.... ::au': . .. '., 4?, .,:Ili r ttr e I. •11,/ .4( 7 i.,,.,' d 1� (v '`u .44:::...-/-!. . •.old 1. ° � -- !i0 ;� . f t,. P . "I F.I.,,./,\,,,. CIY OF TIGARD I SDR2002.00018NAR2002.00048NAR2002.00049 SITE PLAN N SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER IMa is not to scale) 25101 BC-02100 25101 BC-01900 ANNAND JOHN D II&EDNA N DELAO ALICIA& 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD DELAO SANTA CECILIA& EXHIBIT, 78 TIGARD,OR 97223 GARCIA ERNESTO 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-01800 2S 101 BD-00301 BEAUDOIN MICHAEL E& EAST SIDE VAN&STORAGE INC DONNA R 4836 SE POWELL BLVD 12490 SW KNOLL DR PORTLAND,OR 97206 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BB-01500 2S101BC-02200 CALWEST INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LLC HHO&B ASSOCIATES LLC BY DELOITTE&TOUCHE LLP BY H&A CONSTRUCTION CO 2235 FARADAY AVE STE 0 PO BOX 23755 CARLSBAD,CA 92008 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S 101 B B-01400 2S 101 BC-02501 WEST INDU AL HOLDINGS LLC HUTTIG INC BY D- . •I " : TOUCHE LLP 14500 SOUTH OUTER 40 RD 2235 '7 •• _VE STE 0 CHESTERFIELD,MO 63017 LSBAD,CA 92008 25101 BC-00400 25101 BC-00500 CARASOF ALEX S&LILIYA V KIM KYONG SUK 12330 SW KNOLL DR 12300 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-01000 2S 101 BC-02401 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KING JAMES F 13855 SW PACIFIC HWY 12650 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-00800 25101 BC-02700 C ENER BERT R&PATRICIA A KING JAMES F 13855 ACIFIC HWY PO BOX 23819 RD,OR 9 223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BC-00900 25101 BC-03300 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KISH ROBERT J/SUSAN C 13855 SW PACIFIC HWY 7510 SW ASHFORD ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 2S 101 BC-01600 2S 101 BC-00100 DALTON LOIS KNEZ JOHN S SR&JEANNE M 12420 SW KNOLL DR 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-01700 2S 101 BC-00200 DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE& KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC DEFOE CHARLES E JR 8185 SW HUNZIKER ST STE A 12455 SW 68TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S101 BC-00101 2S101 BC-03000 KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC ROBERTS DAVID 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD 12361 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-02202 2S 101 BC-02800 LEACH DOUGLAS SEVERSON JAMES A&ROBIN 0 8430 SW HUNZIKER RD STE 200 29404 SW HEATER RD PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S101 BC-02300 2S10100-00700 MCCARTHY KELLY E&JANICE L SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L 13705 SW FARMINGTON RD PO BOX 930 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 25101 BC-01801 25101 BC-0250 MILLER LORI M S TH G G WESTERN PROPERTIES L 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD PO 930 TIGARD,OR 97223 SON ,OR 97070 2S 101 BC-03100 2S 101 BD-0030 NGUYEN VUONG P& TI D C OF VO PHAN 1312 HALL 12387 SW KNOLL DR ARD,0 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 BC-01100 2S101 BC-00201 NITSOS STEVE TOM& WESTEC AMERICA INC BETTY MAXINE 8255 SW HUNZIKER 8465 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BD-00300 2S101 BC-02900 PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING GROUP IN WESTPHAL EDGAR A&PATRICE M 208 E WOODLAWN RD 1811 NW 93RD PL STE#200 PORTLAND,OR 97229 CHARLOTTE,NC 27217 2S101BC-00301 2S101BC-00103 REED WILLIAM C WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC THE PO BOX 12564 PO BOX 1195 PORTLAND,OR 97212 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2S101 BC-03200 25101 BC-01200 REID CHARLES 0& WILDER GEORGE C&LUCETTE A RUTH A 8445 SW HUNZIKER ST 12435 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-02201 2S 101 BC-01500 ROACH MICHAEL A AND PAMELA S WILLIAMS PORTUS W AND SARAH T 956 WEST POINT RD 12390 SW KNOLL DR LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 TIGARD,OR 97223 Jack Biethan 11023 SW Summerfield Drive, #4 Tigard, OR 97224 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Dieter Jacobs 7775 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Ye0 TIGARD - EAST(I SUBCOMMITTEE (i:lcurpinlset //� AVERY0 Address Labets AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING 44 CITY OF TIGARD Community[Development Shaping Better Community I, cpatricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specialist for the City of'Tigar Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appropriate Box(s)Below} © NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: SDR2002-000I8/VAR2002-00048/VAR2002-00049 — SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked EXhibit"A",and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked EXhibit'T',and by reference made a part hereof, on December 30,2002, and deposited in the United States Mail on December 30,2002, postage prepaid. ah - ' ,' 11111./ / ./_.. (Person that Pr are. Notice) SZTAL OAF O , GON ) County o ff Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the �7da of ..P , 200 . �� OFFICIAL SEAL . / �°`�'''r"�" DIANE M JELDERKS .� , /, NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON G �% COMMISSION NO.326578 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 ' I l ' ' ' I I I I ' • , '' My Commission Ex; .s: 7 EXHIBIT. A NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION Alt SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY OF TIGARD Community(Deve(opmctit Shaping A(Better Community DATE OF NOTICE: December 30, 2002 FILE NUMBERS: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00018 Type II Land Use Application VARIANCE (VAR) 2002-00048 VARIANCE (VAR) 2002-00049 FILE NAME: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the City. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON JANUARY 13, 2003. All comments should be directed to Mathew Scheideqqer, Assistant Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at (503) 639-4171. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 6, 2003. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: . Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; . Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: • The application is accepted by the City • Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. • The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. • City Staff issues a written decision. . Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled Your Right to Provide Written Comments." - �1 4N„7 ��� �'��� �� V VICINITY MAP V �� ► ,� - A,�\ ,-"�"' `1 SDR2002-00018 1 1(1 VAR2002-00048 �.7\\ r" VAR2002-00049 ry �j►,.. ' ' ", ��,. -� SYKART INDOOR - - - _ RACING CENTER *I% __ .%\z, taz i b\lk‘ , U4,%,-- ,\ AI ... .WIR',110,:;, \ • kl■:4 t all . ,..,...1.2!..7,,w..,:too. :i; # S A 0 \, S, . ----- I J / -- City nfTI1 d _�\ ^:.'° 2S101BC-02100 2S101BC-01900 EXHIBIT ANNAND JOHN D II&EDNA N DELAO ALICIA& 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD DELAO SANTA CECILIA& TIGARD,OR 97223 GARCIA ERNESTO 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 BC-01800 2S101 BD-00301 BEAUDOIN MICHAEL E& EAST SIDE VAN&STORAGE INC DONNA R 4836 SE POWELL BLVD 12490 SW KNOLL DR PORTLAND,OR 97206 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 B B-01500 2S 101 BC-02200 CALWEST INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LLC HHO&B ASSOCIATES LLC BY DELOITTE&TOUCHE LLP BY H&A CONSTRUCTION CO 2235 FARADAY AVE STE 0 PO BOX 23755 CARLSBAD,CA 92008 TIGARD,OR 97281 25101 BB-01400 2S101 BC-02501 WEST INDU AL HOLDINGS LLC HUTTIG INC BY D- •IT ' : TOUCHE LLP 14500 SOUTH OUTER 40 RD 2235 '7 • VE STE 0 CHESTERFIELD,MO 63017 LSBAD,CA 92008 2S101 BC-00400 2S101 BC-00500 CARASOF ALEX S&LILIYA V KIM KYONG SUK 12330 SW KNOLL DR 12300 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-01000 2S 101 BC-02401 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KING JAMES F 13855 SW PACIFIC HWY 12650 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-00800 2S 101 BC-02700 ENER BERT R&PATRICIA A KING JAMES F 13855 ACIFIC HWY PO BOX 23819 RD,OR 9 223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-00900 2S 101 BC-03300 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KISH ROBERT J/SUSAN C 13855 SW PACIFIC HWY 7510 SW ASHFORD ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 2S 101 BC-01600 2S 101 BC-00100 DALTON LOIS KNEZ JOHN S SR&JEANNE M 12420 SW KNOLL DR 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 BC-01700 2S1 O1 BC-00200 DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE& KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC DEFOE CHARLES E JR 8185 SW HUNZIKER ST STE A 12455 SW 68TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 • 2S101 BC-00101 2S101 BC-03000 KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC ROBERTS DAVID 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD 12361 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 BC-02202 2S 101 BC-02800 LEACH DOUGLAS SEVERSON JAMES A&ROBIN 0 8430 SW HUNZIKER RD STE 200 29404 SW HEATER RD PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S1 01 BC-02300 2S10100-00700 MCCARTHY KELLY E&JANICE L SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L 13705 SW FARMINGTON RD PO BOX 930 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 2S 101 BC-01801 2S 101 BC-0250 MILLER LORI M S TH G G WESTERN PROPERTIES L 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD PO 930 TIGARD,OR 97223 SON ,OR 97070 2S 101 BC-03100 2S 101 BD-0030 NGUYEN VUONG P& TI D C OF VO PHAN 1312 HALL 12387 SW KNOLL DR ARD,0 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 BC-01100 2S101 BC-00201 NITSOS STEVE TOM& WESTEC AMERICA INC BETTY MAXINE 8255 SW HUNZIKER 8465 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BD-00300 2S 101 BC-02900 PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING GROUP IN WESTPHAL EDGAR A&PATRICE M 208 E WOODLAWN RD 1811 NW 93RD PL STE#200 PORTLAND,OR 97229 CHARLOTTE,NC 27217 2S101 BC-00301 2S101BC-00103 REED WILLIAM C WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC THE PO BOX 12564 PO BOX 1195 PORTLAND,OR 97212 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2S101 BC-03200 2S 101 BC-01200 REID CHARLES 0& WILDER GEORGE C&LUCETTE A RUTH A 8445 SW HUNZIKER ST 12435 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BC-02201 2S101BC-01500 ROACH MICHAEL A AND PAMELA S WILLIAMS PORTUS W AND SARAH T 956 WEST POINT RD 12390 SW KNOLL DR LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 TIGARD,OR 97223 Jack Biethan Ed Murphy & Associates 11023 SW Summerfield Drive, #4 Attn: Ed Murphy Tigard, OR 97224 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97224 Sue Rorman Yun S. Hong 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 17450 West Valley Hwy. Tigard, OR 97223 Tukwila, WA 98188-5111 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78'h Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Dieter Jacobs 7775 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 tO{ TI GARD - EAST(IT SUBCOMMITTEE (i:\curpin\sei A� EITY ' Address Labels l • AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF A LAND USE PROPOSAL MPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED ON THE SITE. In the Matter of the Proposed Land Use Applications for: Land Use File Nos.: SDR2002-00018NAR2002-00048NAR2002-00049 Land Use File Name: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER I, Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planner for the City of Tigard, do affirm that I posted notice of the land use proposal affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) -2-5/e)/,43 -.°.- and did personally post notice of the proposed land use application(s) by means of weatherproof posting in the general vicinity of the affected territory, a copy of said notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the /` day of der„,,...,.-, , 2002. Siggatu of-Person Who Pe fo med Posting (In the presence of the Notary) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the '2 day of J 4,∎J, , 2003 . OFFICIAL SEAL SHERMAN S.CASPER NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.323409 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 13,2003 !« „ OFFICIAL ti ' ^-1� i� M7 r �-- qq�.. SHI;>� r `i;�� N; f • �N NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON 4 , r -,AI�sl� � �9 /3 Z1X13 •. • • � 1f�{ My Commission Expires: ////7/ � h:\login\patty\masters\affdavit of posting for applicant to post public hearing.doc SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00018 VARIANCE (VAR) 2002-00048/VARIANCE (VAR) 2002-00049 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor go-kart racing -enter. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. LOCATION : 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g. , restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g. , noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design -Ind development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Mathew Scheideqqer, Assistant Planner) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171 . A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. IF CITY of TIGARD • � GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM AREA NOTIFIED (500') GASDEN P i is 61110N05 101' n10u1015w 1♦ FOR: SDR2002-00018 -- - 1 nXlec1a11 •\ RE: x111CMM1 ____. 7s81BBC0i000 �� l( n1HC/7k0 \ J` `•f 1111NCNMi IIIIIIIgllq lk# ` x..e1n1, xX,NM71! Property owner information ' is valid for 3 months from �\ �\ ,_ the date printed on this map. �=_ nexolBiol i nW NCa1900 1 `` ,(� n,mec117m `` -� -i !1X,111 / 70 "` _.-... ._.., 1118C07300 �` -- �>' S` 7s X18C00100 ,/x1•I117781 T \\ nR11canati TiW NO \ / \ OBiN • 01440/741/ / r. IIIIIII \ °L 01X4COnM \n 41BC078St \�`���.te x11401740 '� 75NIBC07511, N Oil' / A 200 400 600 Feet I 1'=416 feet ne/0000700 \ A I \ yo 1 ' City of Tigard ` \ Information on this map is for general location only and / \ i i should be verified with the Development Services Division 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 (503)639-4171 171 http:/hxww.ci.tgard.or.us J Community Development Plot date:Dec 27,2002;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR 1 ' 2S 101 BC-02100 2S 101 BC-01900 ANNAND JOHN D II&EDNA N DELAO ALICIA& 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD DELAO SANTA CECILIA& TIGARD,OR 97223 GARCIA ERNESTO 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-01800 25101 BD-00301 BEAUDOIN MICHAEL E& EAST SIDE VAN&STORAGE INC DONNA R 4836 SE POWELL BLVD 12490 SW KNOLL DR PORTLAND,OR 97206 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BB-01500 25101 BC-02200 CALWEST INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LLC HHO&B ASSOCIATES LLC BY DELOITTE&TOUCHE LLP BY H&A CONSTRUCTION CO 2235 FARADAY AVE STE 0 PO BOX 23755 CARLSBAD,CA 92008 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S 101 BB-01400 2S 101 BC-02501 • WEST INDU - AL HOLDINGS LLC HUTTIG INC BY D- SI ' : TOUCHE LLP 14500 SOUTH OUTER 40 RD 2235 '7•• ' VE STE 0 CHESTERFIELD,MO 63017 LSBAD,CA 92008 2S101BC-00400 2S101BC-00500 CARASOF ALEX S&LILIYA V KIM KYONG SUK 12330 SW KNOLL DR 12300 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-01000 2S 101 BC-02401 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KING JAMES F 13855 SW PACIFIC HWY 12650 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-00800 25101 BC-02700 ENER BERT R&PATRICIA A KING JAMES F 13855 ACIFIC HWY PO BOX 23819 RD,OR 9 223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-00900 2S 101 BC-03300 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KISH ROBERT J/SUSAN C 13855 SW PACIFIC HWY 7510 SW ASHFORD ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 2S 101 BC-01600 2S 101 BC-00100 DALTON LOIS KNEZ JOHN S SR&JEANNE M 12420 SW KNOLL DR 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-01700 25101 BC-00200 DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE& KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC DEFOE CHARLES E JR 8185 SW HUNZIKER ST STE A 12455 SW 68TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-00101 2S 101 BC-03000 KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC ROBERTS DAVID 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD 12361 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-02202 2S 101 BC-02800 LEACH DOUGLAS SEVERSON JAMES A&ROBIN 0 8430 SW HUNZIKER RD STE 200 29404 SW HEATER RD PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S101 BC-02300 2S10100-00700 MCCARTHY KELLY E&JANICE L SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L 13705 SW FARMINGTON RD PO BOX 930 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 261016C-01801 291016C-025o MILLER LORI M S TH G G WESTERN PROPERTIES L 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD PO 930 TIGARD,OR 97223 SON ,OR 97070 2S 101 BC-03100 2S 101 BD-0030 NGUYEN VUONG P& TI D C OF VO PHAN 1312 HALL 12387 SW KNOLL DR ARD,0 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-01100 2S 101 BC-00201 NITSOS STEVE TOM& WESTEC AMERICA INC BETTY MAXINE 8255 SW HUNZIKER 8465 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BD-00300 25101 BC-02900 PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING GROUP IN WESTPHAL EDGAR A&PATRICE M 208 E WOODLAWN RD 1811 NW 93RD PL STE#200 PORTLAND,OR 97229 CHARLOTTE,NC 27217 2S101BC-00301 2S101BC-00103 REED WILLIAM C WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC THE PO BOX 12564 PO BOX 1195 PORTLAND,OR 97212 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2S 101 BC-03200 2S 101 BC-01200 REID CHARLES 0& WILDER GEORGE C&LUCETTE A RUTH A 8445 SW HUNZIKER ST 12435 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-02201 2S 101 BC-01500 ROACH MICHAEL A AND PAMELA S WILLIAMS PORTUS W AND SARAH T 956 WEST POINT RD 12390 SW KNOLL DR LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 TIGARD,OR 97223 Jack Biethan 11023 SW Summerfield Drive, #4 Tigard, OR 97224 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Dieter Jacobs 7775 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Y.�O TIGARD - EAST SI� SUBCOMMITTEE (i:\curpin\sei �/�� AV�>f�y�, A ress tabeis APPLICANT MATERIALS PRE-APP.HEW BY: CITY Or TIGARD PLANNING L iVISION . A13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223-8189 1*411 503.639.4171/503.684.7297 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION File# c.7-rye -Awl Other Case# U4 2.2_ spgi V/J 7. L_000.4 9 J • Date i llt21tL , By MCI— Receipt# L'�" X73' Date Application Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR Q'Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Minor Modification (I) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑ Planned Development (III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) ❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) ❑ Sensitive Lands Review (I, II or III) ❑Zone Ordinance Amendment (IV) ❑ Home Occupation (I or II) ErSite Development Review (II) ❑ Miscellaneous (I) - (Lot Line Adjustment/Temporary Use/Tree Removal/Director's Interpretation, etc.) LOCAI ION WHERE PROPOSED AC 11V1 1 Y WILL OCCUR(Address if available) 8Z0S Sc,J �Uvt Z�Ite✓ ST• T(.90 o12 TAX MAP& I AX LO I NOS. 2S (01 QGO02--0o I 01AL SI 1 E SIZE ZONING CLASSII-ICAIION , 2 ct Cr'e5 APPLICANT' �f a S. ; cvt � ) c Kaff to door. lac/1451 MAILING AD RESS//CIl Y/STATE/'ZIP {- / / r- ! / I / '^ �� p PHONE NO. (71 o tt1e�1 Val e / � "!WQ FAXNUTaklt�I/ , l,{/Ui ?CJteD - SS (i yZ 5 - 2 S ( - Salo y25 - 2Sr ' PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON PHONE NO. FA)< No. � uY1 1i y, ecitvicfrs1 f / cc)C) f-s 903 ' 6z - Z5 503 - 768-Ic7tI PROPERTY OWNERDEtD HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) j ie z sect ( Group / 01(-14. 3''Ar1 {r,l e z Tv. MAILING ADDRESSICI IY/STATE/Z1P E?)18s 5(J.) f{uNZ;ke� s . -1—(67 J °g Q7Zz3 PHONE NO. ,/ /�J(, S03 - 62 - (L/Z SU3 -c) QI'6,a *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) ; e i ec/L, , o G G cc - ac Ce SQ (,-)/ ( •• r c�Q i in ' & I u ' • o1 • ?Iacrra4C-e- fo__ 1,0/4 ;.s?u.yr , cqu/Yed d(r' sI"reif 041 cle In 5-Faces. • r G =. (4 L.V .• A., • .011 1< � • „ u , APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. 12/09/2002 17: 39 503-620-2405 k:NEZ BLDG MATERIALS PAGE 01 uec um Ue U3: 44p Murphy 50" 81674 p. 3 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. 1 / /2 9- 6' Z- •" ner's Signature -/ Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date RECEIVED JUN 2 6 2000 - STATE OF OREGON , ss County of Washington_ - of Assess- I, Jerry r _ .;.�; ,... •. :o County meet - ify that c Gerk '�°jn: '.aS;�eceived the wit ±,.'= pt said t and re 9l S% . ,y 1' county r A*:81V;:;-'s��%`,r%/ h "\?k" hector of ' x3tion,Ex- Doc Clerk After recording, return to: Doc : 2000044357 Knez Realty Group LLC Root: 256060 42.00 8185 SW Hunziker Street, Suite A 06/05/2000 04:27:11pm Tigard, OR 97223 8229 —--- -- -- – l SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED U.S. NATURAL RESOURCES, INC., a Delaware corporation, Grantor, conveys and specially warrants to KNEZ REALTY GROUP, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company, Grantee, the real property in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, described on attached Exhibit A (the "Property"), free of encumbrances created or suffered by the Grantor except as specifically set forth in attached Exhibit B. The true consideration for this conveyance is ONE MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,750,000). This deed is given by Grantor in full satisfaction of Grantor's obligations under that certain Standard Contract of Sale between Grantor and Grantee dated April 30, 1997 (the "Contract"), a memorandum of which was recorded on May 1, 1997 in the Records of Washington County, Oregon at Document No. 97040497, Rect 185479. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING Until a change is requested, all tax statements shall be sent to: Knez Realty Group, LLC 8185 SW Hunziker Street, Suite A Tigard, OR 97223-8229 Property Tax Account No.: 2S 1 IBC 00200; Key No. R458365 Poolnd1-2036119.1 0017081-00003 4/24/00 3 11 PM 3 'd SLOL LSS COS 0H Z31JN 1.1E11717 : T t 2002 60 d3S • DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. DATED as of the 2-1") day of April, 2000. GRANTOR: U.S. NATURAL RESOURCES, INC., a Delaware corporation By: �x 1 - -, Printed Name: ,F/►A`A R BEc!-f E� Title: Vic E f)ees t OerJT- STATE OF 4,bi Sh, 041 ss. County of (e4 On this ray r tay of April, 2000, before me personally appeared _hovar� J-.& to me personally known to be the j/, f / e,s4eAJY of U.S. NATURAL RESOURCES, INC., a Delaware corporation, the corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that be/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and year first above written. Signature �Gt.J PEE B. FF99 U,Z�'a�i1�s �Eto �� Name(Print): eh ff"4G ! fiC/Cleft '�� P ��OTA.. `� NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of cA PUBOG 2 Washington, residing at HCC-oGT °c'7- iQ ZooIvG My appointment expires: /o///,,/,GIN. OF wASN0' e«um1-20361 I9 1 00170A I-0oau3 2 ? 'd SLOG LSS EOS 0H Z3W)l WEJ ' Tt ZOO? 60 d3S EXHIBIT A TO SPECIAL F;ARRANTY DEED PARCEL I: A parcel of land located in the Northwest one-quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at an iron pipe on the North line of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, situated in said Section 1, which bears South 82°37' East along said North line, 123.0 feet from the Northwest corner of said Donation Land Claim; thence South 82°37' East along said North line, a distance of 211.5 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to Thomas W. and Minta Saddler, as described on Page 71 of Volume 166 of Washington County Deed Records; thence South 12°24' West along the West line of said Saddler Tract, a distance of 866.5 feet to the center line of SW Hunziker Road tCounty Road No. 34), 40 feet in width; thence North 60°59' West along said center line, a distance of 362.0 feet to a point which bears South 22°47' West. 22.3 feet from an iron pipe; thence North 22°47' East, a distance of 756.8 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPT THEREFROM that portion of the above described parcel lying within SW Hunziker Road, and EXCEPT THEREFROM the following described parcel: Commencing at an iron pipe in the North line of said W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39 in said county and state which bears South 82°37' East, 123.0 feet from the Northwest corner of said Claim No. 39; thence South 22°47'00" West, a distance of 541.00 feet to the point of beginning of the parcel herein to be described; thence continuing South 22°47'00" West, a distance of 195.70 feet to a point in the Northerly line of SW Hunziker Road; thence South 60°59'00" East along said Northerly line, a distance of 192.28 feet; thence North 23°45'47" East, a distance of 239.12 feet; thence North 73°47'30" West, a distance of 196.52 feet to the point of beginning, and EXCEPT THEREFROM the following described parcel: Commencing at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim; thence South 82°55'00" East 123.00 feet to a 1 inch iron pipe; thence South 22°47'00" West 561.08 feet; thence South 73°47'30" East 196.17 feet to the paint of beginning of the herein described parcel; thence from said point of beginning, South 73°47'30" East 18.73 feet; thence South 23°45'47" West 213.12 feet to a point on the Northerly right-of-way line of Hunziker Road; thence along said Northerly line North 60°59'00" West 18.64 feet; thence North 23°45'47" East 208.95 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL II: A parcel of land located in the Northwest one-quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West. of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim; thence South 82°55'00" East 123.00 feet to a 1 inch iron pipe; thence South 22°47'00" West 541 .00 feet to the point of beginning of the herein described tract; thence from said point of beginning, South 73°47'30" East 196.52 feet; thence South 23°45'47" West 20.12 feet; thence North 73°47'30" West 196.17 feet; thence North 22°47'00" East 20.08 feet to the point of beginning. Exhibit A - Page 1 of 1 3 E 'd SLOG LSS COS bH Z]N)1 WEJb Ti ZOOZ GO dIS EXHIBIT B EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SiZ. D�g 1. , 2. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated October 5, 1973 Recorded • October 8. 1973 Book : 948 Page • 304 In favor of • Adjacent property owner For : not disclosed That portion of said easement affecting the Property described herein lying Northerly of the property described in that certain statutory warranty deed to Westec America Incorporated recorded on June 29, 1990 at Recorder's Fee Number 90- 34347 was terminated by Quitclaim Deed, Dated October 10, 1984 Recorded January 7, 1985 Rec. Fee No. 85000561 3. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated August 23, 1973 Recorded October 26, 1973 Book • 950 Page 838 In favor of City of Tigard For • Underground sewer purposes and appurtenant facilities 4. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated June 16, 1975 Recorded • September 17, 1975 Book • 1044 Page 495 In favor of • City of Tigard For • Slope easement Ponlndl-2036119 1 0017081-00003 Exhibit B - Page 1 of 2 11 b 'd SLOG LSS COS OH Z3NN WHSt : TT 2002 60 d3S 5. Unrecorded Agreement, including the terms and provisions thereof, Dated : April 26, 1978 Between U.S. Natural Resources, Inc., a Delaware corporation And Prendergast & Associates, Inc., an Oregon corporation As disclosed by Memorandum of Agreement, Dated April 26, 1978 Recorded : May 4, 1978 Recorder's Fee No. : 78 20403 Documents recorded on January 7, 1985 at Recorder's Fee Numbers 85000560, 85000561 and 85000562 refer to such Agreement. However, an Easement Agreement providing for a joint access and utilities to benefit both parcels and an exclusive easement for access and parking to benefit the Prendergast& Associates, Inc. parcel was provided for in the above agreement but remains unrecorded. This Easement Agreement with minor revisions was signed on October 10, 1984 by U.S. Natural Resources, Inc. and a partner of Seaport Associates, a Washington partnership, successor in interest to Prendergast& Associates, Inc., but has not been recorded. 6. Any and all matters created or suffered by or through Grantee or that are otherwise the responsibility of Grantee under the above-described Contract. Pottlndl-2036119 1 0017081-00003 Exhibit B - Page 2 of 2 S 'd SLOG LSS COS bH ZAWN WEdSt' : TT Z1102 60 dSS ED MURPHY & ASSOCIATES J and l PlaHHInd and 11cr(dop1Hen Set ricus • December 9, 2002 Matt Scheidegger,Assistant Planner City of Tigard - Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Applications for Site Development Review and Variances for proposed SyKart Indoor Racing Center, 8205 SW Hunziker Street Dear Mr. Scheidegger: On behalf of Mr. Yun Hong, I am pleased to submit this application for Site Development Review and related variances to you. I am also submitting a check for$3465 for the SDR and variance application fees, and two sets of addressed and stamped envelopes for the neighborhood notices. Once you determine the application is complete, I will submit additional copies, including two sets of large format copies of the Site Plan that will be easier to read. Please let me know as soon as possible if you need anything else. You can call me, fax me at the phone number below,or e-mail me at ejmurphy @aol.com. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sinc y, Ed Murphy,AI P cc. Yun Hong John Knez Jr. 9875 SW Murdock St. Tigard, Oregon 97224 /Phone 503. 624.4625 /Cellular 503. 314.0677 1 Fax 503. 968.1674 posaj blarrAtve CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON APPLICATION FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND RELATED VARIANCES SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER s ttt se. '' 11,,# efiti IfieiNG 400 ri PREPARED FOR : YUN S . HONG PREPARED BY ED MURPHY & ASSOCIATES DECEMBER 10, 2002 ♦�♦ iD MURPHY & ASSOCIATES l.aHH(I r- Mann/Ng and fl( l•c1vlrrrr(0/I Sc-t rric cs • December 9, 2002 Matt Scheidegger,Assistant Planner City of Tigard - Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Applications for Site Development Review and Variances for proposed SyKart Indoor Racing Center, 8205 SW Hunziker Street Dear Mr. Scheidegger: On behalf of Mr. Yun Hong, I am pleased to submit this application for Site Development Review and related variances to you. I am also submitting a check for$3465 for the SDR and variance application fees, and two sets of addressed and stamped envelopes for the neighborhood notices. Once you determine the application is complete, I will submit additional copies, including two sets of large format copies of the Site Plan that will be easier to read. Please let me know as soon as possible if you need anything else. You can call me, fax me at the phone number below, or e-mail me at ejmurphy @aol.com. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sinc ly, Ed Murphy,AI P cc. Yun Hong John Knez Jr. 9875 SW Murdock St. Tigard. Oregon 97224 / Phone 503. 624.4625 /Cellular 503. 314.0677 /Fax 503. 968.1674 SyKart SDR/Variance Applications TABLE OF CONTENTS KEY INFORMATION 1 SUMMARY 3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 5 RESPONSE TO SDR CRITERIA 9 PARKING VARIANCE 15 BUFFERING AND SCREENING VARIANCE 19 CONCLUSIONS 23 EXHIBITS 25 Exhibit 'A' Tax assessor's map Exhibit 'B' Topographic map Exhibit 'C' Photographs of the existing building and site Exhibit 'D' Site Plan, including: Sheet 1 -- Existing Conditions map Sheet 2—Site Development Plan Sheet 3 — Landscape Plan Exhibit 'E' Elevation drawings Exhibit 'F' Service provider response -- Clean Water Services Agency Exhibit 'G' Traffic Evaluation Report by cts Engineers (Summary) Exhibit 'H' Survey map showing location of existing buildings Exhibit'I' Neighborhood meeting documentation Exhibit 'J' Pre-application conference notes SyKart SDRIVariances KEY INFORMATION Project Name: SyKart Indoor Racing Center Property Description: 2S101 BC00200 Location: 8205 SW Hunziker Street Parcel size: 4.2 acres Zoning: Industrial Park (I-P) Applicant: Yun S. Hong Sykart Indoor Racing Center 17450 West Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188-5511 Telephone (425) 251-5060 Fax (425) 251-9843 Property Owner: Knez Realty Group LLC Attn: John Knez Jr. 8185 SW Hunziker St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Telephone (503) 620-6142 Fax (503) 639-0162 Applicants Representatives: Land Use Planner Ed Murphy, AICP Ed Murphy & Associates 9875 SW Murdock St. Tigard, Oregon 97224 Telephone (503) 624-4625 Fax (503) 968-1674 Site Designer Mark Ferris, A.S.L.A. LanDynamics 20942 SW Siletz Court Tualatin, Oregon 97062 Telephone (503) 692-9419 Fax (503) 885-1247 edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 SyKart SDR/Variances This page intentionally left blank 2 edmurphy&associatesJJhong/sdrvarapp 12/3102 SyKart SDR/Variances SUMMARY • Mr. Hong seeks Site Development Plan approval of his proposal to convert an old industrial building into a "SyKart Indoor Racing Center". The racecars are little go-karts, outfitted with catalytic converters and mufflers. • The proposed use would be an effective and appropriate adaptive re-use of a 42-year old industrial building. • The use would be classified as "indoor entertainment", which is a permitted use in the Industrial Park (I-P) zone. ♦ The property abuts a low-density residential zone (R-4.5) to the west. It also abuts properties zoned Industrial Park (I-P) to the south, Light Industrial (L-I) to the east, and General Commercial (G-C) to the north. ♦ The racing center will be entirely within the existing 34,777 square feet building. No outdoor recreational activities or facilities are planned. • There will be little if any significant noise, odor, vibration, truck traffic, glare/outdoor lighting or other off-site impacts from the proposed use. ♦ Most of the activities take place in the evening between 8:00 and 10:00 PM, and on weekends. Parking will be primarily in front of the building, with a few additional spaces along the east side of the building. ♦ Mr. Hong is not proposing to pave any additional surface area of the site, or to expand the building. Since the development will not create any new impervious surface, it will not cause any additional stormwater run-off. • The proposed site development would not have any significant effect on transportation facilities or traffic operations. The proposed race center is busiest in the off-peak hours, has limited capacity due to the nature of the business, and does not generate truck traffic. ♦ Concurrent with the SDR application, Mr. Hong is applying for variances to the required minimum number of off-street vehicle parking spaces, and the minimum buffering and screening standards next to the residentially zoned properties. edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 3 SyKart SDRNariances This page intentionally left blank 4 edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 SyKart SDRNariances BACKGROUND INFORMATION History: The property is a 4.2-acre parcel with frontage on SW Hunziker Street. (Please refer to the Tax Assessor's map, Exhibit 'A'). It is virtually flat except for the northernmost portion of the property, which slopes off the north, and has one large building and one small storage shed on it. (Please refer to topographic map, Exhibit 'B'). The property has been zoned for Industrial uses for many years. The building was originally built in 1960 by Irvington-Moore, which used it to manufacture machinery for plywood mills until 1996, when Knez Realty Group LLC acquired it. Since that time, it has been used by Power Rents (for storing and repairing equipment) and Safway Scaffolding, and was most recently used by Knez Building Materials to store sheetrock. (Please refer to the photographs of the site and building, Exhibit 'C'). In 1997, the 2-story office portion of the building was completely remodeled and upgraded by Power Rents. (Building permit file number BUP 97-0319.) That upgrade included adding handicapped accessible restrooms on the ground floor. At the same time, Mr. Knez constructed a handicapped accessible walkway from SW Hunziker Street to the front door, re-striped the existing spaces, and provided handicapped parking spaces, new wheel stops, and sidewalk curb cuts. (See refer to Existing Conditions, Exhibit 'D', Sheet 1). Adjacent uses. The property is bordered on the southwest by a 2-story office building and to the east and southeast by industrial buildings. The area to the north of the property is developed as a business park. There are single-family detached homes on the west side of the property served by SW Knoll Drive. The closest home is approximately 200 feet from the building in which Mr. Hong proposes to operate the SyKart center. Description of Proposal. The proposed use will be inside of an existing industrial building. Mr. Hong will improve the outside appearance of the building and site, but is not planning on expanding the building or parking lot. Outside of the building, the noticeable changes will be: 1. The awnings and metal doors will be repainted; 2. A new wall sign will be installed where the old sign used to be on the front of the building; 3. Parking lot trees will be planted in new landscape islands in front of the building; 4. Trees, shrubs and groundcover will be planted in a new landscape strip along the west property line; 5. The north end of the parcel will be landscaped with trees, shrubs and grass; edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarappl12/3/02 5 SyKart SDRNariances 6. The pedestrian walkway and handicapped parking markings will be repainted. (Please refer to Site Development Plan and Landscape Plan, Exhibit 'D', Sheets 2 and 3 respectively, and to the Building Elevations, Exhibit `E'). The existing building footprint is 31,740 square feet; however, a portion of the building is two-story, with 3077 square feet of offices on each floor, so the total gross area of the building is approximately 34,777 square feet. There is an existing sign structure at the entrance to the site on SW Hunziker Street, which Mr. Hong will use as a sign for the new business by changing the two sign faces. The parking area is already paved and striped (although some of the pavement markings are faded and will have to be re-painted), and has mature landscaping. To the north of the main building is a large parking or storage area, part of which is paved, and part of which is gravel. A small storage building is located towards the back (north) of the parcel. Mr. Hong does not intend to use the area behind the main building, and it is not part of his lease agreement. Mr. Hong does not plan on making any changes to the utilities. The building is already connected to city sewer and water. Storm drainage from the parking lot is generally towards SW Hunziker Street. There are no sensitive lands that will be impacted by the proposed use, i.e. wetlands, steep slopes, floodplains, or wildlife habitats. The Washington County Clean Water Services (CWS) Agency has provided a service provider letter. (Please refer to the CWS letter, Exhibit 'F'.) Meeting Tigard Development Code standards Since this is an already developed parcel with an existing industrial building, it does not strictly meet all of the current City of Tigard zoning and development standards. While it is impractical to bring the entire site up to current standards, Mr. Hong plans to make improvements to the site that will bring it closer to conformance with the current development standards. Impact Analysis: Section 18.390.040.B.2.e. requires an impact study as part of the Type III procedures. Following are comments regarding the impact on public facilities and services. Transportation System: There are no significant impacts to the transportation system as a result of this proposed site development. The traffic study completed by CTS Engineers, Inc. concluded that concluded that the SyKart Indoor Racing Center "can be developed without 6 edmurphy&associates/hong'sdrvarapp/12/3/02 SyKart SDR/Variances adversely affecting traffic operations or safety in the vicinity of the site." (Please refer to Exhibit 'G' for the traffic report summary).' In fact, all intersections in the study area would still operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS D or better). Moreover, it concluded that key intersections and roadways in the study area can operate at acceptable performance levels even if the site were developed with 70,000 square feet of office space. That would be a building (or buildings) with twice the square footage as the existing building, and that was used entirely for offices. The traffic report does not mention an important additional point, which is that the proposed use will generate virtually no truck traffic, unlike previous uses of the building. Drainage System: No additional storm water run-off will occur as a result of this proposed site development. Parks System: No impact to the park system will occur as a result of this proposed site development. In fact, the proposed use will make a new recreational activity available to city residents, unlike any other recreational activity currently provided in Tigard or even in the State of Oregon. Water System: No impact to the water system will occur as a result of this proposed site development. Sewer System: No impact to the sewer system will occur as a result of this proposed site development. Noise: All activities will take place indoors. The doors on the west side of the building, the side facing the residences, will not be left open during operations. The fans for the building will all be on the opposite side, the east side, which abuts industrial uses (subject to building permit approval). Further, there will be almost no truck traffic, as most of the users will arrive in automobiles or vans, not by large trucks. The noise from Hwy. 217 will most likely be louder to the neighbors than any noise they might hear from the racetrack. These are miniature go-carts, with catalytic converters and mufflers, and are not full size racecars. The walls of the building are concrete, which will stop most noise. The loudest sound produced that will be discernable outside of the building probably be the fans, which, as noted above, will face east. 'The City already has a copy of the full traffic report,submitted by Mr.Hong as part of the Zone Change application. File#ZON2002-00003. edmurphy&associatesihong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 7 Sy Kart SDR/Variances Police, Fire and other Emergency Services: No impact to police, fire or other emergency services will occur as a result of this proposed site development. The proposed use will be similar to the SyKart in Tukwila, Washington, at which no serious accidents have occurred since it opening three years ago. 8 edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp 12/3/02 • SvKart SDR/Variances RESPONSE TO SDR CRITERIA Section 18.360.090 of the Tigard Development Code contains the criterion that need to be met for Site Development Review approval. The criterion, and Mr. Hong's response to them, are as follows. 1. Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.810, Street and Utility Standards; Minimum lot size. None required. Minimum lot width: 50' required. The parcel is 100' wide at its narrowest point. Minimum building setbacks: Front yard: 30' required. The building is set 62' back from the property line, and approximately 300' from the Hunziker Street right-of-way. Side and rear yards: 0' required, except when adjacent to a residential zoning district. The building is set back over 359' from the rear lot line, and over 50' from the east side yard. The west side yard, which abuts properties zoned residential, is 28'4" at the northwest corner of the building, and about 58' at the southwest corner. (Please refer to the Survey Map, Exhibit 'H'.) The required minimum setback standard is 50' along the side abutting a residential zoning district. The building does not meet the required 50' setback, but it is a pre-existing situation. Maximum Building Height: 45'. The building is approximately 24' high. Maximum percentage of lot coverage: The maximum building coverage allowed is 75%. The actual building coverage is 18%. Streets: The development fronts on a publicly dedicated street, SW Hunziker, and has an existing driveway onto that arterial street. The City staff have indicated that they may require a one-foot wide dedication of land along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street to meet current right-of-way requirements for a "regional access bikeway", which needs to accommodate bicycle traffic. The owner is willing to dedicate this one-foot of property for public right-of-way. edmurphy&associates/hongJsdrvarappr 1213102 9 SyKart SDRIVariances Pedestrian and handicapped accessibility: The building has direct pedestrian and wheelchair access to the front door of the building from SW Hunziker Street. This pathway will be re-striped for better visibility. Handicapped parking: The site has two handicapped parking spaces near the main entrance of the building. These will be re-striped for better visibility. Bicycle parking. The site does not currently provide any bicycle racks. Bicycle storage will be inside of the building, on the ground floor. Utilities: No improvements to the existing utilities are necessary. Parking lot landscaping. The parking lot is, for the most part, nicely landscaped with existing mature trees. However, the parking area directly in front of the building and along the east side is not landscaped at all. The proposed site plan includes the creation of three new landscaped islands in the parking lot, which will meet the City standard of one tree per seven parking spaces, as per TDC Section 18.745.050.E.1.a.(4). Parking lot lighting: The parking lot is illuminated primarily by three yard lights placed on the front of the building. There are seven additional yard lights on the other three sides of the builidng, illuminating the entire site. The lights on the west side of the building will be shielded to protect the residential neighborhood from light interference. Minimum percentage of site landscaping. Approximately 12% of the gross site area is currently landscaped. The proposed site plan increases this to 20%. According to TDC Section 18.530.040, Table 18.530.2, footnote [6], "a reduction to 20% of the site may be approved through the site development process". An increase from 12% to 20% represents a significant improvement to the site, especially considering that the site is already substantially developed. Other issues. There are two standards that the building and site do not meet, and for which the Mr. Hong is requesting variances. These requirements are: 1. Minimum off-street vehicle parking; 2. Minimum buffering and screening. These two requirements will be addressed under the variance portions of this application. 2.Relationship to the natural and physical environment: a.Buildings shall be: (1)Located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; 10 edmurphy&associates'hong/sdrvarapp.!12/3 102 SyKart SDRNariances No expansion of the existing building is proposed. No existing trees will be removed. No change in topography or in the existing drainage system is proposed. (2)Located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; The building is pre-existing, and is not located in an area subject to ground slumping or sliding. (3)Located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light,air circulation, and fire-fighting;and The building is not located adjacent to any other buildings. The closest building is over 80 feet away. The distance provides adequate light and air circulation. Fire-fighting equipment can access all sides of the building directly. (4)Oriented with consideration for sun and wind. The building is not necessarily oriented to the sun and wind, although the building has many windows on each wall and in the roof area. Between the large window in the sides of the building and the many windows in the roof area, the interior is flooded with natural light. b. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the Requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. No trees will be removed as part of this project. 3.Exterior elevations: a.Along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet by providing any two of the following: (1)Recesses, e.g., decks,patios, entrances,floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet; (2)Extensions, e.g., decks,patios, entrances,floor area, of a minimum depth of eight feet, a maximum length of an overhang shall be 25 feet;and (3) Offsets or breaks in roof elevations of three or more feet in height. Not applicable. 4.Buffering,screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: a.Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, for example, between single-family and multiple family residential, and residential and commercial uses, and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer: (1) The purpose of the buffer,for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution,filter dust,or to provide a visual barrier; (2) The size of the buffer required to achieve the purpose in terms of width and height; (3) The direction(s)from which buffering is needed; (4) The required density of the buffering;and (5) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. The building and site do not need buffering between it and the adjoining industrial and commercial uses. The site plan calls for extensive buffering between the existing building and the adjoining residential uses, which may have a positive impact on noise levels and air pollution, dust, and visual appearance. Since the proposed buffering will not meet the Development Code requirements, Mr. Hong is seeking a variance to the standards. edmurphy&associates/honesdrvarapp/1213102 1 1 SyKart SDR/Variances b. On site screening from view from adjoining properties of such things as service areas,storage areas,parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops, i.e.,air cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: (1) What needs to be screened; (2) The direction from which it is needed; (3) How dense the screen needs to be; (4) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile;and (5) Whether the screening needs to be year around. The building and site do not need screening between it and the adjoining industrial and commercial uses. Screening is already provided partially by a 6'-high, chainlink fence with slats, which sits on top of a retaining wall, and partially by a thick grove of trees along the west property line. The screening will be augmented by the planting of Lombardy Populars along the base of the fence/retaining wall. 8. Where landfill and/or development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain,the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. The existing building is not within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain. 9.Demarcation of public, semi-public and private spaces for crime prevention: a. The structures and site improvements shall be designed so that public areas such as streets or public gathering places, semi-public areas and private outdoor areas are clearly defined to establish persons having a right to be in the space, to provide for crime prevention and to establish maintenance responsibility;and b. These areas may be defined by,but not limited to: (1)A deck,patio, low wall, hedge,or draping vine; (2)A trellis or arbor; 1. A change in elevation or grade; (4)A change in the texture of the path material; (5)Sign;or (6)Landscaping. Mr. Hong is not proposing any outdoor public gathering space. The area along the west side of the building and the area behind the building are fenced off -- preventing public access to these areas. The front (or south) side of the building, and the east side, are clearing visible from inside the building. 10. Crime prevention and safety: a. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants: b.Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; c. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; d. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime;and e. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Windows in the front and sides of the building give the manager good visual access to the public parking area. There is no interior laundry or service areas. The mailbox is located at 12 edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp'1213/02 SyKart SDR/Variances the entrance, off of Hunziker Street. Lighting fixtures are provided from the yard lights on the building, and illuminate all sides of the building. 11. Public transit: a.Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; b. The requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: (1) The location of other transit facilities in the area;and (2) The size and type of the proposal. c. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: (1) Bus stop shelters; (2) Turnouts for buses;and (3) Connecting paths to the shelters. The TriMet bus stop for the #38 and #78 bus lines are located on Hunziker Street, directly in front of the site, with a handicapped accessible pedestrian path directly connecting the bus stop to the front door of the building. Mr. Hong will work with TriMet to make any reasonable pedestrian or transit-oriented improvements that will encourage transit ridership. 12. Landscaping: a.All landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745; b.In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped;and c.A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. With the landscaping improvements shown on the proposed site plan, the percentage of gross area landscaped will be 20%, or 37,030 square feet. (Please refer to Landscape Plan, Exhibit `D', Sheet 3). 13. Drainage: All drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; Mr. Hong is not proposing any change the existing drainage patterns. The property owner, John Knez Jr., reports that he has not seen any flooding on this site. 14. Provision for the disabled: All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447;and The building is handicapped accessible from SW Hunziker Street to the front door. Both front entrances to the building are handicapped accessible. The restrooms are handicapped accessible, although some additional improvements may be necessary. The parking lot has two designated handicapped accessible spaces adjacent to the main front door. 15.All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370.1 The proposal is in compliance with all of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone, except for the number of required parking spaces and buffering/screening requirements. Mr. Hong will seek approval of variances to those standards, which are impractical to meet. edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 13 SyKart SDRNarian es This page intentionally left blank 14 edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp/1213 102 SyKart SDR/Variances PARKING VARIANCE Background. Most of the square footage of the building will be devoted to the racetrack. The rest of the facility will be devoted to ticket sales, restrooms, waiting areas, and administrative offices. The number of cars that can race at any one time, normally ten racecars, limit the number of customers using the facility. The Development Code requires "indoor entertainment" to have 4.3 parking spaces per 1000 square feet of building space. The building is 34,777 sq. ft., including the second floor office space. At 4.3 spaces per 1000 sq. ft., a total of 150 parking spaces would be required. More precisely counting the two-story portion of the building as office space, which requires 2.7spaces/1000 sq. ft. instead of 4.3 spaces per 1000 sq. ft., the Development Code would still require 139 required parking spaces. (That is, 28,703 sq. ft. for the primary use at 4.3 spaces per 1000 sq. ft. = 123 parking spaces, plus 6074 sq. ft. as the secondary use at 2.7 spaces per 1000 sq. ft. = 16 parking spaces, for a total of 139). If the secondary use is figured at 90%, as per Section 18.765.030.D.2 of the Development Code, that reduces the required minimum number of parking spaces to 137 spaces (16 x 90% = 14, +123 = 137). There are 44 marked parking spaces available nearest the building, located in front of the building and also along the east side of the building. Additionally, there are 46 parking stalls on the same parcel, which are available in the evenings and weekends -- SyKart's busiest times. In addition, many organized groups car pool in mini-vans, which obviously require less parking than if everyone drove their own vehicles to the site. Finally, the site is directly accessible by TriMet, which has a bus stop in front of the property on Hunziker Street. There is more than ample parking available for the proposed use. As mentioned above, the site currently provides 44 marked parking spaces, including two handicapped parking spaces. Counting the 46 parking spaces available on the site in the evenings and weekends, there are 90 spaces available on the site. According to a traffic study completed by CTS Engineers, Inc., less than 30 parking stalls are adequate to serve the needs of the facility. (Please see Summary of Traffic Report, Exhibit 'G'). Proposal. The proposed site plan removes four parking stalls in order to add parking lot trees. That will still leave 40 parking spaces immediately available to the SyKart facility. Mr. Hong requests a variance to the parking requirements to reduce the number of required off-street, vehicle parking spaces to 40. Even though there are another 46 parking stalls on the same edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 15 SvKart SDR/Variances parcel, at least some of those spaces are used during the daytime by other near-by tenants. They will be available on an informal basis during the evenings and weekends. However, because the 40 spaces immediately adjacent to the building are more than adequate to meet the parking demand of SyKart Indoor Racing Center, there is no need for the Indoor Racing Center to formally (i.e. through a shared parking agreement) have access to any of the other 46 spaces on the parcel. Response to Variance Approval Criteria a. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; The variance to the parking standards would not be detrimental to other properties in the vicinity. The property owner to the east, Mr. Knez, is supportive of the variance. The owner of the office building to the south, Mr. John Westphal, came to a neighborhood meeting on October 15, 2002, and did not object to the idea of a variance when it was discussed. None of the owners of the residential properties to the west have objected to the variance request. The use is a unique business, very different than other indoor entertainment uses such as movie theaters and arcades. Most of the interior floor space will be used for the racetrack itself, so the number of people using the facility at one time is very limited. The use is intended to be permanent in nature (that is, it cannot be easily converted to a different type of indoor entertainment, such as a bowling alley), and it has a demonstrated low demand for off-street parking. The variance to the parking standards would not be detrimental to other properties in the same zoning district. Granting of this variance, because the use is so specialized and unusual, would not create a precedent for other indoor entertainment uses which may need more parking per 1000 square feet of building space than the indoor racing center does. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of the Development Code. In fact, by granting the variance, there will be less impervious surface created, which in turn will help protect the air and water resources of the city and conserve energy. Granting the variance will also mean the land can be used more efficiently, rather than needlessly paving excessive amounts of land for parking that cannot be used for anything else. Granting a variance will not adversely impact the transportation system. On the other hand, the economy will be positively impacted by the indoor racing center, which may not locate in this facility if the variance is not granted. 16 edmurphy&associates/bong/sdrvarapp!12/3/02 SvKart SDRNcn-iances The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to any other applicable policies and standards. Granting the variance would not adversely affect any other applicable standard, and will result in a positive affect in the storm water quality and quantity standards. There is public transportation available to the site. Granting a variance to the excessive parking standards required by the Development Code, and encouraging the use of public transportation, is consistent with the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan and the Transportation Planning Rule. b.There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; The building is a pre-existing building, built in the early 1960's. The building is set more or less in the center of the site. The rear and west sides of the building are fenced off, and generally not available to the public. Other properties in the same zoning district may not have an existing building on them, and would therefore have more flexibility in planning the type and arrangement of buildings. c. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; The proposed use is indoor recreation, which is a permitted use in the I-P zone. Most of the Development Code standards applicable to this lot will be met. The standards for parking and screening/buffering, however, cannot be maintained while permitting a reasonable economic use of the building and land. The site will be improved in ways that bring it more into compliance with current standards. d. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage,dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title;and The existing physical and natural systems, including traffic, parking, energy systems, environmental systems, would not be adversely affected any more than if the variance were not granted. In fact, granting the variance will have a positive impact on drainage, solar heat gain, and water quality. e. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. A hardship would result if the City required 137 or more parking spaces. Mr. Hong would have to utilize (claim) all of the parking spaces on the property (90), plus create additional parking along the west side of the building or behind the building. This could interfere with the existing parking patterns on the parcel, and reduce the amount of land available for other uses. It would also be quite expensive to create additional paved, marked, lighted and landscaped parking — an expense that is unnecessary and serves no purpose. The hardship edmurphy&associatesihong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 17 Sy Kart SDR/Variances is not self-imposed, and the variance requested is the amount necessary to establish the number of parking spaces that are appropriate to this particular use. 18 edmurphy&associates thong/sdrvarappl12/3/02 SyKart SDR/Variances BUFFERING AND SCREENING VARIANCE Background. The building is on a parcel currently zoned I-P, and is next to a residential zone, R-4.5, and the homes that are in that zone. The Development Code would normally require new industrial land uses to construct some type of buffering and screening to protect the single- family homes from any adverse effects of the industrial uses. According to Matrix 18.745.1, level "E' buffering would be required. This level of buffering requires a 25'-wide landscaped buffer area with a 5' high berm or wall, or a 30'-wide landscaped buffer area with a 6' high hedge or fence (TDC Table 18.745.2). The area to the west side of the building, the side facing the homes, is already paved with concrete to the property line, and there is an existing chainlink fence with slats along this property line. The chainlink fence sits on top of a concrete retaining wall that varies from one to four feet high. The existing homes are at a much higher elevation (at least 20' higher just to the lower side foundation of the homes). In addition to the topographical separation, the existing homes are approximately 200' away from the property line. The Code requires both buffering and screening. Screening is provided on the south one- half of the west property line by the existing concrete retaining wall and fence, which varies in height from 6' to 10' tall. The fence has slats in it, providing the screening. There is a short section "missing" from the fence, just north of the rear wall of the building, which Mr. Hong will install. Screening on the north one-half of the west property line is already provided by the dense growth of evergreen and deciduous trees, which will not be disturbed. Therefore, the screening will be adequate when the short section of fence is installed. Buffering will be achieved by creating a landscape planter at the base of the retaining wall/fence along the west side of the property between southwest corner of the parcel and the existing trees. (Please refer to the Landscape Plan, Exhibit 'D', Sheet 3). This area will be planted with trees spaced 10' apart (compared to the TDC standard of 20' maximum spacing). Over time, as these trees mature, they will reach heights that will screen the industrial building from view. The setback of the existing building from the property line, its height, and its lower elevation relative to the homes also provides a buffer. The building is setback 58' from the property line at the south end of the building. The building is only a single story tall, compared to the 45-foot height limit in the I-P zone. The vertical and horizontal distance to the homes provide edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 19 SyKart SDR1Variances adequate privacy and protection from any adverse visual or noise impacts. (Please refer to the profile of the slope on the Landscape Plan, Exhibit 'D', Sheet 3). Finally, Mr. Hong does not anticipate any activity on the west side of the building that would need to be buffered. That is, Mr. Hong does not intend to use that area for loading or parking, or for outdoor entertainment or activities. Proposal. Mr. Hong is proposing to construct an 8' to 15' wide landscape planter along the base of the existing retaining wall and chainlink fence. The planter will be approximately 200 feet in length, and will have an extruded curb around it (except for the side next to the retaining wail). The concrete paving in this area, along with about 18" of gravel/rock/dirt, will be removed. The planter will be filled with topsoil, and then planted with approximately 23 Lombardy Poplar trees, spaced 10' apart. These trees grow relatively quickly, and will reach heights of over 50 feet. In time, this will provide screening of the building from view from the adjacent homes. In addition to the trees, the landscape planter will be planted with shrubs and groundcover. (Please refer to the Landscape Plan, Exhibit 'D', Sheet 3). The width of the proposed landscape planter is determined by two factors: 1). The desire to keep a vehicular access for Fire Equipment, garbage trucks and equipment all the way around the building, including the west side. The Fire Marshall, Mr. McMullen, reviewed the proposal, and indicated that keeping the west side open with at least 20' of clearance would be his preference. The property owner, Knez Realty Group, would like to keep the west side area open in case someday a different tenant needs access to the two overhead doors on that side of the building. 2). The width of the existing gate between the northwest corner of the building and the property line. This gate is already in place, and neither Mr. Hong nor Mr. Knez want the landscaping to interfere with the potential occasional use of the gate. (In fact, another tenant on the site, All-Star Towing, uses the driveway along the west side of the large building now to access the small storage building and some of the land around it.) The building is only 28'4" in distance from the property line at its northwest corner. In order to leave at least 20' for a fire lane or truck access around the building, the planter can only be 8' wide at that point. The proposed site plan maintains access around the building and allows continued use of the existing gate, and landscapes as much as possible within those constraints. 20 edmurphy&associatesihong/sdrvarapp/12(3/02 SvKart SDR/Variances A wider planter area would render the west side of the building unusable in terms of truck access. Further, the expense of digging out the concrete to create a planter is considerable, yet any additional width would not provide additional screening for the neighbors. The proposed planter strip is wide enough to provide adequate buffering and screening, and increase the overall amount of landscaping on the site, without destroying the existing access to and around the west side of the building. Therefore, Mr. Hong requests a variance to the normal buffering standards, and asks staff to accept the buffering/screening plan presented in the landscape plan. Response to Variance Criteria. a. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; The variance would not be detrimental to the purpose of the Development Code, in that the public health, safety, convenience and welfare would not be compromised. It would allow the site to be fully utilized in its current configuration, but with a significant upgrade in the buffering features. The variance would not endanger life or property in areas of flooding, landslides or other natural disasters and hazards. It would not significantly impact the quality of air or water resources of the City. It would allow the sound economical use of land and land uses, and would help promote the long-term economic diversity of the City. The owners of the residentially zoned and developed properties adjacent to the property did not request buffering or screening. They did request that the chainlink fence be extended to keep trespassers out, and wanted to ensure that any lighting on the building be deflected so as not to shine into their windows or yard areas. But none of the residential neighbors at either of two neighborhood meetings voiced any concern about the lack of buffering along the west property line. b.There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; The use and site are pre-existing, as is the adjacent neighborhood. The building was built in the early 1960's, and the homes have been there, without buffering, for probably at least that long. The previous uses were also industrial uses adjacent to a residential district, and the uses allowed in what was then the Light-Industrial zone were heavier than the uses allowed in the current Industrial-Park zone. The west side of the building is already extensively developed, including a retaining wall and chainlink fence, with concrete paving covering the entire ground area. These are special circumstances over which Mr. Hong has no control, they are particular to the parcel and the history of the land uses on the parcel, and they are not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district. edmurphy&associateslhong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 21 SyKart SDRNariances c. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; The use proposed is permitted in the I-P zone. The standard for buffering is the same in the I-P and the L-I zones. Although different tenants have occupied the building since it was originally built in 1960, no additional buffering was ever provided. The intent of the city standards is to provide a separation between what may otherwise be incompatible land uses. In this case, the separation is provided by the change in elevation, the distance between the existing building and the homes, the existing fence on top of the retaining wall, and the proposed landscaped area. The construction of a planter and the installation of trees in the planter will meet the intent of the City standard, while still permitting reasonable economic use of the land both now and in the future. The City staff has the authority to accept a landscape/screening plan in those situations where the grades are so steep so as to make the installation of walls, fences or landscaping impractical. (TDC 18.745.050B.7). In this case, the steep slope and the existing placement of the building make the use of a standard buffer impractical. However, the landscape/screening plan submitted accomplishes the intent of the Development Code. d. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage,dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title;and The existing physical and natural systems would not be adversely affected by granting the variance. e. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The hardship is not self-imposed. The site was developed before Knez Realty Group bought the property and before the zone was changed from L-I to I-P. Presumably, the property was allowed to develop as it did under the standards in place at the time. The variance requested is the minimum necessary to alleviate the hardship. That is to say, the amount of buffering is the maximum practical without creating an additional hardship on the tenant, the property owner, and possibly future users of the building. edmurphy&associatevhong,sdrvarapp/12/3!02 SvKart SDR/Variances CONCLUSIONS The proposed development, converting an industrial building into an indoor racing center, is in general compliance with the standards set forth in the Tigard Development Code. In the two areas where it is not in full compliance, Mr. Hong is requesting variances. The proposed improvements will make the site more in conformance with the current city standards. The variances requested, one to the required minimum number of off-street vehicle parking spaces and one to the minimum buffering standards, are appropriate in this situation. edmurphy&associateshong/sdrvarapp/12/3/02 23 SyKart SDRNariances This page intentionally left blank 24 edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrvarapp!12/3102 SyKart SDRNariances EXHIBITS Exhibit 'A' Tax assessor's map showing the location and dimensions of the tax lot Exhibit 'B' Topographic map Exhibit 'C' Photographs of the existing building and site Exhibit 'D' Site Plan, including: Sheet 1 -- Existing Conditions map Sheet 2— Site Development Plan Sheet 3 — Landscape Plan Exhibit 'E' Building elevations Exhibit 'F' Service provider response from Clean Water Services Agency Exhibit 'G' Traffic Evaluation Report by CTS Engineers (Summary) Exhibit 'H' Survey map showing location of existing buildings Exhibit 'I' Neighborhood meeting documentation Exhibit 'J' Pre-application conference notes edmurphy&associates/honglsdrvarapp/12/3/02 25 s. 2S I 168 -.- ' • _ 2S I 188 I� INITIAL POINT SCALE 1"•. 100' GO KNOLL ACRES /GEORGE RICHARDSON D.L.C. No 39 SU.S,'[ St 11.3 r M SO*SSt. .).II - -- S[0•2.1 2111 -y;. 102.311 •!i Ii..90 '3 / ' �� •''' 125.1 I NORTH LINE WILl■AN Cl AHAM D.L.0 No 39 ($) 600 500 400 01 301 (..r cos./. 1 200 � , • 1 •o , r..cs•.•. 101 103 i z 209ac. o.�e... Ss a.204c. J.Bd 4r + 1.87 Ac. o` �..[.cos.[. • / G1 ISO _ Is ••'4.7 1•11/13 I / /~ / 4 / 700 2 '•_ • I i % - f 1 i1 U I i I 14 4889 . / 152.27 .30111 S.W. `>•'st , .,urrp IC.S•No.12029) ° Y9 uz/vz r +I r. e,.,,.4/ r 800 `"o `°°.n c i• r r r,p.> W 1 , 3000 I +cis •i. Z > ....: 1 I� r rr�•T.� it-8- ,•, GREENw4r / 3. r ;3100 4 +' 1 500 r,�,r, .. • _ • „19C?-O�j3y './•,l 75AC.. — — 1 e — — — _ — ,1 ,5.--1. ISi - •0 N •pSyoL 1- ./ I — — — -1 •I • 900 p 3300 ',Au .. v ..r +e,.,,.r :1` • r , 1 v e 4 2 3200 ti 1600 rs`'• 1•SEE MAP j •. IJJ-"-U.2 :;• /" 1, ' INITIAL POIh I 2S I 2AA 1: • ISS [ io_,t 1 0 /,/N 1 TIGARDIA TERRAC f 11 I •+.ic , 1 ,..r.13 •p al. a >. _ 5 I 1000 1100 eh 1700 =3j'�'r SITE Ai 1.6.' as 100 I i r\S ��o r r 1200 C rlrr�r�� T� L9T4c. S )) — r{• Fw 1 a 7 °. 1800 .`33.10 -- _ =• Z J / r ebb ^ / '°. 1801 ro.,t a 2•S[.q/. -1 O F. \\\\ s, •p „ r • ) f") tSOD i��tsi' - >o' [aslu[wr w ` \\\ ,b++'� r 1 T1�1 201 2'•.so �j », % .r3••r21•'r no.co 'all.. o ',,1 \ " ``_• e\ /oy a„ ,o + a 4 0 .924. A 1 l a•3 z II �•d•�•."9i \/i(`\`\\ > .• 3 •"^ 1 ` �I` 3�, 104 (C.5.2 St.EQ.5) �_ .: \\ / 3 ` , ■ Z �1 \\ R"a,� l / +1 if/Ac. Ii CC w x 1 2202 cc,•3y'+ N. lied s I. O C $µ. 1 . / .9B 4c >o -.a.Ai.. 43.E •0.c. ' .21-4/1 . ° .1+ I y ,' +- � SCOFFIN3 1 � .r,�, J4 `� .In I Cc STREET r /�l •' " f.::1,, 2200 UN+tp.+ . Li) - 8 2300 cc+s Ac.• 2/3+r^ l l _ 10+.413 kr. `. ' , z rc , .2/AC. \ s . c • a^ • r.r 7 r.03 Ar. 7 c _+t. r 23 / 4 21::',e,r `• p•„., _ 3 1 SEE MAP 2401 ro � ° .J2 _c- s+ I 2AD 3.51 Ac. s 25 1 ..; C.S.388b arc, r t: \°r e.• +ap \/ 4. + r °e[ �... z 1,:,.,..,,,,...._.#.4, ' /1 ,iJ s V Q 11"F Exhibit `B' ., ' o ocs o a .\ '`" / L ' °C: x 155.7 x ts19 J • x 1lAS i 1 o\ * : s\\ ., \ ,r: fair i s p iir no txt . • I - �� x i,' , ., . BU ILDING , 0 A ______ ``o_ • , P 7, ,.. — "� _ / fi I / J 1 150.1 '.J, / x /54.7 x �� ( • 5s Ir' i �.Sx • / x.:„ 04.,,.., / 7 150 5 ] p' l , .\ . c\- \ \ ii / j / .O. 1: .,` / ` tsas it r .4 � \ / •- ..... / . . x x X155.7 `57.2 I '� - ' 150.4 l . , .;_ \ / X164.6 J „,, , The Site and Building J. al i i. , , _-. _,.._. CI 1 AA View from 4 == - --.. - , - _ ' mi....., '-- Hunzik ' _` -' ".4. _ ,- _-' View of parking lot . fA r, a I • •.;, 4 imp 4 iirrr �; , !SI*, I - At- .. , ,.., • ... I 4•11., �;_ ; �- (;:,i ,�� ;f f►,r,1 1 ' _ ,C � -� --7-----" . �� �� -f View . i'ri ( I\ ,�.[ At -- iCl��,�� �∎ 1 ,.4. - ti...l- .e-A.Jt - o ro •e 4 y View of west side , view owar 4 s omes . tip, .. - y . • 1.• . �;1 t �r �1 I t 7 `. f scent p7 Nag ?7J� _ ` vM € I [ , ' c eae oe � o mate mil . „lit , arm, swam._ - :a' 11, r. 4 � • i l t �'r r r' home View from Hwy. 217 View from backyard of adjacent 0 Exhibit `D' f '- • N.r► y a� a 5 .. • ^ A T_ . .. _Th , ,„ _, . . • . . . . .. .. ,.. '_.<ct >, �" I . ` >..,Dense Evergreen! '.'s.` � � — +� 44 .„, ..,.4......_. _.., . , .....,,,,........,„, ___..,°°"Y° 9 ca ' Decitluous Buffer .— - L a ...r. ,, ? r ' `y" . Shed yam+ — {+ _ j 1,.... , e _ •,' � �, 1. yii= y `� a. '.. s' 5'Wire Mesh fence � ,, .z �/ r - Graveled Area /Light Pole(typ.) a r - ; " b,,. }ems ... ... 7 __...:_. - i„.„..,,-.7.---'-:-;.*';`'::"::...1,7. :„,'..1, :1,-.4..... ":"•`'., ,.:1 ::..\\:::\\.>;:',c l` •. w - ,:� y� Paved Storage Y - r; �. -Yard'LlattitYP— _. ... J y ,' ++mot am ' ! • r.^' " • 6'Cyclone&Wood Slat Fence - c=.. "•,}. - '`-7..",..dt6"P. 6.'-- "--• ".-• 1 ij I F i Gate • £ ` ` y 4. z� w, ♦ � I I :, 3.: ?? _ , ., - �_ } !r yy {— it Ir ;d ; Exi a sing _ r Remo. ' b R ' x 4 k. - cue d gyp) D; Building dln •.r r. ,ti., i:, tea,�. . y j.q Yard Light q ing '� - - - - - �i ! ..rl U =� - 1!" "`.SS �"^ _.,€. -err . �� • rq 4)4:: ,..,-,.. ,• • w ` ' Hantlicapped- - - - .`. ` ,...4- likl"54. PI f Existing \ d a . to L. I .'",.. . ---‘,-'',.--. '---.'---;,:: .---,7--4- ir iM illit s as .. Building ding �� O. Air as vv-4 tb iU} : . ,z = �'A Existing E- *, re Budding F ;yt�+•"�V e s M \ `1 •M Pole(typ. r ,T'-'F .. .. •'. ter., ti• r. ,..,_ '.., lio...41-61./. .64%,4%,..4%dirawan • •,•,- \ toy" — r -At 414111, is • • cp EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN 100 50 0 100 200 0 r Exhibit 'E' NIYHRE.GROUP REPLACE LAMM sIGH AT EMIE LOCATION I I I T1 HAM MEMO C 0 AROpr 5mKart-t, INDOOR RACING CENTER ,----="=====„="/- 1=2= El El -7 flILl ■1= F:BEL.47.17.7arivii IMAM EAMES SOUTH ELEVATION - EXISTING APURE PAM • Hi !III 111'111;11 • • s 111 MS NMI AMP EME INNE - EAST ELEVATION - EXISTING ELEVATIONS ml•TIps Gum 0001. TENANT IMPROVEMENT 1205 Sw HUNKER RD. S‘\—ExISTIM WALL TIGARD OREGON TEA.PEA 97223-8227 WEST ELEVATION - EXISTING RENAMM ,. , , • PRE S.OM PA S.P.A. J OB ND 221G0 WE- 12 WOE FILE. NORTH ELEVATION - EXISTING A.1 ELEVATIONS • Exhibit 'F' "1 0 9 2002 File Number rJ/ Clean.�✓Vat � Services \!t' Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment Our commitment is clear 't''y Jurisdiction j t6' 1,I • Date l L' C •0 a Map & Tax Lot �.,2 8C__ Owner Site Address Contact Q f1.?cc-i j_ l-7 Proposed Activity Ni«l Sev CI, vide 1 1 Address 41c : SF • y � cir► Phone uL Official use only below this line Y N NA Y N NA j Sensitive Area Composite Map Stormwater Infrastructure maps y� Map # '7,!_f)1 4'/1 QS # / Locally adopted studies or maps • Other Specify Specify Based on a review of the above information and the requirements of Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order No. 00-7: Sensitive areas potentially exist on site or within 200' of the site. THE APPLICANT MUST PERFORM A SITE CERTIFICATION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE • PROVIDER LETTER OR STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. If Sensitive Areas exist on the site or within 200 feet on adjacent properties, a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required. Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or within 200' of the site. This pre- screening site assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. NO FURTHER SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE A STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development. NO SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. Comments: r 1/ ' /,/ ♦ 1/ d Reviewed By: X' ( ( `ldit p,toao Date: /1 ••// Returned to Applicant Mail Fax Counter Date By 155 N First Avenue,Suite 270•Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 Phone: (503)846-8621 • Fax: (503)846-3525•\ti ww.cicanwaterscrsiccs.orz txntvtt •(i C r s 3300 NW 111th Terrace Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 Tel[503]6904080 Engineers, Inc. Fax[503]645-5930 E-mail:ctsP,,ctsengineers.com CIVIL • TRANSPORTATION • STRUCTURAL • LAND SURVEYING September 9, 2002 Project OR02.035.T01 Tigard Sykart Mr. Brian Rager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 SUBJECT: Traffic Analysis for the Proposed Sykart Indoor Racetrack located at 8205 SW Hunziker Street in Tigard, Oregon Dear Mr. Rager: Based on your request, I have performed an analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center in Tigard. This development will reuse an existing building (formerly Power Rentals) on the site that has a driveway onto SW Hunziker Street. The site contains one building of approximately 34,777 GSF. The proposed use will require the applicant to rezone the site (4.20 acres) from Light Industrial (I-L)to Industrial Park (I-P)to permit the proposed indoor entertainment use. This traffic analysis includes an assessment of the traffic impacts of developing the site under its existing zoning, with the propose rezoning (assuming a worst case land use-offices) and with the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center. Based on the results of these analyses, it is concluded that the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center as well as the worst-case land use scenario can be developed without adversely affecting the traffic operation or safety characteristics of the adjacent street system. Specific findings of this study are as follows: • Based on observations at similar facilities, redevelopment of the site with the Sykart Indoor Racing Center is estimated to generate approximately 20 trips during the weekday PM peak hour. (This facility is not opening during morning hours on weekdays.) If the site was developed with offices uses (worst-case land use under proposed zoning), this would generate approximately 104 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. • In the future, all intersections in the study area will operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS D) or better for all scenarios evaluated. Major traffic movements at the intersection of SW Hunziker Street and the site's access will operate at acceptable LOS C or better. Observations at the existing intersection of SW Hunziker Street at SW Hall Boulevard and SW 72nd Avenue did not reveal any traffic safety or operational problems that need to be addressed by the applicant. • No specific off-site improvements are necessary to accommodate traffic generated by the development of the site with worst-case land uses or Sykart Indoor Racing Center. The following paragraphs document the study's methodology, results, and major findings. 2.035 Tigard Sykart September 9,2002 Page 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Figures 1 and 1A show the vicinity and the proposed site plan. The applicant is proposing a Sykart Indoor Racing Center, which will reuse an existing 34,777 GSF building. This project will remodel the Power Rents Facility previously at 8205 SW Hunziker Street. The site is currently zoned I-L (Light Industrial), which does not permit indoor entertainment uses. Consequently, the applicant is proposing to rezone the site to Industrial Park (IP), which permits indoor entertainment uses. The proposed development will use the existing two shared access driveways. STUDY AREA Based on discussions with City staff, the impact of this development must be evaluated at intersections along SW Hunziker Street at SW Hall Boulevard/SW Scoffins Road and at SW 72nd Avenue,as well as at the site's access driveways. AREA CONDITIONS Study Area Land Uses Land uses in the immediate vicinity of the site consist mainly of industrial uses. Sharing the site's two access driveways are Knez Building Products and another office building. South across from the site is the Centrex Construction Building and the Foundry Industrial Park. Site Accessibility Area Roadway System Figure 2 shows the approximate location of the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center and the surrounding roadway network. The main roadways in the study area include SW Hunziker Street, SW Hall Boulevard, and SW 72nd Avenue. Table 1 presents the characteristics of these roadways. Table 1: Summary of Study Area Roadway Characteristics Road Width Posted Side- Bike O° Street Name Class (Feet) Speed walks Lane Street Parking SW Hunziker Street 2-Lane Major Collector 36 35 Yes No No (at Site's Access) SW 72nd Avenue 2-Lane Major Arterial NB 60 25 Yes No No (at SW Hunziker St) w/CLT&Bike Lanes SB 53 SW Hall Boulevard (at SW Hunziker Street 2-Lane Minor Arterial NB 39 /SW Scoffms Road w/CLT&Bike Lanes SB 45 30 Yes Yes No 2.035 Tigard Sykart September 9,2002 Page 3 Pedestrian and Bicycling Considerations Few pedestrians or bicyclists were observed during our intersection volume counts. In the immediate vicinity of the site, most street sections have sidewalks on both sides of the street. The site already has sidewalks along the north side SW Hunziker Street, and curbs and gutters on both sides of the street. Bike lanes are present on Hall Boulevard and 72nd Ave and the travel lanes along SW Hunziker are wide enough for shared use between bikes and motor vehicles. Transit Considerations Tri-Met operates bus routes 38 and 78 in the vicinity of the site. The nearest bus stops for routes 38 and 78 are at SW 72nd Avenue approximately 93 feet south of SW Hunziker Street, along SW Hunziker Street approximately at site's access, and 172 feet west of SW 72nd Avenue. The number 38 route runs north and south along SW 72nd Avenue to/from the Mohawk and Martina7zi Transit Center and to/from Boones Ferry and Kruse Way. The number 78 route runs along SW Hall Boulevard and SW Hunziker Street to/from the Beaverton Transit Center and the Lake Oswego Transit Center. Existing Traffic Volumes and Peak Hour Operations Traffic Volumes A reconnaissance of the site and its vicinity was conducted. Traffic volumes within the study area were obtained from actual weekday PM peak hour traffic counts conducted in August 2002. The Sykart Indoor Racing Center will not be open during the weekday AM peak hour, and thus, this time period will not be analyzed for this study. Traffic volumes at the site's access were estimated from these counts and driveway counts from a prior traffic study. Figure 3 shows these PM peak hour volumes obtained at the key intersections. Traffic volumes greater than 25 were rounded upward to the nearest five vehicles. These data reveal that the afternoon peak hour occurs between 4:35-5:35 PM. This study considered traffic conditions during weekday PM peak hours, which represent reasonable "worst case" traffic conditions within the study area. Overall, less than 5 percent of vehicles observed were large trucks. Peak Hour Traffic Operations Traffic conditions at key intersections in the study area were analyzed during the PM peak hours. Intersection operational analyses were conducted using the procedures in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000) for evaluating signalized and unsignalized intersections, which describe the traffic operations of an intersection in terms of its Level of Service (LOS). For unsignalized intersections, the intersection's LOS is stated relative to the most critical intersection approach or maneuver, typically the left turn from the minor street approach. For signalized intersections, the LOS is a function of the average vehicle delay that vehicles on all approaches experience. The LOS criteria range from "A," indicating little or no delay, to "F," indicating that drivers experience long delays. The LOS worksheets for the results presented in this study are attached as an Appendix to this report. City of Tigard and Washington County standards require that all signalized intersections operate at LOS D or better and unsignalized intersections operate at LOS E/F or better (if a signal is not warranted). Table 2 (on the following page) shows the calculated existing LOS for the key major study intersections based on the peak hour traffic volumes shown in Figure 3. These intersections operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS C or better). 2.035 Tigard Sykart September 9,2002 Page 4 Table 2: 2002 Current Levels of Service Intersection PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Avg Vehicle Delay(SecNeh) V/C Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd/SW Scoffins Road/SW Hunziker St 24.8 0.75 C SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue 29.2 0.81 C Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Delay (SecNeh) LOS SW Hunziker St/Site's Access Driveway 13.6 B Critical Leg: SB Traffic Safety Accident records for the most recent three years of available data (1999-2001) were obtained from the ODOT Crash Analysis & Reporting Unit. They were examined for existing traffic safety problems at all the major intersections in the vicinity of the site. Figure 4 shows a summary of these data and the location of reported traffic accidents. All the intersections in the study area had accident rates that were acceptable (i.e., less than 1.0 accidents per million entering vehicles). These data revealed that the roadway section in the immediate vicinity of the site access had two reported accidents with an average annual accident rate of 0.29. A preliminary assessment of driver sight distance along SW Hunziker Street found that more than 400 feet is available in either direction, which exceeds the 350 feet required by City/County Code along streets with a 35-mph posted speed limit. SW Hunziker Street at the site's access is straight and relatively flat to the west and east. Two other intersections were analyzed and had an average annual accident rate of less than 0.35 accidents per million entering vehicles. These numbers and rate of accidents are typical for roadways throughout the City of Tigard. Photos in the Appendix show the section of SW Hunziker Street adjacent to the proposed site access and other nearby intersections. Based on this information and the area reconnaissance, it does not appear that the applicant needs to address any traffic safety problems in the immediate vicinity of the site. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS The impact of traffic generated by the Sykart Indoor Racing Center and potential land uses permitted under the proposed Industrial Park zoning on the surrounding street system during the critical weekday peak hours was analyzed as follows: • Based on the projected year of full buildout of the Sykart Indoor Racing Center (the year 2003), the existing traffic volumes were adjusted to reflect estimated background traffic conditions including other nearby developments that will be completed/approved before the end of 2003. 2.035 Tigard Sykart September 9,2002 Page 5 • Total PM peak hour trips both into and out of the site were estimated for complete buildout of the site (4.20 acres) under existing zoning and proposed zoning. In addition, PM peak hour trips into and out of the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center were estimated for buildout conditions. • Estimated site-generated traffic volumes for the PM peak hours were assigned to the roadway network and added to the estimated background traffic volumes to represent future traffic conditions with full buildout of the site. • Future Levels of Service (LOS) at key intersections in the study area were examined under background, and full buildout conditions for three trip generation scenarios: existing zoning, proposed zoning, and with the Sykart Indoor Racing Center. Future Background Traffic Volumes Full buildout of the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center is expected to occur by the end of the year 2003. To assess the likely future traffic conditions regardless of the proposed development, we estimated increases in traffic due to general growth and other proposed developments in the vicinity of the site. Discussions/meetings were held with City of Tigard and Washington County planning staff to review the area. This research did not find any in-process developments that must be considered individually for this traffic study. To account for increases in traffic from sources outside the immediate study area during the next year, existing volumes (in Figure 3) were increased by 4 percent per year. Thus, total future 2003 background traffic volumes were estimated by multiplying existing peak hour traffic volumes in Figure 3 by 1.04. The resulting peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 5. Capacity analyses of background volumes at the study area intersections were performed for the future background traffic volumes in Figure 5. Results of these analyses are shown in Table 4. Comparing these results with the LOS results for existing conditions indicates that with these conservative assumptions, traffic conditions will degrade slightly, but continue to operate at LOS C or better. Table 4: Future Background 2002 Levels of Service Intersection PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Avg Vehicle Delay(SecNeh) V/C Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd/SW Scoffins Road/SW Hunziker St 26.3 0.78 C SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue 32.4 0.84 C Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Delay (SecNeh) LOS • SW Hunziker St/Site's Access Driveway 13.6 Critical Leg: SB B 2.035 Tigard Sykart September 9,2002 Page 6 Site-Generated Traffic Volumes Figure lA shows the proposed site plan for the Sykart Indoor Racing Center. The applicant is proposing to redevelop the existing building on the site (approximately 34,777 GSF). The site contains approximately 4.20 acres and is located at 88205 SW Hunziker Street. The site is currently zoned I-L (Light Industrial), which does not permit the proposed development. Consequently, the applicant is proposing to rezone the site to I-P (Industrial Park). The site is served by two driveways along the north side of SW Hunziker Street. The applicant is proposing to maintain the site's current access scheme. To assess the impact of the proposed zone change, vehicle trips that would be generated were estimated under three scenarios. First, trips generated with full development of the site under its existing zoning were estimated using a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.38, which is a very conservative assumption when the open space requirements and on-site wetlands are considered. Using this assumption, an additional building of about 35,000 GSF could be constructed on the site. Trip generated by this scenario were estimated using standard trip generation rates for Light Industrial uses (ITE code 110) from the ITE Trip Generation Report (6th Edition). Second, trips generated by a worst-case use permitted under the new proposed I-P zoning were estimated using the same FAR. Discussions with City staff concluded that the most appropriate land uses would be general office uses (ITE Land Use Code 710). Finally, we estimated PM peak hour trips generated by the proposed indoor racing center. PM peak hour traffic was counted at a similar facility in Vancouver (Hottrack Racing along NE 134/134` Street) during the PM peak period and compared to counts at another comparable facility in Fife, Washington (Grand Prix Raceway). The Vancouver count was approximately 1/3 lower than the Fife count (14 vs. 22 total trips). To be conservative (slightly high), this analysis will assume that the proposed Racing Center will generate 20 peak hour trips. Comparing these estimates reveals that the highest trip generation would be with offices uses. Also, the proposed Sykart will generate fewer trips than if the site was developed under its existing zoning. Table 5: Trip Generation Scenarios Estimates for the Sykart Indoor Racing Center Site Land Use Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Total In Out Total In Out Full Development Current l-L Zoning 488 64 56 8 69 8 61 Light Industrial ITE Code 110(70,000 GSF) Full Development Proposed I-P Zoning 771 109 96 13 104 86 18 General Office ITE Code 710(70,000 GSF) Estimated Trips Proposed Indoor Racetrack From Observed driveway 20 10 10 counts at similar facilities Distribution and Assignment of Site-Generated Traffic Traffic generated by the three scenarios was assigned to the roadway network by considering existing travel patterns to/from homes and businesses along SW Hunziker Street. The resulting assignments of site-generated traffic during the PM peak are presented in Figures 6a, 6b, and 6c. 2.035 Tigard Sykart September 9,2002 Page 7 Total Future Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service Total future 2002 peak hour traffic volumes were estimated by adding the background future traffic volumes displayed in Figure 5 to the volumes that would be generated by buildout of the Sykart Indoor Racing Center site, which is shown in Figure 6a-6c. Figure 7a, 7b, and 7c displays the total future peak hour traffic volumes for 2002 with buildout of the three development scenarios. Table 6 summarizes the results of the intersection LOS analyses for the total future buildout scenarios. The LOS results in these tables are very similar to the results for the future background traffic conditions. Again all intersections will operate at acceptable LOS D or better. Table 6: Total Future 2002 Traffic Conditions with Potential Land Use Scenarios Intersection I PM Peak Hour Scenario 1: 2003 Buildout with Light Industrial(0.38 FAR) Signalized Intersection Avg Vehicle Delay(Sec/Veh) V/C Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd/SW Scoffins Road/SW Hunziker Street 26.8 0.79 C SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue 36.9 0.86 D Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Delay (Sec/Veh) LOS SW Hunziker St/Site Driveway Critical Leg: SB 152 C Scenario 2: 2003 Buildout with General Office(0.38 FAR) Signalized Intersection Avg Vehicle D elay(SecNeh) V/C Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd/SW Scoffins Road/SW Hunziker Street 27.5 0.80 C SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue 39.5 0.57 D Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Delay (SecNeh) LOS SW Hunziker St/Site Driveway 16.2 C Critical Leg: SB Scenario 3: 2003 Buildout with Sykart Racing Signalized Intersection Avg Vehicle Delay(SecNeh) V/C Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd/SW Scoffins Road/SW Hunziker Street 27.0 0.79 C SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue 33.8 0.85 C Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Delay (SecNeh) LOS SW Hunziker St/Site's Access Driveway 13.9 Critical Leg: SB B 2.035 Tigard Sykart September 9,2002 Page 8 Finally, future traffic volumes at the site's access driveway were evaluated during the critical peak hours to determine if a separate westbound left turn lane or eastbound right turn lane are needed. These analyses were based on future worst case 2003 peak hour traffic volumes with office uses under the I-P zoning shown in Figure 7b. The right turn lane analysis is based on the criteria in the ODOT Design Manual, which considers the number of vehicles turning right and continuing through eastbound along SW Hunziker Street. As shown in Table 7 below, at full buildout future 2003 peak hour volumes do not meet the right turn lane warrant. Furthermore, Hunziker Street is already 36 feet wide, which allows for vehicles to move to the right when they slow to enter the site. Finally, as this is a private driveway, traffic volumes will not increase in the future significantly beyond our estimates in Table 7. Table 7: Result of Right Turn Warrant Analysis for Westbound Traffic Along SW Hunziker Street at Site Access Driveway Projected 2003 PM Peak Hour ODOT Design Manual i Scenario: I-P Zoning with Total Approach Right Turns Right Turn Office Volume Volume Criteria Warrant Met? SW Hunziker St/Site Driveway 508 30 46 NO To assess the need for a separate eastbound left turn lane along SW Hunziker Street, the warrants consider the percent of vehicles turning, the opposing volume, and the total advancing volume. Using worst case office uses under the proposed I-P zoning future 2003 peak hour volumes shown in Figure 7b, our analysis shown in Table 8 found that vehicles traveling eastbound along SW Hunziker Street at the site's driveway turning left do not meet warrants for a separate left turn lane. Table 8: Result of Left Turn Warrant Analysis for Eastbound Traffic along SW Hunziker Street at Site Driveway Projected 2003 PM Peak Hour ODOT Design Manual Opposing plus Scenario: I-P Zoning with Advancing Approach Office Volume Left Turns Volume Criteria Warrant Met? SW Hunziker St/Site Driveway 375 7 38 NO SITE ACCESS As shown in Figure IA, the applicant is proposing to develop the Sykart Indoor Racing Center, which will reuse an existing building approximately 34,777 GSF. The site contains 4.20 acres and is located at 8205 SW Hunziker Street. The site currently has two driveways along SW Hunziker Street that provide one inbound lane and separate left and right turn outbound lanes. The applicant proposes to use these driveways as they currently exist. The applicant will not have to construct any frontage improvements because both sides of Hunziker Street already have with curbs, sidewalks, and gutters. 2.035 Tigard Sykart September 9,2002 Page 9 PARKING Parking was also observed at the Vancouver and Fife Washington facilities. During the PM peak hour, the peak number of cars observed in their parking lots were 7 and 14 respectively. At the Grand Prix Raceway in Fife, a maximum of 20 cars were parked during the facility's peak operations Saturday evening. Currently, the Tigard site contains approximately 44 striped parking stalls adjacent to the building and 46 stalls separating the access driveways. Unmarked areas adjacent to the existing building could also contribute an additional 29 parking stalls for a total of 119 parking stalls on site. In addition, the peak use period for the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center is expected to occur between 8:00 and 10:00 PM on the weekends. As the adjacent business are not opened at this time, a minimum 29 additional spaces will be available Considering that only 10 people can race at one time and that most people spend about an hour at the facility, the parking demand is expected to average less than 30 vehicles. Based on these numbers, the Tigard site for the Sykart Indoor Racing Center will have more than adequate parking available to accommodate its peak parking demands. CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of the analyses described in this report, it is concluded that traffic generated by the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center and rezoning of the site to I-P will not adversely affecting traffic operations or safety in the vicinity of the site. Furthermore, key intersections and roadways in the study area can operate at acceptable Levels of Service when this development is built out. No specific off-site roadway improvements are recommended to accommodate this development or mitigate its impact. Also, the existing parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of this building are more than adequate to meet the peak parking demands of the proposed racing Center. Sincerely, CEO PROsc , 0AGINee O Howard S. Stein, P.E. 7;fr, Transportation Engineer OREGON v '9 2 qH 19, � '��'\ R0 SCOT'S S RENEW DATE /DD ' Exhibit `H' SF4 NG . U 1 m.„... A :v. W, R ( 1/ 0 usE all/LP/11G '0 Exhibit `I' AFFIDAVIT OF MAIL,..G/POSTING NEIGHBORH6./D MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF TIGARD A COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME PROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE, TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT & COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: � r I, I�U , being duly sworn, depose and say that on the (? day of Cc coo DQnr 20 0 1- , I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the ttached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at(or near) A Zo S 5 (!u vrc.ke r the +-, -1---, ,,rd 1 o(. , 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 /✓)A r i 5 IY4t I-, 7-7-9.0 ..7.../ , with postage prepaid thereon. zI Signature (I the presence of a Notary Public) POSTING: I, 0 M N,P �j , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed Sff be I:p'►'c.,f v cJ affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or ta?c lot(s) currently registered) 8 2 O c S Go L---u v1 Zf k ✓ S)-. , r' a�cl c)12, and did on the I s day of Gc+o1"›e,.� , 20 Oa- personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a S;k Dt✓atotm.c,-.f Rw�7 application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. /" The sign was posted at �ct1 e 4 s def.Ja(k, 820 5 cc,,J t'+L. r ke✓ si—. (state location you posted notice on property) Signature (In he presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF 0+--E- Cr1,\ ) County of k_) ' Lf\c J ) Ss. YI-- Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ck day of .e.,0_i,-12}e4(---- , 20 0 ? .. v OFFICIAL SEAL ''t'''.; DIANE M JELDERKS 4°'' ' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON / '" COMMISSION NO.326578 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 /,a,t/,CiC ,e NOTARY PUBL F OREGON My Commission xpires: (� c" 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): h:Uogin\patty\masters\aftidavit of maaing-posting neighborhood meeting doc NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE Land use application for property at 8205 SW Hunziker St. The lessee of the property at 8205 SW Hunziker Street, Mr. Yun S. Hong, intends to apply for Site Development Review (SDR) approval for his proposal to develop an indoor racing center at this site. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for SDR approval, Mr. Hong would like to discuss the proposal with the surrounding property owners and residents, and any other interested citizens. You are invited to attend an informational meeting on: TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2002 7:00 P.M. TIGARD FIRE STATION -- COMMUNITY ROOM * 8935 SW BURHAM STREET, TIGARD *The door is on the right hand side of the building as you are facing the building. Explanation Mr. Hong intends to develop a "SyKart Indoor Racing Center", similar to one he has operated in Tukwila, Washington for the last three years, at this site. The racing center and related offices and conference rooms will be entirely within the existing building. The racecars are actually little go-karts, outfitted with catalytic converters and mufflers. The proposed SyKart Indoor Racing Center will bring a fun, wholesome, recreational and training activity to Tigard, and make great use of an old industrial building. The reason for the proposed SDR application is that the change in the use of the building from manufacturing or warehouse to indoor recreation triggers a review of the entire 4.2-acre site for compliance with the zoning regulations. Before submitting the SDR application to the City of Tigard, Mr. Hong is required by the City to hold a neighborhood meeting to explain the proposal to interested citizens and solicit their comments. (Please note that this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City.) If you have any questions, please come to the informational meeting, or contact me at the phone number, mailing address, e-mail address, or fax number listed below. CONTACT: Ed Murphy, Planning Consultant, Ed Murphy & Associates ADDRESS: 9875 SW Murdock St., Tigard, OR 97224 PHONE NUMBER: 503.624.4625 FAX NUMBER: 503.968.1674 E-MAIL: ejmurphy(a�aol.com CITY of TIGARD GEGGRAPNIG iNEORMATiGN SYSTEM ,:\> 111, __9„a_._ __ __ AREA NOTIFIED (500') — GARDEN PL co r :111111.111111 FOR: Ed Murphy ■ s :111::: --___ RE: 8205 SW Hunziker ...41:� x>trewn �� - ■ (2s i o i Be, 200 •per .�� 1 �� Krr� ► nueessn '�� �--- oerlu irmantw x■rcwtn j Property owner information Ofr. .�� mum* ° ���` I is valid for 3 months from ' � the date printed on this map. 111111114211 ' Ili 7.i 2 ,,,,b, , "------/-zyz.z...... ` xeeom�. ,c)/(76...,... 4: minnow killintlell m . .,111‘ x 'm mn N ' 0 200 400 600 Rest 1'=41614,1 iCity of Tigard I I Information on this map Is for general location only and should be venfied with the Development Services Division13125 SW Mall Blvd Tgard.OR 97223 (503)639-4171 http I/www ct Tgard Of us Community Development Plot date:Sep 30,2002;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR Jack Biethan 11023 SW Summerfield Drive, #4 Tigard, OR 97224 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Dieter Jacobs 7775 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Q.QC ]GARD - EASd COMTTEE (i:\curpin\sel VERY A dress Lauets reed Sheets'"' Use template tor 5161 2S 101 BC-00101 2S 101 BC-03000 KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC ROBERTS DAVID 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD 12361 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 1018C-02202 2S 101 BC-02800 LEACH DOUGLAS SEVERSON JAMES A&ROBIN 0 8430 SW HUNZIKER RD STE 200 29404 SW HEATER RD PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S101 BC-02300 2S10100-00700 MCCARTHY KELLY E&JANICE L SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L 13705 SW FARMINGTON RD PO BOX 930 BEAVERTON,OR 97005 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 2S 101 BC-01801 2S 101 BC-02500 MILLER LORI M S H GE WESTERN PROPERTIES L 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD PO B 30 TIGARD,OR 97223 SONVI E,OR 97070 2S 101 BC-03100 101 BD-0030 NGUYEN VUONG P& TI • •D Y OF VO PHAN 131 HALL 12387 SW KNOLL DR T ARD, •' 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-01100 2S101 BC-00201 NITSOS STEVE TOM& WESTEC AMERICA INC BETTY MAXINE 8255 SW HUNZIKER 8465 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BD-00300 2S101 BC-02900 PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING GROUP IN WESTPHAL EDGAR A&PATRICE M 208 E WOODLAWN RD 1811 NW 93RD PL STE#200 PORTLAND,OR 97229 CHARLOTTE,NC 27217 2S 101 BC-00301 2S 101 BC-00103 REED WILLIAM C WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC THE PO BOX 12564 PO BOX 1195 PORTLAND,OR 97212 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2S 101 BC-03200 2S 101 BC-01200 REID CHARLES 0& WILDER GEORGE C&LUCETTE.A RUTH A 8445 SW HUNZIKER ST 12435 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-02201 25101 BC-01500 ROACH MICHAEL A AND PAMELA S WILLIAMS PORTUS W AND SARAH T 956 WEST POINT RD 12390 SW KNOLL DR LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 TIGARD,OR 97223 AVERY® Address Labels Laser 59617M ...a..a41111J ALG M lava )C-02100 2S 101 BC-01900 ,BAND JOHN D II&EDNA N DELAO ALICIA& ,260 SW HUNZIKER RD DELAO SANTA CECILIA& TIGARD,OR 97223 GARCIA ERNESTO 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 B C-01800 2S 101 BD-00301 BEAUDOIN MICHAEL E& EAST SIDE VAN&STORAGE INC DONNA R 4836 SE POWELL BLVD 12490 SW KNOLL DR PORTLAND,OR 97206 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 25101 BB-01500 2S101BC-02200. CALWEST INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LLC HHO&B ASSOCIATES LLC BY DELOITTE&TOUCHE LLP BY H&A CONSTRUCTION CO 2235 FARADAY AVE STE 0 PO BOX 23755 CARLSBAD,CA 92008 TIGARD,OR 97281 101 BB-01400 2S 101 BC-02501 CAL EST INDU -IAL HOLDINGS LLC HUTTIG INC BY DEL • &TOUCHE LLP 14500 SOUTH OUTER 40 RD 2235 •' • ••Y AVE STE 0 CHESTERFIELD,MO 63017 •RLSBAD,C• 92008 2S101 BC-00400 2S 101 BC-00500 CARASOF ALEX S&LILIYA V KIM KYONG SUK 12330 SW KNOLL DR 12300 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-01000 2S 101BC-02401 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KING JAMES F 13855 SW PACIFIC HWY 12650 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 01 BC-0080 2S 101 BC-02700 CLIC ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KING JAMES F 1385 W CIFIC HWY PO BOX 23819 T ARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-00900 2S 101 BC-03300 CLICKENER ROBERT R&PATRICIA A KISH ROBERT J/SUSAN C 13855 SW PACIFIC HWY 7510 SW ASHFORD ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 2S 101 BC-01600 2S 101 BC-00100 DALTON LOIS KNEZ JOHN S SR&JEANNE M 12420 SW KNOLL DR 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-01700 2S 101 BC-00200 DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE& KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC DEFOE CHARLES E JR 8185 SW HUNZIKER ST STE A 12455 SW 68TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5961Tn1 SIGN-IN SHEET SyKart SDR Proposal Neighborhood Meeting October 14, 2002 NAME ADDRESS PHONE ( 47/. 77G/1 Zi frrje,A' // S!�7P"/G'//f yrfO� *--)2Z6 .L-577/f (1- 47% 11 -5—.5 (1/kit4 505 ( /44/tviVc, Cf- 3 -6 9 -__c--s- ( � 1 0 LeViA 1 �. .5t) a.,eor//Ai Sger(,/ ,(4'1.i .V.446 edmurphy&associates/hong/sdmeighbormtg/sign-in/10/14102 MINUTES SyKart Zone Change Proposal Neighborhood Meeting October 15, 2002 The meeting started at 7:00 P.M. at the Fire Station on Burham St. One property owner, Mr. George Wilder, attended. Representing the applicant were Yun Hong, along with one of his employees, Luke Vasquez and his planning consultant, Ed Murphy and his site designer, Mark Ferris of Landynamics. Summary Mr. Wilder was enthusiastic about the proposed indoor racing center,as he races cars himself. He had no concerns about the noise,as his home is not adjacent to the site and he does not expect that he would even be able to hear the cars. Mr. Wilder's primary concern was the potential of vandalism to his truck, which he parks in his driveway. It's a large white panel truck, and he is concerned that vandals may spray paint the sides. There was discussion about the types of people that are attracted to this type of facility, and whether increased vandalism in the neighborhood was a likely impact of the racing center. Mr. Hong explained that they have had no vandalism at his facility in Tukwila, either to his building or to any of the adjacent buildings. He also explained that racing is quite expensive, that there is really nothing else to do at the site, and it would not be the type of place where young people would hang out. Mr. Wilder expressed his support for the project. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:00 P.M. edmu phy&associates/hong/neighbormtg/minutes'10/15/02 1 • lek Al. 41 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development ShapingA Better Community LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 4/25/2003 FILE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00018 Type II Land Use Application VARIANCE (VAR) 2002-00048 VARIANCE (VAR) 2002-00049 FILE TITLE: SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER APPLICANT: Yun S. Hong OWNER: Knez Realty Group LLC 17450 West Valley Highway Attn: John Knez Jr. Tukwila, WA 98188-5511 8185 SW Hunziker Street, Suite A Tigard, OR 97223 APPLICANT'S Ed Murphy & Associates REP. 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to use an existing industrial building within the I-P zoning district for an indoor 90-kart racing center. Two Variances have also been requested. The first variance is to reduce the minimum required off-street vehicle parking spaces and the second is to reduce the minimum required buffering and screening requirements next to residential uses. LOCATION: 8205 SW Hunziker Street; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 200. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, CRITERIA: 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.795 and 18.810. CIT AREA: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I ® TYPE II ❑ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV DATE COMMENTS WERE SENT: DECEMBER 30, 2002 DATE COMMENTS ARE DUE: JANUARY 13, 2003 HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM ❑PLANNING COMMISSION (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM ❑1 CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM ® STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) DATE OF DECISION: FEBRUARY 6, 2003 COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION ® VICINITY MAP ® LANDSCAPING PLAN IMPACT STUDY ® SITE PLAN I I WETLANDS REPORT Ii TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ® NARRATIVE I I TREE PLAN ® OTHER: MISCELLANEOUS STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheideqqer, Assistant Planner (503) 639-4171, Ext. 2437 i4^1i� CITY OF TIGARD December 27, 2002 OREGON Ed Murphy & Associates Attn: Ed Murphy 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97224 RE: Notice of Complete Application Submittal SDR2002-00018/SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER Dear Mr. Murphy: The City has received the information necessary to begin the review of your Site Development application. Staff has, therefore, deemed your application submittal as complete on 12/26/2002 and will begin the review process. The estimated time for rendering a decision from the date an application is deemed as complete is 6-8 weeks. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 503-639-4171 , extension 2437. Sincerely, t It �Y` L -- Mathew Scheidegger Assistant Planner is\curpin\mathew\sdr\SDR2002-0001 e.acc c: SDR2002-00018 Land use file Yun S. Hong 17450 West Valley Highway Tukwila, WA 98188-5511 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD(503) 684-2772 saloN DNEflI4MOD lNiOI ,I,VDI'IddV ilild CITY OF T1A RD PRE-APPLICATION COMMENCE NOTES m -mm t nt Shaping fi Better Community Meetin g or Six (6) Months) NON-RESIDENTIAL 7o j l o� APPLICANT: Yu>s S. Uo►.G AGENT: Ep Phone: ( :) Lt as- aft - y3 Phone: (ses) (,ay- PROPERTY LOCATION: S Dos ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: Su) k-1ua3∎ R TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): aS 1Ot 13C- 00 a on NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: i REaaE ,s S Jces5u `5 TE DEME,iz ec\jtEW) AciAu +rr,en\- PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: o(,pra-Fe a Lr;,.-i— c _'c6,`; ,A Or\ 4,S' QC re t_.); n +�F Z L �n �Avpt; c4. Currer+ly In rev; cor a r•e36,na allo.., COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: L91-4 Ir u.s cgal ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: 1— L CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM(C.I.T.)AREA: EAs1 IONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18. 530 ) MINIMUM LOT SIZE: NoK sq. ft. Average Min. lot width:SO ft. Max. building height: `-(S ft. Setbacks: Front SO ft. Side 0/so ft. Rear (3/'56 ft. Corner -)0 ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: gs % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: IS %. I'. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S), AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section PRE-APP. NOTES ROUTING SLIP 11 Initial after ■iewiny and route to the next person on the list Dick Bewersdorff Brad Kilby Morgan Tracy t/ Matt Scheidegger Julia Hajduk Sherman Casper PLEASE RETURN TO PATTY TO FILE I J 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. I I IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050] As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.7651 Minimum number of accesses: I 1 Minimum access width: *Sel . Minimum pavement width: 41` 2y ` All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: [1 WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.105.0301 WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7301 ➢ STREETS: feet from the centerline of > LOWER INTENSITY ONES: feet, along the site's boundary. > FLAG LOT: 10-F OT SIDE YARD SETBACK. ❑ SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS IR er to Code Section 18.730.010.BJ BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: Y A maximum building floor ea to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; Y All actual building setba s will be at least half ('A) of the building's height; and Y The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. I J BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 183451 In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 NON Residential Application/Planning Division Section The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS applicable to your proposal area are: feet along north boundary. — feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. Qs'. o' feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: Ljcs-r I LANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.7051 STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7551 Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Lenny Hing is the contact person and can be reached at (503) 625-6177. PARKING [Refer to Code Section 18.765.040) VA REQUIRED arkin for this t e of use: es,A SCE ? parking type SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: P. Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. HANDICAPPED PARKING: All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. y 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. Q LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.765.0801 Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section I I BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Section 18.7651 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 I SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.715) 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. I I STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.715.080.C) When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. ( ,( CLEANWATER SERVICES(CWS)BUFFER STANDARDS (Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 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: TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION &ORDER 96-44 SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTH OF VEGETATED TO SENSITIVE AREA4 CORRIDOR PER SIDE5 ♦ Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 15 feet 10 to <50 acres >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 >50 to <100 acres 50 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure ♦ Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting ♦ Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in • Natural lakes and ponds <25%slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine' 4Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds,whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. 5Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 6The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet,if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 NON Residential Application/Planning Division Section Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the CWS Design and Construction Standards. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. 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. SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7801 SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.C.) A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: �1 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_ MITIGATION (Refer to Code Section 18390.060.11 REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 NON Residential Application/Planning Division Section ➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: •► 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. 17i CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 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. WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT (Refer to Code Section 18.791.030] The WATER RESOURCES (WR) OVERLAY DISTRICT implements the policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is intended to resolve conflicts between development and conservation of significant wetlands, streams and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifically, this chapter allows reasonable economic use of property while establishing clear and objective standards to: protect significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designated riparian corridors; maintain and enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; preserve native plant cover; minimize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; and conserve scenic, recreational and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the "safe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provisions require that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualatin River, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Maior Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow less than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). ➢ Major streams in Tigard include FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIBUTARY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigard include Summer Creek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain short tributaries of the Tualatin River. Riparian Setback Area: This AREA IS MEASURED HORIZONTALLY FROM AND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP-OF-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The riparian setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section ➢ The standard TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. ➢ The MAJOR STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. ➢ ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no riparian setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Cleanwater Services (CWS) standards adopted and administered by the City of Tigard. RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCTIONS [Refer to Code Section 18.797.1001 The DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFIC REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJOR STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK BY AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or impervious surfaces otherwise prohibited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resources is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in preserved portions of the riparian setback area. Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantially disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on the Vegetation Study required by Section 18.797.100 that demonstrates all of the following: ➢ Native plant species currently cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; ➢ The tree canopy currently covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been removed from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; ➢ That vegetation was not removed contrary to the provisions of Section 18.797.100 regulating removal of native plant species; • That there will be no infringement into the 100-year floodplain; and The average slope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Meter to Code Section 18.810.0601 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2% TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the fMinimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. CODE CHAPTERS 18.330(Conditional Use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) 18.340(Directors Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) _ 18.350(Planned Development) _ 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) _1G 18.780(Signs) _.i-/1 8.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) - 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) _18.370(Variances/Adjustments) 18.715(Density Computations) _Z 18.790(Tree Removal) - 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) .4L 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) r 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) - 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) - 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) _,Z 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recydi g Storage) 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 NON-Residential ApplicatiordPlanning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: :313- X�It ( - ecies onC-c ce�..or, hoc bp, CCMc\e4e IC' 44W.ecrrk •C'ct)oea‘S r 4 0.A /• t~,P4 yetr•k's"� ( Jor�, Qv\c.e 1S (`ectUkrG ■4r`'gnc waukQ -bp kCncissecies ( c cc t ct _ Bl),, C1 1-\% 10G4710" 's hoy.—CAc,csop,1(\r. c C21-44nrl-1,,(Ina .)\ Ci t•eQ Vr'e CariOanca ''CO C 14(. Its O O 1 AR.K.;nC J Stu iw OKI so S-ku b S 2re,Q pQr t rn ck t t-ecnnr}v_d ah,d cll-a CLP A -An -,-Le-Ti rl t rito00 1 o� cr•4tir4 0cc;ce 3•a k000 ;S Car MCA, col OCR c-e PROCEDURE 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 4:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 81/2' x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. 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 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard jt�r�w� s cep A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to site planning that should apply o 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 staffrelative 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: QRa c t' L'R L� CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-1297 E-MAIL (staffs first name) ci.tigard.or.us TITLE 18(CITY Of TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNET ADDRESS: www.ci.tigard.Or.us H:Ipattylrnasters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 1-Nov-2001 (Engineering section:preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section CITY OF TIGARD LAND USE APPLICATION CHECKLIST Please read this form carefully in conjunction with the notes provided to you at the pre-application conference. This checklist identifies what is required for submittal of a complete land use application. Once an application is deemed complete by Community Development staff, a decision may be issued within 6-8 weeks. If you have additional questions after reviewing all of the information provided to you, please contact the staff person named below at the City of Tigard Planning Division, 503.6394171. Staff: azr,o k.t. Li Date: 6(1 ic 2_ 1. BASIC INFORMATION Please refer to the"Land use applications basic submittal requirements"checklist for the basic submittal requirements. 2. SPECIAL STUDIES AND REPORTS Because of the nature of your project and/or the site you propose to develop, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL STUDIES WILL BE REQUIRED. These studies must be prepared by certified professionals with experience in the appropriate field: t" Arborist Report/Tree Assessment ❑ Local Streets Traffic Study ❑ Wetlands/Stream Corridor Delineation and Report ❑ Habitat Area Evaluation ❑ Geotechnical Report ❑ Geotechnical Report must address liquefaction potential and soil bearing capacity Other N(1;.€) QAe_Nt. ci 3. PREPARING PLANS AND MAPS Plans and maps should be prepared at an engineering scale (1" = 10/20/50/100/200') and include a north arrow, legend and date. The same scale should be used for all your plans. Where possible the City prefers the use of a scale that allows a site plan or subdivision plat to be shown on a single sheet. Architectural drawings may be prepared at an architectural scale. One copy of each plan must be submitted in photo-ready 8%z x 11 format. THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR EACH TYPE OF PLAN (If the plans you submit do not include all of the information requested because you feel it is not applicable, please indicate this and provide a brief explanation). Vicinity Map Showing the location of the site in relation to: • Adjacent properties ❑ • Surrounding street system including nearby intersections ❑ • Pedestrian ways and bikeways ❑ • Transit stops ❑ • Utility access ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 1 of 4 h:lpattylmasterslcheddist.doc (UPDATED: 26-Jun-02) Existing Conditions Map • Parcel boundaries, dimensions and gross area ❑ Contour lines(2'intervals for 0-10%slopes or 5'for slopes >10%) ❑ Drainage patterns and courses on the site and on adjacent lands ❑ • Potential natural hazard areas including: • Floodplain areas ❑ ♦ Areas having a high seasonal water table within 24"of the surface for three or more weeks of the year ❑ • Slopes in excess of 25% ❑ ♦ Unstable ground ❑ ♦ Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ ♦ Areas having severely weak foundation soils ❑ ♦ Locations of resource areas including: • Wildlife habitat areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan ❑ • Wetlands ❑ Other site features: ♦ Rock outcroppings ❑ • Trees with?6"caliper measured 4'from ground level ❑ Location and type of noise sources ❑ Locations of existing structures and their uses ❑ Locations of existing utilities and easements ❑ • Locations of existing dedicated right-of-ways ❑ Locations of driveways on adjacent properties and across the street ❑ Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map The proposed name of the subdivision ❑ Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets ❑ Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner,developer,engineer surveyor and designer(as applicable) ❑ • Scale, north arrow and date ❑ Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided Names of adjacent subdivisions or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of un-subdivided land ❑ Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at 2'intervals for 0-10%grades and 5'intervals for grades greater than 10% ❑ The purpose, location, type and size of all of the following(within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): • Public and private right-of-ways and easements ❑ ♦ Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ ♦ Domestic water mains including fire hydrants ❑ • Major power telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ • Watercourses ❑ • Deed reservations for parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ ♦ The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level ❑ ♦ The location of all structures and the present uses of the structures,and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting ❑ • Supplemental information including: ♦ Proposed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ ♦ A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements ❑ • Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, wetlands and marsh areas • The proposed lot configurations, lot sizes and dimensions, and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots ❑ • If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application materials ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 2 of 4 h:lpatty\masterslchecklist.doc (UPDATED: 26-Jun-02) • Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan The owner of the subject parcel ❑ The owner's authorized agent ❑ The map scale, north arrow and date ❑ Proposed property lines ❑ Description of parcel location and boundaries ❑ Contour lines (2' intervals for slopes 0-10% or 5'for slopes >10%) ❑ Location, width and names of streets, easements and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel ❑ Location of all permanent buildings on and within 25'of all property lines ❑ Location and width of all water courses ❑ Location of any trees with 6"or greater caliper at 4'above ground level ❑ All slopes greater than 25% ❑ Location of existing and proposed utilities and utility easements ❑ Any applicable deed restrictions ❑ Evidence that land partition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ Future street extension plan showing existing and potential street connections ❑ Site Development Plan The proposed site and surrounding properties ❑ Contour line intervals ❑ The locations, dimensions and proposed names of the following: • Existing and platted streets and other public ways ❑ ♦ Easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ • Proposed streets or other public ways and easements on the site ❑ • Alternative routes of dead-end or proposed streets that require future extensions ❑ The locations and dimensions of the following: • Entrances and exits on the site ❑ • Parking and circulation areas ❑ • Loading and service areas ❑ • Pedestrian and bicycle circulation ❑ • Outdoor common areas ❑ • Above ground utilities ❑ • Trash and recyclable material areas ❑ The locations, dimensions and setback distances of the following: • Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25'of the site ❑ • Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ ♦ Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ • Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ ♦ Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ Locations and type(s)of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques ❑ The locations of the following: • All areas to be landscaped ❑ • Mailboxes ❑ • Structures and their orientation ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 3 of 4 h:\patty\masters\checklist.doc (UPDATED: 26-Jun-02) Landscape Plan Location of trees to be removed ❑ Location, size and species of existing plant materials ❑ General location, size and species of proposed plan materials ❑ Landscape narrative that addresses: • Soil conditions and how plant selections were derived for them ❑ • Plans for soil treatment such as stockpiling the top soil ❑ • Erosion control measures that will be used ❑ Location and description of the irrigation system where applicable ❑ Location and size of fences, buffer areas and screening ❑ Location of terraces, decks, shelters,play areas,and common open spaces ❑ Public Improvements/Streets Plan Proposed right-of-way locations and widths ❑ A scaled cross-section of all proposed streets plus any reserve strips ❑ Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ Grading/Erosion Control Plan The locations and extent to which grading will take place ❑ Existing and proposed contour lines ❑ Slope ratios ❑ Utilities Plan Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ Plan of the proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the locations of valves and meter sizes ❑ Fire hydrants (existing and proposed) ❑ Proposed fire protection system ❑ Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ Location,width and direction of flow of all water courses and drainageways ❑ Location and estimated size of proposed storm drainage lines ❑ Where applicable,location and estimated size and dimensions of proposed water quality/detention facility ❑ Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees ❑ Program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal (Section 18.790.030) ❑ A protection program defining standards and methods to be used during and after construction ❑ Architectural Drawings Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures and their proposed use ❑ Elevation drawings for each elevation of the structure ❑ Sign Drawings Specify proposed location, size and height ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 4 of 4 h:lpattylmasterslcheddist.doc (UPDATED: 26-Jun-02) Oct 10,2002 Tigard Planning Commission Attn: Mathew Scheidegger 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,Oregon 97223 Re: Sykart Indoor Racing Center,8205 SW Hunsiker St. WCTM 2S101BC,Tax Lot 200 Dear Mr. Scheidegger, I would like to voice my concerns about the Sykart Indoor Racing Center being proposed to be located in a renovated warehouse on Hunziker St in Tigard I feel that the noise level of these Go-Carts would be obnoxious at the very least. This is a neighborhood of homes,apartments and light industrial business. We already have the steady hum of Hwy 217,the banging at Fought Steel Co. at times,and the intercom system of the car dealership at the corner of Hwy 99 and Hall. I cannot imagine what they could do to the warehouse building to COMPLETELY seal off the noise. Let alone the exhaust fumes coming from these carts. I do not feel that the City of Tigard should be changing the zoning code for this area just because this business wants to plant itself in the middle of town. I feel that this type of activity belongs on the outskirts of town,AWAY from residential areas and in areas already zoned for such activity. This is NOT what the city of Tigard needs,this will not improve the quality of our life,create many jobs—it sounds like it will just be a nuisance —that if it is allowed and noise problems are an issue that it will be difficult if not impossible to rectify or enforce rules. Bottom line,1 feel that the Planning Commission really needs to understand what these Go-Karts are like, listen to the noise level they produce,perhaps visit an existing facility to see how they deal with the noise issue,and look seriously at the location and really ask it this is what Tigard needs. you your considerati into this very serious issue. Cat y Murphy N \lA r 7675 SW Varns St. Tigard,Oregon 97223 a DATE: PLANS CHECK NO. Oct.17, 2002 PROJECT TITLE: COUNTYWIDE Un-named Project TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE WORKSHEET APPLICANT: Ed Murphy (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) MAILING ADDRESS: CITY/ZIP/PHONE: TAX MAP NO.: SITES NO.ADDRESS: 8205 SW Hunziker LAND USE CATEGORY RATE PER TRIP RESIDENTIAL $239.00 X BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL $ 60.00 OFFICE $220.00 Estimate INDUSTRIAL $230.00 INSTITUTIONAL $ 99.00 PA_YMENT METHOD: CASH/CHECK CREDIT BANCROFT(PROMISSORY NOTE) USE LAND CATEGORY DESCRIPTION OF USE WEEKDAY AVG. INSTITUTIONAL ONLY: DEFER TO OCCUPANCY 890 Video Arcade TRIP RATE 9.6 WEEKEND AVG.TRIP RATE BASIS: The applicant proposes converting 34,817 sq. ft. warehouse to an indoor go-kart race track CALCULATIONS: TIF = (( Week day Avg. Trips X T.G.S.F.) - credit) X Rate Per Trip $9,855 = (( 9.6 X 34.817 ) - ( 4.88 X 34.817 )) X $60 Transit Amt. = Projected Trip Rate X $18 $2,952 = 164 X $18 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION: 164 sue.FEE: $9,855 FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY ADDITIONAL NOTES: 169 trip credit applied for previous use (#150 Warehouse 4.88 trip rate) ROAD AMT. $6,903 TRANSIT AMT. $2,952 PREPARED BY: S.S. Casper I:TIFWKST.DOC (DST) EFF: 07-01-98 `-9-3 (U uv • PRE-APPLICATION ,,1,.4(�! CONFERENCE REQUEST CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Applicant: y(40 . .ficmcc Address: 17t(5O U,1esfi Ugl(e,f Phone:4125-251 •`/8413 Case No.: ' �z 'O°° City: Tu kt,ei(G, (.+)A Zip: qs (TX - 5 S[( Receipt No.: a ea 02 - 35 7 "2— Application Accepted By: Contact Person: fel 114 1-1✓p11_y Phone: S03"62Y" y(oz5 Date: llito L Property Owner/Deed Holder(s): Reall-I Group DATE OF PRE-APP.: 1 DNa Z f TIME OF PRE-APP.: (t; Address: 4NS� Sct) �(,(NZrk�,i Phone: 5G3 "l 20-(r1t-I2 PRE-APP. HELD WITH: /'L( City: 7-c"9a✓ri Q/S Zip: g7Zz3 Rev.7/1/2002 is\curpin\masters\revised\Pre-AppRequest.doc Property Address/Location(s): 5205 S W t-tuNZike r- REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS (Note: applications will not be accepted without the required submittal elements) Tax Map & Tax Lot#(s): ZS(D I gC- 002L D Zoning: (hdu S frtQ E Pre-Application Conf. Request Form 2 COPIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING: Site Size: `I.2 a C rC 5 Er Brief Description of the Proposal and PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE INFORMATION any o ldp like questions/issues that you would like to have staff research prior to the meeting. All of the information identified on this form are required to be submitted by the applicant and received by the Planning Division a Er Site Plan. The site plan must show the minimum of one (1) week prior to officially scheduling a proposed lots and/or building layouts pre-application conference date/time to allow staff ample time to drawn to scale. Also, show the location prepare for the meeting. of the subject property in relation to the nearest streets; and the locations of A pre-application conference can usually be scheduled within 1-2 driveways on the subject property and weeks of the Planning Division's receipt of the request for either across the street. Tuesday or Thursday mornings. Pre-application conferences are 12 The Proposed Uses. one (1) hour lonq and are typically held between the hours of 9:00-11:00 AM. E4- Topographic Information. Include Contour Lines if Possible. PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCES MUST BE SCHEDULED IN ❑ If the Pre-Application Conference is for a PERSON AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER FROM MONOPOLE project, the applicant must 8:00-4:00/MONDAY-FRIDAY. attach a copy of the letter and proof in the form of an affidavit of mailing, that IF MORE THAN 4 PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND THE the collocation protocol was completed PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IN YOUR GROUP, PLEASE (see Section 18.798.080 of the Tigard INFORM THE CITY IN ADVANCE SO THAT ALTERNATE ROOM Community Development Code). ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE a Filing Fee $200.00 GROUP. Pre-Apps (CD Meetings) October 2002 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Tuesday, October 01, 2002 8:00 8:30 9:00 Pre-app 9:30 10:00 Pre-app appt 10:30 11:00 Pre-app Ed Murphy 503-642-4625 SDR 8205 SW Hunziker 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 3:55PM Wednesday, September 18, 2002 ♦• ED MURPHY & ASSOCIATES Land Use Planning and Development Services September 18, 2002 City of Tigard Department of Community Development 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Pre-application Conference for proposed SDR Tax Lot 2S101 BC00200, 8205 SW Hunziker Street Dear Planning and Development Services Staff: On behalf of Mr. Yun Hong of Sykart Indoor Racing Center, I would like to schedule a pre- application meeting for as soon as possible to discuss SDR approval, with related variances or adjustments, for a proposed indoor racetrack on the above referenced parcel. The proposed use is an indoor racetrack for miniature racecars or go-carts, which would be classified as "Indoor Entertainment" in the Tigard Development Code. All activities will be inside of the existing industrial building. No additions to or expansions of the building or paving of any additional land area is proposed. In addition to SDR approval, we will be applying for the following adjustments or variances: 1. Parking. The number of required parking spaces for indoor recreation far exceeds what is necessary and appropriate for the use. 2. Setback. The northwest corner of the building is closer than the required 50' minimum setback from the property line of the adjoining residential properties. 3. Buffering and Screening. Level 'E' buffering and screening is required along the west property line, which would be very difficult to achieve. 4. Percent landscaping. It will be difficult to meet the standard that requires 25% of the site to be landscaped. Description of the proposal The existing building footprint is 31,740 square feet; however, a portion of the building is two- story, with 3077 square feet of offices on both floors, so the total gross area of the building is 34,777 square feet. The building and site were improved in 1977 under a previous tenant, Power Rents. At that time, a handicapped accessible walkway from SW Hunziker Street to the front door was installed, along with handicapped parking spaces, and handicapped restrooms on the ground 9875 SW Murdock St. Tigard, Oregon 97224 /Phone 503. 624.4625 /Cellular 503. 314.0677 /Fax 503. 968.1674 Hong—SyKart.Pre-application conference floor. The parking area is already paved and striped, and has mature landscaping. There is an existing sign structure at the entrance to the site on SW Hunziker Street which the applicant will use as a sign for the new business by just changing the sign faces. The north side of the main building is a large gravel parking or storage area. A small storage building is located towards the back (north) of the parcel. The applicant does not intend to use the area behind the main building, and it is not part of his lease agreement. The building is already connected to city sewer and water. Storm drainage is generally towards SW Hunziker Street, which is improved with curb, gutter and sidewalks. There are no sensitive lands that will be impacted by the proposed use, i.e. wetlands, steep slopes, floodplains, or wildlife habitats. Since this is an already developed parcel with an existing industrial building, it does not strictly meet all of the current city zoning and development standards. The applicant will make reasonable improvements to the site, but it would be impractical to bring the entire site up to current city standards. There are five issues that we would like to discuss in the pre-application conference, which are parking, buffering/screening, percent landscaping, noise and lighting. Parking Most of the square footage of the building will be devoted to the race track. The rest of the facility will be devoted to restrooms, an observation area for visitors, administrative offices, and a ticket sales and waiting area. The number of cars that can race at one time, normally ten race cars, limit the number of customers using the facility at any one time. The zoning code requires "indoor entertainment" to have 4.3 parking spaces per 1000 square feet of building space. The building is 34,817 sq. ft., including the second floor office space. At 4.3 spaces per 1000 sq. ft., a total of 150 required parking spaces would be required. More precisely counting the office areas in both the upper and lower floors as office space, which requires 2.7spaces/1000 sq. ft. instead of 4.3 spaces per 1000, would still result in 140 required parking spaces. (That is, 28,663 sq. ft. for the primary use at 4.3 spaces per 1000 sq. ft. = 123 parking spaces, plus 6154 sq. ft. as the secondary use at 2.7 spaces per 1000 sq. ft. = 17 parking spaces, for a total of 140). If the secondary use is figured at 90%, that reduces the required minimum number of parking spaces to 138 spaces. Aside from the 44 already marked parking spaces available, there are also 46 parking stalls on the same parcel which are available in the evenings and weekends, which are SyKart's busiest times. In addition, there is parking available in the adjoining parcels to the south, tax lots 2S1018BC00100 and 2S1018BC 00101, also owned by Knez Realty Group. On those parcels, edmurphy&associates/honglsdrpreapplet19 118/02 2 Hong—SyKart.Pre-application conference there are at least 30 parking stalls already marked and immediately adjoining the proposed SyKart Indoor Racing Center. Many organized groups arrive in vans or busses, which obviously require less parking than if everyone drove their own vehicles to the site. In addition, the site is directly accessible by TriMet, which has a bus stop in front of the property. There is more than ample parking available for the proposed use. The site currently has 44 marked parking spaces, including two handicapped parking spaces. Counting the 46 parking spaces available on the site in the evenings and weekends, there are 90 spaces available on the site, with another 30 available on the adjacent parcel. According to a traffic study completed by CTS Engineers, Inc. less than 30 parking stalls are adequate to serve the needs of the facility. Buffering and Screening The building is on a parcel currently zoned LI, and is next to a residential zone, R-4.5, and the homes that are in that zone. The zoning code would normally require new industrial land uses to use buffering and screening to protect the single family homes from any adverse effects of the industrial uses. According to Matrix 18.745.1, level "E' buffering would be required, which requires a 25-30'-wide landscaped buffer area, with a 5'-6'-high hedge, fence, berm or wall. Mr. Hong does not anticipate any activity on the west side of the building that would need to be buffered. That is, the applicant does not need that area for loading or outdoor storage, or for any outdoor activities. Further, there does not appear to be a practical way to buffer or screen the homes from the existing building on the parcel, for reasons: • The area to the west side of the building, the side facing the homes, is already paved to the property line, and there is an existing chainlink fence with slats along this property line. • The existing homes are at a much higher elevation (20' - 30' higher just to the lower side foundation of the homes. In addition to the topographical separation, the homes are about 200' away from the property line. The vertical and horizontal distance to the homes provide an adequate privacy and protection from any adverse visual or noise impacts. It would be futile to construct a 6'-high wall or fence, or a 5'-high, 25'-wide berm along the property line with the idea that this would provide any sort of screening. It would not block the neighbor's view of the building, or provide any additional privacy or protection beyond what they already experience. edmurphy&associates/hong/sdrpreapplet/9/18/02 3 Hong-SyKart.Pre-application conference Minimum landscaping The site does not meet the I-P minimum landscaping standard of 25%. Currently, 12% of the site is landscaped, most of which is the area behind the building in the northwest corner of the parcel. To meet the standard, an additional 23,784 square feet (over 1/2-acre) would have to be landscaped. The whole area in front of the building, as well as the area on both sides of the building, is already paved and used for parking for this building and the adjoining industrial buildings. An extensive area behind the building is also already paved or is in hard packed gravel. While there is some room on the north end of the parcel to install additional landscaping, it will be difficult to meet the 25% minimum landscaping requirement. Setback from residentially zoned properties The required minimum setback standard is 50' along the side abutting a residential zoning district. The actual setback of the building is 32.5' at the northwest corner of the building. Noise All activities will take place indoors. The doors on the west side of the building, the side facing the residences, will not be left open during operations. The fans for the building will all be on the opposite side, the east side, which abuts industrial uses. Further, there will be almost no truck traffic, as most of the users will arrive in automobiles or vans, not by large trucks. The noise from Hwy. 217 will most likely be louder to the neighbors than any noise they might hear from the racetrack. These are miniature go-carts, with catalytic converters and mufflers, and are not full size racecars. The walls of the building are concrete, which will stop most noise. Lighting All exterior lighting will be directed downward or otherwise shielded to protect the residential neighborhood from light interference. Questions for staff 1. What type of evidence will the city require showing that other parking is available within 300 feet of the property? And is it within 300' of the property, or 300' of the front door of the building? The Development Code (18.765.030.B.2.a) says it is the "primary site". 2. Why does the Code have two parking ratios for office uses, 2.7 and 3.9 spaces per 1000? Attachments: Attached please find two copies of the following: • The pre-application conference request form. edmurphy&associates/bong/sdrpreappleU4/18/02 4 Hong—SyKart.Pre-application conference ♦ A "marked-up" aerial photograph of the site, showing the existing building, driveways and parking; the pedestrian walkway; the adjacent residential properties; and the existing trees and other vegetation. ♦ A tax assessor's map showing the location and dimensions of the tax lot. ♦ A topographic map showing the contours and the locations of the adjoining homes. Thank-you for your time and interest. We look forward to discussing these and other issues with you at our pre-application conference. Si erely, I Ed Murphy Yun Hong, Sykart Mark Ferris, ASLA, LanDynamics edmurphy&associates/hung/sdrpreapplet/9/18/01 5 of KNOLL ACRES /�GEORGE RICHARDSON O.L.C. No .s . - asf ....a,. I CO Yw•zir aau • ,CS.t ANAti, O.L.0 No � � t NORTN LINE WtL 11AN G 301 �Y.. coat. I ?00 10' 103 600 vo 500 400 IN..CR:Y.m L2?ac 3.B2 ar .., o.Lc.■k a l.B7AC. I - 209AC. / 1 Y.L.C,�Y[f . i RIR R.I. oY.r0.0+ua •/ 1 a /.. Mg/93 . / li sc I` i':'.�4 / 700 . i. /• •1 / _ 2 + I u Z. I • i^ 74089 f !IC 1�I J H, , scz•rs , •.UrtA / IC.S•No.120291 • s.w• t �tt„ft ��— s ^_ KNO „�_ QUA l Y \ ,/! ° S tSt.L it {c'a "••S �� '• ..--.� GREEN WAY 1 4 r � 4 C•b �eo.., o i• r^ t>o.sz i:.tr,1 / 1 800 3000 1 Y` t ' 4 �c{rs y° I / 3 ' 13100 (•','..1 4', /1500 =st.t, I: ° Y d• : CO z�ao c' 2 1 /S m ! t (r 900 3300 !. -: m ss,.,s.t �)� �, , • _ M.af e t t o v 2 3200 1600 °A''' . �' I • 4 i w. I us.r SEE MAP •/ I J J Jo / I INITIAL PoIN jt TIGA:1%1 TERRAC ti .I 2S I 2AA C. / sa c°.s` 1 u - I' is \i,_________________"fa.,s t �° �s, ss,.,s, ^ i f 100 a 1 1000 1100 ` 1700 ts,,,s f= /.3%ac. a 1200 C tr J IGARD) 1\ Y S ^,'for r �.` - _ _ _ Tt �'� f�6 r • R] / ,f str�,�t _ N ,`sa 0 ° 1800 ..ss.rt _ astrter - -; ---- - ---- --I ▪ W / 0. fags / a. - 1801 ro.,, I to' tastYtrt z - 1 /.\ '4J fc, M L900 a� tip a z.- - I i I. o ~ '.1 \\\\ s i° ua r r.• R.-. I.,pa n. ' Yn•attt•'r ro.m lal Z � \\ `° ter � r�r� _ ?', zol . a 1., p--- o w l ,i -� t�\g `°s+�c� a° • i 4 _ 3 0 IC.5.2a,•a95) i= in tL 1 1/u ucyl \\ ! j ' ' • 104 I, 3 z �1 \\� �\ ..,. IArs w , , 1�• 0. Y 1 2202 CA Ra r by f° a ..1••.vi,, t ,o•O < S.W. .9B AC ro /co.sa t'•s ca ,”,1 , •�^ t• Y- ~ SGOFINS k ;~ / .",c• hays, f 11.I I rt 2 STREET V a °'3'.,, "_� .:.a 1 r t� I I d 1 A'a/is r 2200 �N"���s. 1 ! 1 w A 9 2300 /.09 Ac.• Zl�£�s �, ' ,a..c,src. O I I .2/AC. Z � stV 8„° "D R ' +n 2 201 a y,,' al. •o5 b,•t a /.OS AC. •si a :::'"fi:- °°'ss• e I ;' .. r as 23-74 ° 2100 t 1 2401 +o a "7=.s\ I,t i SEE MAP a \ c. 0.5.3896 y:*n Fss.. I25 I '2AD /• r 3.51 Ac. °" t \� as,• / �` J 1 , ,, / 1 x / a 1 253! °n `_f.,. D _ Exhibit `G' �� xts46 , .v ..z� OCS 0 Ce e "t xtss.T x1s19 ,.4;4;° 111 .1 'wegiav, r.. . .e._.. ._16;0,1 \ r, \ , .... :.. ... ;--.. . I o as 11 I p xn 11 dr ..___ .____;.._. . f ; x il .. : i es3.0 •F 7/ ,- ` X J 404. \ �� l . / /ic . _ 6.41 1 / . T';'.' - _ • 0 ‘ ,„.... I i! I�/ . '' ,/t J P Alit o 0 t PSJ' ( O x S . —!/ �� t PAVED 1S15X /litir 1 is .."7-____ ____,—- / -7, .czz , I...... _., __,_ -...• 5,..______/___i__________ (4)::: )/S ' x f I\,, `.,rte [ .� ) ) L 1 , ( isXS t1 4119 \ 'i x x1ss.7 )410:1;''' • OP . 0 74' 1 . .0>c. ..‘. ,,___,- . 0) Ittre., 4P' ... .,,,<-- X064.6 / J \ , Y I I ' . f • , ,,,• AIM r ED 4 .4. •-.,,t,-., - -is* • 4.`•.`" ;I J:1%. '''iiiiiti.lerrigk-: • II"': . •4',...i* "! i - , -• ., .P......41,......1.4.44 4.=. , ,,HI ip,. • - „;... _ . .. - 31110ailawasii-. II) .. ' - 41P'' Mr , 4 S.W. Hall V•lvd. ...".„ 'N •••1, 4 Id ... . .... , .- . • ; 1 ir . i len ; 11 -• . r . li i I ' '. •l' ' #1. 4. , ' 1 ' V. 2,.-1.‘ rt • IN. 10 it, # 4. . ...' lib 4) i;':• : . ,,, • '. '.... ... 4 ,, ''.■ Lir r .• -.' . ,' • . ',•( • p alp 1,, 4 4' ' .14 . , ,,, ,.,_ I "PV.111111111.11t ' ., ' 0 it . ., - Ir ``'. ...,. . .• • • el :"g bi, . , .11 A : 401. . . • . , . . . . ‘,...•--. ik ...lo .. •.,. ..'.. . t•• 4 ip/ ts, , ., 4 Or` * . . ..... - ... i ••..0.... 411" 14 . 111111 0• 7.4 _ .. . _ .o„,., -• . ' 4. 1, #4. .. .......... „... • ••••%,........ . 1 , ' • . . , . • , . , .. . tiLt. .v ,,,, de . . s !,%400. , . ., . . ,.... _ • ,. . . , ...... ,... 0.0 . •40. • ,„•, . ., •:.„ , .:, „ • , oil • T", 4 1,..,. IP . s'...40 4,1:.A. .1 //if . . .ov. • ,,,,,,,, . . . ,,,,„... --.) it.....<r14.•••-..,,,,. , rl e . • ' • . . .‘ e. ,.. ,. ...„ •_ ,.., . i .... , . ... ',0 ...... . IA • , , • ‘ 4:...t.• , . .,.. _ ..4.•- . . . • • - , . • . 4. . /41 / • .. ..„ ri .„,1.. ..„ , ,010, r 4 . . , -44ef ,,) . .: . . _ ie . .. .■ ■ . , ' l!,1,V ftb ;'' so i 4.: /• ,.%'fr n*. r 4 '■ 0 . 4..., _......--- 12, . . . .. e• ' ...% „,,.. lc"), ..t ' ' ' .4r.' A . , ... . . , , 4 /.. . i ,..: i 410110 ...,, • ,.. 4/4p • V . ,• ' 41 . . ,. • • ' .' '4''44• - ..." • - ‘ ' , '., • .. Of !,•,Sk., ' .•' • P itt .CO 4, '- ' *' . • . :.. -r--, .. . a.. .. if' z- ; r, ..• , ..,R• . , .. -.., / . . . (... , . . _. 4 __:_. • ' frft/V ib..,-.- . . / • r,....._ ---- (7) ...,14/Go iri, ,, • a _< triti. . / , . . 2. /_----"------- , . ' / i, .1 • ' A -I ^ ft g i , iftkiii Z 4. , t -It. X- 3 0 < . s . a . . . ..' 11.4 ''•`-41...# g_.°fl .k • 4.. .,.., , Cn A '', ..' ,T.•, ,;'• 4. ... 7- ■ .1 m 0. ,. , E --- i e//j '-•-.' . ,'', ' 7 1 -2 Pl 6 i a 1 k" . e_dia6 -; • II, 4 - F, i "4 2 m . . 0 :„.___ -r;...,_ 2 6°41-iv--4.-674,--,-6„, ., ._------- i; I r D z• • a 1 .••,•0' _ . 1 ...,, ; r 4 I i 1 - a ,V 0 =„,-• 4, . ccl un Ti- . 0,,f. •.•. i / CO M • C x 1 gi. .,.., , c!, . .• - . .1 , 5 5 N .4"■,./ I • ca co g' t • f . • I A - it '•*t I 4 .41 . - - • (4 - '411'' 0 - ' /v r .--- II .• %a', ; •1 - • /4 ...V`• •. (II . • 4v4Iff.i.:'':4 4";00ie_.,,., , -r. . x...„,... 4, I i , ''''''. , ■ I Xi. ' ,4 4. •, 1"e:. .4,:t44.46k. . , j i ''. ; 1 %".4.. 0 I - ' • / Me • ' t , t r ' ' I ' ,:,..,:. ....„. ... f - ' 'L- 'Y. 4. °I . .• ...y,, ,r.,.. , o4pP . .41 •;',. 1.PN, S. 4 ir 1 1 P • ..-io..' 6.10 i 14 ' • •, 10:0 • ..i. ...e.-, . Ilk 4--,..Wr . il■ • * a . l' .1k. ',...• 1 . . 114 . • . r A •IA il 4 L4 0 4 A 0 • . 't1" :1., ' h.-.. . . 4 .40111 it ' • 1 • • .4 , M f lc! - • i•w' 4., •. ' • 1 ) .t: '.• .'-' 4,- ''' ' • . ., . ... , ,t4, •, .,.. • 'l'‘, ',.. • A .1%, .. X • ; ' .. A t•„ •, 4 ' ' al- ' • 4 "It lay g. ,, ' • ‘ ' 7- 1 • .."0 1 4.1 ...._4L4- .r4 • , ' A ,A * .• , •N "'rP.14:41 4.0 " 4 •1 . CT • . b 1.,b Allt AP 4 j ' .4 i 'VP 1..' . • , . fir *1 • 1 .' 2. .- , ,4 I •-•• / " •.. -. g ".1'' ' r • it %.9 N) • .. , 4•••e ; , ,III. / ■ 1 . . ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS Mar 10 03 03: 50p Mur 50" S81674 P 1 • .•. D MURPHY & ASSOCIATES 1r i. Land Use Nunninq nu l fl t'elopinettl Services FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO To: City of Tigard ATTN: Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager Matt Scheidegger, Assistant Planner FAx#: 503-684-7297 DATE: 3/11/03 RE: SyKart Indoor Racing Center, Buffering MESSAGE: Hi Dick and Matt. This memo concerns the required buffer area along the west property line of the proposed racing center. The SDR decision issued on 2/27/03 requires an 18-25 foot buffer along this property line. We had proposed an 8-15 foot buffer in our SDR application. Under our proposal, there would have been a 2300 square foot buffer area; under the City's requirement, there would be a 4300 square foot buffer area. We reviewed the site again in detail, and feel there are some practical concerns with trying to create a buffer that is 18'-wide on one end and 25'- wide on the other. Considering the drainage along the base of the retaining wall, the slope of the concrete pavement away from the building, the potential for occasional vehicular access around the building, and the existing seams or joints in the concrete, we have determined that an 11.5'-wide to 34'-wide buffer would be a much more sensible option. The resulting buffer area would be 4550 square feet. Section 18.745.050 of the Development Code gives the Director the authority to approve an alternative to the buffer area landscaping and screening standards, provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening. We believe the new proposal would result in at least the same degree of buffering and what the City required. We would like to present detailed plan to you for your consideration and approval, but we wanted to determine if you were open to discussion on this point. 4:'... /Phone 503. 624-4625 "'Fax 503.968.1674 Rejmurphy @aol.com 50 '681674 p. 2 Mar 10 03 03: 50p M u . . •, , .,,:, , . J . '' . . I '-' .,' I ,.. i I , i ,,,IN 0. , , ,,..,,,..,,,, . ' ... , "..1.- - '11 .•. T tic.4 1 ,r A *, . V 4 i4. . ,,A k%.1',.-.‘.•",.:•.,,4:'4`,...•4.'., . ,.a,2 . .,, '• ,, ,.i , fv.... .i1lV1 t.`.4,;•L."! •..•„•t 6 11•c:•,7.T'i•,',1 V.‘, ••., t ',,.v"%.,fr..-t.,•N'I1tW,0i+,.o.k...'4A41a..,si:l",,l,,3t4a4;,:•:A•,1,i■‘fIf.f.;tk0...,t ti.:1„‘;1'1,.%1.`.5 2%v'"'a 4I1i.g4,1,•Aet0.;,r.1'1--i1f'i,',.,„,,, ,a .)14 ,1,,i) ' " 7., -:0,..111.1.7,i.7.,,,,,,•ma--,,,,,L,-04;,,,rig- / 0..,,,rir owlet. .14 1, '.- -.‘" ,.,... tow, •,,,,,,,, 40 „,„tc•,••••—t, • . • 0. . ..,„..,, iit.„.•,--,.,• •jiff • la„,, 0,:„ ,,, „,4• k N , kt ,PS.,. o... '•'...A..... . 41i ,,'It'Y..,'.."!t',, ;.!‘ ..4•I‘I,::,',$ '' j. .,.., '-. liiiiip'':i!.::%1*.iS ;;X";i •••14117' 1''V,1,,k1:'''. ' 413, , .ks.,.. lt,,', , 1• . i‘.. •• . ,• .•t'''. ,1:.,'''',,,A.,1'••'I:",..,,,VIV.0 , , ,••,„,•3/4r. • •„.4, .. ..•;,..4;to' &• 14,,,• ••••. .,f•• , ,•,. • •-.,.• ',,t•,,,,',•••:4 .. 'ts,•=.• N. ..k. Arrel,,,, .,,.),..„- ,,!,L.i.;,,...tth 04.,..4,1 ,,, .,■4,.;,',:vit..•41( :I'.;00 41444`4,,y4r •:1,.•111,..41,:k•n• . 1 " V‘ ..F•••• -1' ''a '• ‘ ' '''- :`• 4:'k•''',4,''' )0•4plic„ •. 0-VAl. ., •.c:.4)''' ' ■,: .ri“....4,1 •Ig,„*VIcs.i.LtAkts.V.4.,4iirfwAttiA, ,, .,;41,,•:10. i eg,,.0 V.•,1, 4 ,i4*-'41,40, . ' i'l4S)vt'ilf..41'',1.04' '.'t.;'''..''''#''.1...4';4..a.f.k.i..0'.141141')1 . ',.. ,','.',' ',,,..... ,Z•z?..,A;NI c',.41$04',..'17Nkt:.''''.g.iti.o..°4.'''''''14,?.....Mli...."Vf'414149,, .,-,F,,;,.*p 3516-1 ite,k4:,','''.-, ,!•. '.:,'', .-0;‘,..'),i.,, , tp.••,,, s'4 '',•••,'!). ,Varsq_1,7•11i,•,;,;•:, ., ',0:,'s;', ',.,i',,:1•,:t4:1!:',.•:,.01„''..1 tv,iltik,4.:44'4,,i'''i :10)4, NIX';)••••••,,ik•-lk,4,411k. • t.ipoi, "ii. ;'t-ttl. •;t1 ' ••)4-.) Hie', lu.•Ut4,1''.',#;tils *- •,,,, ..'t,ii ItT.,6440.044 , :',..:,.v , ivo t. , ,,i,N..?..,,;,,irlt;vi.4,'!IV,174r.r ANMI.4'24 %t 61,7,4 ,1.1: •v'..-N44.,e ,ilatIle,1..4,:too „ha, .A:,.., :, {. 4',`,•),, ,, ,-.`.„,','•4''1",; : •••.;r• 1‘,•••!.. •A■Cr V.'" .4-460,,Iti 1. ••,,, ,,44...kr;,V ti:44 ti. Ort, ils•IP.'J.....• 114-44...'4";t4 A ,%74,■4:',1,4.7•1" ;,,i,t4441,irli`t;t•ffat44.44.1. ,t","• r` •‘ • • '.‘••••':•" ,,stri.,/ ',%.4,4191%40 a th:V.1,etklf.';' .■•'„,,:,44,; 4.V. AIR •i095ifiti,44',.v ... '• 1,,r,',■'4.,-;.• .;,,,, 0 ,c ' trtl•t.., '.,,...1,1.0,.,,' '''''',;',''' ''1,Z..'•.'"•,..,,,r•52,,,s1A, tli ' .••''' • ':"i , ' ',1"''*v. 'I.V.1.:',g,..?,,,%.t.4i,'.3 iis`'vik '..w:AT"r,$, 1.'La:,t,4,N'I',10:..,,,„..i41,7i.vAkil..t 6...41_,ir,R;...7,,. , 44744 fl,7';',..;'4.4,1w.?'.0',•''.' ;A: d•• ;'',',Y1':;`4., • •:,... :...•-•;•;41,,i• i‘,,,,,,..-,,,,,.-4:14v,,I. -• . '',,,e,11 '1,' ,,,,,.i.r.,,,,,, .t,e,,,ito,*.f3.14e* ! ...,,,,,s,#,,,,,4,...,,..... , 1 [ . v„,..,,,,, ,,; y5i,, ,„. ...,1*,,,,,,,,,1,41,0, ,.. , . ,,, 1+!ehtia,,, ,,,.•,,, ,.,..,..,,6'.'i,01„ki3i$P,',4k,.1 )4r1,,,,', '',, , v....0,14 ,", B41.,'',,,'./■,,..!rg..F,,f.q..•,,,:••,.,.,e.?,',.1'.1,c,,,, r e ,,'...,: ....e lt'1 itf','''''':..:' v4, ' " '4 Y:.''sv. ' . •'%;'',.:7 k''''''',.i•':!''./.•:'.ii,;,' .''.4.:,.ri' 4 , ,1.•11‘.eik`.31'.:1'4AZ,,*ft..7.•.■4,:.'..ilps..;1,y!lkki:l..4.,• is,...'••1:,..,:'f-,.'. ''', • 4'••.i•f,,■.".q 0.0:r'44”,1 ,,:','t,'■", ,Is '' . e f'.kt. ,;t1:).11 *- ' ''''.' , ''t,44,ift.T.;`).'i,,, 14,',.,:,,Vjli:;':..!'sq'';';1:1,...,•"i''')' r,,....,4'2"1', t, . ,, ,,. .••...- ..t.- . ....,,,,,.,,, .„..,4, ,. ,-,,,,•,,,.,.• • - ,,,,,,,,•••.: - .t.1, •• • s..,..44,,,,••••tkpf I.:Y.': 1,,,..'1,..;.,„••• • P.': k:,". .. , • ' -11''..' •••.1:.:.:., I:-.1 ••• ■ .ot e1.1.t.'+' ' •t.(0 I`. ;...•••...., \`.01,■.',,.!.I.,L'I' ' ' , . '' i ' ' ; 4 , ;, 2,.( , ','.'',.,,ik:14%..,:".:4:.".‘:'1,..."'')?•;i.::,4,':t';''.'',i:?":•:'4■:•;,...• N::'‘4;,„...•I'VZ.1...k.1..b.j. Pii'‘:;:;•NI"•:.t's).i...:;:ilr‘ ..,,. ...... . 44.F•iif.; ,... k ;1 , ' 1 '44,7,'‘,'1.''' t' : • t .1.'N't-,,-,4; ,-...2 i„ !,,.;''..,•,,,..',...,';,.'..,. .'..4'1, ...g: ...'..:,,,;%\'44 ‘ "• 11.4;1 ^; 41,.!..1 .0. - .1'. .... . •-,.,....:9.t, ., tY.4 t r', , ,• , , ,,A ',, ,I....y(li,:g.;• ,s.yec:tkr,;1*.,i '..1.k...;,..4;P".4„1-4.1.t,i,„%a;.1.,':,g,ip•..,4:4..`otiris'4,'0‘..4,11. 1, ';!f.,'S.chi v','.. . :i ;-'' .;'•:'.2.1 I ..' .. ..t.,..';',•,.. .';'12.04,..b, 1,,,.., ' a.,•'41,:p.i...4;. .'. .7: '....'...,.„''., , , , ,..,'..:-IN ,4;1\ ',., 4.;,. 'v,:,..,iii% . • '-' ' ,r16•.•1,..;`' I 0 r+''NI`' •4'!,•1I %J:%)' F tS',W. - V. •''11'1,"; • ,.. 1 . `tt' ''* "'14 Irtk ''''''*' 1... •14 ltfr„, '9,::,' ''' ' ' . '4.4 , '.; •,.t.....:.•,••1.-,,.. 1 , ...,1••••:.. ..., • . . ••• . . t', • ,. • '' . • .• ' • , ' ' i 2 -,,.;:.:4-4.:,-., (WO) .•.. . .... ., • ..• • -•,.), i 4 ,,,,• .. :i Wit' ,•,,,4,..S.,,,t, ,,. ' y r ''';4,,,,.:41.:-s- . , ,,,,,,i , --..,..-,... ..1 to,w r' • - ' :44 .''' •• :•: 1 tl.g;'•1?•4`,(8!;*tl•i)'0,1A,-,•,:•'s•i•: . . , k • . ■••'.••• 4■1) s• ' • . ; ;'44 . ' YVilitik" 's .,i....z.-;,, .,......4 •?..,E. , ' .. .... .•:".i.' , , , • .. ; ■ ' . '..'.v■.• , . ''-'1 fl.'''':.S .'''. 'Y ';.■,..;..`,A‘..'. l' -' '', , , . ' I! " ;,, ,.! , , ..".; ..1:,,.. , ,, ,,' , , „, %,, . r.„ ... ‘ •• , . ,,,...‘ „..,.. , ,, . ... .,it...,.., w s,.'.L. I ' ' l''' ' ' ' '' ' '' 0?,, --111.; " Ie'14‘'o. ', . 't f' I....•k I ',r. .'. ', --'' ..sa, . .. . ,... .,.,... , .,, ...,, . ,„., - ,,A. , ,. \ , k'r,...4.'.. '. „I .1,,...f,.4k ■.,, , ,..) ,■ ,. '. ,-:•"„..?,, ,s, li . .1,1, ; 1' ,‘.1:,F1 ' ii,..• -. .• ' e 4 •-' .,,...., ,..'■L''' r.; m..-.:. '0 ., i, ,; !../.41,..,1"'" .iv-.'.4."'!'' . . vy • ........■:.st ',..yRi 1 i4:4!•*'1,•'" ''-4•/II ,,,Afifo :-. tr,..,,. ,.• . . . . . dislil . ,,,t • . ....... . -,:„..,:i4:4:4#,...,,,... , . ' 'r.,, , „....„__ .. _.... .., w, . .. . . . ... _. . tAkt, , th',',,•;(4, ';N;Iii'•„;•',IA'•`. )tiv rno• r 7 , . . ., .... ,. .: , ... ,.. ..,,,,,b..,.N . ,..„. ;..,41„ .,,. . ,1114;.-N.ps : -.,- ,; ,-:. .,, e v.„ Re . . . . ........:::::: „.,..Iii, 4,,,, ...4.•••,!.• , ,s4•,, ,:,. I I,-,sik, ...z. ....... •i. . ..3: • •a i.: •,,,,t ',.4.41,• ;1„,,,.1007,'1"..'f7 ito" 'Vtri•:.•' i f.t.;,:!•••,f,..4. •• f,li • .1 1; .,'?"1t.'`'i,.i . .0•ViiII s . •qtiti14.11.!'`fil;',. '1*.".1:: ; .. • • It ", :i•i" .% 0.`";•••,,,- '''1.1$4 ,'„,.,,iilt ei ,,,60,'4‘k,el z!,-1 • ,A45,-.4,r.i,, . ,. 10.. , •... _ .• =•••• 1,,,,'k,,,, ,.•,v.t ,•' „t•-,..v...,,• ,‘ •-...'„ , -a.,.....i.4.444. 4.0,4., ..'.... . ... ..!...._ . ,... .. .,.. , ,,(,%, 'o..,•,i.;v1:%,•^104 ti- i ' Ill••'.:r 11 • .,;• • 'I':'kt: •• '* ,..I:•s.114:41•11,4'4# : ., ..(4,*' • •','::4.,..,-....- P. itTA,, ,,..,...„... 7., - , : • -., sf-i4i,..1,14...c..4,ic-p:r,...2,e,,- •:, •. -,,,,,,,ero , ,,,..".i.;:..:.1 b.1.1:Y'I'Pg;14;.". .4t5::.t‘e;,,Nb..1,i45:. ,.,'• ir..4z,„;. ,-...,-.,....,,, ... 4ir . \It(typ) i I.slii::::.:•et ,i...,,,q.,,,,,th•-,,•y.;,-,‘•!',.-:',-;..4..i ' .?; ' '..-`,'.‘•• •••• ,fard\-"13 -'' • ' --h. ;.:'••.. - - •. '.,:• . •• !'s,' .PI Vi ii 0114...•`,/..1,...,*A t, II r c, 1 , ti11:41.4...;11c1.1...t,..'t.4%.*Atii,4144,41,"4 .......L'......'..:,•;:,. • , $ 1 ■ I 1 i I ] 1 ' I ' ., ' ,. .....r ,,„ , . ,,, ' ■ . . , . , Z.'.r4"/ai.44,Vsc ••ii.• ..?, '.•, ..,:••....•:-.. .... ••:, 4 oti:' ,.. 41":'• '01 ' •'',' ' •4141.''''''.1:' 'L ' .kf,,,l'P.',...41. ;. :'414.!6:1:::',:.'":?',: .•, . '' • , i 1 I ;4',. 1 .. ' ' / l'' 7 ' •'.., ''',.,' ''''.1i ''.... 1;4 ;1 .1 ' .4.:. ' it•, 1q.. ... SN , . •,..., „ ., . . '. 1 1 1 4111 i I r*Y I 1 , ....._ ..,,, Ap''' ,,..,., `...4 , , ••• 4 4:.. .i i t i k r s•;,' •:`;:' • $.•1„1 4, I I ., • • '''': • , s• • , . 4.„.,•.:'4/0;,:!l'..e...4'. 1' ' . .• 111111 '_ a 1 r, , , Z. --''-•••• •r...',.,14;.; , . ...,f, ..”...•'' ;.)••• .' • ' 1 '• ' .4, IA' ' .• :•'''- .y,■.‘ 5!" ••;•••. ' •••40/I t*•••••. •. iNt — --•"."---••• •.• .,,.'1 '''•"'.A Z. ••5 44... 44,' . .11,..', 4. is, r, • l' ' . CITY OF TIGARD 4/30/2003 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 11:30:46AM Tigard,Oregon 97223 I � (503) 63 9-417 1 Receipt #: 27200300000000001726 Date: 04/30/2003 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2002-00018 [UNGRND] Fee Lieu Underground 230-0000-445003 3,988.00 SDR2002-00018 [OTHER]Other Revenue 100-0000-478000 378.50 SDR2002-00018 [OTHER]Other Revenue 100-0000-478000 3,375.00 Line Item Total: $7,741.50 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct/Check Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check SYKART INDOOR RACING KJP 8923 In Person 378.50 CENTER LLC Check SYKART INDOOR RACING KJP 8924 In Person 3,988.00 CENTER LLC Check SYKART INDOOR RACING KJP 8925 In Person 3,375.00 CENTER LLC Payment Total: $7,741.50 Page 1 of 1 cReceipt.rpt ! 5 , � 5 curityyenhanced /•erlleen See back for details. 9 SYKART IIN�DOO LING CENTER, LLC 8923 1„' MaiiN ACCT. 17450 WEST VALLEY HWY. 425-251-5060 TUKWILA,WA 98188 2 8, 03 18-B6lflsso DATE 01 PAY ORDE OF 6 / /9-054C-U 1 $ 3 97, 1 4 d 'e V h 4� /o-to DOLLARS Q - NORTHWEST • INTERNATIONAL • BANK Metropolitan Park West Tower �i� 1100 Olive Way Suite )6 i Battle,WA 98101 (206)676-8880 wwwnwib.00m 8" FOR �r�/ ' P"//- : 61-Ale —--=_— —--.__..._____ FP- to Security erth•nred document. See back far det•ite.fe - r.. ,...... •. .. ,.... ..,,, SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER, LLC 8924 MAIN ACCT. 17450 WEST VALLEY HWY. 425-251-5060 TUKWILA,WA 98188 ..,p 19-851/1250 DATE 4 • �F1J , 01 PAY /,e �` / _�� 1 TO THE (� i-f-- �,y�� ��'� /) 1 �}T. f (� � ORDER OF ����" — T 3 7�� \CJ% � 4 ag- dimAd11-- ze /di —� DOLLARS 8 e' NORTHWEST • INTERNATIONAL • BANK �� . Metropolitan Park West Tower —. 4A '---. 4A '-- 1100 Olive way,mite 102 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)676-8880 • J4 Z&OwwZ w -m BOD/2 ` (---- • RJR eCtlietz7- -------—— --— ---; 0 a ry V - - -....... ,. _..._T-. -_..... __. u.. ---.r_MMAIINI.E.--- .� . ■ Security[ 5 e e u r i t y enhance! Jac u...m e n•t. S e e b a c k f o r d e r a t-_® ,�-- .. --.-..• —-,�_--- ... ..- —� r S YKAR T I N D O OR RACING CENTER, LLC 8925 MAIN ACCT. 17450 WEST VALLEY HWY. 425-251-5060 TUKWILA,WA 98188 ^ 19-851/1250 DATE �•(J 1 01 PAYS ORDER OF e/ � /r�4 � $ 3, 375.AAP { _AM(—1 ��i. I/ 1' /' / _Jl/�� . _1 ��_ if AA' >� ate —DOLLARS 8 O NORTHWEST • INTERNATIONAL • BANK / Metropolitan Park West Tower _„.?4, --- Seattle,W Way Suite 102 Seattle,ib 98101 (206)676-88M1 r wwwawib.mm �" `/> • - a�•41 . •�glil' 77 c G —- • FOR -- — -----— g .A.:r35' iji'. '''''''=---'''"'' '''''"'''''' Ill.m1111211 •.� El) M t_I R1.1i YT &. ASSOC IA'! ES 1.ct ►►c1 use PI« u►ii►(y cc►tcl I)c'vc'lul►►►cr►tt Services FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO To: City of Tigard ATTN: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer Sherm Casper, Permits Coordinator Matt Scheidegger, Assistant Planner FAX#: 503-684-7297 DATE: 3/17/03 RE: Transportation Impact Fee MESSAGE: In the SDR decision for the SyKart Race Center, there is a sentence on page 25 which states "The applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $20,032 based on the use proposed." From my conversation with Sherm Casper, I understand that he come up with that figure by using the average daily trip rate for a video arcade, at 9.6 trips per 1000 total gross square feet (TGSF) and not deducting anything for the previous use of the building (Power Rents and Irvington-Moore). First of all, of course an indoor racing center is not comparable to a video arcade. We will be providing you with information that should clearly demonstrate that the average weekday trip rate for this type of use will be less than 1,0 trip per 1000 TGSF, Second, the prior use was `general industrial", which has an average daily trip rate of 6.97 trips per 1000 TGSF. My understanding is that Mr. Hong will be given credit for the prior use or uses of the building. Doing so would drop the TIF from "approximately $20,032" to $0. As a side note, we were shocked at the large dollar amount, surprised that it was buried at the bottom of page 25 of the decision, and worried that the dollar amount was already set. You may want to modify how you let applicant's know of potential TIF charges so as not to cause undue distress! cc. Yun Hong ■Phone 503. 624-4625 RFax 503.968.1674 ■ejmurphy @aol.com . 03/17/2003 03:17 15036, 30 CTS ENGINEERS IP PAGE 02/03 3300 NW 2111"Ter, ce Hillsboro.Oiaaon 97120 Ct S Engineers, Inc. Tel(103f 690.8080 Fax(303)645.5910 E n►url:etvrEgctsengineers.com CIVIL • TRANSPORTATION • STRUCTURAL. • LAND SURVEYING Memorandum Date: March 14,2003 To: Brian Rager,City of Tigard From: Eric Graves,P.E. Project: 2.035 Tigard SYKART Subject: Assessment of Daily Trip Generation for the Proposed Development As requested, this memorandum to provides an estimate of Daily Weekday Traffic for the purpose of calculating a Traffic Impact Fee for the proposed SYKART Indoor Racetrack located at 8205 S W Hunziker Street in Tigard, Oregon. The proposed use does not have a basis for trip determination in either the Washington County T1F Ordinance or the current ITE Trip Generation Report. In order to estimate the trip generation for the development, we have obtained sales data for the month of February 2003 from the SYKART Indoor Racetrack in Tukwila Washington which operates in a 45,000 TGSF building. According to the owners, February sales were typical to most other months and represent average usage. The data shown an Table 1, attached, consists of two variables: daily race sales, and daily sales of helmet head liners. All persons who race must wear certified headgear. This headgear is available at the racetrack, however the user must purchase a hygienic liner. Most racers do race more than once per visit, thus the head liner is a better indicator of people visiting this racetrack. The owner of the Tukwila facility also told us that most racers carpooled to the site in groups of three or more. For this estimate, we will assume a vehicle occupancy rate of 2.5. From the data provided, the estimated daily traffic can be calculated as follows: Average Weekday Sales of Head Liners: 34 racers per weekday Adjustment for Vehicle Occupancy 34/2.5 = 14 vehicles to and from the site Average Weekday Vehicle Trips(racing) 14"2=28 customer trips per Weekday Average Weekday Vehicle Trips 10 employee trips per Weekday (3 full time& 3 part time enopl ees with 3 employees on site at a time) Total Average Weekday Trips 38 Weekday Trips per LOW)TGSF(38 rrips/45) 0,85 The Tukwila facility is similar to the proposed Tigard raceway in that they both allow 10 racers at a time, and include amenities such as vending machines, video game machines (less than 10), and a viewing area. The Tukwila facility is about 45,000 TGSF, roughly 10,000 GSF larger than the Tigard building, It is our understanding that trips from the previous use of the building will be discounted for the purpose of TIP calculations. Per the Washington County TIF Ordinance, the trip rate for light industrial uses is 6.97 trips per TGSF. Based on the attached data and the calculation above, it is clear that the previous use as a construction equipment rental store generated significantly more traffic than the proposed use. As such, a more detailed investigation of daily trip generation is not justified. Should you have further concerns or questions regarding this matter,please feel free to contact me at 503.690.8080. . 03/17/2003 03:17 15036 30 CTS ENGINEERS It PAGE" 03/03 Table 1: Sales at SYKART Indoor Racing Facility, Tukwila Washington(February 2003) DATE Total Race Head Liner Sales Sales Saturda , Fe'ma 01, 2003 235 135 Sundap Februe 02 2003 p 115 C'ti,"'k'.1�� l'al .•1, 1. .,A +iii �t 1i'Mor Sf .,•°izz i-cf bra'. f�< Imam;:j r. ' U:.LL`�:ladY�`1. :�:i� s. r4: J ".,0 gip,. ,1 Saluda ,Febnw 08,2003 1J 188 82 Sunda Februa r� 08, 2003 MFg x Y Ztin. d: '.tom {.M Satunia Februa 15 2003 203 142 Sunda ebnta 16 12003 103 81 ..: �-L 6,8„',- n r r �'I . ^ 9� w� Ct - , �� qI'LyZ R _ ? 3107 rw, Y a 1''T•' , n.,:-f.)lilf -0I 1 '••T 1 Imo! _r 3s *eC _ Saturda ebrua 22. 2003 124 58 Sunda ,Fabius 23 2003 120 87 i. Le�►S'u:.'.°J'>:}Oi��k:.;prr.,��i.�a.:I•.k a. y`.5 Kf Sri MOUNDEE Tote Month' Sales 2.i 83 1 305 Avere∎e Dell Sales gg 47 Total Weekda Sales 1484 871 Avers_a Waak1a...sales�fJ 34 3/24/03 Conditions Associated With 4:34:58PM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 -pC_OMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC + a tuoa Status tie Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By 1 DIFFERENT SPECIES TREE IN BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 1 WEST PROPERTY LINE BUFFER None eat.f MAS 3/24/03 MAS 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List" located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans.Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 1 OVERFLOW PKNG.SIGNAGE None egai MAS 3/24/03 MAS 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 1 NOISE STUDY None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard(7.40.160 Noise Limits). 1 EMISSIONS EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water(steam)will not be visible from any of the property lines. 1 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE VIBRATION None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 1 ODORS EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 1 JOINT ACCESS None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 1 PROVIDE ST.TREES-EXISTING PLANTER None MO MAS 3/24/03 MAS 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards(Section 18.745.040.C). l MIXED SOLID WASTE&RECYCLABLES None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 1 REFUSE CONTAINER DESIGN STANDARD None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 1 JOINT USE LEGAL EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 12.Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds,leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 1 RESERVE 5%CARPOOLNANPOOL None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpoolivanpool. 1 PROVIDE 2 ADA ACCESSIBLE PKNG. None Mete MAS 3/24/03 MAS 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 1 PKNG STALLS TO BE A MINIMUM OF... None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 1 BICYCLE PKNG.AREA SIGNAGE None MAS 3/24/03 MAS 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area,and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Page 1 oft CaseConditions..rpt 3/24/03 Conditions Associated With 4:34:58PM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC. Condition Status Updated Code Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By 1 BICYCLE RACK DESIGN None MR MAS 3/24/03 MAS 17. Provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.0.of the Tigard Development Code. 1 PROVIDE 17 BICYCLE PKNG.STALLS None Met i MAS 3/24/03 MAS 18. Provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. 1 WHEEL STOPS None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 19. Provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. 1 PROVIDE 1 LOADING SPACE None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 20. Provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. 1 HUNZIKER STREET ROW DEDICATION None NOT MET BDR 3/14/03 PLL 21. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street to increase the right-of-way to 31 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 1 BIKE LANE STRIPING FEE None NOT MET BDR 3/14/03 PLL 22. Prior to final building inspection,the applicant shall pay$378.50 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. 1 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES OR PAY FEE None NOT MET BDR 3/14/03 PLL 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project,or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be$27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen,the amount will be $3,988.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. ■ t Page 2 of 2 CaseConditions..rpt 4/2/03 Conditions Associated With 8:41:41 AM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC. Condition Status Updated Code Title Hod Status changed By Tag Date By 1 DIFFERENT SPECIES TREE IN BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 1 WEST PROPERTY LINE BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List"located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans.Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 1 OVERFLOW PKNG.SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 1 NOISE STUDY None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard(7.40.160 Noise Limits). 1 EMISSIONS EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water(steam)will not be visible from any of the property lines. 1 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE VIBRATION None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 1 ODORS EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 1 JOINT ACCESS None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 1 PROVIDE ST.TREES-EXISTING PLANTER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards(Section 18.745.040.C). 1 MIXED SOLID WASTE&RECYCLABLES None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 1 REFUSE CONTAINER DESIGN STANDARD None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 1 JOINT USE LEGAL EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 12. Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds,leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 1 RESERVE 5%CARPOOL/VANPOOL None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. a 1 PROVIDE 2 ADA ACCESSIBLE PKNG. None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 1 PKNG STALLS TO BE A MINIMUM OF... None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 1 BICYCLE PKNG.AREA SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area,and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Page 1 of 2 CaseConditions..rpt 4/2/03 Conditions Associated With 8:41:41 AM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS, 1%C Condition Status Updated Code Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By • 1 BICYCLE RACK DESIGN None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 17. Provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.0. of the Tigard Development Code. 1 PROVIDE 17 BICYCLE PKNG. STALLS None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 18. Provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. 1 WHEEL STOPS None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 19. Provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. 1 PROVIDE 1 LOADING SPACE None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 20. Provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. 1 HUNZIKER STREET ROW DEDICATION None NOT MET BDR 3/14/03 PLL 21. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street to increase the right-of-way to 31 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 1 BIKE LANE STRIPING FEE None NOT MET BDR 3/14/03 PLL 22. Prior to final building inspection,the applicant shall pay$378.50 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. 1 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES OR PAY FEE None NOT MET BDR 3/14/03 PLL 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project,or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be$27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen,the amount will be $3,988.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. Page 2 of 2 CaseConditions..rpt Letter of Transmittal J City of Tigard DATE RECEIVED RECEIVED X1503 (.1 I r yr t naHRD PLANNING/ENGINEERING TO: 6Le DEPT: FROM: /'�k7 hviderok ieyre(479 XA/ PHONE NUMBER: CS-63/ 6.87 RE: (Case number, site address, parcel number, etc.) COMMENTS: isdsts\forms\LetterTransmittal.doc 07/31/01 ♦•♦ ED MURPHY & ASSOCIATES Land Use Planning and Development Services April 24, 2003 Bill Monahan, City Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: SyKart Indoor Race Center, Noise Ordinance Dear Mr. Monahan: I am writing on behalf of Mr. Yun Hong, who is developing an indoor racing center at 8205 SW Hunziker Street. The staff has approved the Site Development Review application for the facility, subject to conditions. One of the conditions was that a noise study be completed, or more precisely, prior to final inspection, Mr. Hong is to "provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits)." According to Tigard Municipal Code, Article IV. "Nuisances Affecting the Public Peace", Section 7.40.160, the maximum decibel (dB) level is 50 dB during the daytime and 40 dB between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day. Mr. Hong is almost ready to open his racing center, and he has completed the noise study. The concern is, if the noise ordinance is strictly applied, the race center will not meet the City's noise standards without unreasonable modifications to the building. We need you to make a judgment call that the mitigation plan proposed by Mr. Hong meets the intent of the ordinance, so that Mr. Hong may receive his final inspection and occupancy permit, and be allowed to open for business. Mr. Hong engaged the services of Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. to complete a noise study and evaluation, who have summarized their findings in two reports, enclosed. The first report, "Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study", is a technical study that provides information on what modifications would be required in the building façade to ensure that the City noise standards would be met, measured at the property boundary. The second report, "Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues", is an evaluation of the impact of the proposed racing center on the surrounding residences considering some proposed building modifications and the ambient noise levels. DSA found that, to strictly meet the City's noise ordinance standards, Mr. Hong would have to make substantial improvements to the building; namely, he would have to replace the existing doors and windows in the west wall and in the western sides of the north and south walls with concrete masonry units walls, with a minimum 4-inch thickness. The second report puts this in perspective, weighing the significant cost of the building improvements necessary to meet the standards 9875 SW Murdock St. Tigard, Oregon 97224 / l'hone 503. 624.4625 Cellular 503. 314.0677 /Fax 503. 968.1674 Sykart Indoor Race Center against the complete absence of any benefits to the neighbors of making those improvements. The second report also evaluates the impact of the noise mitigation approach proposed by Mr. Hong, which consists of applying sound insulating fiberglass to the two overhead doors on the west side of the building. With this more practical building improvement in place, DSA concluded that the racing activities will be "for the most part unnoticeable and will have no noise impact on the residences near the Sykart site because of masking by Highway 217 traffic noise." That is, the ambient noise level will be above the maximum Sykart radiated noise level, so the neighbors normally won't even be able to hear the go-karts over the highway traffic noise while standing in their back yards, even after 9:00 p.m. In addition to insulating the two overhead doors, Mr. Hong also proposes to limit the hours of operation to between 7:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM Friday and Saturday. Mr. Hong is also creating a wide landscaped buffer area on the west side of the building, which over time will help reduce the noise radiation even more as the trees and shrubs mature. As you know, the noise standards are found in Article IV, the nuisance section of the Municipal Code, not in the Development Code. This Article does not have a specific "exception" clause in it. However, the City Manager is granted authority in the ordinance to waive the requirements in certain situations, and certainly the City Manager may interpret or apply the ordinance in a way that is fair and reasonable. The noise ordinance is a prohibition on "excessive noises". The tests to be applied in when dealing with potential "nuisances" are not only the technical noise levels measured by a sound meter at the property line. The more common-sense tests are, is the noise plainly audible? Is it unnecessarily loud within a noise-sensitive unit, i.e. an adjoining home? Is it excessive? Does if affect the public peace? I think that when you read the two reports, you will agree that the mitigation plan proposed by Mr. Hong, coupled with a sensible application of the noise ordinance, is a good approach to take in this particular case. We would ask that you keep in mind that the racing center is within a building that was built in 1960, and was occupied from 1960 until 1996 by Irvington-Moore, which manufactured all types of equipment for sawmills. After that, it was used by Power Rents for two years as an equipment repair facility. After Power Rents, Safway Scaffolding used the building and site to assemble scaffolding equipment. Power Rents and Safway Scaffolding both often worked late into the night, and operated both inside and outside of the building. All of these uses -- with their machinery, trucks, forklifts, cranes, heavy truck traffic, and vehicular traffic associated with large numbers of employees -- undoubtedly created much more noise than the racing center ever will. (And by the way, when those uses went in to this building, they owners were not required to provide a noise study or do anything at all to mitigate the noise impacts of their uses). edmurphy/hang/noise/monahanlet/3/24/03 2 Svkart Indoor Race Center Further, from our discussions with the neighbors, we do not believe the City has received any noise complaints regarding those previous uses. The property owner, John Knez Jr., says that they have never received a complaint from the neighbors about noise. As evidenced by the second DSA report, it is not likely that any of the neighbors will even notice the noise from the indoor race center. Mr. Hong is almost ready for final inspection, and wants to begin operating the race center as soon as possible. However, the planning staff will not "sign off" on the issuance of the occupancy permit until they are satisfied that the proposed use will meet the noise standards, and the noise ordinance does not seem to give them any authority to grant a waiver or to interpret the ordinance. What we are asking you to do is two-fold: 1). Grant an exception to the strict application of the City's noise standards in this particular case, as the improvements that would have to be made to the building are very substantial and not viable, and as the benefit to the near-by residences of making those improvements (even if they could be done) is nil because of the ambient noise levels. 2). Initiate a review of the City's noise ordinance standards, which appear to be unreasonably restrictive, and which would pose a hardship on many new and existing businesses if they were rigorously enforced. Therefore, we are asking for your review of the attached reports -- and a decision - at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, please give Mr. Hong or myself a call. Mr. Hong may be reached at 503-684-5060. Sincerely, Ed Murphy cc. Mr. Yun Hong, Sykart Indoor Racing Mr. Kerrie Standlee, Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. Mr. Jim Hendrix, Community Development Director edmurphy/bong/noise/inonahanlet/4/24/03 3 April 9,2003 ENGINEERS Sykart Indoor Racing Center Daly • Standlee &Associates, Inc. 8205 Hunziker St. 4900 S.W.Griffith Drive Suite 216 Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton,Oregon 97005 (503)646-4420 Fax(503)646-3385 Attn: Yun Hong From: Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. PROF :;7 ?GIN$B `. r11,� ♦ /j. • • OREGON GL& €, D 4F 0. STS E :7giRE] Charles H. Oppenheimer, PhD Kerrie G. Standlee, P.E. Engineer Principal Re: Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study DSA File#: 117031 Introduction The City of Tigard Community Development Director has approved the use of 8205 SW Hunziker Street, Tax Lot 200, for purposes of indoor go-kart racing subject to a number of conditions. One of the conditions is that a noise study be prepared by a certified acoustical engineer showing that the noise generated by the proposed operations will meet the maximum allowable noise standard of the City of Tigard. This document reports the findings of the noise study. Information about the Proposed Operation Customers of the Sykart Indoor Racing Center will drive go-karts around a track inside a warehouse type building constructed with concrete walls, windows, and a number of overhead garage-style doors. Typically, there will be no more than 8 go-karts traveling around the track because of safety concerns. Customers will drive either a standard go-kart 117031-Ll.doc Page 1 of 6 LbSykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study or a performance go-kart, the latter being available to customers with demonstrated driving skill. Business hours will be 11 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. on Monday through Thursday, 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. on Friday and Saturday,and 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Sunday. Noise sources at the Sykart facility will include the go-karts and the ventilation system. Go-karts will operate on an indoor track that will occupy all but the southeast region of the building. Almost all of the go-kart noise radiated from the building will be transmitted from the overhead garage-style doors and windows of the building because these components have so much less sound reduction properties than the exterior concrete masonry unit walls. The building ventilation system consists of building vents and exhaust fans. The cents are located on the rooftop and raise radiating from inside the building through the vents will be negligible compared to that produced by the exhaust fans. In addition the vents are small in size and they are covered with rain protection hoods that direct the sound down toward the top of the roof. The exhaust fans are located as follows: 1) three on the roof, 2) four in a row of windows on the north side of a vaulted section of the building, and 3)three in windows on the east side of the building and one in a window on the east end of the north side of the building. The noise radiating from the rooftop exhaust fans will mainly reflected upwards like noise radiating from the roof vents. Noise produced by fans in the vaulted windows will be blocked by a second vaulted section (there are two vaulted sections in the building). Noise from fans on the north and east sides of the building will tend to radiate to the north and east. The Sykart facility will be located on land that was recently re-zoned industrial park. The properties surrounding the Sykart site are zoned for various uses. The properties immediately east of the site are zoned light industrial. The property immediately south of the site is zoned industrial park. The properties to the west are zoned residential and the properties to the north are zoned commercial Applicable Noise Limits Noise produced in the City of Tigard is governed by the noise limits set forth in section 7.40 of the Tigard Municipal Code. The Tigard code defines noise criteria for two types of receiving properties. The first property type is any property occupied by a "noise sensitive unit"defined in section 7.40.150.A of the code as: "... any building or portion of a building containing a residence,place or overnight accommodation, church, day care center, hospital, school, or nursing care center. " The second property type is any property not occupied by a noise-sensitive unit. This category of property could include commercially, industrially and residentially zoned property; the only requisite is that a residence, church, daycare center, hospital, school, or nursing home is not located on the property. 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 2 of 6 -16 T - 1 Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study The specific noise limits for the two receiving properties are presented in section 7.40.160 of the Tigard code. There are limits for daytime hours and limits for nighttime hours where daytime hours are considered to be 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. and nighttime hours are considered to be 9 p.m. to 7 a.m. In general, the nighttime hour noise limits are more restrictive than the daytime hour limits and the noise limits for property with a noise sensitive building are more restrictive than the limits for property without a noise sensitive building. In all instances, the specified noise limits apply at or within the boundary of the noise receiving property. The code's noise limits are summarized below in Table 1. Table 1: City of Tigard maximum allowable noise levels(dBA) Noise Receiver Daytime Period Nighttime Period Category I (7 AM to 9 PM) (9 PM to 7 AM) Property with a 50 40 Noise-sensitive unit Property without a 75 60 Noise-sensitive unit Since Sykart intends to operate during nighttime hours, the nighttime noise limit will tend to limit the amount of sound that can radiate from the facility to noise sensitive receivers. Predicted Noise Levels The amount of noise radiating from the Sykart indoor race facility was predicted using standard acoustic equations for sound transmission and sound propagation through the atmosphere. Reference noise level data for the predictions were obtained through measurements of the actual sound sources that will be located at the facility. Exhaust fan noise was measured outside the Sykart building. Go-kart noise was measured outside and inside the building. Measurements were made for a standard go-kart and a performance go- kart at a point near the door and window at northwest corner of the building interior while each go-kart was driven around the track inside the building. The measurements outside the building were made near an overhead door and near a window to help assess the amount of sound transmitted through those building components. The measured data revealed that, for the same amount of interior noise, the overhead doors transmitted more noise than the windows. This fmding is expected because the hinge panels and a perimeter seal of the garage style doors are expected to leak more sound than the windows. A conservative analysis approach was used to predict the amount of noise that will radiate from the facility. The approach includes the prediction of the noise that will radiate from the facility with an operating scenario that produces the greatest amount of noise that can possibly occur. The actual noise radiated by the Sykart facility will be less than or equal to that predicted but typically it will never be higher than predicted. This approach was used because it was concluded that, if the greatest possible amount of noise radiating from the 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 3 of 6 .Ns& ENGINEERS_ Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study facility meets the city noise requirements, then the noise radiating from the Sykart facility will always meet the city requirements. The loudest operating scenario includes the following operating assumptions: • Four pairs of performance go-karts drive the track side by side, each go-kart radiating the maximum noise level that was measured during lap testing. • The go-kart pairs are located 6 feet within the building near windows and doors at the northwest corner, west side, southwest corner,and east side of the building. • All exhaust fans operate. • All windows serving the racing space are closed. • Ground effects between the building and receiver will be negligible. • Weather conditions are 50 degrees Fahrenheit and 90%relative humidity. It is unlikely that the go-karts will operate in a fashion that follows the loudest assumed scenario because there will often be fewer than 8 go-karts driving simultaneously. Also, the noise emitted by g•-karts in the building will vary with time as drivers accelerate and brake, instead of being at a maximum at all times as assumed in the analysis. Moreover, the go-karts will often not all be at the same locations assumed in the modeling; these locations are selected to maximize the amount of go-kart noise transmitted through relatively noise- transparent doors or windows. In addition, the actual mix of go-karts will likely include more standard go-karts than performance go-karts. Assumptions regarding the minimal effects of vegetation and weather are also conservative because weather conditions other than the assumed conditions will produce more atmospheric noise absorption than in the prediction. The neglect of these additional absorption effects adds to the conservatism of the noise predictions. Using this conservative approach, noise was predicted at a number of locations. The prediction points are shown as the yellow squares in Figure 1. The noise sources are indicated by the red dots in the figure and represent noise emanating from the go-karts and fans. 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 4 of 6 . . • - 3E � Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study Mpoint:40 MIA 800 4111. i mr, 11. ,.. . . . „tr- . , . 700 ..si, • , ■ 600 — ' i K •_ .,% r ..---: W home:45 ASA 14 F _ -j ...,r.... WI; .141k1 NO? a g I +/� I� NWbr4 -NI. ! 500 - c Elra 4 _ v, point 57 dB ' E Ems • -ai 1 .VSWe • 400 - '2.- W... - SW corner:49 AB .A J -7:; - fill' 300 r PIS -' _ _-� • ♦ 1>r- •200 - , a . , -' . 100 , S, ."-itsit- . 1R i iiit.; . 1A--,4,,. _ is 0 r t r 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 feet Figure 1: Noise levels predicted to radiate from Sykart activities 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 5 of 6 1:2A'S RS -r Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study Assessment of Predicted Noise Before assessing the predicted noise radiation, we again emphasize the fact that the predictions describe the maximum noise that would most likely be radiated, based on the worst-case noisiest operating scenario described above. Noise radiation will generally be much less than that predicted. The noise that will radiate north, east, and south fom the site is predicted to meet the Tigard requirements during daytime and nighttime hours because the applicable noise limits at those boundaries are the limits specified for property that does not contain a noise sensitive building. If the noise reduction properties of the Sykart building are not increased before operations begin,the amount of noise that will radiate west from the Sykart site is predicted to exceed the Tigard code at the western boundary during daytime and nighttime business hours (11 a.m. to 9 p.m. and 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. respectively for the Sykart operations). On the other hand, the results of the analysis show that, even without an upgrade of the noise reduction properties of the building facade, the amount of noise radiating west from the Sykart site will be well below the Tigard code limit of 50 dBA (the daytime hour code) at all residential structures on the adjacent properties where noise impacts would most likely be expected if there were going to be impacts. During the nighttime hours of 9 p.m. to 11 p.m.,the predicted levels will exceed the City's limit of 40 dBA at the residential structures as well as at the receiving property boundaries, unless the noise reduction provided by the Sykart building is increased. Noise Mitigation If the noise level limits presented in the Tigard code are to be met at the west boundary of the Sykart property, the noise reducing properties of the doors and windows needs to change significantly on the whole west side of the building and on the west end of the north and south sides of the building. For instance, b meet the noise code, the doors and windows on the west side will have to be removed from the building and replaced with a minimum of 4" thick concrete masonry units (CMU). In addition, the windows in the on the west end of the north wall and south wall of the building will have to be removed and replaced with 4" thick CMU. Without this level of effort, the noise radiating from the Sykart building will never meet the 40 dBA limit required by the City code at the west property boundary. If the requirement to meet the 40 dBA limit at the property boundary is not required, then the changes to the building facade can be reduced considerably. Conclusion Noise radiating from the Sykart facilities will exceed the City of Tigard maximum allowable noise levels unless a significant amount of effort is made to improve the noise reduction properties of the building façade. To meet the City's code during all proposed business hours, the existing doors and windows in the west wall and the windows on the west end of the north and south walls of the building have to be replaced with at least 4" thick CMU wall material. 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 6 of 6 April 24, 2003 11 I ENGINEERS_ - Sykart Indoor Racing Center Daly • Standlee &Associates, Inc. 8205 Hunziker St. 4900 S.W.Griffith Drive e Suite 216 Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton,Oregon 97005 (503)646-4420 Fax(503)646-3385 Attn: Yun Hong From: Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. „ PION a a1Ntp 1, 4 now /j • - OREGON '`te 3.%l 1 Charles H. Oppenheimer, PhD Kerrie G. Standlee, P.E. Engineer Principal Re: Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues DSA File#: 117031 Introduction In a recent noise study report for the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center at 8205 SW Hunziker Street, Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. (DSA) presented information regarding the changes that would be required in the building facade to ensure that the City of Tigard noise code would be met at the site property line. After a review of the report, you realized that the required noise mitigation measures would be a severe financial burden which would be impossible to absorb through your business. At your request, DSA conducted an additional investigation to determine information that might have a bearing on the evaluation of the noise radiating from the proposed Sykart indoor racing operation. In addition, DSA assessed the noise reduction provided by a building modification that you and the building owner, Knez Realty Group, proposed. This report summarizes the information developed DSA and the noise assessment of the building modifications that you have proposed. 117031-L2.doc Page 1 of 11 RS Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues Overview of Additional Work Undertaken by DSA Ambient Noise Levels During the time when outdoor go-kart noise measurements were being made in the original noise study, it was noticed that Highway 217 traffic had a significant influence on the ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Sykart site. In fact, it was observed that the go- kart noise was only slightly audible above the traffic noise at the western property line of the Sykart site during the time measurements were being made. The highway traffic noise was observed to be higher than the 50 dBA Tigard daytime noise limit and substantially higher than the 40 dBA nighttime limit. In fact, to gather the noise level data we needed for our analysis, we actually had to move up to within 3 feet of the building to ensure that the noise levels we were measuring were actually dominated by the go-kart equipment and not Highway 217 traffic. High ambient noise levels at the Sykart site can have two effects that we think should be considered before a final decision is made on the noise mitigation measure that will be used to address noise radiating from the Sykart facility: 1) The high level of highway noise will tend to lessen the impact of any noise generated by Sykart activities by masking Sykart generated noise, and 2) The high level of highway noise in the area could make enforcement of the Tigard noise code virtually impossible with respect to Sykart because traffic noise levels may already exceed the City noise code limits at the measurement point during the hours of operations at the Sykart facility. Therefore, it became obvious that, in developing reasonable noise mitigation measures that should be considered in reducing noise radiating from the Sykart facility, it would be important to first quantify the ambient noise levels present in the vicinity of the Sykart facility. Thus, as part of the additional work performed for Sykart, ambient noise levels were measured over a weekend period when most of the activity would normally be expected to occur at the new business. The City of Tigard Noise Code In Comparison to Other Codes When we first looked i the City of Tigard noise code relative to the noise that would be generated by the Sykart facility, we noticed that parts of the City code was similar in some ways to the state DEQ noise regulation, and similar in some ways to parts of other city noise codes. For instance, we noticed that the Tigard noise code had a noise level limit for daytime hour noise levels and a noise level limit for nighttime hour noise levels, like the state noise regulation and like most other city regulations. However, we also noticed that the Tigard noise code appeared to be exceptionally more stringent than the DEQ noise regulation and noise regulations in other cities when it came to regulating the amount of noise that could radiate from a commercial or industrial noise source to a residential property. For instance, the DEQ noise regulation has an hourly statistical noise level limit that applies at a point that is 25 feet from a noise sensitive structure. The DEQ limits how long the noise level radiating from a commercial or industrial noise source can exceed specified levels and does not try to pin down an absolute maximum allowable noise level limit. In comparison, the City of Tigard noise code is an absolute maximum instantaneous 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 2 of 11 Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues noise level limit that applies at the property line of the receiving property which, in some instances, may be as much as 200 feet or more from a residential structure. Because the Sykart facility was used for commercial operations with multiple noise sources by other companies in the past without complaints about noise, because the City of Tigard noise code is relatively new, and because the establishment of a overly restrictive noise code can have an adverse effect on business in Tigard by adding unnecessarily to the cost of business development, we thought that it might be helpful to provide more information regarding the City noise code relative to other noise codes. Therefore, time was spent in reviewing noise codes in other cities around the Portland area. Consideration of Other Noise Control Options The original noise study concluded that significant building modifications would be needed at the Sykart facility before the noise radiating from the facility could meet the Tigard noise code as it is currently written. The building modifications involve removing the existing doors and windows in the west wall and in the western sides of the north and south walls, and then installing CMU material with a minimum of 4-inch thickness. These building modifications would have adverse economic impacts on both the Sykart owner and the landowner of the Sykart site. In addition to the immediate economic impact on the building owner, if the modifications were made to ensure the noise levels would meet the existing noise code, the building owner would be faced with the fact that, if the Sykart business failed to continue in the future, the CMU wall materials may have to be removed and doors and windows reinstalled to provide light access and door access for a new tenant. These features could be valuable to a future tenant, in the opinion of the landowner. Because there seemed to be so many reasons to support less noise mitigation than that provided by the complete replacement of windows and doors with CMU materials at the Sykart facility, you asked Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. to evaluate and address an alternate noise mitigation scheme, taking into account the ambient noise levels as well as the Tigard noise code. Therefore, as part of our work, DSA assessed the noise control provided by the alternate mitigation and provided comment of the results of the mitigation relative to noise impacts at the residences. The Ambient Noise Issue To help determine the ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Sykart facility, DSA performed ambient noise measurements near the southwest corner of the Sykart property and near the rear yard of the residence at 12390 SW Knoll Drive. Measurements were made continuously over a 30 hour period from approximately 6:00 p.m. on Friday evening April 4 to 11 p.m. on Saturday night April 5. The measurement period includes Friday and Saturday nights when the Sykart facility is expected to be most active and it includes the nighttime hours when the Sykart facility would not be operating. The data was measured during the nighttime hours when the Sykart facility would be closed mainly see what noise levels were present in the area during what is normally considered the quietest hours of a 24 hour period(2 a.m. to 4 a.m.). Ambient noise levels were measured at two locations: 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 3 of 11 . . _ . .. , ), ) 71-171—___-- ., Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues Yard boundary, west of site: Within 20 feet of the usable yard boundary of the residence at 12390 SW Knoll Drive. The location is roughly 20 feet higher than the foundation of the Sykart building and is representative of the ambient conditions at the boundaries of the yards of the homes west of the Sykart site. Noise reaching this location was observed to be dominated by traffic on Highway 217. Southwest corner of site: Within 10 feet of the corner, also the northeast corner of the residence at 8335 SW Hunziker Road. This location is representative of the noise environment along the western property line of the Sykart site where the Sykart building acts as a shield from some of the Highway 217 traffic noise. Noise reaching this location was observed to be either totally due to traffic during the periods when it was not raining, and due to both the noise generated by water draining down the roof drain on the south side of the building and the traffic noise at times when it was raining. The rain was intermittent between noon on Saturday April 5 and 11 p.m. that night. The measured hourly ambient noise levels are shown in Figure 1, along with the Tigard noise code limits. The upper graph in Figure 1 shows the ambient noise levels measured at the residence site, and the lower graph in the figure shows the ambient noise level measured along the west property line of the Sykart property. The figures show the minimum sound level Lin measured during each hour, as well as the sound level exceeded 90% of the time during each hour (54 minutes of the hour - known as the hourly LAo noise level) at the two locations. The business hours of the Sykart facility are also indicated. The first thing the two graphs illustrate is the fact that the ambient noise at the residences west of the Sykart facility is actually louder than that found at Sykart's west property line. This finding is due to the fact that the residences are elevated above Highway 217 more than the Sykart building and there is less reduction of sound between the highway and the residences than there is between the highway and the west property line. The second thing the graphs show is that, during most of a 24-hour period, the minimum noise level at the receivers is above the City noise code limit. The upper graph of Figure 1 shows that the noise level at residences west of the Sykart facility drops below the City's maximum allowable noise level limit during only 6 hours out of 24 hours (based on the minimum noise level part of the graph). The figure also shows that during those 6 hours, the sound level exceeded the maximum allowable noise level limit by a substantial amount during at least 90% of the time and possibly more than 95% of the time. Finally, the graph clearly illustrates that the ambient noise levels at the residences are generally well above the City's maximum allowable noise level during all the hours when Sykart will be operating, and especially during the nighttime hours of 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. The significance of these findings is the fact that it will be difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to determine how much noise is radiating from the Sykart facility, especially at the location of the residences, but even at the property line if the level of the noise is close to the ambient noise level; and especially if the noise is below than the ambient noise level. Thus, it may be virtually impossible for the City to enforce the ordinance in this area. Before an enforcement officer could find a violation of the noise code with a sound level meter, he or she would have to find a time when the noise radiating from the Sykart facility to the west property line was significantly above the ambient noise level, or the ambient 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 4 of 11 - -r -- Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues noise level was at least 3 dB below the noise level limit. Based on the noise levels predicted to radiate from the facility and the ambient noise level data measured on April 4 and 5, those conditions may never exist. Yard boundary, west of site 60 NNN"01A 50 ��rhi ��'� „"""�11�►` Lmin ��► �� — --L90 40 -.w limit 30 a a a < < < < ., a a a a a< a CO CO O N N V (0 0o 0 CV N V CO CO O Hour Sykart business Sykart business hours hours (--A--) Southwest corner of 60 s' m Lmin 40 -- L90 limit 30 a a a < < < < < < a aa (0 c0 O (0 co CV o Hour Figure 1: Comparison of measured ambient noise levels and City of Tigard noise limits at two locations near the Sykart site. 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 5 of 11 110 Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues Tigard Noise Code Compared to Noise Codes in Other Cities DSA researched noise regulation codes in other jurisdictions in the Portland metropolitan area, and learned that the City of Tigard noise control code is one of the most restrictive codes, if not the most restrictive code, for commercial and industrial operations in the Portland metropolitan area. The Tigard code places limits on the instantaneous maximum noise level (Lax). Some municipalities like Beaverton, Oregon City and Lake Oswego do not we a maximum noise level limit. Instead, those municipalities rely on the regulations of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ), which contain statistical noise level limits instead of maximum instantaneous noise level limits. Statistical noise level limits basically define how long the noise radiating from a source can exceed a prescribed level, but they do not define the absolute maximum level that can radiate from a source. However, because the DEQ noise limits include an hourly Lai limit(the level exceeded 1% of the hour or 36 seconds in an hour), that limit essentially makes sure that if a louder noise occurs, it only occurs for a very short time period. There are several other municipalities in the metropolitan area that impose an absolute maximum noise level limit like that used in the City of Tigard code. Out of four other municipalities in the metropolitan area that use an Lmax noise criterion, three of those municipalities use the property line of the receiving property as the measurement point like the City of Tigard and one uses a point located 25 feet from the residential structure. In that sense, the City of Tigard is very similar to most of the other communities. However, when it comes to the criterion level specified as the limit, in all of those cases -- including the one which applies 25 feet from the residential structure -- the Lax limit in the code is higher and less restrictive than that specified in the Tigard code. A survey of maximum allowable noise levels limit ordinances is presented in Table 2. The tabulated noise limits apply to the case of an industrial noise source radiating to a residential receiver such as will be the case at the Sykart facility. The measurement location for the criterion is also shown in the table. Table 2: Maximum instantaneous noise level limits for continuously operating industrial noise sources that radiate noise to residential receivers(by municipality) Daytime Nighttime Point of Daytime Nighttime Municipality Lmax Limit Lmax Limit Measurement Period Period (dBA) (dBA) Gresham 60 50 Property line of 7 AM to 10 PM 10 PM to 7 AM residence Milwaukie 55 50 Property line of 7 AM to 10 PM 10 PM to 7 AM residence Portland 60 55 Property line of 7 AM to 10 PM 10 PM to 7 AM residence Tualatin None 60 25 feet from 7 AM to 9 PM 9 PM to 7 AM residence Tigard 50 40 Property line 7 AM to 9 PM 9 PM to 7 AM of residence 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 6 of 11 4. i. Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues Based on the information shown in the table, it can be seen that the Tigard code is at least 5 to 10 dBA more restrictive during daytime hours and 10 to 15 dBA more restrictive during nighttime hours than the codes of other municipalities that use the property line as the measurement point. In the case of the Tualatin code, the answer to how much more restrictive the Tigard code is during nighttime hours depends on the distance between the residential structure and the property line. If the Tualatin code limit was used at the residences west of the Sykart facility, because of the significant distance between the residences and the Sykart west property line, the equivalent level at the would be approximately 72 dBA instead of 40 dBA; approximately 32 dB higher than what is allowed by the Tigard code. This is a tremendous difference in allowed noise level. While the Tualatin noise code may not be restrictive enough to adequately protect residential receivers in the City of Tigard, given the fact that the residences west of the Sykart property are located so far from Sykart's west property line, the application of any one of the other nighttime hour property line noise limits of 50 to 55 dBA would be much more reasonable. This is especially true when the ambient noise levels are so high and when the noise level at the residences would be 10 to 12 dB less than that found at the property line (in other words, 38 to 40 dBA if the limit was 50 dBA, which could never be measured because the ambient noise is always far above those levels at the residences). Consideration of Other Noise Control Options The original noise study concluded that, without major changes to the indoor racetrack building, noise radiating from the Sykart facility will exceed the Tigard noise limits along the west property line where the Sykart property is bordered by property occupied by noise-sensitive residences. This finding was mainly due to the fact that the maximum noise level radiating from Sykart's operations could not exceed a level of 40 dBA during nighttime hours at the west property line, and because that property line is so close to the building wall. As discussed in the previous section, if the property line noise limit for nighttime hours was more in line with that used in other communities in the metropolitan area, and more in line with the ambient noise levels found during the ambient noise study (say in the range of 50 dBA), then the equivalent noise levels at the noise sensitive residences would be close to the City's nighttime limit level of 40 dBA. Subsequently, the amount of changes required on the building would be reduced significantly. To help demonstrate the significance of the noise limit chosen for the west property line, we will discuss the expected noise levels around the facility with two noise mitigation scenarios. The first scenario will be the scenario discussed in the original report, i.e., building modifications that would be necessary to meet the City's 40 dBA criterion at the west property line during nighttime hours. The noise levels predicted to radiate with the recommended CMU walls at locations west of the racetrack are shown in Figure 2. In addition to the predicted noise levels radiating from the facility, the average ambient IAo noise levels found during the 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. hours is provided. As can be clearly seen in the figure, the noise radiated to the property line from the acetrack facility would be between 37 and 40 dBA, which is at or below the City's limit.More significantly, it is well below the ambient noise at the property line. Even more importantly, the noise predicted to radiate from the facility to the residences west of the facility would be as low as 25 dBA at 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 7 of 11 �► •r Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues some locations. This level is so far below the ambient noise that it could never be detected by ear or meter. Therefore, using the CMU mitigation measure would be going well beyond the point of ensuring that there will be no significant noise impacts at residences located to the west of the proposed racetrack facility. In fact, while it ensures the code is met, the use of that mitigation measure becomes a waste of money given the fact that no one would be able to notice the Sykart noise once it was more than 5 dB below the ambient noise level. The second mitigation scenario is one that you proposed. You proposed to apply sound insulating fiberglass to the interior surfaces of the two overhead doors on the west side of the building, and you wanted to know the affect of such a measure. According to information you provided, the building modification would consist of covering the northwest corner door in the building with an 18-inch thick layer of insulation. In addition, you would install a 6-inch thick layer of insulation over the door located near the middle of the west side of the building. The thinner layer would allow continued operation of the middle door for moving a garbage dumpster in and out of the building. You wanted to know the effect of such a treatment; the following information provides our answer to that question. The sound reduction properties of the fiberglass was modeled and included in predictions of the noise radiating from the Sykart facility. The noise levels predicted to radiate to the west with the fiberglass treatments are shown in Figure 3. As can be seen from the figure, with the fiberglass insulation, Sykart generated noise will be at or less than 40 dBA at all residential buildings west of the site. In addition, Sykart noise will be less than the 50 dBA daytime hour noise limit at the boundaries of all yard spaces located at those residences and only slightly above the nighttime hour noise limit of 40 dBA. At the west Sykart property line, the noise radiating from the racetrack facility would be in the range of the ambient noise currently found on the property line (50 to 52 dBA). While the predicted property line noise level could exceed the City's daytime noise limit at the north end of the property and while it is definitely above the 40 dBA nighttime hour noise limit, there would be no impact on the residences west of the property line. This is because the distance between those residences and the property line is great enough that the noise levels at the residences is, as stated above, at the City's nighttime hour noise limit of 40 dBA, and well below the ambient noise measured at those residences. Thus, we believe that, when all of these factors are considered, it is readily apparent that removing the windows and doors from the proposed Sykart racetrack facility and replacing them with concrete block material would amount to spending a lot of money for building modifications that will never provide a benefit to anyone. Conclusions The reduction of Sykart noise to the Tigard maximum allowable noise limit at the west property line of the site will be difficult to achieve due to the amount of building modifications required to achieve the goal. Further, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce due to the ambient noise level already present around the site. The benefits of meeting the City's property line noise limits will be virtually impossible to measure 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 8 of 11 •1641..\ ___2.es Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues because the ambient noise caused by Highway 217 traffic is so much greater than that which would radiate to the residences from facility. You have proposed to modify the building with an alternative treatment method to reduce the noise that will radiate from the go-kart facility. With your proposed modifications of 18" thick insulation over the northwest door and 6" thick insulation over the south end door, the indoor racing activities will be, for the most part, unnoticeable. That is, there will be no noise impact on residences near the Sykart site because of the masking effect provided by Highway 217 traffic noise. One might therefore conclude that the aural comfort of residents living by the Sykart site will be preserved and protected with the proposed alternative building modification. 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 9 of 11 ' v = 7 Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues M * - ° i 111,800 I IOW - is ,• ~' O` J. ■ 700 29 d8A 152 dBA amb1 �� 600 osip • f I�, `.�"" � "r „ I 4iii , s 139 dBAi 49 dBA amb 1 ^+ i S Hw ka4 500 - �"L c. t ,.r.C c,; 1374BA/49dBAambl .. •_ `1 l wrr— h 9 400 - _ t. M1+�sw tan. I 7 $r. • 1: ir. 300 , iiir � .- .w s _ - .0 U..o 200 .,}+1 r .t �.., i it ft• - Vliv. 4y . _ r 100 .. � y V s 't r * of .,s- 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 feet Figure 2: Comparison of noise levels predicted to radiate from Sykart activities with CMU replacement of windows and doors and ambient 1490 noise levels power averaged over the 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. business hours. 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 10 of 11 Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues 800 t 700 iii, ,-r R_ • -.1 • Y y e-` • , - , NW yard:43 dBA • .1_— 600 - 1,1' ,c : .�._ i. ._ � + W home:40 dBA -- -_--- J • .. • 500 -- .-• 4• • v rw point:52 dBA m AP IA— + •W. . I 1 400 • . - -___ ��+.w, • •. 'i 9 opf - 300 -r _ 1� 4 "` , 410 ..%-%44p !f' 200 , ,s P ' - • ',. , - • 4,.. , Zs % irli w 100 ' ,. ,.` ∎ s w 17,,,,.„ ir:40.//i --.. a �-`- k ti, "--, jili .. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 feet Figure 3: Noise levels predicted to radiate from Sykart activities with fiberglass insulation of doors on western side of building. 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 11 of 11 .iriggiiiii,41 &kelt April 29, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Ed Murphy Ed Murphy & Associates 9875 SW Murdock Street Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Murphy: This is in response to your letter to Bill Monahan regarding the Sykart Indoor Racing Center noise issue. Bill and I have discussed the issue and your noise study. Please be advised that the City Manager has no authority to waive the provisions of the noise ordinance as you suggest. The City cannot, in good conscience, ignore the ordinance standards especially for noise sensitive units. Your report indicates four-inch thick concrete masonry units will provide for compliance that provides more protection than necessary. You have indicated that you prefer to utilize 18-inch fiberglass insulation over the door at the northwest corner of the building and six-inch over the door located near the middle of the building's west side. Your report indicates that night time noise would approximate night time ambient levels. The report offers no other alternative. Recognize that whether or not noise standards are met, your client's property is still subject to the noise complaint provisions of the code for noise that is unnecessarily loud regardless of decibel levels. In such a case, two witnesses of noise issues are required to establish a violation. Previous uses of the property are irrelevant. A change of use must be subject to ordinance standards. You and your client have been aware of the necessity of meeting the noise requirements since the beginning of your quest to operate in this particular location. The City cannot guess whether or not there will be noise complaints based on the information provided in the study you have presented. Ultimately, that can only be answered by the adjacent residents. Your client will assume the risk of violating the ordinance and subsequent fines regardless of the mitigation route taken. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Page 1 of 2 I would suggest that your client develop an additional alternative that will provide compliance. If, as the report says, the ambient noise levels may mask the noise, then maybe the operation will not be subject to complaints. Mr. Monahan and I discussed the suggestion that a review be made of the noise ordinance standards. Please be advised, that these standards have been in effect for years and were reaffirmed by Council with the adoption of the 2001 amendments. The standards are specifically to protect noise sensitive units. To change the standards means the higher probability of intrusive noise, more complaints, and lesser protection of noise sensitive units. We do not believe this is prudent or advisable given the City Council's desire to protect neighborhoods. Sincerely, Richard H. Bewersdorff Planning Manager I:\curpin\dick\letters\sykart indoor racing noise study.doc c: SDR2002-00018 ZON2002-00003 Bill Monahan Page 2 of 2 ' Washl' :aunty,Oregon 2003-073771 t' RETURN RECORDED DOCUMI ;0: 05/081. 10:59:28 AM CITY HALL RECORDS DEPARTMENT, DOD Cnt■1 Btn■11 C WHITE CITY OF TIGARD $15.00$6.00$11.00-Total■$32.00 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR 97223 INDIVIDUAL 00328772200300737710030030 I,Jerry Hanson,Director ofA merit and Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for Washington County, .,. . pp Oregon,do hereby certify that the within Instrument of `y' Sfll" �oz.— cool t, writing • •f? .•.. -:f File No. !; records of said county. •'• '1T � my �y,,",I(_ " ndT ,N Jerry R.Hanson,Dlrector`bt i�t_""l m�eF'nt"',and Taxation, -v f;c`If Ex-OffIclo County Clerk DEDICATION DEED FOR ROAD OR STREET PURPOSES Space above reserved for Washington County Recording information tC Knez Realty Group does hereby dedicate to the public a perpetual right-of-way for street, road, and utility purposes on, over, across, under, along, and within the following described real property in Washington County,Oregon: Attached Exhibit"A" To have and to hold the above-described and dedicated rights unto the public forever for uses and purposes hereinabove stated. The grantors hereby covenant that they are the owner in fee simple and the property is free of all liens and encumbrances, they have good and legal right to grant their right above-described, and they will pay all taxes and assessments due and owing on the property. The true consideration for this conveyance is $0.00. However, the actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is the whole consideration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I hereunto set my hand on this /6 day of (iptif ,2003 *hue igna 8205 SW Hunziker St.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 8205 SW Hunziker St.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 Tax Statement Mailing Address Property Address STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. County of Washington) This instrument was acknowledged before me on 41//6/3 (date)by: C -,/ 7(b-.9_ (name of person(s)). OFFICIAL SEAL eZk KATHLEEN 0 STEaE 1 • .,�1 00.e J` NOTARY PIALI.OREGON N 's Signature `` �� IV4I COSSION N0.361267 MY COMPASSION EXPIRES OCTOBER 5,2006 My Commission Expires: /o/S/A.6 Accepted on behalf of the City of Tigard this I, day of Arf Y 1 , ,2003. City Engineer CHASE, JONES & ASSOCIATES INC. FORMERLY BOOTH&WRIGHT Zan,/,Sigravioz5 Eagineers ,S1neE 1855 CJz 716 S.E.11th AVENUE PORTLAND,OREGON 97214 TEL.(503)228-9844 April 9 , 2003 #11000 ONE FOOT STREET DEDICATION A tract of land in the northwest 1/4 of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard , County of Washington and the State of Oregon being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a 5/8" iron road on the northerly right- of-way line of S .W. Hunziker Road ( 60 feet wide ) being at the southeast corner of the survey recorded as S.N. 27185 and designated as point "A" on said survey; thence North 61°00 ' 31" West along said north right-of-way line 473. 86 feet to the Point of Beginning of the tract herein to be described; thence North 12° 15 ' 28" East along the west line of Tract 1 as per said S.N. 27185 a distance of 1. 04 feet; thence North 61° 00 ' 31 " West parallel with said north right-of-way line 165. 51 feet more or less to the east line of that tract of land as described in fee #90-34347 and recorded June 29 , 1990; thence South 23 °44 ' 16" West along said east line 1.00 feet to the northerly right-of-way of said S.W. Hunziker Road; thence South 61°00 ' 31 " East 165. 72 feet more or less to the Point of Beginning. 1 1111 11111 2003-73771 VS TAX LOT 200 ti 14A TRACT 2 ttg p TAX LOT 200 O 14)tO FEE NO. 90—.34347 A, ∎//� $OP ,C;yti `� o)° 3 ''k...c''' s'''' ''''.....,.�: ti 0 4%,ry 1. 4.- r . ' �'bo, / . TRACT 1 .? . P. O. B. \ '`O�A� MAP ti��� ti o`Q Qp TO <•5' \ '�'�:, o�,���, ACCOMPANY �.'`te�.'* , LEGAL DESCRIPTION REGISTERED SITUATED IN THE N. W. 1/4 SECT/ON 1, T 2 S, R 1 W, W. A/ PROFESSIONAL 40 - `7\ LAND SURVEYOR CITY OF T/GARD - WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON c,. \ DATE: APRIL 10, 2003 PREPARED BY CHASE, JONES ASSOCIATES, INC. ���ti1 OREGON� ` gz/z _4-)96' 716 S.E. 11TH AVENUE JOB NO. 11000 PORTLAND, OREGON 97214 JULY 16, 1982 • PHONE: 50.3 228-9844 00 ERR I C D. JONES 40 5/8" IRON ROD 1996 PER S.N. 19499 EXPIRES: 6-30-03 & S.N. 27185 5/14/03 A .00 5/14/03 Conditions Associated With 4:33:33P 3 . T I• D E M A R K Case #: SDR2002-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. Condition Status Updated Code Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By DIFFERENT SPECIES TREE IN BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 1 WEST PROPERTY LINE BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List" located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans.Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 1 OVERFLOW PKNG.SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 1 NOISE STUDY None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard(7.40.160 Noise Limits). 1 EMISSIONS EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 5/14/03 MAS 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water(steam)will not be visible from any of the property lines. 1 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE VIBRATION None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 1 ODORS EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 1 JOINT ACCESS None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 1 PROVIDE ST.TREES-EXISTING PLANTER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards(Section 18.745.040.C). 1 MIXED SOLID WASTE&RECYCLABLES None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 1 REFUSE CONTAINER DESIGN STANDARD None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 1 JOINT USE LEGAL EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 12. Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds,leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 1 RESERVE 5%CARPOOL/VANPOOL None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. 1 PROVIDE 2 ADA ACCESSIBLE PKNG. None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 1 PKNG STALLS TO BE A MINIMUM OF... None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 1 BICYCLE PKNG.AREA SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area,and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Page I oft CaseConditions..rpt ADDENDUM#1 This Addendum #1 dated March 20, 2003, is to modify the Lease dated February 28, 2003 between Knez Realty Company ("Landlord") and Sykart LLC, or assigns ("Tenant"), for the Property known as the Knez Building, 8205 SW Henziker Rd, Tigard, Washington County, OR 97223, Tax Parcel #2S101 BC-00200, containing approximately 30,000-35,000 sq. ft., including the warehouse and office areas, plus parking, except the parking area in the rear of the building. JOINT USE OF ADDiTIONAL PARKING Landlord is also the owner of the building at 8185 SW Henziker Rd. Landlord and Tenant hereby enter into an agreement for joint use of 46 parking spaces that are adjacent to the building at 8185 SW Henziker Rd., allowing Tenant to use these spaces as overflow parking for his business at 8205 SW Henziker Rd. All other provisions of the Lease shall remain unchanged and in effect. Agreed to• 4ndlord: --� /,oh S. Knez Jr. Date Inez Realty Compaq Tenant: 1Z-/‘ — o■3 Yun S. Hong Date Sykart LLC • J TICOR TITLE INSURANCE STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED SEA—PORT ASSOCIATES, A PARTNERSHIP COMPOSED OF GERALDINE DORE, DAVID F. HISCOCK, K.F. GRIMES AND MARY GRIMES, SILIUS C. RANTA, FRITZ ERKEN, LARRY F. SCHAEEFFER, (EXgrfWICT conveys and warrants to WESTEC AMERICA INCORPORATED, AN OREGON CORPORATION Grantee, the following described real property free of encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein situated in WASHINGTON County, Oregon, to wit: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLI- CABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON ACQUIR- ING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES. The said property is free from encumbrances except STATUTORY POWERS OF THE UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY; RIGHTS OF THE PUBLIC IN STREETS, ROADS AND HIGHWAYS; EASEMENTS RECORDED 10/5/73 IN BOOK 948, PAGE 304 AND10/26/73 IN BOOK 950, PAGE 838, RECORDS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON; SLOPE EASEMENT RECORDED 9/17/75 IN BOOK 1044, PAGE 495; AGREEMENT RECORDED 5/4/78 FEE NO. 78020403; The true consideration for this conveyance is 11111111.111. (Here comply with the requirements of ORS 93.030) Dated this day of 19 SEAPORT ASSOCIATES State of Oregon, County of State of Oregon, County of The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19 by day of , 19 by President and Secretary of a corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public for Oregon My commission expires: Notary Public for Oregon My commission expires: WARRANTY DEED This Space Reserved for Recorder's Use SEAPORT ASSOCIATES GI<AN I OR WESTEC AMERICA INCORPORATED GRANTEE Until a change is requested, all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: WESTEC AMERICA INCORPORATED 15405 SW 115TH AVENUE KING CITY, OR. 97224 Escrow No. 147350 Title No. 147350 After recording return to: WESTEC AMERICA INCORPORATED 15405 SW 115TH AVENUE KING CITY, OR. 97224 Tloor Form No. 137 Statutory Warranty Deed 8/83 FAHIBIT 'A' GRANTOR CONTINUED FREDERICK M. STRAY, CHARLES THOMPSON, HARRY H. HOROWITZ, ANDREW MALSEED, CARL B. LUCKERATH, ROSE HENRY, AS TO PARCEL I; SEAPORT ASSOCIATES, A WASHINGTON PARTNERSHIP, AS TO PARCEL II LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL I : A tract in the Northwest quarter of Section 1 , Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, described as follows : Beginning at an iron pipe on the North line of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, in Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, South 82° 37 ' East 123 feet from the Northwest corner of said Donation Land Claim; thence South 22° 47 ' West 541 . 0 feet to the true point of beginning of the herein described tract; thence South 73° 47 ' 30" East 196 . 52 feet; thence South 23° 45 ' 47" West 239 . 12 feet to the North line of S.W. Hunziker Road; thence North 60° 59 ' West along said North line 192 . 28 feet to an iron pipe which is South 22° 47 ' West of the true point of beginning; thence North 22° 47 ' East 195 . 70 feet to the true point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to U. S. Natural Resources, Inc. by deed recorded January 7 , 1985 , fee number 85000560 , Deed Records of Washington County, Oregon. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion described in that deed of dedication, recorded July 31 , 1974 , in Book 986 , Page 291 , Records of Washington County, Oregon. PARCEL II : A tract of land in the Northwest one-quarter of Section 1 , Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, described as follows : Commencing at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim; thence South 82° 55 ' 00" East 123. 00 feet to a one inch iron pipe; thence South 22° 47 ' 00" West 561 . 08 feet; thence South 73° 47 ' 30" East 196 . 17 feet to the point of beginning of the herein described tract; thence, from said point of beginning, South 73° 47 ' 30" East 18 . 73 feet; thence South 23° 45 ' 47" West 213 . 12 feet to a point on the Northerly right of way line of Hunziker Road; thence along said Northerly line North 60° 59 ' 00" West 18 . 64 feet; thence North 23° 45 ' 47" East 208 . 95 feet to the point of beginning. 1°c l)cer( ao \°c d el s and Wig\" lc °1) (posi0% ss%\sany` the PNra de s° - A\I va ma \a ���,� she skett�cpa y ad� a\survey tE `� ec° WI ,� tescecta\ned O ' °o`N . ��'� W f 1 w NF W O._ 4 i� �" S67°13'6 238.27 f ��� N '•1-v N•r rirr�i�iiiiiiiriiirii�zr�z �tiyrrrrrirr��(� N N I X600 \ �1tiGAR��A (ERRAC Z w N67°13'W ^ 181.6 300 31 z �\ ` 10 �S N012p3 1,n z t 867 i 4 N, _ - _i N 1 t B r.,, r 258.4 r - - - - ro '- © ‘1°° rA\�J� N 0 \ 'EASEMENT I W \O T \ \'/ i N ! 1� ��S \1 n\ - 196.52 I8:75 i 'N z.�� 5.a° E .,14.., �f 7J ,`,n�� ` r \� �� 173 I 0 d0 66.1 ..- i2 S61°13.E 8453.16 .. 80.16 d 214.90 y ' i 2 t00 \200 'C e9 0\ \`�00 k 20\ l ( 1 rn \g00 \$ c---) 92Ac- 1 W n 1...\ r , d 1 1 I f 4._ M N.) - • • Of , A 6 r N N 1 N N N J .0 0 `i� N n tN ~ W O Z ,�� N \ M N!N 1 I r G 1‘7' 1 1 O N ' 50 .x._20 ^N' S /3.49 4 �. N ', z 1043 963 715 84.5 1 �[.,�y�/ p 80.64 \ t , r ' �l4m ;40. Y/1- 6y:/ A!{ / { 192.28 ��fir%%f ������ N60°59'W 234.6 $ £. `4 986/291 i 75 8. Co. Rd. No.34 N60O59.W(! To- AU$t IC 5 60 M UNZIKER 986/291 o 0 TO PU8C 1043 1979 ^ o� 2:2-° Ac. 175 -.-- 1043/981 M ' l050/51 1\ r(, 8364 2.2_00 0 1Ac. \ 210 2.?-°\ ©0 Ac. ° .-. .3886 ° 500 "' 2 n „ M 574c. n N tD N — — -- i.,., - a 0 h 7 N 100 2 1 N Y N H m _0 120 N N - O 3< S60°59 E CO r m S66 89 275.05 - 720,95 0 N >R 2400 3.04 Ac. ro 3 `' t V .2 4 ° r, 0 I. h v5 lc 5 N°. c41._, 66, 82n Conditions Associated With 5/14/03 4:33:33PM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC. ccian on Status tipthiled Ode ..._. _ Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date S 1 BICYCLE RACK DESIGN None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 17. Provide a plan that shows the required bicycle rack designed according to Section 18.765.050.C.of the Tigard Development Code. 1 PROVIDE 17 BICYCLE PKNG.STALLS None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 18. Provide a total of 17 bicycle parking stalls. 1 WHEEL STOPS None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 19. Provide wheel stops on all parking stalls that abut the existing walkways. 1 PROVIDE 1 LOADING SPACE None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 20. Provide one loading space for the loading and unloading of go-karts and associated equipment. 1 HUNZIKER STREET ROW DEDICATION None Met 4/18/03 BDR 4/18/03 BDR 21. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street to increase the right-of-way to 31 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 1 BIKE LANE STRIPING FEE None Met BDR 4/30/03 PLN 22. Prior to final building inspection,the applicant shall pay$378.50 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. 1 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES OR PAY FEE None Met BDR 4/30/03 PLN 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project,or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be$27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen,the amount will be $3,988.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. Page 2 of 2 CaseConditions..rpt ASS 041100 at�a ° a J uo ?s dour Poe `P s°a, , Ott pup ald ,Au xag�:as Pug 0(01 alp Pi Pniadrad a y9nd alp cv 8u S QCW alb `fOd PjictaQ .0A1 avid CHASE, JONES & ASSOCIATES INC. rQ•r FORMERLY BOOTH&WRIGHT land csutatejots &En9laztLts csuzet tS&g C �z 716 S.E.11th AVENUE PORTLAND,OREGON 97214 TEL.(603)228-9844 1 April 9 , 2003 #11000 ONE FOOT STREET DEDICATION A tract of land in the northwest 1/4 of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard , County of Washington and the State of Oregon being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a 5/8" iron road on the northerly right- of-way line of S .W. Hunziker Road ( 60 feet wide ) being at the southeast corner of the survey recorded as S.N. 27185 and designated as point "A" on said survey; thence North 61°00 ' 31" West along said north right-of-way line 473. 86 feet to the Point of Beginning of the tract herein to be described; thence North 12° 15 ' 28" East along the west line of Tract 1 as per said S.N. 27185 a distance of 1.04 feet; thence North 61° 00 ' 31 " West parallel with said north right-of-way line 165 . 51 feet more or less to the east line of that tract of land as described in fee #90-34347 and recorded June 29 , 1990 ; thence South 23 °44 ' 16" West along said east line 1. 00 feet to the northerly right-of-way of said S.W. Hunziker Road; thence South 61 °00 ' 31 " East 165 . 72 feet more or less to the Point of Beginning. ./�, TAX LOT 200 $1 _ TRACT 2 / At _ fi i4i e / / TAX LOT 200 "� o 90-5447 k it of ., i, , • tti / i,r, '/4 \� �....- ~°r• TRACT 1 isb sr. 40.- h lit- 4,.�- ti P. O.B. 4 MA P til� �4r_ Ali TO 9 ,rte .tip ACCOMPANY ‘gttr. * il LEGAL DESCR/P T/ON REGISTERED 9\ PROFESSIONAL giw7ZD ITV TILE N. W. 1/4 SECTION 1, T. 2 .1, . 1 w., W. M. -1,,a- ` LAND SURVEYOR CITY OF WARD — WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON g/114-4) Q, 41E AIYK 10, 200.5 RWPA PAD BY:• CHASE, JONES *.ASSOCUTE3 INC. Q OREGON SCALE. 1" s IXD' 716 S.E. 111N A$VWf --.\ JULY 16. 1982 JOS NO. 11LaAD PORTLAND, OREGON 97214 (p ERRIC D. JONES PPbIGNiE 5125-1211-9844 1 RV �� mote EXPIRES: 6-3D-03 . PER .SN. 19499 t SIL 171$5 5/14/03 ■■■ Conditions Associated With 4:33:33PM 'TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC. Condition Status Updated Code Title Hold S_tatus Changed By Tag, Date By 1 DIFFERENT SPECIES TREE IN BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 1 WEST PROPERTY LINE BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List"located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans.Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 1 OVERFLOW PKNG.SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 1 NOISE STUDY None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard(7.40.160 Noise Limits). 1 EMISSIONS EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 5/14/03 MAS 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water(steam)will not be visible from any of the property lines. 1 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE VIBRATION None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 1 ODORS EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 1 JOINT ACCESS None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 1 PROVIDE ST.TREES-EXISTING PLANTER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards(Section I8.745.040.C). 1 MIXED SOLID WASTE&RECYCLABLES None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 1 REFUSE CONTAINER DESIGN STANDARD None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 1 JOINT USE LEGAL EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 12.Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds,leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 1 RESERVE 5%CARPOOLNANPOOL None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. 1 PROVIDE 2 ADA ACCESSIBLE PKNG. None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 1 PKNG STALLS TO BE A MINIMUM OF... None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 1 BICYCLE PKNG.AREA SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area,and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Page 1 of 2 CaseConditions..rpt •.1 `1a` r.•.'f •f.. o � � F oncer National r Tide Insurance Company • — 78 20403 _ MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT This Memorandum of Agreement, made as of April 26, 1978, by and between U. S. Natural Resources, Inc. (USNR) a Delaware corporation and Prendergast & Associates, Inc., an Oregon corporation (Prendergast). On April 26, i978, the parties hereto entered into an Agreement wherein USNR, as lessee and optionee of the premises set forth in Exhibit "A", and Prendergast, as buyer from USNR of the premises set forth in Exhibit "B" for the sum of have agreed to exchange mutual easements and adjust the boundary between the two mentioned parcels after exercise by USNR of the option affecting the premises set forth in Exhibit "A", and pursuant to the terms of the above-mentioned Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto executed this Memorandum of Agreement. U. TU' ■ ' .s,�J`C• , INC. r� . S> r44,14I �7• By Michael M. Moyer, Secr:l ary PRENDERRGAST & ASSOCIAT S, INC. _--- Patrick R. Prendergast! President STATE OF OREGON, County of Multnomah) se: / April 26, 1978 Personally appeared Michael M. Moyer who being first duly sworn, did say that he is the secretary of U. S. Natural Resources, Inc., a corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its board of directors; and acknow'.edged saidstrument to be its voluntary act and deed. ; / � C-/ Before me: ( •E,e C Notary Public for Oregon; My commission expires: 11-29-78 STATE OF OREGON, County of Multnomah) se: May 4, 1978 Personally appeared Patrick R. Prendergast who being first duly sworn, did say that he is the president of Prendergast & Associates, Inc., a cor- poration, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its board of directors; and acknowledgad said instrument to be its voluntary act and ded / nn / Before me: b Notary Public for Oregon; My commission expires: 11-29-78 i' ) I. 1-3 .r%�11Yit'�k7.i,►c?{�HMFx.r. ,, .. •-.a r,. . . . L_J• 1�yY1� �".-_ {. ,}•''l�,itik.Yl�.4§ eY ,nF..l• �w...;.';.. • t.?�'Y o�{'K••.'�/Y+�12�.'�'a�:?Yl'.•''.ff�`��3•:!.T.1.'�`t i\i^�.!, .. iW:v.w.•....., le 1 . .. EXHIBIT "A" T. i A tract of land situated in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Mer..1ian. in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows: •' Beginning at an iron pipe on the North line of tt°e W. W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, situated in said Section 1, which bears South 82° 37' East along said North line, 123.0 feet from the Northwest corner of said Donation Land Claim; thence South 82° 37' East along said North line, a distance of 211.5 feet to the Northwest corner of that certain tract • of land conveyed to Thomas W. and Minta Saddler as described on page 71 of Volume 166 of Washington County Deed Records; thence South 12° 24' i West along the West line of said Saddler tract, a distance of 866.5 feet to the center line of SW Hunziker road, County Road No. 34, 40 feet in width; thence North 60° 59' West along said center line, a distance of 362.0 feet to a point which bears South 22° 47' West 22.3 feet from an iron pipe; thence North 22° 47' East a distance of 756.8 feet to the point of beginning. • EXCEPT THEREFROM that portion of the above described tract lying within i said SW Hunziker Road. i EXCEPT THEREFROM the following described tract: ea 1 1 1 Commencing at an iron pipe in the North line of said W. W. Graham ? Donation Land Claim No. 39 in said County and State which bears fi South 82° 37' East 123.0 feet from the Northwest corner of said Claim No. 39; thence South 22° 47' 00" West a distance .of 541.00 feet to the 1 point of beginning of the tract herein to be described; thence continuing South 22° 47 ' 00" West a distance of 195.70 feet to a point in the Northerly line of SW Hunziker Road; thence South 60° 59' 00" East along said Northerly line, a distance of 192.29 feet; thence North 23° 45' 47" East a distance of 239.12 feet; thence North 73° 47' 30" West a distance of 196.52 feet to the point of beginning. a i 1. t • I 1 y 4 1 1 A . , H— ?4�' ite * c,� t+ YJ e.." K. r, tii tIt,r t ... n• L �'t r��fj•,�F-j'+Ii I� ,T +t�y� ,.rk �'r}`Ff��`41� i�I'�+r (�ti'�j Ye .. r yhly ;( )1 ,� J,w.`r1 *4•;∎1•.j ,"\11Y���, �, •h-.,, ' 'lily��,� H+•• o'Li• ',..:a •,, fr` « •x"t'• .� �•1' ti . 1 ' 5'� s v�. , t, ,. ,,, , + , Z'S t, I : - i ,.1• P,A.44�.4../.yii,yi•• w11'n;% T Y ,• .. f . • . S • EXIIIBIT "D" L. ' A tract in the 1'orthwest quartcr•of Section 1, Township 2 South, Lange . . . 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, described as follows: • Beginning at an iron pipe on the North line of the 'W_V./. Graham D.L.C. tto. 39, in Township 2 South, P.ange 3. West, Willamette Meridian, . Washington County, Oregon, South U2° 37' East 123 feet from tho Northwest • corner of said D./..C.; thwncc South 22° 47' West 541.0 feet to the true point of. beginning of the herein described tract; thence South 73° • _ 47' 30" East 196.52 feet; thence South 23° 45' 47", West 239. 12 feet to' •• the North line of S.T7. tiunzikcr Road; thence North G0° 59' West along • said Worth line 192.28 feet to an iron pipe which is South 22°, 47' - West of the true point of beginning; thence Worth• 22° 47' East 195.70 . , feet to the.true point of beginning. • • , - •• •• • I EXCEPT THEREFROM that portion of the above described tract lying within said S.W. Hunziker Road, described in that deed of dedication recorded July 31, 1974 in. Book 986 Page 29, records of Washington County, Oregon. TOGETHER WITH an easement for the benefit of Grantee in the use of,the ! parcel described above, over a tract described as follows: . ' . 1 .A tract in the Northwest quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, I . Pange.l West, 'Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, described t ' as follows: . . • , t Beginning at the Northwest corner of the abbve described tract; thence - North 22° 4V East 30.20 feet; thence South 73° 47' -30" East 227.30 • j feet; thence South 23° 45' 47" West. 27G.12 feet to the Northerly line of S.W. llunziher Road; thence North 60° 59' West on the Northerly line • of the road 30.13 feet to the Southeast corner;" thence North 23° 45' 47" East to the Northeast corner; thence North.73° 47' 30" West. to the point of beginning.---------- —... --- . STATE OF OREGON G . County of Wof r.pon ss NDEXEQ •',,^ • Ond Elections eta r x•Offlofe o can'► . leoni a in *.td rwttty,.do hw,W puffy tkee the within,1t"trvn»"1•of oohing vas received EM MOONS' M.book.M-rwwd,,. fd t • e + • of add Cooney Witness my'band std noel affixed. - rt) ',AOOEA THOMIMN..4 Dinner of +4, A 'ill.E4etforur• n 4QAO K,,.., -a e,- •<. i 4,. 1 _ •+ 1R l�.i,rj'Qt:ks+L:e•4 rl Y 1)I.//(I..rV VF'...44111P n ilJ P("i.'•`� k:i i^ ray}t 1+..k % T '•.y ��,�.�� �/'�`.•ef, .G r y '*Iti I.A. • 't...• 10, A ....... Fite 4, ., , ':',..t .,f, 5/14/03 Conditions Associated With 4:33:33PM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC. n a Std` - 3 „-, <: r • Linde Title Hold Status 1 DIFFERENT SPECIES TREE IN BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 1 WEST PROPERTY LINE BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List"located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans.Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 1 OVERFLOW PKNG.SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 1 NOISE STUDY None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard(7.40.160 Noise Limits). 1 EMISSIONS EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 5/14/03 MAS 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water(steam)will not be visible from any of the property lines. 1 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE VIBRATION None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 1 ODORS EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 1 JOINT ACCESS None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 1 PROVIDE ST.TREES-EXISTING PLANTER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards(Section 18.745.040.C). 1 MIXED SOLID WASTE&RECYCLABLES None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 1 REFUSE CONTAINER DESIGN STANDARD None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 1 JOINT USE LEGAL EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 12.Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds,leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 1 RESERVE 5%CARPOOL/VANPOOL None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. 1 PROVIDE 2 ADA ACCESSIBLE PKNG. None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 1 PKNG STALLS TO BE A MINIMUM OF... None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 1 BICYCLE PKNG.AREA SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area,and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Page 1 of 2 CaseConditions..Tpt SYKART INDOOR RACING CENTER,LLC. 8205 SW. Hunziker St Tigard, Or. 97223 503.684.5060 Fax 5063.620.9481 April 29, 2003 Mr.Mathew Scheidegger Planning Department City of Tigard Re: SDR 2002-00018 Conditions of Approval Dear Mr.Scheidegger, We submit the following responses for your approval and further consideration and review: Item No.4 - A completed noise study has been submitted to the City Manager and Community Development Director for their input and consideration. Item No.5 - Our current HVAC system does not generate or emit any visible steam from our leased property. Our HVAC system is monitored and regularly maintained by Willamett HVAC LLC. The Willamette Personnel has inspected the HVAC system last week and it has noted no emission from our leased property. Item No.6 - Our operation will not cause or generate vibration which may affect adjacent property or neighborhood. Our Karts weighs approximately I50 to 180 lbs. And it runs on 4 to 9 hp. Engine. Based on our past four years of operation experience we do not have any concern in regard to vibration or noise. Item No.7 - We will not produce or emit odors which may affect adjacent property or neighborhood. Our ventilation and exhaust capacity will be sufficiently adequate for air circulation as noted in the Building permit plan submitted. Item No.8 - Attached copy of warranty deed granted to Westec America Inc. Item No.12 - Attached the joint use and access document as an addendum of the lease agreement for your reference and file. Item No.21 - The dedication document has been executed by the Knez Realty Group, property owner, and submitted to your Engineering Department for the recording of the same. Item No.22 - Attached a check in the amount of $378.50 for the bike lane. Item No.23 - Attached a check in the amount of $3,988.00 to cover the cost of undergrounding the utility lines. We believe that we can meet all conditions associated with SDR within final building inspection time frame, except the Landscaping work and the striping of the parking lanes which will be done after the landscaping. We have contracted the Landscaping work with Triple T, Inc. ( please see the attached contract). The asphalt cutting and new curbs for the three planter in the parking lot has been completed and the concrete cutting of west side drive way is currently undergoing at this time. In light of above, we respectfully request an additional 45 days to complete the landscaping and striping. As we discussed it earlier, we are prepared to provide you a check in the amount of $3,375.00 for the remaining balance due for the completion of the landscaping work. After your review of the above, should you have any questions or require further information, please contact me at 503-684-5060. We thank you for your cooperation and kind assistance provided to us. Yun S. Hong, ma aging member Attachments cc.Mr.Ed Murphy, Ed Murphy & Associates 5/14/03 Conditions Associated With 4:33:33PM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC. Condition sS � e s Coti'e Title . .. . .* to '-- Chang i 6:4 1 DIFFERENT SPECIES TREE IN BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 1 WEST PROPERTY LINE BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List"located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans.Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 1 OVERFLOW PKNG. SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 1 NOISE STUDY None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard(7.40.160 Noise Limits). 1 EMISSIONS EVIDENCE None NOT MET MAS 5/14/03 MAS 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water(steam)will not be visible from any of the property lines. 1 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE VIBRATION None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 1 ODORS EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 1 JOINT ACCESS None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 1 PROVIDE ST.TREES-EXISTING PLANTER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards(Section 18.745.040.C). 1 MIXED SOLID WASTE&RECYCLABLES None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 1 REFUSE CONTAINER DESIGN STANDARD None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 1 JOINT USE LEGAL EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 12. Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds,leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 1 RESERVE 5%CARPOOL/VANPOOL None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. 1 PROVIDE 2 ADA ACCESSIBLE PKNG. None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 1 PKNG STALLS TO BE A MINIMUM OF... None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 1 BICYCLE PKNG.AREA SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area,and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Page 1 of 2 CaseConditions..rpt ' TT Y TR ' ET, INC. LANDSCAPE PROPOSAL FOR: SYKART INDOOR RACING. Submitted to: Yun Hong April 22, 2003 8205 S.W. Hunziker St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Phone: (503) 684-5060 Fax: (503) 620-9481 Landscape Architect Mark Bailey Ferris TRIPLE T, INC. hereby proposes to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the completion of the work referenced below as per landscape drawings 1-1, 1-2, 1-3. All plant material as per drawing for the 3 planters in the parking lot and the planter on the west side of building which is approximately 175ft by 30ft $4,900.00 3 units of compost for plantings. 375.00 Barkdust 5 units fresh fir 1,100.00 Total: $6,375.00 PAYMENT to be as follows: $3,000.00 down and balance upon completion. Submitted by ,- Accepted by Joe nzo Yun Hong 290. Jt-32 Li r 26801 S. W. Stafford Road • Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 Telephone:(503) 682-5959 • Fax:(503) 682-4546 Licensed • Bonded • Insured 5/15/03 Conditions Associated With 8:55:21AM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR20O2-00018 COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. Condition Status Updated Code Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By 1 DIFFERENT SPECIES TREE IN BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 1 WEST PROPERTY LINE BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List" located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans.Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 1 OVERFLOW PKNG. SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking, with signage directing vehicles to the area. 1 NOISE STUDY None NOT MET MAS 3/14/03 PLL 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard(7.40.160 Noise Limits). 1 EMISSIONS EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/15/03 MAS 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water(steam)will not be visible from any of the property lines. 1 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE VIBRATION None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 1 ODORS EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 1 JOINT ACCESS None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 1 PROVIDE ST.TREES-EXISTING PLANTER None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards(Section 18.745.040.C). 1 MIXED SOLID WASTE&RECYCLABLES None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 1 REFUSE CONTAINER DESIGN STANDARD None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 1 JOINT USE LEGAL EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/03 MAS 12. Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds,leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 1 RESERVE 5%CARPOOL/VANPOOL None Met MAS 4/2/03 MAS 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. 1 PROVIDE 2 ADA ACCESSIBLE PKNG. None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 1 PKNG STALLS TO BE A MINIMUM OF... None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 1 BICYCLE PKNG.AREA SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/03 MAS 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area,and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Page 1 of 2 CaseConditions..rpt 12/29/2003 Conditions Associated With 9:54:57AM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00018 ,W COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC. • t ,t1c Title Hold Stiar 13‘ Tat; I)al.• 13‘ 1 DIFFERENT SPECIES TREE IN BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/2003 MAS 1. Provide a different species of tree to be planted within the proposed buffer. 1 WEST PROPERTY LINE BUFFER None Met MAS 3/24/2003 MAS 2. Provide a plan that shows an 18-25 foot buffer along the west property line planted with materials described in the "Plant List"located on sheet 3 of the originally submitted plans. Trees must be approved by the City's Arborist. 1 OVERFLOW PKNG. SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/2003 MAS 3. Provide a plan that shows the area that is not located in the 100-year floodplain will be marked as overflow parking,with signage directing vehicles to the area. 1 NOISE STUDY None Met MAS 12/29/2003 PLL 4. Provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard(7.40.160 Noise Limits). 1 EMISSIONS EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/15/2003 MAS 5. Provide evidence that emissions from space heating or the emission of pure uncombined water(steam)will not be visible from any of the property lines. 1 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE VIBRATION None Met MAS 5/14/2003 MAS 6. Provide evidence that the proposed use will not cause vibration at the western property line. 1 ODORS EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/2003 MAS 7. Provide evidence that odors from the proposed use cannot be detected at the property line. 1 JOINT ACCESS None Met MAS 5/14/2003 MAS 8. Provide legal evidence establishing joint access between the subject site and adjoining 8255 SW Hunziker. 1 PROVIDE ST.TREES-EXISTING PLANTER None Met MAS 3/24/2003 MAS 9. Provide street trees within the existing planter strip according to the City's street tree planting standards(Section 18.745.040.C). 1 MIXED SOLID WASTE&RECYCLABLES None Met MAS 4/2/2003 MAS 10. Provide evidence that one of the four methods of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage have been addressed. 1 REFUSE CONTAINER DESIGN STANDARD None Met MAS 4/2/2003 MAS 11. Provide evidence that the Design Standards for the proposed refuse container area have been met. 1 JOINT USE LEGAL EVIDENCE None Met MAS 5/14/2003 MAS 12. Provide satisfactory legal evidence in the form of deeds,leases or contracts establishing the joint use of the existing 46 parking stalls closest to SW Hunziker. 1 RESERVE 5%CARPOOL/VANPOOL None Met MAS 4/2/2003 MAS 13. The applicant shall reserve five percent of the proposed parking for carpool/vanpool. 1 PROVIDE 2 ADA ACCESSIBLE PKNG. None Met MAS 3/24/2003 MAS 14. Provide 2 additional ADA accessible parking stalls. 1 PKNG STALLS TO BE A MINIMUM OF... None Met MAS 3/24/2003 MAS 15. Revise plans to show all parking stalls to be a minimum of 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet. 1 BICYCLE PKNG. AREA SIGNAGE None Met MAS 3/24/2003 MAS 16. Provide information regarding directional signage to the bicycle parking area, and location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Page 1 of 2 CaseConditions..rpt ♦�♦ ED MURPHY & ASSOCIATES ♦ Land Use Planning and Development Services April 24, 2003 Bill Monahan, City Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: SyKart Indoor Race Center, Noise Ordinance Dear Mr. Monahan: I am writing on behalf of Mr. Yun Hong, who is developing an indoor racing center at 8205 SW Hunziker Street. The staff has approved the Site Development Review application for the facility, subject to conditions. One of the conditions was that a noise study be completed, or more precisely, prior to final inspection, Mr. Hong is to "provide a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer that meets the City's Maximum Allowable Noise Standard (7.40.160 Noise Limits)." According to Tigard Municipal Code, Article IV. "Nuisances Affecting the Public Peace", Section 7.40.160, the maximum decibel (dB) level is 50 dB during the daytime and 40 dB between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day. Mr. Hong is almost ready to open his racing center, and he has completed the noise study. The concern is, if the noise ordinance is strictly applied, the race center will not meet the City's noise standards without unreasonable modifications to the building. We need you to make a judgment call that the mitigation plan proposed by Mr. Hong meets the intent of the ordinance, so that Mr. Hong may receive his final inspection and occupancy permit, and be allowed to open for business. Mr. Hong engaged the services of Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. to complete a noise study and evaluation, who have summarized their findings in two reports, enclosed. The first report, "Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study", is a technical study that provides information on what modifications would be required in the building façade to ensure that the City noise standards would be met, measured at the property boundary. The second report, "Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues", is an evaluation of the impact of the proposed racing center on the surrounding residences considering some proposed building modifications and the ambient noise levels. DSA found that, to strictly meet the City's noise ordinance standards, Mr. Hong would have to make substantial improvements to the building; namely, he would have to replace the existing doors and windows in the west wall and in the western sides of the north and south walls with concrete masonry units walls, with a minimum 4-inch thickness. The second report puts this in perspective, weighing the significant cost of the building improvements necessary to meet the standards 9875 SW Murdock St. Tigard, Oregon 97224 /Phone 503. 624.4625 /Cellular 503. 314.0677 /Fax 503. 968.1674 Sykart Indoor Race Center against the complete absence of any benefits to the neighbors of making those improvements. The second report also evaluates the impact of the noise mitigation approach proposed by Mr. Hong, which consists of applying sound insulating fiberglass to the two overhead doors on the west side of the building. With this more practical building improvement in place, DSA concluded that the racing activities will be "for the most part unnoticeable and will have no noise impact on the residences near the Sykart site because of masking by Highway 217 traffic noise." That is, the ambient noise level will be above the maximum Sykart radiated noise level, so the neighbors normally won't even be able to hear the go-karts over the highway traffic noise while standing in their back yards, even after 9:00 p.m. In addition to insulating the two overhead doors, Mr. Hong also proposes to limit the hours of operation to between 7:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM Friday and Saturday. Mr. Hong is also creating a wide landscaped buffer area on the west side of the building, which over time will help reduce the noise radiation even more as the trees and shrubs mature. As you know, the noise standards are found in Article IV, the nuisance section of the Municipal Code, not in the Development Code. This Article does not have a specific "exception" clause in it. However, the City Manager is granted authority in the ordinance to waive the requirements in certain situations, and certainly the City Manager may interpret or apply the ordinance in a way that is fair and reasonable. The noise ordinance is a prohibition on "excessive noises". The tests to be applied in when dealing with potential "nuisances" are not only the technical noise levels measured by a sound meter at the property line. The more common-sense tests are, is the noise plainly audible? Is it unnecessarily loud within a noise-sensitive unit, i.e. an adjoining home? Is it excessive? Does if affect the public peace? I think that when you read the two reports, you will agree that the mitigation plan proposed by Mr. Hong, coupled with a sensible application of the noise ordinance, is a good approach to take in this particular case. We would ask that you keep in mind that the racing center is within a building that was built in 1960, and was occupied from 1960 until 1996 by Irvington-Moore, which manufactured all types of equipment for sawmills. After that, it was used by Power Rents for two years as an equipment repair facility. After Power Rents, Safway Scaffolding used the building and site to assemble scaffolding equipment. Power Rents and Safway Scaffolding both often worked late into the night, and operated both inside and outside of the building. All of these uses -- with their machinery, trucks, forklifts, cranes, heavy truck traffic, and vehicular traffic associated with large numbers of employees -- undoubtedly created much more noise than the racing center ever will. (And by the way, when those uses went in to this building, they owners were not required to provide a noise study or do anything at all to mitigate the noise impacts of their uses). edmurphy/hong/noise/monahanlet/4/24/03 2 Sykart Indoor Race Center Further, from our discussions with the neighbors, we do not believe the City has received any noise complaints regarding those previous uses. The property owner, John Knez Jr., says that they have never received a complaint from the neighbors about noise. As evidenced by the second DSA report, it is not likely that any of the neighbors will even notice the noise from the indoor race center. Mr. Hong is almost ready for final inspection, and wants to begin operating the race center as soon as possible. However, the planning staff will not "sign off" on the issuance of the occupancy permit until they are satisfied that the proposed use will meet the noise standards, and the noise ordinance does not seem to give them any authority to grant a waiver or to interpret the ordinance. What we are asking you to do is two-fold: 1). Grant an exception to the strict application of the City's noise standards in this particular case, as the improvements that would have to be made to the building are very substantial and not viable, and as the benefit to the near-by residences of making those improvements (even if they could be done) is nil because of the ambient noise levels. 2). Initiate a review of the City's noise ordinance standards, which appear to be unreasonably restrictive, and which would pose a hardship on many new and existing businesses if they were rigorously enforced. Therefore, we are asking for your review of the attached reports -- and a decision - at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, please give Mr. Hong or myself a call. Mr. Hong may be reached at 503-684-5060. Sincerely, Ak-TC-1 Ed Murphy cc. Mr. Yun Hong, Sykart Indoor Racing Mr. Kerrie Standlee, Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. Mr. Jim Hendrix, Community Development Director edmurphy/bong/noise/monahanler/4/24/03 3 April 9,2003 `� f ITFEI Sykart Indoor Racing Center Daly • Standlee &Associates, Inc. 8205 Hunziker St. 4900 S.W.Griffith Drive Suite 216 Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton,Oregon 97005 (503)646-4420 Fax(503)646-3385 Attn: Yun Hong From: Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. )PRO/46a 4,47-• ,3INB4,� 0 11, 2 /'j • - OAEOON e01€4-44L.-- /F 0. 8. flaWS Charles H. Oppenheimer, PhD Kerrie G. Standlee, P.E. Engineer Principal Re: Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study DSA File#: 117031 Introduction The City of Tigard Community Development Director has approved the use of 8205 SW Hunziker Street, Tax Lot 200, for purposes of indoor go-kart racing subject to a number of conditions. One of the conditions is that a noise study be prepared by a certified acoustical engineer showing that the noise generated by the proposed operations will meet the maximum allowable noise standard of the City of Tigard. This document reports the findings of the noise study. Information about the Proposed Operation Customers of the Sykart Indoor Racing Center will drive go-karts around a track inside a warehouse type building constructed with concrete walls, windows, and a number of overhead garage-style doors. Typically, there will be m more than 8 go-karts traveling around the track because of safety concerns. Customers will drive either a standard go-kart 117031-L1.doc Page 1 of 6 -44 TIM Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study or a performance go-kart, the latter being available to customers with demonstrated driving skill. Business hours will be 11a.m. to 10:30 p.m. on Monday through Thursday, l la.m.to 11 p.m. on Friday and Saturday,and 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Sunday. Noise sources at the Sykart facility will include the go-karts and the ventilation system. Go-karts will operate on an indoor track that will occupy all but the southeast region of the building. Almost all of the go-kart noise radiated from the building will be transmitted from the overhead garage-style doors and windows of the building because these components have so much less sound reduction properties than the exterior concrete masonry unit walls. The building ventilation system consists of building vents and exhaust fans. The vents are located on the rooftop and noise radiating from inside the building through the vents will be negligible compared to that produced by the exhaust fans. In addition the vents are small in size and they are covered with rain protection hoods that direct the sound down toward the top of the roof The exhaust fans are located as follows: 1) three on the roof,2) four in a row of windows on the north side of a vaulted section of the building,and 3)three in windows on the east side of the building and one in a window on the east end of the north side of the building. The noise radiating from the rooftop exhaust fans will mainly reflected upwards like noise radiating from the roof vents.Noise produced by fans in the vaulted windows will be blocked by a second vaulted section (there are two vaulted sections in the building).Noise from fans on the north and east sides of the building will tend to radiate to the north and east. The Sykart facility will be located on land that was recently re-zoned industrial park. The properties surrounding the Sykart site are zoned for various uses. The properties immediately east of the site are zoned light industrial. The property immediately south of the site is zoned industrial park. The properties to the west are zoned residential and the properties to the north are zoned commercial Applicable Noise Limits Noise produced in the City of Tigard is governed by the noise limits set forth in section 7.40 of the Tigard Municipal Code. The Tigard code defines noise criteria for two types of receiving properties.The first property type is any property occupied by a"noise sensitive unit"defined in section 7.40.150.A of the code as: "... any building or portion of a building containing a residence,place or overnight accommodation, church, day care center, hospital, school, or nursing care center. " The second property type is any property not occupied by a noise-sensitive unit. This category of property could include commercially, industrially and residentially zoned property;the only requisite is that a residence, church,daycare center, hospital, school,or nursing home is not located on the property. 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 2 of 6 = -INFERS �) �, --_ Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study The specific noise limits for the two receiving properties are presented in section 7.40.160 of the Tigard code. There are limits for daytime hours and limits for nighttime hours where daytime hours are considered to be 7 a.m.to 9 p.m. and nighttime hours are considered to be 9 p.m.to 7 a.m. In general, the nighttime hour noise limits are more restrictive than the daytime hour limits and the noise limits for property with a noise sensitive building are more restrictive than the limits for property without a noise sensitive building. In all instances,the specified noise limits apply at or within the boundary of the noise receiving property. The code's noise limits are summarized below in Table 1. Table 1: City of Tigard maximum allowable noise levels(dBA) Noise Receiver Daytime Period Nighttime Period Category (7 AM to 9 PM) (9 PM to 7 AM) Property with a 50 40 Noise-sensitive unit Property without a 75 60 Noise-sensitive unit Since Sykart intends to operate during nighttime hours, the nighttime noise limit will tend to limit the amount of sound that can radiate from the facility to noise sensitive receivers. Predicted Noise Levels The amount of noise radiating from the Sykart indoor race facility was predicted using standard acoustic equations for sound transmission and sound propagation through the atmosphere. Reference noise level data for the predictions were obtained through measurements of the actual sound sources that will be located at the facility. Exhaust fan noise was measured outside the Sykart building. Go-kart noise was measured outside and inside the building. Measurements were made for a standard go-kart and a performance go- kart at a point near the door and window at northwest corner of the building interior while each go-kart was driven around the track inside the building. The measurements outside the building were made near an overhead door and near a window to help assess the amount of sound transmitted through those building components. The measured data revealed that, for the same amount of interior noise, the overhead doors transmitted more noise than the windows. This finding is expected because the hinge panels and a perimeter seal of the garage style doors are expected to leak more sound than the windows. A conservative analysis approach was used to predict the amount of noise that will radiate from the facility. The approach includes the prediction of the noise that will radiate from the facility with an operating scenario that produces the greatest amount of noise that can possibly occur. The actual noise radiated by the Sykart facility will be less than or equal to that predicted but typically it will never be higher than predicted.This approach was used because it was concluded that, if the greatest possible amount of noise radiating from the 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 3 of 6 ' INEERS '' Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study facility meets the city noise requirements, then the noise radiating from the Sykart facility will always meet the city requirements. The loudest operating scenario includes the following operating assumptions: • Four pairs of performance go-karts drive the track side by side, each go-kart radiating the maximum noise level that was measured during lap testing. • The go-kart pairs are located 6 feet within the building near windows and doors at the northwest corner, west side, southwest corner, and east side of the building. • All exhaust fans operate. • All windows serving the racing space are closed. • Ground effects between the building and receiver will be negligible. • Weather conditions are 50 degrees Fahrenheit and 90%relative humidity. It is unlikely that the go-karts will operate in a fashion that follows the loudest assumed scenario because there will often be fewer than 8 go-karts driving simultaneously.Also,the noise emitted by go-karts in the building will vary with time as drivers accelerate and brake, instead ofbeing at a maximum at all times as assumed in the analysis.Moreover,the go-karts will often not all be at the same locations assumed in the modeling and the locations chosen are selected to maximize the amount of go-kart noise transmitted through relatively noise-transparent doors or windows. In addition, the actual mix of go-karts will likely include more standard go-karts than performance go-karts. Assumptions regarding the minimal effects of vegetation and weather are also conservative because weather conditions other than the assumed conditions will produce more atmospheric noise absorption than in the prediction. The neglect of these additional absorption effects adds to the conservatism of the noise predictions. Using this conservative approach, raise was predicted at a number of locations. The prediction points are shown as the yellow squares in Figure 1.The noise sources are indicated by the red dots in the figure and represent noise emanating from the go-karts and fans. 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 4 of 6 INFERS -- _ r — Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study N point:40 d8A Y 800 !' , ; + .. , fi lir 700 - ! ,`�p , 1 v �� , .tea` 600 -i' ,' , .__ = vi I'+ t„,.�' W home:IS dBA - __ CW corner:59 d8A ` ` Nw,.n, N l.n 500 - • :`;, r �Z E fans rA• J �r' • 1J;int:s8dBAl-•W tam E Wei •400 - •S karts r 1 el NI=Eral/ ' tii. 300 -Jr ''� = -:��._! .. f , ''' 411. 4 ,44.•. . - ..." 200 -/ • • . . i .• ■ t. • ' i 411104L. . i. ate& 100 - o i�"'vi a 4 = • •• ' .4 ... ili" mik,„ .." lie . 0 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 feet Figure 1: Noise levels predicted to radiate from Sykart activities 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 5 of 6 �f = INFERS - ' _ __=� Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Study Assessment of Predicted Noise Before assessing the predicted noise radiation, we again emphasize the fact that the predictions describe the maximum noise that would most likely be radiated, based on the worst-case noisiest operating scenario described above.Noise radiation will generally be much less than that predicted. The noise that will radiate north, east, and south from the site is predicted to meet the Tigard requirements during daytime and nighttime hours because the applicable noise limits at those boundaries are the limits specified for property that does not contain a noise sensitive building. If the noise reduction properties of the Sykart building are not increased before operations begin,the amount of noise that will radiate west from the Sykart site is predicted to exceed the Tigard code at the western boundary during daytime and nighttime business hours(11 a.m. to 9 p.m. and 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. respectively for the Sykart operations). On the other hand, the results of the analysis show that, even without an upgrade of the noise reduction properties of the building façade,the amount of noise radiating west from the Sykart site will be well below the Tigard code limit of 50 dBA(the daytime hour code)at all residential structures on the adjacent properties where noise impacts would most likely be expected if there were going to be impacts. During the nighttime hours of 9 p.m. to 11 p.m., the predicted levels will exceed the City's limit of 40 dBA at the residential structures as well as at the receiving property boundaries, unless the noise reduction provided by the Sykart building is increased. Noise Mitigation If the noise level limits presented in the Tigard code are to be met at the west boundary of the Sykart property,the noise reducing properties of the doors and windows needs to change significantly on the whole west side of the building and on the west end of the north and south sides of the building. For instance, to meet the noise code,the doors and windows on the west side will have to be removed from the building and replaced with a minimum of 4"thick concrete masonry units (CMU). In addition,the windows in the on the west end of the north wall and south wall of the building will have to be removed and replaced with 4"thick CMU. Without this level of effort, the noise radiating from the Sykart building will never meet the 40 dBA limit required by the City code at the west property boundary. If the requirement to meet the 40 dBA limit at the property boundary is not required, then the changes to the building facade can be reduced considerably. Conclusion Noise radiating from the Sykart facilities will exceed the City of Tigard maximum allowable noise levels unless a significant amount of effort is made to improve the noise reduction properties of the building facade. To meet the City's code during all proposed business hours, the existing doors and windows in the west wall and the windows on the west end of the north and south walls of the building have to be replaced with at least 4" thick CMU wall material. 117031-L1.doc April 9, 2003 Page 6 of 6 April 24, 2003 ENGINEERS Sykart Indoor Racing Center Daly • Standlee &Associates, Inc. 8205 Hunziker St. 4900 S.W.Griffith Drive Suite 216 Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton,Oregon 97005 (503)646-4420 Fax(503)646-3385 Attn: Yun Hong From: Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. • 11,942 PA • - OREGON tpAlt4 3 101144,41 G. err" 6G-6— Charles H. Oppenheimer, PhD Kerrie G. Standlee, P.E. Engineer Principal Re: Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues DSA File#: 117031 Introduction In a recent noise study report for the proposed Sykart Indoor Racing Center at 8205 SW Hunziker Street, Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. (DSA) presented information regarding the changes that would be required in the building facade to ensure that the City of Tigard noise code would be met at the site property line. After a review of the report, you realized that the required noise mitigation measures would be a severe financial burden which would be impossible to absorb through your business. At your request, DSA conducted an additional investigation to determine information that might have a bearing on the evaluation of the noise radiating from the proposed Sykart indoor racing operation. In addition, DSA assessed the noise reduction provided by a building modification that you and the building owner, Knez Realty Group, proposed. This report summarizes the information developed DSA and the noise assessment of the building modifications that you have proposed. 117031-L2.doc Page 1 of 11 -1 Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues Overview of Additional Work Undertaken by DSA Ambient Noise Levels During the time when outdoor go-kart noise measurements were being made in the original noise study, it was noticed that Highway 217 traffic had a significant influence on the ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Sykart site. In fact, it was observed that the go- kart noise was only slightly audible above the traffic noise at the western property line of the Sykart site during the time measurements were being made. The highway traffic noise was observed to be higher than the 50 dBA Tigard daytime noise limit and substantially higher than the 40 dBA nighttime limit. In fact, to gather the noise level data we needed for our analysis, we actually had to move up to within 3 feet of the building to ensure that the noise levels we were measuring were actually dominated by the go-kart equipment and not Highway 217 traffic. High ambient noise levels at the Sykart site can have two effects that we think should be considered before a final decision is made on the noise mitigation measure that will be used to address noise radiating from the Sykart facility: 1) The high level of highway noise will tend to lessen the impact of any noise generated by Sykart activities by masking Sykart generated noise, and 2) The high level of highway noise in the area could make enforcement of the Tigard noise code virtually impossible with respect to Sykart because traffic noise levels may already exceed the City noise code limits at the measurement point during the hours of operations at the Sykart facility. Therefore, it became obvious that, in developing reasonable noise mitigation measures that should be considered in reducing noise radiating from the Sykart facility, it would be important to first quantify the ambient noise levels present in the vicinity of the Sykart facility. Thus, as part of the additional work performed for Sykart, ambient noise levels were measured over a weekend period when most of the activity would normally be expected to occur at the new business. The City of Tigard Noise Code In Comparison to Other Codes When we first looked at the City of Tigard noise code relative to the noise that would be generated by the Sykart facility, we noticed that parts of the City code was similar in some ways to the state DEQ noise regulation, and similar in some ways to parts of other city noise codes. For instance, we noticed that the Tigard noise code had a noise level limit for daytime hour noise levels and a noise level limit for nighttime hour noise levels, like the state noise regulation and like most other city regulations. However, we also noticed that the Tigard noise code appeared to be exceptionally more stringent than the DEQ noise regulation and noise regulations in other cities when it came to regulating the amount of noise that could radiate from a commercial or industrial noise source to a residential property. For instance, the DEQ noise regulation has an hourly statistical noise level limit that applies at a point that is 25 feet from a noise sensitive structure. The DEQ limits how long the noise level radiating from a commercial or industrial noise source can exceed specified levels and does not try to pin down an absolute maximum allowable noise level limit. In comparison, the City of Tigard noise code is an absolute maximum instantaneous 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 2 of 11 ris Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues noise level limit that applies at the property line of the receiving property which, in some instances, may be as much as 200 feet or more from a residential structure. Because the Sykart facility was used for commercial operations with multiple noise sources by other companies in the past without complaints about noise, because the City of Tigard noise code is relatively new, and because the establishment of a overly restrictive noise code can have an adverse effect on business in Tigard by adding unnecessarily to the cost of business development, we thought that it might be helpful to provide more information regarding the City noise code relative to other noise codes. Therefore, time was spent in reviewing noise codes in other cities around the Portland area. Consideration of Other Noise Control Options The original noise study concluded that significant building modifications would be needed at the Sykart facility before the noise radiating from the facility could meet the Tigard noise code as it is currently written. The building modifications involve removing the existing doors and windows in the west wall and in the western sides of the north and south walls, and then installing CMU material with a minimum of 4-inch thickness. These building modifications would have adverse economic impacts on both the Sykart owner and the landowner of the Sykart site. In addition to the immediate economic impact on the building owner, if the modifications were made to ensure the noise levels would meet the existing noise code, the building owner would be faced with the fact that, if the Sykart business failed to continue in the future, the CMU wall materials may have to be removed and doors and windows reinstalled to provide light access and door access for a new tenant. These features could be valuable to a future tenant, in the opinion of the landowner. Because there seemed to be so many reasons to support less noise mitigation than that provided by the complete replacement of windows and doors with CMU materials at the Sykart facility, you asked Daly-Standlee & Associates, Inc. to evaluate and address an alternate noise mitigation scheme, taking into account the ambient noise levels as well as the Tigard noise code. Therefore, as part of our work, DSA assessed the noise control provided by the alternate mitigation and provided comment of the results of the mitigation relative to noise impacts at the residences. The Ambient Noise Issue To help determine the ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Sykart facility, DSA performed ambient noise measurements near the southwest corner of the Sykart property and near the rear yard of the residence at 12390 SW Knoll Drive. Measurements were made continuously over a 30 hour period from approximately 6:00 p.m. on Friday evening April 4 to 11 p.m. on Saturday night April 5. The measurement period includes Friday and Saturday nights when the Sykart facility is expected to be most active and it includes the nighttime hours when the Sykart facility would not be operating. The data was measured during the nighttime hours when the Sykart facility would be closed mainly see what noise levels were present in the area during what is normally considered the quietest hours of a 24 hour period(2 a.m. to 4 a.m.). Ambient noise levels were measured at two locations: 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 3 of 11 IMO ___Rs_ - Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues Yard boundary, west of site: Within 20 feet of the usable yard boundary of the residence at 12390 SW Knoll Drive. The location is roughly 20 feet higher than the foundation of the Sykart building and is representative of the ambient conditions at the boundaries of the yards of the homes west of the Sykart site. Noise reaching this location was observed to be dominated by traffic on Highway 217. Southwest corner of site: Within 10 feet of the corner, also the northeast corner of the residence at 8335 SW Hunziker Road. This location is representative of the noise environment along the western property line of the Sykart site where the Sykart building acts as a shield from some of the Highway 217 traffic noise. Noise reaching this location was observed to be either totally due to traffic during the periods when it was not raining, and due to both the noise generated by water draining down the roof drain on the south side of the building and the traffic noise at times when it was raining. The rain was intermittent between noon on Saturday April 5 and 11 p.m. that night. The measured hourly ambient noise levels are shown in Figure 1, along with the Tigard noise code limits. The upper graph in Figure 1 shows the ambient noise levels measured at the residence site, and the lower graph in the figure shows the ambient noise level measured along the west property line of the Sykart property. The figures show the minimum sound level Lmi„ measured during each hour, as well as the sound level exceeded 90% of the time during each hour (54 minutes of the hour - known as the hourly [90 noise level)at the two locations. The business hours of the Sykart facility are also indicated. The first thing the two graphs illustrate is the fact that the ambient noise at the residences west of the Sykart facility is actually louder than that found at Sykart's west property line. This fmding is due to the fact that the residences are elevated above Highway 217 more than the Sykart building and there is less reduction of sound between the highway and the residences than there is between the highway and the west property line. The second thing the graphs show is that, during most of a 24-hour period, the minimum noise level at the receivers is above the City noise code limit. The upper graph of Figure 1 shows that the noise level at residences west of the Sykart facility drops below the City's maximum allowable noise level limit during only 6 hours out of 24 hours (based on the minimum noise level part of the graph). The figure also shows that during those 6 hours, the sound level exceeded the maximum allowable noise level limit by a substantial amount during at least 90% of the time and possibly more than 95% of the time. Finally, the graph clearly illustrates that the ambient noise levels at the residences are generally well above the City's maximum allowable noise level during all the hours when Sykart will be operating, and especially during the nighttime hours of 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. The significance of these findings is the fact that it will be difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to determine how much noise is radiating from the Sykart facility, especially at the location of the residences, but even at the property line if the level of the noise is close to the ambient noise level; and especially if the noise is below than the ambient noise level. Thus, it may be virtually impossible for the City to enforce the ordinance in this area. Before an enforcement officer could find a violation of the noise code with a sound level meter, he or she would have to find a time when the noise radiating from the Sykart facility to the west property line was significantly above the ambient noise level, or the ambient 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 4 of 11 1kTT Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues noise level was at least 3 dB below the noise level limit. Based on the noise levels predicted to radiate from the facility and the ambient noise level data measured on April 4 and 5, those conditions may never exist. Yard boundary, west of site Ii41iiI !! diI 1i!!iIIIIi!!!!!! i !! Lmi L90n ao -.w• limit 30 cO O < N V Co co ccoo < N NN V CO CO O Hour Sykart business Sykart business hours hours (--A—) Southwest corner of 60 s' y 50 a 1, i Ai- CO 40 1 Lmin L90 limit 30 (O Co O < N V cco or, O N N V Co CO 0 Hour Figure 1: Comparison of measured ambient noise levels and City of Tigard noise limits at two locations near the Sykart site. 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 5 of 11 • o' Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues Tigard Noise Code Compared to Noise Codes in Other Cities DSA researched noise regulation codes in other jurisdictions in the Portland metropolitan area, and learned that the City of Tigard noise control code is one of the most restrictive codes, if not the most restrictive code, for commercial and industrial operations in the Portland metropolitan area. The Tigard code places limits on the instantaneous maximum noise level (Lax). Some municipalities like Beaverton, Oregon City and Lake Oswego do not ise a maximum noise level limit. Instead, those municipalities rely on the regulations of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ), which contain statistical noise level limits instead of maximum instantaneous noise level limits. Statistical noise level limits basically define how long the noise radiating from a source can exceed a prescribed level, but they do not define the absolute maximum level that can radiate from a source. However, because the DEQ noise limits include an hourly Lot limit(the level exceeded 1% of the hour or 36 seconds in an hour), that limit essentially makes sure that if a louder noise occurs, it only occurs for a very short time period. There are several other municipalities in the metropolitan area that impose an absolute maximum noise level limit like that used in the City of Tigard code. Out of four other municipalities in the metropolitan area that use an Lax noise criterion, three of those municipalities use the property line of the receiving property as the measurement point like the City of Tigard and one uses a point located 25 feet from the residential structure. In that sense, the City of Tigard is very similar to most of the other communities. However, when it comes to the criterion level specified as the limit, in all of those cases -- including the one which applies 25 feet from the residential structure -- the 1-max limit in the code is higher and less restrictive than that specified in the Tigard code. A survey of maximum allowable noise levels limit ordinances is presented in Table 2. The tabulated noise limits apply to the case of an industrial noise source radiating to a residential receiver such as will be the case at the Sykart facility. The measurement location for the criterion is also shown in the table. Table 2: Maximum instantaneous noise level limits for continuously operating industrial noise sources that radiate noise to residential receivers (by municipality) Daytime Nighttime Point of Daytime Nighttime Municipality Lmax Limit L,„ Limit Measurement Period Period (dBA) (dBA) -Gresham 60 50 Property line of 7 AM to 10 PM 10 PM to 7 AM residence _ Milwaukie 55 50 Property line of 7 AM to 10 PM 10 PM to 7 AM residence Portland 60 55 Property line of 7 AM to 10 PM 10 PM to 7 AM residence Tualatin None 60 25 feet from 7 AM to 9 PM 9 PM to 7 AM residence _ Tigard 50 40 Property line 7 AM to 9 PM 9 PM to 7 AM of residence 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 6 of 11 , • , usIlk :,__:., -r -` Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues Based on the information shown in the table, it can be seen that the Tigard code is at least 5 to 10 dBA more restrictive during daytime hours and 10 to 15 dBA more restrictive during nighttime hours than the codes of other municipalities that use the property line as the measurement point. In the case of the Tualatin code, the answer to how much more restrictive the Tigard code is during nighttime hours depends on the distance between the residential structure and the property line. If the Tualatin code limit was used at the residences west of the Sykart facility, because of the significant distance between the residences and the Sykart west property line, the equivalent level at the would be approximately 72 dBA instead of 40 dBA; approximately 32 dB higher than what is allowed by the Tigard code. This is a tremendous difference in allowed noise level. While the Tualatin noise code may not be restrictive enough to adequately protect residential receivers in the City of Tigard, given the fact that the residences west of the Sykart property are located so far from Sykart's west property line, the application of any one of the other nighttime hour property line noise limits of 50 to 55 dBA would be much more reasonable. This is especially true when the ambient noise levels are so high and when the noise level at the residences would be 10 to 12 dB less than that found at the property line (in other words, 38 to 40 dBA if the limit was 50 dBA, which could never be measured because the ambient noise is always far above those levels at the residences). Consideration of Other Noise Control Options The original noise study concluded that, without major changes to the indoor racetrack building, noise radiating from the Sykart facility will exceed the Tigard noise limits along the west property line where the Sykart property is bordered by property occupied by noise-sensitive residences. This finding was mainly due to the fact that the maximum noise level radiating from Sykart's operations could not exceed a level of 40 dBA during nighttime hours at the west property line, and because that property line is so close to the building wall. As discussed in the previous section, if the property line noise limit for nighttime hours was more in line with that used in other communities in the metropolitan area, and more in line with the ambient noise levels found during the ambient noise study (say in the range of 50 dBA), then the equivalent noise levels at the noise sensitive residences would be close to the City's nighttime limit level of 40 dBA. Subsequently, the amount of changes required on the building would be reduced significantly. To help demonstrate the significance of the noise limit chosen for the west property line, we will discuss the expected noise levels around the facility with two noise mitigation scenarios. The first scenario will be the scenario discussed in the original report, i.e., building modifications that would be necessary to meet the City's 40 dBA criterion at the west property line during nighttime hours. The noise levels predicted to radiate with the recommended CMU walls at locations west of the racetrack are shown in Figure 2. In addition to the predicted noise levels radiating from the facility, the average ambient 4o noise levels found during the 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. hours is provided. As can be clearly seen in the figure, the noise radiated to the property line from the acetrack facility would be between 37 and 40 dBA, which is at or below the City's limit.More significantly, it is well below the ambient noise at the property line. Even more importantly, the noise predicted to radiate from the facility to the residences west of the facility would be as low as 25 dBA at 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 7 of 11 Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues some locations. This level is so far below the ambient noise that it could never be detected by ear or meter. Therefore, using the CMU mitigation measure would be going well beyond the point of ensuring that there will be no significant noise impacts at residences located to the west of the proposed racetrack facility. In fact, while it ensures the code is met, the use of that mitigation measure becomes a waste of money given the fact that no one would be able to notice the Sykart noise once it was more than 5 dB below the ambient noise level. The second mitigation scenario is one that you proposed. You proposed to apply sound insulating fiberglass to the interior surfaces of the two overhead doors on the west side of the building, and you wanted to know the affect of such a measure. According to information you provided, the building modification would consist of covering the northwest corner door in the building with an 18-inch thick layer of insulation. In addition, you would install a 6-inch thick layer of insulation over the door located near the middle of the west side of the building. The thinner layer would allow continued operation of the middle door for moving a garbage dumpster in and out of the building. You wanted to know the effect of such a treatment; the following information provides our answer to that question. The sound reduction properties of the fiberglass was modeled and included in predictions of the noise radiating from the Sykart facility. The noise levels predicted to radiate to the west with the fiberglass treatments are shown in Figure 3. As can be seen from the figure, with the fiberglass insulation, Sykart generated noise will be at or less than 40 dBA at all residential buildings west of the site. In addition, Sykart noise will be less than the 50 dBA daytime hour noise limit at the boundaries of all yard spaces located at those residences and only slightly above the nighttime hour noise limit of 40 dBA. At the west Sykart property line, the noise radiating from the racetrack facility would be in the range of the ambient noise currently found on the property line (50 to 52 dBA). While the predicted property line noise level could exceed the City's daytime noise limit at the north end of the property and while it is definitely above the 40 dBA nighttime hour noise limit, there would be no impact on the residences west of the property line. This is because the distance between those residences and the property line is great enough that the noise levels at the residences is, as stated above, at the City's nighttime hour noise limit of 40 dBA, and well below the ambient noise measured at those residences. Thus, we believe that, when all of these factors are considered, it is readily apparent that removing the windows and doors from the proposed Sykart racetrack facility and replacing them with concrete block material would amount to spending a lot of money for building modifications that will never provide a benefit to anyone. Conclusions The reduction of Sykart noise to the Tigard maximum allowable noise limit at the west property line of the site will be difficult to achieve due to the amount of building modifications required to achieve the goal. Further, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce due to the ambient noise level already present around the site. The benefits of meeting the City's property line noise limits will be virtually impossible to measure 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 8 of 11 1 4 its f Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues because the ambient noise caused by Highway 217 traffic is so much Beater than that which would radiate to the residences from facility. You have proposed to modify the building with an alternative treatment method to reduce the noise that will radiate from the go-kart facility. With your proposed modifications of 18" thick insulation over the northwest door and 6" thick insulation over the south end door, the indoor racing activities will be, for the most part, unnoticeable. That is, there will be no noise impact on residences near the Sykart site because of the masking effect provided by Highway 217 traffic noise. One might therefore conclude that the aural comfort of residents living by the Sykart site will be preserved and protected with the proposed alternative building modification. 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 9 of 11 . . \ , Ili I c I 1 ,-.--eiG-Itig, Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues igkirw 800 t - 1% - - 700 r . 117/ •s' ,16,---___ , • 29 dBA 152dBA amb 600 - ' 1 • ji IOW , r • ..l49 dBA amb • 't •5 dBA 152 dBA tomb f,14W i w tarts 500 r • • 4 • • 0) 37 dBA 149 dBA iamb J Ilir I 400 - - ' 5W"". r7 011 i7----L-1_401...300 -r AN 200 -% - r K . •*. t - ^ a_ . �,� - , ,. Vii►•100 �`� / 4i "'iv - - — [k. • �/ '• < 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 feet Figure 2: Comparison of noise levels predicted to radiate from Sykart activities with CMU replacement of windows and doors and ambient 1..90 noise levels power averaged over the 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. business hours. 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 10 of 11 W ) A Sykart Indoor Racing Center Noise Issues .a-' 14 p 400111. ,, ., ,.. ii-rim 800 700 1' .1 y a` �.� NW yard:43 dBA f- 600 " rr �! � 'T=.. . R` .�_..-•- ,..--.., W home:40 dBA IiNW■arner 52dBA �' VVV My.' .,,.tea. 500 10 T "`'�� 7-+, w MW point 5 dI3A ` • g •Wart.-y 4• ir 400 •t ' • SW�.rt. , 300 y',. ow`ell ,, —# 1 1 200 :1, .' •`• ,. , . % 100 ,, _� .` ,,. s iy _ . qt shy' - - 0 ,•- ti 'P ,,,....10. `\ • 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 feet Figure 3: Noise levels predicted to radiate from Sykart activities with fiberglass insulation of doors on western side of building. 117031-L2.doc April 24, 2003 Page 11 of 11 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE B. This section shall not apply to B. If measurements are made, the person authorized construction projects with reasonable making those measurements shall have completed safeguards to prevent injury or death to playing training in the use of the sound level meter, and children. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(5)), 1986). shall use measurement procedures consistent with that training. (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 01- 7.40.120 Scattering Rubbish. 13A,Ord 90-03 §1(part), 1990). No person shall deposit upon public or 7.40.150 Definitions. private property any kind of rubbish, trash, debris, refuse, or any substance that would mar the As used in this Article: appearance, create a stench or fire hazard, detract from the cleanliness or safety of the property, or A. "Noise-sensitive unit" shall include any would be likely to injure a person, animal, or building or portion of a building containing a vehicle traveling upon a public way. (Ord. 86-20 residence, place of overnight accommodation, §4(Exhibit C(5)(6)), 1986). church, day care center, hospital, school, or nursing care center. For the purpose of this ARTICLE IV.NUISANCES AFFECTING definition, "residence" and "overnight THE PUBLIC PEACE accommodation" does not include living/sleeping quarters of a caretaker or watchperson on 7.40.130 Prohibition On Excessive industrial or commercial property provided by the Noises. owner or operator of the industrial or commercial facility. No person shall make, assist in making, permit, continue, or permit the continuance of, B. "Plainly audible" means any sound for any noise within the City of Tigard in violation of which the information content of that sound is this article. No person shall cause or permit any unambiguously communicated to the listener, noise to emanate from property under that such as, but not limited to, understandable spoken person's control in violation of this article. speech, comprehensible.musical rhythms or vocal (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord. 96- sounds. 06; Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 1990). C. "Unnecessarily loud" means any sound 7.40.140 Sound Measurement. that interferes with normal spoken communication or that disturbs sleep. A. While sound measurements are not required for the enforcement of this article, should D. "City Manager" means the City measurements be made, they shall be made with a Manager or designee. (Repealed and replaced by sound level meter. The sound level meter: Ord.01-13A,Ord.90-03 §51(part), 1990). 1. Shall be an instrument in good 7.40.160 Noise Limits. operating condition,meeting the requirements of a Type I or Type II meter; It is unlawful for any person to produce,or permit to be produced,sounds which: 2. Shall contain at least an A- weighted scale, and both fast and slow meter A. When measured at the boundary of or response capability. within a property on which a noise sensitive unit, 7-40-5 SE Update: 12/01 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE not the source of the sound, is located,exceeds: motorcycle, truck, bus or other vehicle while in motion,except as a danger signal. 1. Forty dB at any time between nine p.m. and seven a.m. the following day; or 2. The operation of sound-producing devices such as, but not limited to, musical 2. Fifty dB at any time between seven instruments, loudspeakers, amplifying devices, a.m. and nine p.m. the same day; or public address systems, radios, tape recorders and/or tape players, compact disc players, B. Is plainly audible at any time between phonographs, television sets and stereo systems, nine p.m. and seven a.m. the following day within including those installed in or on vehicles. a noise-sensitive unit which is not the source of sound;or 3. The operation of any gong or siren upon any vehicle, other than police, fire or other C. Is unnecessarily loud within a noise- emergency vehicle, except during sanctioned sensitive unit which is not the source of the sound. parades. D. When measured at or within the 4. The use of any automobile, boundary of or within a property on which no motorcycle or other vehicle so out of repair or in noise-sensitive unit is located, and the noise such a manner as to create loud or unnecessary originates from outside the property, if the noise sounds,grating, grinding,rattling or other noise. level exceeds: 5. The keeping of any animal or bird 1. Sixty dB at any time between nine that creates noise in excess of the levels specified p.m. and seven a.m.of the following day;or in Section 7.40.160. 2. Seventy-five dB at any other time. 6. The operation of air conditioning or heating units, heat pumps, refrigeration units, E. If within a park, street or other public (including those mounted on vehicles) and place, is unnecessarily loud at a distance of 100 swimming pool or hot tub pumps. feet. (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 1990). 7. The erection (including excavation),demolition,alteration or repair of any 7.40.170 Prohibited Noises. building, except as allowed under Sections 7.40.180.E and 7.40.180.F. A. The use of exhaust brakes (fake brakes), except in an emergency, is prohibited at all times 8. The use or creation of amplified within the City,regardless of noise level. sound in any outdoor facility. B. Except as provided in Section 7.40.180, 9. Any other action that creates or the following acts are violations of this chapter if allows sound in excess of the level allowed by they exceed the noise limits specified in Section Section 7.40.160. (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 7.40.160: 01-13A,Ord.96-06; Ord.90-03 §1(part), 1990). 1. The sounding of any horn or signal device or any other device on any automobile, 7-40-6 SE Update: 12/01 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 7.40.180 Exceptions. H. Sounds caused by air-,electrical-or gas- driven domestic tools, including, but not limited The following shall not be considered to, lawn mowers, lawn edgers, radial arm, circular violations of this article, even if the sound limit and table saws,drills, and/or other similar lawn or specified in Section 7.40.160 is exceeded: construction tools,but not including tools used for vehicle repair, during the hours of seven a.m. to A. Non-amplified sounds created by nine p.m. Monday through Friday and eight a.m. organized athletic or other group activities, when to nine p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. such activities are conducted on property generally used for such purposes, such as I. Sounds caused by chainsaws, when used stadiums, parks, schools, and athletic fields, for pruning, trimming or cutting of live trees during normal hours for such events. between the hours of seven a.m. and nine p.m. Monday through Friday and eight a.m. and nine B. Sounds caused by emergency work, or p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and not exceeding by the ordinary and accepted use of emergency two hours in any twenty-four hour period. equipment, vehicles and apparatus, regardless of whether such work is performed by a public or J. Sounds created by community events, private agency,or upon public or private property. such as parades, public fireworks displays, street fairs, and festivals that the City Manager or C. Sounds caused by bona fide use of designee has determined in writing to be emergency warning devices and alarm systems. community events for the purposes of this section. The City Manager's decision shall be based on the D. Sounds regulated by federal law, anticipated number of participants or spectators, including, but not limited to, sounds caused by the location of the event and other factors the City railroads or aircraft. Manager determines to be appropriate under the circumstances. E. Sounds caused by demolition activities when performed under a permit issued by K. Sounds made by legal fireworks on the appropriate governmental authorities and only third of July, Fourth of July, and the Friday and between the hours of seven a.m. and nine p.m. Saturday during the weekend closest to the Fourth Monday through Friday and eight a.m. and nine of July of each year, between the hours of seven p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. a.m.and eleven p.m. F. Sounds caused by industrial, agricultural L. Sounds made between midnight and or construction activities during the hours of 12:30 a.m. on January 1 of each year. seven a.m. to nine p.m. Monday through Friday and eight a.m. to nine p.m. on Saturday and M. Sounds originating from construction Sunday. projects for public facilities within rights of way pursuant to a noise mitigation plan approved by G. Sounds caused by regular vehicular the City Manager. The noise mitigation plan traffic upon premises open to the public in must: compliance with state law. Regular vehicle traffic does not include a single vehicle that creates noise 1. Map the project noise impacts and in excess of the standard set forth in Section explain how the impacts will be mitigated; 7.40.160. 7-40-7 SE Update: 12/01 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 2. Provide special consideration and ARTICLE VI.VIOLATION--PENALTY mitigation efforts for noise sensitive units; 7.40.210 Penalty For Chapter Violations. 3. Outline public notification plans; A. A violation of this chapter shall 4. Provide a 24-hour telephone constitute a Class 1 civil infraction,which shall be contact number for information and complaints processed according to the procedures established about a project. in the civil infractions ordinance, set out at Chapter 1.16 of this code. The City Manager may approve a noise mitigation plan only if the City Manager B. Each violation of a separate provision of determines that the noise mitigation plan will this chapter shall constitute a separate infraction, prevent unreasonable noise impacts. (Repealed and each day that a violation of this chapter is and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord 90-03 §1(part), committed or permitted to continue shall 1990). constitute a separate infraction. 7.40.190 Maximum Limit For Certain C. A finding of a violation of this chapter Activities. shall not relieve the responsible party of the duty to abate the violation. The penalties imposed by Notwithstanding Section 7.40.180, the this section are in addition to and not in lieu of creation of noise by any activity subject to the any remedies available to the City. exceptions listed in Sections 7.40.180.E, 7.40.180.F, 7.40.180.H, or 7.40.180.I, in excess of D. If a provision of this chapter is violated 85 dB measured on property on which a noise by a firm or corporation, the officer or officers, or sensitive use is located, for more than 5 minutes in person or persons responsible for the violation any calendar day shall be a violation. (Repealed shall be subject to the penalties imposed by this and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord. 99-29; Ord. chapter. (Ord. 99-01; Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 96-06;Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 1990). 1990).• 7.40.200 Evidence. In any civil infraction action based on a violation of the limits set forth in Sections 7.40.160.B, 7.40.160.0 or 7.40.160.E, the evidence of at least two persons from different households, shall be required to establish a violation. Any Police or Code Enforcement Officer or other City employee who witnessed the violation shall be counted as a witness for purposes of the two witness requirement. The City may ask an alleged violator to enter into a voluntary compliance agreement based on a single complaint or single witness. (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 01-13A,Ord. 99-29; Ord. 96-06; Ord.90-03 §1(part), 1990). 7-40-8 SE Update: 12/01 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE B. This section shall not apply to B. If measurements are made, the person authorized construction projects with reasonable making those measurements shall have completed safeguards to prevent injury or death to playing training in the use of the sound level meter, and children. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(5)), 1986). shall use measurement procedures consistent with that training. (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 01- 7.40.120 Scattering Rubbish. 13A,Ord 90-03 §1(part), 1990). No person shall deposit upon public or 7.40.150 Definitions. private property any kind of rubbish, trash, debris, refuse, or any substance that would mar the As used in this Article: appearance, create a stench or fire hazard, detract from the cleanliness or safety of the property, or A. "Noise-sensitive unit" shall include any would be likely to injure a person, animal, or building or portion of a building containing a vehicle traveling upon a public way. (Ord. 86-20 residence, place of overnight accommodation, §4(Exhibit C(5)(6)), 1986). church, day care center, hospital, school, or nursing care center. For the purpose of this ARTICLE IV.NUISANCES AFFECTING definition, "residence" and "overnight THE PUBLIC PEACE accommodation" does not include living/sleeping quarters of a caretaker or watchperson on 7.40.130 Prohibition On Excessive industrial or commercial property provided by the Noises. owner or operator of the industrial or commercial facility. No person shall make, assist in making, permit, continue, or permit the continuance of, B. "Plainly audible" means any sound for any noise within the City of Tigard in violation of which the information content of that sound is this article. No person shall cause or permit any unambiguously communicated to the listener, noise to emanate from property under that such as,but not limited to, understandable spoken person's control in violation of this article. speech, comprehensible.musical rhythms or vocal (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord. 96- sounds. 06;Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 1990). C. "Unnecessarily loud" means any sound 7.40.140 Sound Measurement. that interferes with normal spoken communication or that disturbs sleep. A. While sound measurements are not required for the enforcement of this article, should D. "City Manager" means the City measurements be made,they shall be made with a Manager or designee. (Repealed and replaced by sound level meter. The sound level meter: Ord.01-13A,Ord.90-03 §51(part), 1990). 1. Shall be an instrument in good 7.40.160 Noise Limits. operating condition,meeting the requirements of a Type I or Type II meter; It is unlawful for any person to produce, or permit to be produced,sounds which: 2. Shall contain at least an A- weighted scale, and both fast and slow meter A. When measured at the boundary of or response capability. within a property on which a noise sensitive unit, 7-40-5 SE Update: 12/01 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE not the source of the sound, is located, exceeds: motorcycle, truck, bus or other vehicle while in motion,except as a danger signal. 1. Forty dB at any time between nine p.m. and seven a.m. the following day; or 2. The operation of sound-producing devices such as, but not limited to, musical 2. Fifty dB at any time between seven instruments, loudspeakers, amplifying devices, a.m. and nine p.m.the same day; or public address systems, radios, tape recorders and/or tape players, compact disc players, B. Is plainly audible at any time between phonographs, television sets and stereo systems, nine p.m. and seven a.m. the following day within including those installed in or on vehicles. a noise-sensitive unit which is not the source of sound;or 3. The operation of any gong or siren upon any vehicle, other than police, fire or other C. Is unnecessarily loud within a noise- emergency vehicle, except during sanctioned sensitive unit which is not the source of the sound. parades. D. When measured at or within the 4. The use of any automobile, boundary of or within a property on which no motorcycle or other vehicle so out of repair or in noise-sensitive unit is located, and the noise such a manner as to create loud or unnecessary originates from outside the property, if the noise sounds,grating,grinding,rattling or other noise. level exceeds: 5. The keeping of any animal or bird 1. Sixty dB at any time between nine that creates noise in excess of the levels specified p.m. and seven a.m.of the following day;or in Section 7.40.160. 2. Seventy-five dB at any other time. 6. The operation of air conditioning or heating units, heat pumps, refrigeration units, E. If within a park, street or other public (including those mounted on vehicles) and place, is unnecessarily loud at a distance of 100 swimming pool or hot tub pumps. feet. (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 1990). 7. The erection (including excavation),demolition,alteration or repair of any 7.40.170 Prohibited Noises. building, except as allowed under Sections 7.40.180.E and 7.40.180.F. A. The use of exhaust brakes (fake brakes), except in an emergency, is prohibited at all times 8. The use or creation of amplified within the City,regardless of noise level. sound in any outdoor facility. B. Except as provided in Section 7.40.180, 9. Any other action that creates or the following acts are violations of this chapter if allows sound in excess of the level allowed by they exceed the noise limits specified in Section Section 7.40.160. (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 7.40.160: 01-13A,Ord. 96-06; Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 1990). 1. The sounding of any horn or signal device or any other device on any automobile, 7-40-6 SE Update: 12/01 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 7.40.180 Exceptions. H. Sounds caused by air-, electrical-or gas- driven domestic tools, including, but not limited The following shall not be considered to, lawn mowers, lawn edgers, radial arm, circular violations of this article, even if the sound limit and table saws,drills, and/or other similar lawn or specified in Section 7.40.160 is exceeded: construction tools, but not including tools used for vehicle repair, during the hours of seven a.m. to A. Non-amplified sounds created by nine p.m. Monday through Friday and eight a.m. organized athletic or other group activities, when to nine p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. such activities are conducted on property generally used for such purposes, such as I. Sounds caused by chainsaws, when used stadiums, parks, schools, and athletic fields, for pruning, trimming or cutting of live trees during normal hours for such events. between the hours of seven a.m. and nine p.m. Monday through Friday and eight a.m. and nine B. Sounds caused by emergency work, or p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and not exceeding by the ordinary and accepted use of emergency two hours in any twenty-four hour period. equipment, vehicles and apparatus, regardless of whether such work is performed by a public or J. Sounds created by community events, private agency,or upon public or private property. such as parades, public fireworks displays, street fairs, and festivals that the City Manager or C. Sounds caused by bona fide use of designee has determined in writing to be emergency warning devices and alarm systems. community events for the purposes of this section. The City Manager's decision shall be based on the D. Sounds regulated by federal law, anticipated number of participants or spectators, including, but not limited to, sounds caused by the location of the event and other factors the City railroads or aircraft. Manager determines to be appropriate under the circumstances. E. Sounds caused by demolition activities when performed under a permit issued by K. Sounds made by legal fireworks on the appropriate governmental authorities and only third of July, Fourth of July, and the Friday and between the hours of seven a.m. and nine p.m. Saturday during the weekend closest to the Fourth Monday through Friday and eight a.m. and nine of July of each year, between the hours of seven p.m.on Saturday and Sunday. a.m.and eleven p.m. F. Sounds caused by industrial, agricultural L. Sounds made between midnight and or construction activities during the hours of 12:30 a.m. on January 1 of each year. seven a.m. to nine p.m. Monday through Friday and eight a.m. to nine p.m. on Saturday and M. Sounds originating from construction Sunday. projects for public facilities within rights of way pursuant to a noise mitigation plan approved by G. Sounds caused by regular vehicular the City Manager. The noise mitigation plan traffic upon premises open to the public in must: compliance with state law. Regular vehicle traffic does not include a single vehicle that creates noise 1. Map the project noise impacts and in excess of the standard set forth in Section explain how the impacts will be mitigated; 7.40.160. 7-40-7 SE Update: 12/01 • TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 2. Provide special consideration and ARTICLE VI.VIOLATION--PENALTY mitigation efforts for noise sensitive units; 7.40.210 Penalty For Chapter Violations. 3. Outline public notification plans; A. A violation of this chapter shall 4. Provide a 24-hour telephone constitute a Class 1 civil infraction,which shall be contact number for information and complaints processed according to the procedures established about a project. in the civil infractions ordinance, set out at Chapter 1.16 of this code. The City Manager may approve a noise mitigation plan only if the City Manager B. Each violation of a separate provision of determines that the noise mitigation plan will this chapter shall constitute a separate infraction, prevent unreasonable noise impacts. (Repealed and each day, that a violation of this chapter is and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord 90-03 §1(part), committed or permitted to continue shall 1990). constitute a separate infraction. 7.40.190 Maximum Limit For Certain C. A finding of a violation of this chapter Activities. shall not relieve the responsible party of the duty to abate the violation. The penalties imposed by Notwithstanding Section 7.40.180, the this section are in addition to and not in lieu of creation of noise by any activity subject to the any remedies available to the City. exceptions listed in Sections 7.40.180.E, 7.40.180.F,7.40.180.H, or 7.40.180.I, in excess of D. If a provision of this chapter is violated 85 dB measured on property on which a noise by a firm or corporation, the officer or officers, or sensitive use is located, for more than 5 minutes in person or persons responsible for the violation any calendar day shall be a violation. (Repealed shall be subject to the penalties imposed by this and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord. 99-29; Ord. chapter. (Ord. 99-01; Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 96-06;Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 1990). 1990).• 7.40.200 Evidence. In any civil infraction action based on a violation of the limits set forth in Sections 7.40.160.B, 7.40.160.0 or 7.40.160.E, the evidence of at least two persons from different households, shall be required to establish a violation. Any Police or Code Enforcement Officer or other City employee who witnessed the violation shall be counted as a witness for purposes of the two witness requirement. The City may ask an alleged violator to enter into a voluntary compliance agreement based on a single complaint or single witness. (Repealed and replaced by Ord. 01-13A, Ord. 99-29; Ord.96-06; Ord. 90-03 §1(part), 1990). 7-40-8 SE Update: 12/01