The URL can be used to link to this page

SDR2002-00001 SDR2002- 00001 RED INK, INC . 120 DAYS = 6/12/2002 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping(Better Community CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER Case Numbers: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY (SLR) 2002-00003 Case Name: RED INK, INC. Name of Owner: Tom and Lori Hays Name of Applicant: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. —Attn: Kim McMillan Address of Applicant: 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road Portland, OR 97062 Address of Property: 12220 SW Grant Street Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washington County Tax Assessor's Map No. 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW AND WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY. THE CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE HEARINGS OFFICER HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL I 5, 2002 TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER. Request: : The applicant requested to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. Zoning Designation: I-P: Industrial Park District. Comprehensive Plan Designatiopn: Light Industrial. Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. Action: ❑ Approval as Requested © Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to: © Owners of Record Within the Required Distance © Affected Government Agencies © The Affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator © The Applicants and Owners The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard City Hall. Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 30, 2002 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MAY 15, 2002 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Review Authority 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 18.390.040.6.2. 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. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON MAY 14, 2002. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON Regarding an application by Lewis &Van Vleet, Inc. for ) FINAL ORDER Red Ink,Inc. for Site Development and Sensitive Lands ) SDR 2002-00001 Reviews to convert a single family home into an office in the ) SLR 2002-00001 I-P zone at 12220 SW Grant Street in the City of Tigard ) SLR 2002-00003 A. SUMMARY 1. This final order concerns an application by Lewis&Van Vleet,Inc. for Red Ink, Inc. (the"applicant")to convert an existing single family home into an office and to add 600 square feet to the structure. This requires Site Development Review and Sensitive Lands Review. The applicant also proposes to install a storm water discharge pipe within the Fanno Creek buffer. This requires Sensitive Lands Review. All of the site is in the floodplain or floodway of Fanno Creek. The site contains 35,136 square feet. It is situated on the east side of SW Grant Street at 12220 SW Grant Street; also known as tax lot 110, WCT Map 2S 102BA (the"site"). Additional facts about the site and surroundings are provided in the Staff Report to the Hearings Officer dated March 28, 2002(the "Staff Report"), incorporated herein by reference. 2. At the public hearing in this matter,City staff recommended approval,subject to conditions. The applicant accepted the staff recommendations as amended at the hearing and waived its right to have the record held open for final argument. Other than relevant service providers and public agency staff,no one testified orally or in writing with objections or concerns. The hearings officer closed the record at the end of the hearing. 3. For the reasons provided and referenced in this final order,the hearings officer approves the applications, subject to the conditions recommended by City staff with certain changes described more herein. B. HEARING AND RECORD 1. Tigard Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer")held a duly noticed public hearing on April 15,2002 to receive and consider public testimony in this matter. The record includes a witness list,materials in the casefile as of the close of the hearing,and an audio record of the hearing. At the beginning of the hearing,the hearings officer made the declaration required by ORS 197.763. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parte contacts,bias or conflicts of interest. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected relevant testimony offered at the hearing. 2. City planner Brad Kilby summarized the proposed development,the applicable approval standards,the Staff Report and recommended conditions of approval. 3. Kim McMillan testified for the applicant. She introduced a letter in which the Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL) stated that the applicant is not required to obtain an ODSIJUSCOE permit for the pipeline that will extend into the buffer of Fanno Creek. She also testifed that the owner of the parcel of land that extends over the top of the creek bank has indicated they will grant an easement for the pipeline. She accepted the findings and recommended conditions of approval in the Staff Report without objections or corrections. She waived the applicant's right to submit a final written argument after the public hearing. 4. Georgie Earl, who is the Realtor for the property owners,testified in support of the application. 5. At the end of the public hearing,the hearing officer closed the public record and announced his intention to approve the application subject to conditions recommended by City staff. C. DISCUSSION City staff recommended approval of the application based on findings and conclusions and subject to conditions of approval recommended in the Staff Report with one amendment. The applicant accepted those conditions as amended. No one disputed the findings in the Staff Report. The hearings officer agrees with those findings,conclusions and conditions as amended by the discussion of testimony above,and adopts the affirmative findings in the Staff Report as support for this Final Order. D. CONCLUSION The hearings officer concludes that the Site Development Review and Sensitive Lands Review applications do or can comply with the relevant standards and criteria of the Tigard CDC as provided in this Final Order,provided the application is subject to conditions of approval that ensure finals plans and certain other information are provided and found sufficient by the Director in a timely manner and that subsequent development will comply with applicable CDC standards and criteria. Therefore those applications should be approved subject to such conditions. E. DECISION Based on the findings and conclusions provided or referenced in this Final Order, the hearings officer hereby approves SDR 2002-00001, SLR 2002-00001 and SLR 2002- 00003 subject to the conditions of approval in Section II of the Staff Report. By submitting the letter from ODSL described above,the applicant complies with condition of approval 12. DATEDA1 is 29th d erpril, 2002. 0 zr Larry Epste' i City of Tig.i ngs Officer SDR 2002-000012, SLR 2002-00001 Hearings Officer Final Order and SLR 2002-00003(Red Ink, Inc.) Page 2 Agenda Item: 2.2 Hearing Date: April 15,2002 STAFF REPORT TOMB A HEARING OFFICER CIT rw.107,el FOR THE CITY OF TI Al , OREGON 8 4 meter 120 DAYS = 06/11/2002 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: RED INK, INC. CASE NOS: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2002-00001 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2002-00001 Water Resources Overlay (SLR) SLR2002-00003 OWNER: Tom and Lori Hays APPLICANT: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. 12220 SW Grant St. Attn: Kim McMillan Tigard, OR 97223 18660 SW Boones Ferry Rd. Tualatin, OR 97062 PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to a Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN and ZONING DESIGNATION: Light Industrial: 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, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797, and 18.810. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find th althe.pro*ssed Site:Develoq tent Review, Sensitive Lands, and Water Resources Overt a not advers 'aft health, safety and welfafe of the City and meek the " Standards Tai, _� . _ Staff recommendsAPPROVAL, subject to the folly . ` ,�, "-n of'App RED INK,INC. PAGE 1 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 388) for review and approval: 1. The addition to the existing structure must not exceed the required height of the district (45 ft.), and shall be verified prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The applicant shall provide a revised access plan that provides a safe pedestrian walkway extending from the entrance of the building to SW Grant Street. The walkway shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and signposts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The walkway 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. 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. 3. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the street tree plan to show compliance with Tigard Development Code (TDC) Section 18.745.040. 4. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan illustrating the placement of trees within the interior of the parking lot that provides a canopy effect for the parking lot. All trees shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. 5. The applicant shall provide a narrative addressing the criteria of one of the 4-methods of compliance for Mixed Sold Waste and Recyclable Storage as established in TDC Chapter 18.755, and provide a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. 6. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the site plan to illustrated compliance with the Solid Waste and recyclable storage design standards. 7. Prior to final occupancy, the parking lot shall be striped in accordance with the TDC Chapter 18.765. 8. Prior to final occupancy, wheel stops shall be provided for all parking areas as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. 9. The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the dimensions of the parking areas in accordance with Table 18.765.1 and indicate bumper overhang areas on the plan. 10. If the applicant proposes to split the spaces between compact and standard, the new plan must reflect the compact spaces and they must be marked as such prior to final occupancy. 11. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to reflect only seven parking spaces as opposed to the eight that are proposed. 12. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. 13. The applicant shall supply the City arborist with a tree protection plan to protect those trees that will remain on the site, and insure that said measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to site work. RED INK, INC. PAGE 2 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 14. Prior to construction, the applicant must attain permission in the form of a utility easement from the adjacent property owner to run the pipe all the way to Fanno Creek. The utility easement must be recorded and a copy provided to the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of any site work permits. 15. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay. Said plan shall be consistent with the requirements of TDC Section 18.797.080(J). 16. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan, that shows no projection off site and complies with crime prevention requirements of the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 17. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach, sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue, as well as any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 18. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Grant Avenue as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements; and C. driveway apron. 19. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 20. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach, sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue, as well as any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 21. Prior to issuance of a building permit, additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue to increase the right-of-way to 30 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 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: 22. 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. 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Grant RED INK,INC. PAGE 3 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $4,318.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 24. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 25. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The site is currently occupied by an existing single-family residence and an out building. The two buildings were constructed within the floodway and floodplain when they were originally built. Vicinity Information: The site is located within an area that is characteristic of a neighborhood being converted to business and industry. Fanno Creek is located on the west border of this property. There are a variety of other uses including single-family residences and office located to the immediate north south and east of the property. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is currently developed with a single-family home and an out building. The site slopes east to west and is within both the floodplain and the floodway. The structures are non-conforming in that they would not be able to be constructed in their current location under existing regulations, however, the use is permitted subject to site development review. In this instance, the developer is seeking approval to convert the single-family home into an office, locate a stormwater pipe in the buffer area adjacent to Fanno Creek, and add a 600 square foot expansion onto the back of the existing structure. Portions of the existing structure are located in the floodway. The addition is proposed to be located in the floodplain. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to convert a single-family residence into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The applicant is also proposing to add 600 square feet of office space onto the rear of the existing structure. Offices are outright permitted uses within the I-P zoning district. RED INK,INC. PAGE 4 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Summary Land Use Permits: Chapter 18.310 Defines the decision-making type to which the land-use application is assigned. The proposed site development review, and the pipe crossing of the buffer area are typically subject to a Type II staff review. However, because a portion of the site is located within the 100-year floodplain and the associated floodway, all approvals for this request are subject to review before the City of Tigard Hearings Officer as a Type III-HO review. The request will require site development review, sensitive lands and water resources overlay review approval. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET The Tigard Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal and be given the opportunity to provide written comments prior to a decision being made. Staff received no correspondence from citizens regarding this application. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this report are as follows: A. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.360 Site Development Review) 18.390 Decision-Making Procedures) 18.530 Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.705 Access, Egress & Circulation) 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.760 Nonconforming Situations) 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780 Signs) 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) 18.797 Water Resources Overlay) B. Additional Site Development Review Approval Standards (18.360) C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards (18.810) D. Impact Study (18.390) The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following chapters: 18.410 Lot Line Adjustments; 18.600, Community Plan Area Standards; 18.710, Accessory Residential Units; 18.715, Density Computations; 18.720, Design Compatibility Standards; 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standard; 18.740, Historic Overlay, 18.742, Home Occupations; 18.750, Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations; 18.785, Temporary Uses; and 18.798, Wireless Communications Facilities. These chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS Site Development Review (18.360) 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 proposal's consistency with these Code chapters is reviewed in the following sections. RED INK,INC. PAGE 5 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Industrial Zoning Districts (18.530) The subject property is zoned I-P (Industrial Park). Office uses are permitted outright subject to Site Development Review. Development standards in Industrial zones are provided in the following table: TABLE 18.530.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES STANDARD I-P Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 30,492 SF Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 156 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. 15ft Pre-existing - Side facing street on corner& through lots [1] 20 ft. N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3] Met - Rear yard 0/50 ft. [3][4] Met - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a public or private street -- -- Maximum Height 45 ft. Pre-existing Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75%[5] 26% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 74% [1]The provisions of Chapter 18.795(Vision Clearance)must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3]No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4]Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Policy 11.5.1. [5]Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80%if the provisions of Section 18.530.050.B are satisfied. [6]Except that a reduction to 20%of the site may be approved through the site development review process. The existing building is below the 45-foot maximum height, and the applicant's plan shows that the addition will maintain the existing roofline. As noted above, approximately 26% of the site will be covered with impervious surface area, including the building and parking area. This is well below the 75% maximum allowed in I-P zones. The remaining 74% of the site will be landscaped or revegetated natural areas. The existing structure has a nonconforming front yard setback. There is no applicable rear or side yard setbacks since the properties to the north and south are also zoned for industrial development. FINDING: The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable development standards in industrial zones with the exception of the front yard setback for the existing structure. Nonconforming structures are permitted to continue and expand subject to the criteria within the nonconforming section of the Code, and is discussed later in this report. Because the height of the building and addition are not clear, staff recommends the following condition be imposed. CONDITION: The addition to the existing structure must not exceed the required height of the district (45 ft.), and shall be verified prior to issuance of building permits. RED INK,INC. PAGE 6 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Access, Egress and Circulation (18.705) 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; The applicant is required to improve the frontage along Grant Street including sidewalks, but has not shown a sidewalk connection from the entrance of the building to the street as required by this standard. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The proposal does not provide a walkway from the ground floor entrance to the street, which provides the required access and egress as required in TDC Section 18.705.030(F)(1). 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; and The required frontage improvements will involve crossings of the two driveways. The driveways are proposed to be 25 feet in width, and the sidewalk improvements that are required will meet the requirements for contrasting pavement materials as they are concrete and the applicant has proposed aggregate pavement for the accesses. This criterion is met. 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 indicates that the new curb, gutter, and sidewalks will be constructed to City Standards. This criterion has been met. 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 less than 99 parking spaces is one 30-foot-wide access with a 24- foot pavement width. The applicant has proposed two access points of 30-feet in width with 24-feet of pavement. This criterion has been met. CONDITION: The applicant shall provide a revised access plan that provides a safe pedestrian walkway extending from the entrance of the building to SW Grant Street. The walkway shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and signposts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The walkway 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. 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. RED INK,INC. PAGE 7 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Environmental Performance Standards (18.725) Requires that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 Performance Standards regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the Commercial zoning districts and the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of ure 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. 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. Odors. The emissions 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. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. 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. FINDING: As this is a typical industrial-park use, there is not the typical machinery, emission stacks, or sound creating devices that would potentially create problem environmental conditions that have been listed above. The above performance standards are met. These standards would be subject to code enforcement investigation if for some reason, the above standards were in question. Landscaping and Screening (18.745) Street trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 required 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 applicant has submitted a landscape plan that provides for two "Red Maple" trees and an existing 30-inch pine along SW Grant Street. The continuation of street trees would be difficult beyond this point because of the fall in the grade of the lot. The submitted landscape plan also shows 28 feet on center spacing but does not identify the caliper of the proposed street trees. The plan meets the intent of the street tree standard, but should be conditioned to meet the size standards. FINDING: The proposal fails to meet the street tree size requirements of TDC Section 18.745.040(C)(2)(b). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the street tree plan to show compliance with TDC Section 18.745.040. RED INK,INC. PAGE 8 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Land Use Buffering and Screening: Buffering and Screening is required between different types of land uses. The proposed office is a permitted use within the Industrial park zone and abuts the same industrial zone on three sides and open space on the fourth. As such, it is not subject to any required screening standards of the TDC or the buffering requirements of Table 18.745.1. This criterion has been satisfied. Screening - 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 applicant has proposed to retain 13 of the 15 trees on site that were over six inches in caliper, and has proposed to incorporate the existing trees into the landscape and screening plan for the parking. There is one section at the north end of the parking lot that would require an additional tree to provide the canopy effect as required above. FINDING: The proposal does not meet the criteria set forth in TDC Section 18.745.050(E)(1)(a.)(4). CONDITION: The applicant shall revise the landscape plan illustrating the placement of trees within the interior of the parking lot that provides a canopy effect for the parking lot. All trees shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. 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). 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 applicant has not indicated which of the 4 methods will be used to demonstrate compliance with this chapter, but has shown an enclosure on the site plan. RED INK,INC. PAGE 9 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FINDING: The proposal does not specifically detail which option will be used of the four options available within TDC Section 18.755.040. CONDITION: The applicant shall provide a narrative addressing the criteria of one of the 4 methods of compliance for Mixed Sold Waste and Recyclable Storage as established in TDC Chapter 18.755, and provide a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. 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; Fndoor 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 site plan shows a trash enclosure with a fence surrounding it within a side yard. The site plan indicates a 27 square foot enclosure dedicated to this purpose. This standard has been met. 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 indicated that a 6-foot chain link fence with vinyl slats will screen the enclosure. However, the applicant has not identified the width of the openings as required in the design standards, and staff was unable to determine the intent from the site plan. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: Because the applicant has not provided evidence of complete compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage design standards, this standard has not been met. If the applicant complies with the condition listed below, the standards will be met: CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the site plan to illustrated compliance with the Solid Waste and recyclable storage design standards. RED INK,INC. PAGE 10 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Nonconforming Situations (18.760) Nonconforming development. 1. Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this title that could not be built under the terms of this title by reason of restrictions on lot area, lot coverage, height, yard, equipment, its location on the lot or other requirements concerning the structure, such structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following provisions: a. No such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity but any structure or portion thereof may be enlarged or altered in a way that satisfies the requirements of this title or will decrease its nonconformity; or It would be highly unlikely that the existing structure would be able to be built today, and other than a few miscellaneous permits for minor interior remodels, there have been no other permits issued for the building since its original construction. Because of its location in the floodway prior to the current Code, it is a nonconforming development. The applicant has proposed to convert the single-family residence to an office in an industrial zoning district. It is a permitted use in the zone, so the use is not nonconforming. Pursuant to this chapter, the structure may be enlarged as long as it satisfies the TDC or decreases its nonconformity. The applicant has proposed to convert and enlarge the structure in compliance with the chapter. This criterion is met. b. Should such nonconforming structure or nonconforming portion of structure be destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 60% of its current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this title; and The structure has not been destroyed, therefore, this criterion is inapplicable. c. Should such structure be moved for any reason for any distance whatever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the zoning district in which it is located after it is moved. The structure is not being moved. This criterion is inapplicable. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765) 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 parking area has accommodations for one ADA accessible parking space that will meet the requirements for a 7 space parking facility. This criteria has been met. 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. RED INK,INC. PAGE 11 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Access was discussed previously in this report, and visual clearance will be addressed later in this report. This standard can be met. 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 applicant has not indicated that the parking lot will be striped. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not indicated that the parking lot will be striped as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. CONDITION:Prior to final occupancy, the parking lot shall be striped in accordance with the TDC Chapter 18.765. 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. The applicant did not propose nor demonstrate compliance with the above standard. This criterion has not been met. FINDING: The proposal does not address the requirements for wheel stops as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. CONDITION:Prior to final occupancy, wheel stops shall be provided for all parking areas as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Table 18.765.1. outlines the minimum dimensions for angled parking. The proposal identifies 8 spaces with the following dimensions: Minimums Compact, _ t,3 Compact/Standard s � (in Feet) (Proposed) Parking Angle 90 degrees 90 degrees 90 degrees Stall Width 7.5-8.0/8.5-10.0 8.5' typical 8.5' typical Stall Depth 16.5/18.5 16.5' 18' Aisle Width 24-28124-28 24' 24' Stall Width Parallel to Aisle 7.5-8.0/8.5-10 +8.5' +8.5' Module Width 58-61/61-65 N/A N/A FINDING: As illustrated in the table, the proposed parking lot fails to meet the minimum standards of Table 18.765.1. If the proposal that the parking angle remain at 90 degrees and a stall width of 8.5 feet stands, then the stall depth should reflect the minimum dimensions for the standards as they apply within Table 18.765.1 for compact spaces and standard spaces independently. The Table must be read directly across and not interchanged to ensure function of the parking areas. RED INK,INC. PAGE 12 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CONDITIONS: The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the dimensions of the parking areas in accordance with Table 18.765.1 and indicate bumper overhang areas on the plan. If the applicant proposes to split the parking spaces between compact and standard, the new plan must reflect the compact spaces and they must be marked as such prior to final occupancy. 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. The minimum bicycle parking requirement for office facilities is .4 per thousand square feet of office space. The applicant has proposed 1 bicycle parking space. The proposed 2,200 square foot office building would only require one bicycle space. This criterion has been met. 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 TDC requires a minimum of 2.7 spaces for every thousand square feet, and a maximum of 3.4 spaces for every thousand square feet of space occupied by the proposed use. Assuming a building size of 2,200 square feet, the minimum amount of parking required would be six spaces, and the maximum allowed would be seven spaces. This criterion has not been met. FINDING: The applicant has proposed eight parking spaces, however, the maximum allowed parking for this size building within the zone A parking area is seven. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to reflect only seven parking spaces as opposed to the eight that are proposed. Sensitive Lands 18.775) The Hearings Officer shall have the authority to issue a sensitive lands permit in the 100-year floodplain by means of a Type IIIA procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.775.070 B-E The proposal involves excavation of more than 50 cubic yards of material and construction of an addition to a structure on property that is almost entirely located within the floodplain and largely within the floodway. This proposal warrants consideration by the Tigard Hearings Officer. 18.775.040 General Provisions for Floodplain Areas A. Permit review. The appropriate approval authority shall review all permit applications to determine whether proposed building sites will be safe from flooding. The Hearings Officer reviews all applications for land use consistency, and the Building Official will review all construction plans in compliance with this title and the Oregon Uniform Building Code as required. RED INK,INC. PAGE 13 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER B. Special flood hazard. The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled "The Flood Insurance Study of the City of Tigard," dated September 1, 1981, with accompanying Flood Insurance Maps (updated February 1984) is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter. This Flood Insurance Study is on file at the Tigard Civic Center. The applicant and staff have reviewed these maps and agree that this site is within one of the identified special flood hazard areas. The application is being reviewed under this premise. C. Base flood elevation data. When base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with Subsection B above, the Director shall obtain, review and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a federal, state or other source, in order to administer Subsections M and N below. The base flood elevation has been provided for this site and has been discussed elsewhere in this report. D. Test of reasonableness. Where elevation data is not available either through the Flood Insurance Study or from another authoritative source, applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a local judgment and includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate at least two feet above grade in these sensitive land areas may result in higher insurance rates. As discussed previously, the elevation data is available on the maps that are available within Tigard City Hall. E. Resistant to flood damage. All new construction and substantial improvements, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. All materials and utility equipment is reviewed for resistance to flood damage by the City of Tigard building division. F. Minimize flood damage. All new construction and substantial improvements, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. To ensure that any construction on site minimizes flood damage, the City of Tigard building division will review the proposed construction, and require adjustments where necessary. G. Equipment protection. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air- conditioning equipment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. The equipment will be reviewed prior to building permit issuance by the City of Tigard's commercial plans examiner to ensure that it is flood proofed. RED INK,INC. PAGE 14 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER H. Water Supply Systems. All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the system. There are no new water supply systems proposed with this application. I. Anchoring. All new construction, all manufactured homes and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. Anchoring is also required by the OUBC. Anchoring for all new structures will be reviewed at the time of building permit review. J. Sanitary sewerage systems. New and replacement sanitary sewerage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the systems and discharge from the systems into floodwater. There are no new or replacement sanitary sewerage systems associated with this proposal. K. On-site water disposal systems. On-site water disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. There are no on-site detention facilities associated with this proposal because it lays directly adjacent to Fanno Creek. This criterion is met. L. Residential Construction. 1. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure, including manufactured homes, shall have the lowest floor, including the basement, elevated at least one foot above base flood elevation; 2. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited, or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwater. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect, or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: a. A minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided; b. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade; and c. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices, provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood waters. 3. Manufactured homes shall be securely anchored to an adequately anchored permanent foundation system. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors. This standard does not apply as the purpose of this construction is for industrial purposes. RED INK,INC. PAGE 15 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER M. Nonresidential Construction. New construction and substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential structure shall either have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to the level of the base flood elevation, or together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall: 1. Be flood-proofed so that below the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; 2. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; 3. Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting provisions of this subsection based on their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the Building Official as set forth in Subsection 18.775.030 E2; and 4. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not flood-proofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in 18.775.040 L2. Applicants flood-proofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one foot below the flood- proofed level (e.g., a building constructed to the base flood level will be rated as one foot below that level). As discussed previously, the City of Tigard Building Division will be reviewing the construction plans for this proposal to ensure that they are consistent with the State and Local requirements as they pertain to development within the 100-year floodplain. The applicant has provided a letter from a certified registered engineer that states that the proposed structures will be verified for consistency prior to application. N. Subdivisions and partitions in 100-year floodplain. Subdivisions and partitions in the 100-year floodplain shall meet the following criteria: 1. The design shall minimize the potential for flood damage; 2. Public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems shall be located and constructed so as to minimize flood damage; 3. Adequate drainage shall be provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and 4. For subdivisions or partitions which contain more than 50 lots or 5 acres and where base flood elevation data is not available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or another authoritative source, the applicant shall generate base flood elevation data to be reviewed as part of the application. This proposal does not involve a subdivision or partition. Within the 100-year floodplain The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified by a registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge; The applicant has provided a letter from Kim McMillan, P.E. stating that the encroachments into the floodplain will not decrease the storage function or maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway. Her letter states that, "...the fill can be balanced with an equal amount of cut RED INK,INC. PAGE 16 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER volume." In a second letter, Mrs. McMillan estimates a net cut of 12.07 cy that would prevent any issue of conveyance or storage reduction. In a memo, Greg Berry, City of Tigard Capital Facilities Engineer, concurs with the balance method. This criterion has been satisfied. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards; The subject property is designated industrial in the Comprehensive Plan. This criterion is satisfied. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood; As discussed earlier, the applicant's engineer as indicated that there will be a net cut of 12.07 cy in the parking lot area that will enhance any storage capacity lost by the overall balance of cut and fills. The parking area improvements are going to be placed at the same elevation of the existing grade, and the addition will be required to be flood-proofed so that it does not increase the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. This criterion is satisfied. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely; The greenway in which the Fanno Creek Trail system would possibly follow is located on the West side of the creek. This parcel is outside of the location of any potential pathway. This criterion is met. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands (DSL) approvals shall be obtained; and It has not been ascertained as to whether or not the applicant would need any approvals from the Oregon DSL for work within the 100-year floodplain, nor has the applicant provided evidence that would indicate that they are not necessary. The applicant's engineer has indicated that a Joint Aquatics Resource Permit Application (JARPA) has been filed with both agencies. Staff has been in contact with the Army Corps of Engineers, and Kathryn Harris with the ACOE has indicated that no permit will be necessary for this project. This criterion has not been satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not provided any evidence that would indicate that no approval from the Oregon DSL is necessary for the work that is proposed within the 100-year floodplain. CONDITION:Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain,.the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. There is no need for additional open land area within and adjacent to this floodplain according to the Long Range Planning Department. This criterion is satisfied. RED INK,INC. PAGE 17 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FINDING: There are no excessive slopes, drainageways, or wetlands associated with the proposal, therefore, the remaining criterion within TDC Section 18.775.070 does not apply to this proposal. Signs (18.780) No sign or sign structure shall hereafter be erected, re-erected, constructed, structurally altered or relocated within the City limits except as provided by this title, and a permit for the same sign or sign structure has been issued by the Director. The applicant has stated in the narrative that the developer does not intend to install any outside signs. This criterion is 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. The applicant has provided a tree survey and protection plan from Halstead Arboriculture Consultants. In the report, the arborist states that there are a total of eleven trees over twelve inches in diameter. Of these eleven trees, three are hazardous and would not be required to be mitigated for if removed. Only two trees are slated for removal as part of this proposal, and the arborist has stated that the third tree could be preserved with proper treatment. The arborist has also provided protection measures for the trees during construction, but the applicant did not indicate that these measures would be followed. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant does not indicate how the existing trees that are to remain on site will be protected during construction as required by the TDC. CONDITION:The applicant shall supply the City Arborist with a tree protection plan to protect those trees that will remain on the site, and insure that said measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to site work. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795 Section 18.795.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.B. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center Fine grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. The applicant has stated in the narrative that the visual clearance area requirements will be met. Currently, there is not a visual clearance problem on site and the applicant has not proposed any potential obstructions on the plans. This standard is satisfied. WATER RESOURCES CHAPTER (18.797) Applicability and Generalized Mapping: Section 18.797.030 The WR overlay district applies to all significant wetlands and streams and applicable riparian setback and water quality buffer areas, that appear on the Tigard Wetlands and streams, and riparian setback and water quality buffer areas, that appear on the Tigard Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map. Standard Riparian Setbacks and Clean Water Services (CWS) Water Quality Buffers: Section 18.797.030.C. The applicant shall be responsible for surveying and mapping the precise location of the top of bank, wetland edge, riparian setback and/or CWS water quality buffer at the RED INK,INC. PAGE 18 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER time of application submittal. Table 18.797.1 summarizes riparian setbacks and water quality buffers that apply to significant water resources within the WR overlay zone: FROM TABLE 18.797.1 RIPARIAN SETBACKS AND WATER QUALITY WR STANDARD CWS STANDARD WATER BUFFERS SIGNIFICANT WATER RESOURCE TYPE RIPARIAN SETBACK' QUALITY BUFFER' Tualatin River& associated wetlands 75 feet 25 feet Major streams & associated wetlands 50 feet 25 feet Developed subdivision lot exception 25 feet 25 feet (major streams & associated wetlands) Minor streams & adjacent/isolated wetlands Not applicable 25 feet Measured in feet from the top-of-bank or the associated wetland edge,whichever is greater. 2 Measured in feet from the stream top-of-bank or the wetland edge,whichever is greater. Division of State Lands notification required for all proposed development activities within any wetland. Clean Water Services standards are applicable when development activities are proposed within 25 feet of any wetland or stream. The subject development site includes designated wetlands, floodplain, and a Major stream, Fanno Creek, along the southwestern portion of the site. Table 18 797.1 indicates a 50-foot riparian setback for major streams and associated wetlands. Applicable definitions for major streams and riparian setback area are contained in Tigard Development Code Section 18.797.020. The applicant has submitted a Wetland Determination and Vegetated Corridor Assessment from Fishman Environmental Services, LLC. The applicant has provided mapping of the top- of-bank, floodplain, and riparian setback on the plans and it is discussed within the report. See also, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands in this decision for additional criteria and conditions related to development within the floodplain. Application Requirements: Section 18.797.060 Type II and III uses: required studies and mitigation reports. Each of the following studies shall be required whenever any Type II or III use is proposed within the W overlay district. Each required report must consider the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory (Fishman Environmental Services, 1994) shall be in addition to the submission of information required for specific types of development, and shall be prepared by professionals in their respective fields. This is a Type II Water Resource Overlay Review in accordance with Table 18.797.2(h) underground utilities. The following reports are required for Type II Water Resource Overlay Review applications: 1. Hydrology and soils report. 2. Grading Plan. 3. Vegetation report. 4. Streambank conditions report. The applicant has submitted the Wetland Determination and Vegetated Corridor Assessment from Fishman Environmental Services, LLC, which addresses the hydrological, soil, and vegetative impacts to the riparian setback area. The reports indicate that the placement of the 8" pipe in conjunction with the proposed enhancement will minimize impacts of the development to the Water Resource Overlay Zone. No grading is proposed within the Water Resource Overlay Zone. RED INK,INC. PAGE 19 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • Development Standards: Section 18.797.080 The following shall apply to all development, including native vegetation removal and excavation, within the WR overlay district. No application for a use identified in Section 18.797.050 shall be deemed complete until the applicant has addressed each of these standards in writing. A. Alternatives considered. Except for stream corridor enhancement, most Type II and Ill uses are expected to develop outside of water resource and riparian setback areas. Therefore, Type II and Ill development applications must carefully examine upland alternatives for the proposed use, and explain the reasons why the proposed development cannot reasonably occur outside of the water resource or riparian setback area. This application is for the placement of an 8" storm water outfall pipe to discharge stormwater into Fanno Creek. Because of the grade of the lot, there are no other reasonable alternatives to discharge the water. The applicant has indicated that they have been unable to contact the owner of the adjacent property about directing the pipe through their property, so there may be a need to consider sheet flow or some other mechanism to get the stormwater discharge to an approved system. FINDING: The applicant does not have permission from the adjacent landowner to install the stormwater outfall pipe across their property as proposed. CONDITION: Prior to construction, the applicant must attain permission in the form of a utility easement from the adjacent property owner to run the pipe all the way to Fanno Creek. The utility easement must be recorded and a copy provided to the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of any site work permits. If the applicant is unable to gain the easement, then they must provide an alternative method of transport consistent with these requirements. B. Minimize siting impacts. The proposed use shall be designed, located and constructed to minimize excavation, loss of native vegetation, erosion, and adverse hydrological impacts on water resources. 1. For Type II and Ill uses, the civil engineer with experience in water quality must certify that any adverse water quality impacts of the development proposal will be minimized consistent with best management practices; No adverse water quality impacts are expected to result from the proposed stormwater outfall pipe installation. A mitigation and enhancement plan has been submitted to Clean Water Services (CWS) for their approval, and the service provider letter requires that the mitigation be complied with as part of the CWS approval. It is anticipated that CWS will require the mitigation to be planted according to the plan that was submitted by Fishman Environmental Services. 2. For all uses, the development shall be located as far from the water resource, and use as little of the water resource or riparian setback area, as possible, recognizing the operational needs of the proposed development. The applicant has proposed to observe the fifty-foot buffer requirement of the riparian setback, and recommendations have been made to ensure the long-term maintenance of the proposed enhancement. C. Construction materials and methods. Where development within the riparian area is unavoidable, construction materials or methods used within the riparian setback area shall minimize damage to water quality and native vegetation. The applicant has indicated that an 8" pvc pipe will be installed, but has not indicated by which method. With the implementation of the recommended erosion control techniques, and the implementation of the enhancement, any damage should be minimal. RED INK,INC. PAGE 20 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER . D. Minimize flood damage. Above-ground residential structures shall not be permitted within the WR overlay district, where such land is also within the 100- year floodplain. On-site flood storage capacity shall not decrease as a result of development. The cumulative effects of any proposed development shall not reduce flood storage capacity or raise base flood elevations on- or off-site. Any new commercial or industrial land development proposed within the 100-year floodplain shall be designed consistent with Chapter 18.775, Sensitive Lands. Impacts to the floodplain have been addressed previously in this report under the Sensitive Lands Review Chapter. The effects of this development on the floodplain have been identified in that section. E. Avoid steep slopes. Within 50 feet of any water resource, excavation and vegetation removal shall be avoided on slopes of 25% or greater and in areas with high erosion potential (as shown on SCS maps), except where necessary to construct public facilities or to ensure slope stability. No steep slopes within 50 feet of the Water Resource Overlay will be impacted by this proposal. F. Minimize impacts on existing vegetation. The following standards shall apply when construction activity is proposed in areas where vegetation is to be preserved. 1. Temporary measures used for initial erosion control shall not be left in place permanently; 2. Work areas on the immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to reduce potential damage to trees and vegetation; 3. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment. During clearing operations, trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area; 4. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees and brush shall be taken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place; 5. Stockpiling of soil, or soil mixed with vegetation, shall not be permitted on a permanent basis. The applicant has submitted a vegetated corridor report as part of the Fishman Environmental Services, LLC that indicates the corridor is in good to degraded condition. The applicant's proposal does not further impact any vegetated areas. In fact, the mitigation required by CWS should enhance the corridor. G. Vegetation mitigation plan. If a Type II or III use is proposed within a water resource site or riparian setback area, or mitigation is proposed as a method to reduce the riparian setback in accordance with Section 18.797.100, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented. 1. The applicant shall be responsible for re-vegetating areas temporarily disturbed by excavation on a 1:1 basis; 2. Where approval is granted to reduce the riparian setback area, the applicant shall be responsible for mitigating for the reduced setback by replacing non-native vegetation within the remaining, protected riparian setback area on a 1.5:1 basis. That is, for each 100 square feet of riparian setback that is lost to development, at least 150 square feet of existing disturbed area within the riparian setback or wetland shall be re-planted with native plant species; 3. The re-vegetation plan shall provide for the replanting and maintenance of native plant species designed to achieve pre-disturbance conditions. The applicant shall be responsible for replacing any native plant species that do not survive the first two years after planting, and for ensuring the RED INK,INC. PAGE 21 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER survival of any replacement plants for an additional two years after their replacement. This criteria has been addressed in part by the mitigation requirement of CWS that is discussed in Section 18.797.080.F above. H. Water and sewer infiltration and discharge. Water and sanitary sewer facilities shall be designed, located and constructed to avoid infiltration of floodwaters into the system, and to avoid discharges from such facilities to streams and wetlands. The proposal includes an on-site detention facility that is designed to filter water prior to being discharged to Fanno Creek. This criterion has been met. On-site systems. On-site septic systems and private wells shall be prohibited within the WR overlay district. This criteria is inapplicable as there are no proposed on-site septic systems or private wells within the WR overlay district. J. Erosion control plan. If a Type II or III use is proposed within a water resource site or riparian setback area, the following erosion control standards shall apply within the WR overlay district: 1. Specific methods of soil erosion and sediment control shall be used during construction to minimize visible and measurable erosion; 2. The land area to be grubbed, stripped, used for temporary placement of soil, or to otherwise expose soil shall be confined to the immediate construction site only; 3. Construction activity will take place during the dry season (June- October), whenever feasible, and the duration of exposure of soils shall be kept to a minimum during construction; 4. Exposed soils shall be covered by mulch, sheeting, temporary seeding or other suitable material following grading or construction, until soils are stabilized. During the rainy season (November through May), soils shall not be exposed for more than 7 calendar days. All disturbed land areas which will remain unworked for 21 days or more during construction, shall be mulched and seeded; 5. During construction, runoff from the site shall be controlled, and increased runoff and sediment resulting from soil disturbance shall be retained on-site. Temporary diversions, sediment basins, barriers, check dams, or other methods shall be provided as necessary to hold sediment and runoff; 6. A stabilized pad of gravel shall be constructed at all entrances and exists to the construction site. The stabilized gravel pad shall be the only allowable entrance or exit to the site; 7. Topsoil removal for development shall be stockpiled and reused on-site to the degree necessary to restore disturbed areas to their original or enhanced condition, or to assure sufficient stable topsoil for re- vegetation. Additional soil shall be provided if necessary to support re- vegetation; 8. The removal of all sediments which are carried into the streets, water resources or on to adjacent property, are the responsibility of the applicant. The applicant shall be responsible for cleaning u and repairing streets, catch basins, water resource areas and adjacent properties, where such properties are affected by sediments or mud. In no case shall sediments be washed into storm drains, ditches or drainageways; 9. Any other relevant provisions of the Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans Technical Guidance Handbook (City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services and Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington RED INK,INC. PAGE 22 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER County, Revised February 1994), required by the Planning Director. The applicant has provided staff with an erosion control plan for site work, but has failed to address erosion control during work within the Water Resource area. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not submitted an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay as required in TDC Section 18.797.080(J). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay. Said plan shall be consistent with the requirements of TDC Section 18.797.080(J). K. Plan implementation. A schedule of planned erosion control and re-vegetation measures shall be provided, which sets forth the progress of construction activities, and mitigating erosion control measures. An approved Erosion Control of Re-vegetation Plan shall be implemented and maintained as follows: 1. Erosion control measures shall be installed prior to any stripping or excavation work. 2. The applicant shall implement the measures and construct facilities contained in the approved Erosion Control Plan in a timely manner. During active construction, the applicant shall inspect erosion control measures daily, and maintain, adjust, repair or replace erosion control measures to ensure that they are functioning properly. 3. Eroded sediment shall be removed immediately from pavement surfaces, off-site areas, and from the surface water management system, including storm drainage inlets, ditches and culverts. 4. Water containing sediment shall not be flushed into the surface water management system, wetlands or streams without first passing through an approved sediment filtering facility or device. 5. In addition, the applicant shall call for City inspection, prior to the foundation inspection for any building, to certify that erosion control measures are installed in accordance with the erosion control plan. These criteria will be addressed by the previous condition and through the site inspection process. This standard is met. B. ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL CRITERIA 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); 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; 18.360.090.8 (D(100-year floodplain); 18.360.090.13 (Parking); 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.15 rainage); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled); 18.360.090.15 (Provisions of the underlying zone). RED INK,INC. PAGE 23 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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. The applicant's plans have considered the natural environment on the site by locating the development in a location that will incorporate a majority of the trees into buffering and screening. No buildings or structures are proposed that will hinder air circulation, natural lighting or prevent fire fighting apparatus from performing their jobs. This criteria has been met. 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. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this project and has not indicated concern or objection with the proposal. To ensure that the plan addresses crime prevention concerns, the applicant would need to provide a detailed lighting plan to the Tigard Police Department and the Tigard Planning Department. Additionally, the applicant has proposed vegetation that would allow easy observation of activities that are on-going on the site. The crime prevention standards have not been fully met. FINDING: The proposal fails to address lighting as required by the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan, that shows no projection off site and complies with crime prevention requirements of the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). 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 closest stops are located at the intersection of SW Johnson and SW Grant Street. The stop is not adjacent to an existing or proposed transit route, therefore, this standard does not apply. 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: RED INK, INC. PAGE 24 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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 minor collector street to have a 60-foot right-of-way width and a 40-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 Grant Avenue, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City of Ticard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 20 feet of ROW east of fie centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate additional ROW to provide at least 30 feet from the centerline. The applicant's plans indicate they will provide this dedication. SW Grant Avenue is currently partially improved adjacent to this site, with adequate pavement width and curbing to meet the current standard. The existing streetlight spacing along this street is also adequate. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should install the necessary driveway approach to the site, along with a concrete sidewalk, and street trees along the site frontage. 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. By constructing the concrete sidewalk along the Grant Avenue frontage, the applicant will meet this provision. 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 are two CWS trunk sewer lines (a 24-inch and a 60-inch) adjacent to the southern property line of this site. There is also an 8-inch public main line in SW Grant Avenue. According to City records, the existing building is connected to public sewer. The applicant's plans are not clear as to where the sewer connection is located, but it does not appear that the applicant will need additional sewer connections. RED INK,INC. PAGE 25 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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). This site is at an elevation lower than the roadway, and may accept a limited amount of street runoff during rainstorms because of the existing asphalt driveway. When this site is improved, the applicant will be installing a new concrete driveway approach that will help eliminate any street runoff from flowing down the driveway. Other than Fanno Creek flowing through the site, there are no other upstream public drainage facilities affecting 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). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. Since this site lies adjacent to Fanno Creek, there is no need to require onsite detention. The applicant's plan shows that they will collect the onsite runoff, treat it in a filter, and then discharge to Fanno Creek. This concept is acceptable. 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. There are no proposed bikeways adjacent to this development, therefore this criterion does not apply. 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. Because of the scale of this business, and the amount of required improvements, It is highly unlikely that bikeway improvements are going to benefit this development. This criterion does not apply. RED INK,INC. PAGE 26 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • 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. As discussed previously, this criterion does not apply. 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 Grant Avenue. 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 157 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $4,318.00. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: This site is within the City of Tigard service area and is presently served by the public water system. No additional public water line improvements are necessary for this development. 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. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall RED INK,INC. PAGE 27 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant proposes to treat the onsite runoff in a Stormwater Management catch basin filter unit. These units have been approved for use on private property and have shown that they will meet the phosphorus removal criteria of the CWS standards. Therefore, the use of this unit on this site is acceptable. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. The proposed unit from Stormwater Management is acceptable, provided the property owner agrees to hire the manufacturer (or approved equal) to provide the required maintenance of the unit. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. A grading and erosion control plan must be reviewed and approved by the Building Division prior to construction. D. IMPACT STUDY (18.390) Section 18.390.040.B.2.e 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 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 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. 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 $5,358 based on the 2,200 square feet of office usage. Based on the estimate that the total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this project's traffic impact is RED INK,INC. PAGE 28 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER $16,743.75 ($5,358 divided by 0.32). The difference between the TIF paid, proposed improvements to the street system, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the street system. The applicant has proposed dedication of an additional 10 feet of right-of-way at a cost of $15,840 ($12.00 x 1320 SF of dedication) and half-street improvements of 132 feet along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue. The improvements to the street are valued at approximately $19,800 ($150 per lineal foot). Consequently, the unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $-18,896. The Development has mitigated 100% for the impacts that it will contribute to the arterial and collector system. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division commented that the proposed structure is to be converted from an R3 residential structure to a B office use. OSSC Chapter 11 ADA requirements shall be met for accessibility from the parking area to the new addition and throughout the structure by means of ramps or other approved means. Protection of mechanical, plumbing, and electrical items required. No hazmat storage allowed without review. Additions to the existing structure must be flood proofed (Staff Contact: Daryl Jones). The City of Tigard Engineering Department was sent this proposal for review and the comments have been incorporated into this report. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager/Water Department has reviewed this application and has indicated that the existing hydrant would need a minimum 3' setback from the driveway. If the meter is to be relocated contact the Water Department. The applicant shall install double check valve assembly directly behind the water meter. All utility work should be shown in drawings and coordinated with the City prior to site work. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed this application and has provided the following comments: 1. A minimum of 2 fire hydrants shall be provided for this development. One hydrant is shown on the plans directly adjacent to the building. One additional hydrant shall be installed so that no part of the structure is more than 500 feet from the hydrant. (UFC 903.4) 2. Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access roadway that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly. (UFC Sec. 901.4.3) 3. Approved fire apparatus access roadways and firefighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to stockpiling combustibles on-site or the commencement of combustible construction. (UFC Sec. 8704) 4. A building survey and plans, in accordance with TVF&R Ordinance 99-01, Appendix III-F, shall be submitted. A copy of Appendix III-F, the building survey form and the instructions are available on the Fire District web site. To access this information via Internet, follow this link: http://www.tvfr.com/Departments/FireMarshal/new construction.htm City of Tigard Arborist has reviewed this application. His comments have been included in the previous discussion regarding tree preservation. City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed this application, but offered no comments. City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and requested that an exterior lighting plan be submitted to the Police Department for review. Long Range Planning Division has reviewed this application, but offered no comments. RED INK,INC. PAGE 29 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services has reviewed the proposal and offered the following comments and conditions: Developer must address water quality to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this conversion. A 30' wide sanitary sewer easement crosses this property. No Storm Water Connection Permit can be issued on this project until the applicant has satisfied the requirements of Service Provider Letter No. 1104. (Contact Lee Walker or Heidi Berg) Tualatin Valley Water District, Portland General Electric, Tri-Met, NW Natural Gas, US Army Corps of Engineers, Oregon DEQ, and Oregon DSL were given the opportunity to review this proposal and submitted no comments or objections. March 28, 2002 PREPARED B : Brad ilby DATE Associate Planner . March 28, 2002 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewer dorff DATE Planning Mana er RED INK,INC. PAGE 30 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER ■ Of OOAA�MIC IMf OIIYATIOM aYaTlY CITY of TIGAIRD NM !FiljAll LIS IPIEMINE lik :11.1.11till. I VICINITY MAP dthillIE c9 :T:: ■� i . 1.� I SDR2002-00001 s4 �� ■ 11_36A ff SLR2002-0000 F�rrL _ ■ � _ SLR2002-00003 • 11,:,,orn„,J 1 � ♦ k RED INK, INC. 'yMFi, ♦�' 'sT•.' •',,P+�`, �* 411 te••• ■ 4. \\\te , ,. r ; ana'fi,2 ,. ....„,—„ , ,A,T., .. ,,,,, ,, ow , _.___. / . 1. . . • '„wily .' .H • , ,,,,, SOG • 2u” —a .._d_.i pa_ At4 , C, B[F aENO � ! ANA RR,( O � 1 > 0).% `v " • GQ ; 1 4 Tiawd Area Map ir ‘ s#) •It. • • . D 200 500 800 Feet let. '• , BG 1"•101 HSt T , �-F� y941 0 ,*#,A. . 1t� illCity of Tigard Intomuaon on this map is for amoral location ony and ST should be vetoed vAth the Development Services Division. W WM 13125,O Man 223 Tlpard,OR 07227. (S03)5394171 httplAwnv cl.tigard.of.us ommunity Development Plot date:Feb 12,2002;C:magic\I AGIC03.APR / �rNIR_ rY-M MM.Mal / WI smewarr `I\`�� MOM Mwn•r.ti•l \ // G PR V ::Yn�.i IM: • TNK !L•/ W •• •• I Illi Iq►10T I _ 01 5 f IR..M MERINO MOS. MOP. i Y \y / .......TA WAD Pr- I} .Mu AMMO n. M l . ,,.l . ...,.. ,..,/ , Ma PAW PAWN! PM AP nAIN Ka01 AMT R ..ittlf/w4I��. v -• \• PEI CM OP MOO Inmano / � I P1, suss . ICRYNOTIS ■ 1S a 4 \ / M..I..MrN•w.MM.MMaa •••NMI 111M IIII+.f 02•101101,7101••••• I1ow (YR�1II.r..l. 12111k12Nb a'INX //f a1 - ` q SITE dUDD1■AO CIIA.1NA PLAN moms �+w,. \ Na SWUM c°1rt1e01 PLAN . f 1 NRT■TOPOa'■16NQC savvy un 1 rr.w.I.`Ta/ / ' s V LAOfc4PrmNa PLAN I 6NATSCN /�//\ \ • 2 ILOCn RAN awl \ ± j s.n 1 Loss 4 • > �Y]' W••YO au III �.� Ylti+1~ T \ Q 1 ••••11111•1•1.1.yTROMP WM TYOI R`.W t S WNW°•0W n..01•1L N M / 4�• ••IIOaA.R }t...1 r^ a ��r'I"Ilww FAA.we rl142 INN ff.,.DMA••I AO04112 ORAL 11 A��1.0.10 `` , Arivn r r^ - I 111•010 MIrn"PM OR...._1 • r r � —•—WOO Ala / ♦ • Ma 1114 • -a1aN M• rib .■■I AM Mr i I 2 Ia.ORMAN rem /' / LIB/' \ Rsm ru e Tar.6M.l we NO • • rKM w aura 7l' a 1••••M N.I �,�1+ t 'K rw srlla.valcr.R f A CITY OF TIGARD SDR2002-00001 lSLR2002.000011SLR2002.00003 CITY OF SITE PLAN N RED INK, INC. (Map is not to scale) 04/05/2002 08:54 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard 11002 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING MPOIRTANTINO T ICEi! !THE' EQ R A IF I OF 'p T �' I Irr D i I ' I CITY kTTHEADDRES S I l L( ACC0MPANEdlI,074I COP x O I.HH T1 EfTHA PS I P' E 'p � T'HE',S ITE li,!H II'.I I,:I , ,I i 1 I I i 'Iii' . ; Il;;,_I'l14i' li lP1 l' pili Iil�l',.�� i ,,I III 1 VIII I' o ;l , , lill '411'1;I' I ,, 1�14i11:: , ' ' . '1 1'ilAt' fTigaraairiI 9Yrlison jilll'Il:11 . 'II,;I ;IIi'1II1,1 I.,1,II ,,I 44hi, ..I'1 1I ' j1II;'1:11 11;i4 }13125,;„syFtaI{ lipi e_ ardl l II'l;H; I' '''III IgU'I,I �' ! „I , ,i l, ,ill ,�, ; '11 lii,' 1 , ...mI,II i111: ' „l igiiil'OR 911. li8li�iQi . I' ' lljl I , II”' 'I I I 1,10h 1.,...s . .,,I; Ii , l,,li.,1, 11111, 4 ' ill II,I i r'' ,I 1;ll1111' 'l : I 11 d l' . h I'.1"I' n 0■0111 511111 l ' , 5 . ,hrN'I I II III, ii I" l11I 1 ■I hil 5II,IY,, , , i ,ii cll;,'16 1 1 In the Matter of the Proposed Land Use Applications for: RECEIVED Land Use File Nos.: SDR2002-00001/SLR2002-00001/SLR2002-00003 _ ■ ∎FTIGARD Land Use File Name: RED INK, INC. CANNING/ENGINEERING I, wrA l do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a land use ropos�QI affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) /:2920 cw(..,' 4 2a f 7--c -7a-14/ . ' i, , and did personally post notice of the Public Hearing on 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 )3'°' day of `i /G ,:( l, , 20 � C Sign, 71 . of P, rson Who Performed Posting (In the presence of the Notary) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF DIE'S-(1o4 ) ( County of jc)AQ.%1m rvN ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ,5 day of , 20 -1.,A, I �•�, OFFICIAL SEAL = ' ' KATHLEEN M CULLISON NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON i r- COMMISSION NO.310598 I MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APR.19,2002 , /1 ��Y, 1-v--a_21-b--P---eL.- ARY PUBLIC OREGON My Commission Expires: hAlogin\pattY\mastertkaindava or poattng fora public hcaring.doc Y R HEARINGCITOF'S OFFICER APRIL 15, 2002 - 7:00 PM TOWN HALL TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223 Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item must sign-in on the appropriate sign-in sheets. PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on the Friday prior to the meeting. Please call (503) 639-4171 , Ext. 320 (voice) or (503) 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and r Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. To request such services, please notify the City of Tigard of your need(s) by 5:00 p.m., no less than one (1 ) week prior to the meeting date at the same phone numbers listed above so that we can make the appropriate arrangements. OVER FOR HEARING AGENDA ITEM(S) CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 1 OF 3 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA r�l CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping A Better Community CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER MONDAY- APRIL 15, 2002 - 7:00 PM AGENDA e . ..:.. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 WALL STREET DOG PARK CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2002-00001 REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking approval to construct a temporary off-leash area dog park on privately owned property. The site is a 3.8 acre undeveloped, open field. The fenced area of the park will occupy 1.73 acres of the property and will encircle a small isolated wetland located along SW Wall Street. Site improvements include 1,423 feet of 5-foot-high cyclone fencing, a 6-foot-wide by 20-foot-long paved path leading into the dog park from an existing paved parking area, a portable 110-gallon water tank, benches, and picnic tables located inside the fenced area. Sixteen parking spaces within an existing parking area will be designated for dog park parking. Native vegetation is also proposed to be planted around the fenced area. LOCATION: 7930 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S10100, 1202 (Wall Street is a private street off of SW Hunziker Road). ZONE: I-L: Light Industrial District. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725 and 18.780. 2.2 RED INK, INC. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2002-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2002-00003 REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 2 OF 3 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA 2.3 WESTGATE BAPTIST CHURCH EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2001-00004 ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2002-00002 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking Conditional Use Approval to construct a 42,000 square foot multi-purpose building on the site in two phases; reconstruct the existing athletic field; update site utilities; add more parking; and construct a 1,320 square foot addition to an existing classroom. The applicant is also seeking an Adjustment to the parking standards and have requested that the parking standards that are in place at the time of construction be imposed, as they are anticipating a change in those standards as a result of a pending application before the Tigard City Council. LOCATION: 10820 SW 130th Avenue; WCTM 1 S133AD, Tax Lot 2200. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE 3 OF 3 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA Agenda Item: 2.2 Hearing Date: April 15, 2002 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CITY OF TIGARD Community Development FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 06/11/2002 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: RED INK, INC. CASE NOS: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2002-00001 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2002-00001 Water Resources Overlay (SLR) SLR2002-00003 OWNER: Tom and Lori Hays APPLICANT: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. 12220 SW Grant St. Attn: Kim McMillan Tigard, OR 97223 18660 SW Boones Ferry Rd. Tualatin, OR 97062 PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to a Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN and ZONING DESIGNATION: Light Industrial: 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, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797, and 18.810. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find that the proposed Site Development Review, Sensitive Lands, and Water Resources Overlay Review will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended Conditions of Approval: RED INK,INC. PAGE 1 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kiiby, 639-4171, ext. 388) for review and approval: 1. The addition to the existing structure must not exceed the required height of the district (45 ft.), and shall be verified prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The applicant shall provide a revised access plan that provides a safe pedestrian walkway extending from the entrance of the building to SW Grant Street. The walkway shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and signposts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The walkway 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. 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. 3. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the street tree plan to show compliance with Tigard Development Code (TDC) Section 18.745.040. 4. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan illustrating the placement of trees within the interior of the parking lot that provides a canopy effect for the parking lot. All trees shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. 5. The applicant shall provide a narrative addressing the criteria of one of the 4-methods of compliance for Mixed Sold Waste and Recyclable Storage as established in TDC Chapter 18.755, and provide a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. 6. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the site lan to illustrated compliance with the Solid Waste and recyclable storage design standards. 7. Prior to final occupancy, the parking lot shall be striped in accordance with the TDC Chapter 18.765. 8. Prior to final occupancy, wheel stops shall be provided for all parking areas as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. 9. The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the dimensions of the parking areas in accordance with Table 18.765.1 and indicate bumper overhang areas on the plan. 10. If the applicant proposes to split the spaces between compact and standard, the new plan must reflect the compact spaces and they must be marked as such prior to final occupancy. 11. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to reflect only seven parking spaces as opposed to the eight that are proposed. 12. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. 13. The applicant shall supply the City arborist with a tree protection plan to protect those trees that will remain on the site, and insure that said measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to site work. RED INK,INC. PAGE 2 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 14. Prior to construction, the applicant must attain permission in the form of a utility easement from the adjacent property owner to run the pipe all the way to Fanno Creek. The utility easement must be recorded and a copy provided to the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of any site work permits. 15. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay. Said plan shall be consistent with the requirements of TDC Section 18.797.080(J). 16. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan, that shows no projection off site and complies with crime prevention requirements of the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 17. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach, sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue, as well as any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 18. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Grant Avenue as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements; and C. driveway apron. 19. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 20. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach, sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue, as well as any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 21. Prior to issuance of a building permit, additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue to increase the right-of-way to 30 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 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: 22. 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. 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Grant RED INK,INC. PAGE 3 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $4,318.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 24. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 25. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The site is currently occupied by an existing single-family residence and an out building. The two buildings were constructed within the floodway and floodplain when they were originally built. Vicinity Information: The site is located within an area that is characteristic of a neighborhood being converted to business and industry. Fanno Creek is located on the west border of this property. There are a variety of other uses including single-family residences and office located to the immediate north south and east of the property. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is currently developed with a single-family home and an out building. The site slopes east to west and is within both the floodplain and the floodway. The structures are non-conforming in that they would not be able to be constructed in their current location under existing regulations, however, the use is permitted subject to site development review. In this instance, the developer is seeking approval to convert the single-family home into an office, locate a stormwater pipe in the buffer area adjacent to Fanno Creek, and add a 600 square foot expansion onto the back of the existing structure. Portions of the existing structure are located in the floodway. The addition is proposed to be located in the floodplain. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to convert a single-family residence into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The applicant is also proposing to add 600 square feet of office space onto the rear of the existing structure. Offices are outright permitted uses within the I-P zoning district. RED INK,INC. PAGE 4 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Summary Land Use Permits: Chapter 18.310 Defines the decision-making type to which the land-use application is assigned. The proposed site development review, and the pipe crossing of the buffer area are typically subject to a Type II staff review. However, because a portion of the site is located within the 100-year floodplain and the associated floodway, all approvals for this request are subject to review before the City of Tigard Hearings Officer as a Type III-HO review. The request will require site development review, sensitive lands and water resources overlay review approval. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET The Tigard Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal and be given the opportunity to provide written comments prior to a decision being made. Staff received no correspondence from citizens regarding this application. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this report are as follows: A. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.360 Site Development Review) 18.390 Decision-Making Procedures) 18.530 Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.705 Access, Egress & Circulation) 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.760 Nonconforming Situations) 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780 Signs) 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) 18.797 Water Resources Overlay) B. Additional Site Development Review Approval Standards (18.360) C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards (18.810) D. Impact Study (18.390) The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following chapters: 18.410 Lot Line Adjustments; 18.600, Community Plan Area Standards; 18'.710, Accessory Residential Units; 18.715, Density Computations; 18.720, Design Compatibility Standards; 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standard; 18.740, Historic Overlay, 18.742, Home Occupations; 18.750, Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations; 18.785, Temporary Uses; and 18.798, Wireless Communications Facilities. These chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS Site Development Review (18.360) 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 proposal's consistency with these Code chapters is reviewed in the following sections. RED INK,INC. PAGE 5 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Industrial Zoning Districts (18.530) The subject property is zoned I-P (Industrial Park). Office uses are permitted outright subject to Site Development Review. Development standards in Industrial zones are provided in the following table: TABLE 18.530.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES STANDARD I-P Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 30,492 SF Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 156 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. 15ft Pre-existing -Side facing street on corner& through lots [1] 20 ft. N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3] Met - Rear yard 0/50 ft. [3][4] Met - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a public or private street -- -- Maximum Height 45 ft. Pre-existing Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75%[5] 26% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 74% [1]The provisions of Chapter 18.795(Vision Clearance)must be satisfied. [2]Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3]No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4]Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Policy 11.5.1. [5]Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80%if the provisions of Section 18.530.050.B are satisfied. [6]Except that a reduction to 20%of the site may be approved through the site development review process. The existing building is below the 45-foot maximum height, and the applicant's plan shows that the addition will maintain the existing roofline. As noted above, approximately 26% of the site will be covered with impervious surface area, including the building and parking area. This is well below the 75% maximum allowed in I-P zones. The remaining 74% of the site will be landscaped or revegetated natural areas. The existing structure has a nonconforming front yard setback. There is no applicable rear or side yard setbacks since the properties to the north and south are also zoned for industrial development. FINDING: The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable development standards in industrial zones with the exception of the front yard setback for the existing structure. Nonconforming structures are permitted to continue and expand subject to the criteria within the nonconforming section of the Code, and is discussed later in this report. Because the height of the building and addition are not clear, staff recommends the following condition be imposed. CONDITION: The addition to the existing structure must not exceed the required height of the district (45 ft.), and shall be verified prior to issuance of building permits. RED INK,INC. PAGE 6 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Access, Egress and Circulation (18.705) 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; The applicant is required to improve the frontage along Grant Street including sidewalks, but has not shown a sidewalk connection from the entrance of the building to the street as required by this standard. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The proposal does not provide a walkway from the ground floor entrance to the street, which provides the required access and egress as required in TDC Section 18.705.030(F)(1). 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; and The required frontage improvements will involve crossings of the two driveways. The driveways are proposed to be 25 feet in width, and the sidewalk improvements that are required will meet the requirements for contrasting pavement materials as they are concrete and the applicant has proposed aggregate pavement for the accesses. This criterion is met. 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 indicates that the new curb, gutter, and sidewalks will be constructed to City Standards. This criterion has been met. 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 less than 99 parking spaces is one 30-foot-wide access with a 24- foot pavement width. The applicant has proposed two access points of 30-feet in width with 24-feet of pavement. This criterion has been met. CONDITION: The applicant shall provide a revised access plan that provides a safe pedestrian walkway extending from the entrance of the building to SW Grant Street. The walkway shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and signposts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The walkway 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. 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. RED INK,INC. PAGE 7 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Environmental Performance Standards (18.725) Requires that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 Performance Standards regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the Commercial zoning districts and the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of ure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-0'15 and 340-28-070) apply. 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. Odors. The emissions 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. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. 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. FINDING: As this is a typical industrial-park use, there is not the typical machinery, emission stacks, or sound creating devices that would potentially create problem environmental conditions that have been listed above. The above performance standards are met. These standards would be subject to code enforcement investigation if for some reason, the above standards were in question. Landscaping and Screening 18.745) Street trees: Section 18.74 .040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 required 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 applicant has submitted a landscape plan that provides for two "Red Maple" trees and an existing 30-inch pine along SW Grant Street. The continuation of street trees would be difficult beyond this point because of the fall in the grade of the lot. The submitted landscape plan also shows 28 feet on center spacing but does not identify the caliper of the proposed street trees. The plan meets the intent of the street tree standard, but should be conditioned to meet the size standards. FINDING: The proposal fails to meet the street tree size requirements of TDC Section 18.745.040(C)(2)(b). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the street tree plan to show compliance with TDC Section 18.745.040. RED INK,INC. PAGE 8 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Land Use Buffering and Screening: Buffering and Screening is required between different types of land uses. The proposed office is a permitted use within the Industrial park zone and abuts the same industrial zone on three sides and open space on the fourth. As such, it is not subject to any required screening standards of the TDC or the buffering requirements of Table 18.745.1. This criterion has been satisfied. Screening - 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 applicant has proposed to retain 13 of the 15 trees on site that were over six inches in caliper, and has proposed to incorporate the existing trees into the landscape and screening plan for the parking. There is one section at the north end of the parking lot that would require an additional tree to provide the canopy effect as required above. FINDING: The proposal does not meet the criteria set forth in TDC Section 18.745.050(E)(1)(a.)(4). CONDITION: The applicant shall revise the landscape plan illustrating the placement of trees within the interior of the parking lot that provides a canopy effect for the parking lot. All trees shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. 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). 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 applicant has not indicated which of the 4 methods will be used to demonstrate compliance with this chapter, but has shown an enclosure on the site plan. RED INK,INC. PAGE 9 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FINDING: The proposal does not specifically detail which option will be used of the four options available within TDC Section 18.755.040. CONDITION: The applicant shall provide a narrative addressing the criteria of one of the 4 methods of compliance for Mixed Sold Waste and Recyclable Storage as established in TDC Chapter 18.755, and provide a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. 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 site plan shows a trash enclosure with a fence surrounding it within a side yard. The site plan indicates a 27 square foot enclosure dedicated to this purpose. This standard has been met. 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 indicated that a 6-foot chain link fence with vinyl slats will screen the enclosure. However, the applicant has not identified the width of the openings as required in the design standards, and staff was unable to determine the intent from the site plan. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: Because the applicant has not provided evidence of complete compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage design standards, this standard has not been met. If the applicant complies with the condition listed below, the standards will be met: CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the site plan to illustrated compliance with the Solid Waste and recyclable storage design standards. RED INK,INC. PAGE 10 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Nonconforming Situations (18.760) Nonconforming development. 1. Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this title that could not be built under the terms of this title by reason of restrictions on lot area, lot coverage, height, yard, equipment, its location on the lot or other requirements concerning the structure, such structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following provisions: a. No such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity but any structure or portion thereof may be enlarged or altered in a way that satisfies the requirements of this title or will decrease its nonconformity; or It would be highly unlikely that the existing structure would be able to be built today, and other than a few miscellaneous permits for minor interior remodels, there have been no other permits issued for the building since its original construction. Because of its location in the floodway prior to the current Code, it is a nonconforming development. The applicant has proposed to convert the single-family residence to an office in an industrial zoning district. It Is a permitted use in the zone, so the use is not nonconforming. Pursuant to this chapter, the structure may be enlarged as long as it satisfies the TDC or decreases its nonconformity. The applicant has proposed to convert and enlarge the structure in compliance with the chapter. This criterion is met. b. Should such nonconforming structure or nonconforming portion of structure be destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 60% of its current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this title; and The structure has not been destroyed, therefore, this criterion is inapplicable. c. Should such structure be moved for any reason for any distance whatever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the zoning district in which it is located after it is moved. The structure is not being moved. This criterion is inapplicable. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765) 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 parking area has accommodations for one ADA accessible parking space that will meet the requirements for a 7 space parking facility. This criteria has been met. 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. RED INK,INC. PAGE 11 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Access was discussed previously in this report, and visual clearance will be addressed later in this report. This standard can be met. 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 applicant has not indicated that the parking lot will be striped. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not indicated that the parking lot will be striped as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. CONDITION:Prior to final occupancy, the parking lot shall be striped in accordance with the TDC Chapter 18.765. 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. The applicant did not propose nor demonstrate compliance with the above standard. This criterion has not been met. FINDING: The proposal does not address the requirements for wheel stops as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. CONDITION:Prior to final occupancy, wheel stops shall be provided for all parking areas as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Table 18.765.1. outlines the minimum dimensions for angled parking. The proposal identifies 8 spaces with the following dimensions: Minimums Compact Standard Compact/Standard Spaces Spaces (in Feet) (Proposed) (Proposed) Parking Angle 90 degrees 90 degrees 90 degrees Stall Width 7.5-8.0/8.5-10.0 8.5' typical 8.5' typical Stall Depth 16.5/18.5 16.5' 18' Aisle 24-28/24-28 24' 24' Stall Width Parallel to Aisle 7.5-8.0/8.5-10 +8.5' +8.5' Module Width 58-61/61-65 N/A N/A FINDING: As illustrated in the table, the proposed parking lot fails to meet the minimum standards of Table 18.765.1. If the proposal that the parking angle remain at 90 degrees and a stall width of 8.5 feet stands, then the stall depth should reflect the minimum dimensions for the standards as they apply within Table 18.765.1 for compact spaces and standard spaces independently. The Table must be read directly across and not interchanged to ensure function of the parking areas. RED INK,INC. PAGE 12 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CONDITIONS: . The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the dimensions of the parking areas in accordance with Table 18.765.1 and indicate bumper overhang areas on the plan. . If the applicant proposes to split the parking spaces between compact and standard, the new plan must reflect the compact spaces and they must be marked as such prior to final occupancy. 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. The minimum bicycle parking requirement for office facilities is .4 per thousand square feet of office space. The applicant has proposed 1 bicycle parking space. The proposed 2,200 square foot office building would only require one bicycle space. This criterion has been met. 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 TDC requires a minimum of 2.7 spaces for every thousand square feet, and a maximum of 3.4 spaces for every thousand square feet of space occupied by the proposed use. Assuming a building size of 2,200 square feet, the minimum amount of parking required would be six spaces, and the maximum allowed would be seven spaces. This criterion has not been met. FINDING: The applicant has proposed eight parking spaces, however, the maximum allowed parking for this size building within the zone A parking area is seven. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to reflect only seven parking spaces as opposed to the eight that are proposed. Sensitive Lands (18.775) The Hearings Officer shall have the authority to issue a sensitive lands permit in the 100-year floodplain by means of a Type IIIA procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.775.070 B-E The proposal involves excavation of more than 50 cubic yards of material and construction of an addition to a structure on property that is almost entirely located within the floodplain and largely within the floodway. This proposal warrants consideration by the Tigard Hearings Officer. 18.775.040 General Provisions for Floodplain Areas A. Permit review. The appropriate approval authority shall review all permit applications to determine whether proposed building sites will be safe from flooding. The Hearings Officer reviews all applications for land use consistency, and the Building Official will review all construction plans in compliance with this title and the Oregon Uniform Building Code as required. RED INK,INC. PAGE 13 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER B. Special flood hazard. The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled "The Flood Insurance Study of the City of Tigard," dated September 1, 1981, with accompanying Flood Insurance Maps (updated February 1984) is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter. This Flood Insurance Study is on file at the Tigard Civic Center. The applicant and staff have reviewed these maps and agree that this site is within one of the identified special flood hazard areas. The application is being reviewed under this premise. C. Base flood elevation data. When base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with Subsection B above, the Director shall obtain, review and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a federal, state or other source, in order to administer Subsections M and N below. The base flood elevation has been provided for this site and has been discussed elsewhere in this report. D. Test of reasonableness. Where elevation data is not available either through the Flood Insurance Study or from another authoritative source, applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a local judgment and includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate at least two feet above grade in these sensitive land areas may result in higher insurance rates. As discussed previously, the elevation data is available on the maps that are available within Tigard City Hall. E. Resistant to flood damage. All new construction and substantial improvements, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. All materials and utility equipment is reviewed for resistance to flood damage by the City of Tigard building division. F. Minimize flood damage. All new construction and substantial improvements, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. To ensure that any construction on site minimizes flood damage, the City of Tigard building division will review the proposed construction, and require adjustments where necessary. G. Equipment protection. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air- conditioning equipment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. The equipment will be reviewed prior to building permit issuance by the City of Tigard's commercial plans examiner to ensure that it is flood proofed. RED INK,INC. PAGE 14 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER H. Water Supply Systems. All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the system. There are no new water supply systems proposed with this application. I. Anchoring. All new construction, all manufactured homes and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. Anchoring is also required by the OUBC. Anchoring for all new structures will be reviewed at the time of building permit review. J. Sanitary sewerage systems. New and replacement sanitary sewerage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the systems and discharge from the systems into floodwater. There are no new or replacement sanitary sewerage systems associated with this proposal. K. On-site water disposal systems. On-site water disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. There are no on-site detention facilities associated with this proposal because it lays directly adjacent to Fanno Creek. This criterion is met. L. Residential Construction. 1. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure, including manufactured homes, shall have the lowest floor, including the basement, elevated at least one foot above base flood elevation; 2. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited, or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwater. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect, or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: a. A minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided; b. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade; and c. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices, provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood waters. 3. Manufactured homes shall be securely anchored to an adequately anchored permanent foundation system. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors. This standard does not apply as the purpose of this construction is for industrial purposes. RED INK,INC. PAGE 15 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER M. Nonresidential Construction. New construction and substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential structure shall either have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to the level of the base flood elevation, or together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall: 1. Be flood-proofed so that below the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; 2. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; 3. Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting provisions of this subsection based on their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the Building Official as set forth in Subsection 18.775.030 E2; and 4. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not flood-proofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in 18.775.040 L2. Applicants flood-proofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one foot below the flood- proofed level (e.g., a building constructed to the base flood level will be rated as one foot below that level). As discussed previously, the City of Tigard Building Division will be reviewing the construction plans for this proposal to ensure that they are consistent with the State and Local requirements as they pertain to development within the 100-year floodplain. The applicant has provided a letter from a certified registered engineer that states that the proposed structures will be verified for consistency prior to application. N. Subdivisions and partitions in 100 year floodplain. Subdivisions and partitions in the 100-year floodplain shall meet the following criteria: 1. The design shall minimize the potential for flood damage; 2. Public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems shall be located and constructed so as to minimize flood damage; 3. Adequate drainage shall be provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and 4. For subdivisions or partitions which contain more than 50 lots or 5 acres and where base flood elevation data is not available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or another authoritative source, the applicant shall generate base flood elevation data to be reviewed as part of the application. This proposal does not involve a subdivision or partition. Within the 100-year floodplain The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified by a registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge; The applicant has provided a letter from Kim McMillan, P.E. stating that the encroachments into the floodplain will not decrease the storage function or maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway. Her letter states that, "...the fill can be balanced with an equal amount of cut RED INK,INC. PAGE 16 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER volume." In a second letter, Mrs. McMillan estimates a net cut of 12.07 cy that would prevent any issue of conveyance or storage reduction. In a memo, Greg Berry, City of Tigard Capital Facilities Engineer, concurs with the balance method. This criterion has been satisfied. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards; The subject property is designated industrial in the Comprehensive Plan. This criterion is satisfied. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood; As discussed earlier, the applicant's engineer as indicated that there will be a net cut of 12.07 cy in the parking lot area that will enhance any storage capacity lost by the overall balance of cut and fills. The parking area improvements are going to be placed at the same elevation of the existing grade, and the addition will be required to be flood-proofed so that it does not increase the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. This criterion is satisfied. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely; The greenway in which the Fanno Creek Trail system would possibly follow is located on the West side of the creek. This parcel is outside of the location of any potential pathway. This criterion is met. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands (DSL) approvals shall be obtained; and It has not been ascertained as to whether or not the applicant would need any approvals from the Oregon DSL for work within the 100-year floodplain, nor has the applicant provided evidence that would indicate that they are not necessary. The applicant's engineer has indicated that a Joint Aquatics Resource Permit Application (JARPA) has been filed with both agencies. Staff has been in contact with the Army Corps of Engineers, and Kathryn Harris with the ACOE has indicated that no permit will be necessary for this project. This criterion has not been satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not provided any evidence that would indicate that no approval from the Oregon DSL is necessary for the work that is proposed within the 100-year floodplain. CONDITION:Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain,.the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. There is no need for additional open land area within and adjacent to this floodplain according to the Long Range Planning Department. This criterion is satisfied. RED INK, INC. PAGE 17 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FINDING: There are no excessive slopes, drainageways, or wetlands associated with the proposal, therefore, the remaining criterion within TDC Section 18.775.070 does not apply to this proposal. Signs (18.780) No sign or sign structure shall hereafter be erected, re-erected, constructed, structurally altered or relocated within the City limits except as provided by this title, and a permit for the same sign or sign structure has been issued by the Director. The applicant has stated in the narrative that the developer does not intend to install any outside signs. This criterion is 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. The applicant has provided a tree survey and protection plan from Halstead Arboriculture Consultants. In the report, the arborist states that there are a total of eleven trees over twelve inches in diameter. Of these eleven trees, three are hazardous and would not be required to be mitigated for if removed. Only two trees are slated for removal as part of this proposal, and the arborist has stated that the third tree could be preserved with proper treatment. The arborist has also provided protection measures for the trees during construction, but the applicant did not indicate that these measures would be followed. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant does not indicate how the existing trees that are to remain on site will be protected during construction as required by the TDC. CONDITION:The applicant shall supply the City Arborist with a tree protection plan to protect those trees that will remain on the site, and insure that said measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to site work. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795 Section 18.795.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.B. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center Dine grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided alT branches below eight feet are removed. The applicant has stated in the narrative that the visual clearance area requirements will be met. Currently, there is not a visual clearance problem on site and the applicant has not proposed any potential obstructions on the plans. This standard is satisfied. WATER RESOURCES CHAPTER (18.797) Applicability and Generalized Mapping. Section 18.797.030 The WR overlay district applies to all significant wetlands and streams and applicable riparian setback and water quality buffer areas, that appear on the Tigard Wetlands and streams, and riparian setback and water quality buffer areas, that appear on the Tigard Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map. Standard Riparian Setbacks and Clean Water Services (CWS) Water Quality Buffers: Section 18.797.030.C. The applicant shall be responsible for surveying and mapping the precise location of the top of bank, wetland edge, riparian setback and/or CWS water quality buffer at the RED INK,INC. PAGE 18 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER time of application submittal. Table 18.797.1 summarizes riparian setbacks and water quality buffers that apply to significant water resources within the WR overlay zone: FROM TABLE 18.797.1 RIPARIAN SETBACKS AND WATER QUALITY WR STANDARD CWS STANDARD WATER BUFFERS SIGNIFICANT WATER RESOURCE TYPE RIPARIAN SETBACK' QUALITY BUFFER2 Tualatin River& associated wetlands 75 feet 25 feet Major streams & associated wetlands 50 feet 25 feet Developed subdivision lot exception 25 feet 25 feet (major streams & associated wetlands) Minor streams & adjacent/isolated wetlands Not applicable 25 feet 1 Measured in feet from the top-of-bank or the associated wetland edge,whichever is greater. 2 Measured in feet from the stream top-of-bank or the wetland edge,whichever is greater. Division of State Lands notification required for all proposed development activities within any wetland. Clean Water Services standards are applicable when development activities are proposed within 25 feet of any wetland or stream. The subject development site includes designated wetlands, floodplain, and a Major stream, Fanno Creek, along the southwestern portion of the site. Table 18 797.1 indicates a 50-foot riparian setback for major streams and associated wetlands. Applicable definitions for major streams and riparian setback area are contained in Tigard Development Code Section 18.797.020. The applicant has submitted a Wetland Determination and Vegetated Corridor Assessment from Fishman Environmental Services, LLC. The applicant has provided mapping of the top- of-bank, floodplain, and riparian setback on the plans and it is discussed within the report. See also, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands in this decision for additional criteria and conditions related to development within the floodplain. Application Requirements: Section 18.797.060 Type II and Ill uses: required studies and mitigation reports. Each of the following studies shall be required whenever any Type II or Ill use is proposed within the WR overlay district. Each required report must consider the City of Tioard Local Wetlands Inventory (Fishman Environmental Services, 1994) shall be in addition to the submission of information required for specific types of development, and shall be prepared by professionals in their respective fields. This is a Type II Water Resource Overlay Review in accordance with Table 18.797.2(h) underground utilities. The following reports are required for Type II Water Resource Overlay Review applications: 1. Hydrology and soils report. 2. Grading lolan. 3. Vegetation report. 4. Streambank conditions report. The applicant has submitted the Wetland Determination and Vegetated Corridor Assessment from Fishman Environmental Services, LLC, which addresses the hydrological, soil, and vegetative impacts to the riparian setback area. The reports indicate that the placement of the 8" pipe in conjunction with the proposed enhancement will minimize impacts of the development to the Water Resource Overlay Zone. No grading is proposed within the Water Resource Overlay Zone. RED INK, INC. PAGE 19 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Development Standards: Section 18.797.080 The following shall apply to all development, including native vegetation removal and excavation, within the WR overlay district. No application for a use identified in Section 18.797.050 shall be deemed complete until the applicant has addressed each of these standards in writing. A. Alternatives considered. Except for stream corridor enhancement, most Type II and Ill uses are expected to develop outside of water resource and riparian setback areas. Therefore, Type II and Ill development applications must carefully examine upland alternatives for the proposed use, and explain the reasons why the proposed development cannot reasonably occur outside of the water resource or riparian setback area. This application is for the placement of an 8" storm water outfall pipe to discharge stormwater into Fanno Creek. Because of the grade of the lot, there are no other reasonable alternatives to discharge the water. The applicant has indicated that they have been unable to contact the owner of the adjacent property about directing the pipe through their property, so there may be a need to consider sheet flow or some other mechanism to get the stormwater discharge to an approved system. FINDING: The applicant does not have permission from the adjacent landowner to install the stormwater outfall pipe across their property as proposed. CONDITION: Prior to construction, the applicant must attain permission in the form of a utility easement from the adjacent property owner to run the pipe all the way to Fanno Creek. The utility easement must be recorded and a copy provided to the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of any site work permits. If the applicant is unable to gain the easement, then they must provide an alternative method of transport consistent with these requirements. B. Minimize siting impacts. The proposed use shall be designed, located and constructed to minimize excavation, loss of native vegetation, erosion, and adverse hydrological impacts on water resources. 1. For Type II and III uses, the civil engineer with experience in water quality must certify that any adverse water quality impacts of the development proposal will be minimized consistent with best management practices; No adverse water quality impacts are expected to result from the proposed stormwater outfall pipe installation. A mitigation and enhancement plan has been submitted to Clean Water Services (CWS) for their approval, and the service provider letter requires that the mitigation be complied with as part of the CWS approval. It is anticipated that CWS will require the mitigation to be planted according to the plan that was submitted by Fishman Environmental Services. 2. For all uses, the development shall be located as far from the water resource, and use as little of the water resource or riparian setback area, as possible, recognizing the operational needs of the proposed development. The applicant has proposed to observe the fifty-foot buffer requirement of the riparian setback, and recommendations have been made to ensure the long-term maintenance of the proposed enhancement. C. Construction materials and methods. Where development within the riparian area is unavoidable, construction materials or methods used within the riparian setback area shall minimize damage to water quality and native vegetation. The applicant has indicated that an 8" pvc pipe will be installed, but has not indicated by which method. With the implementation of the recommended erosion control techniques, and the implementation of the enhancement, any damage should be minimal. RED INK,INC. PAGE 20 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER D. Minimize flood damage. Above-ground residential structures shall not be permitted within the WR overlay district, where such land is also within the 100- year floodplain. On-site flood storage capacity shall not decrease as a result of development. The cumulative effects of any proposed development shall not reduce flood storage capacity or raise base flood elevations on- or off-site. Any new commercial or industrial land development proposed within the 100-year floodplain shall be designed consistent with Chapter 18.775, Sensitive Lands. Impacts to the floodplain have been addressed previously in this report under the Sensitive Lands Review Chapter. The effects of this development on the floodplain have been identified in that section. E. Avoid steep slopes. Within 50 feet of any water resource, excavation and vegetation removal shall be avoided on slopes of 25% or greater and in areas with high erosion potential (as shown on SCS maps), except where necessary to construct public facilities or to ensure slope stability. No steep slopes within 50 feet of the Water Resource Overlay will be impacted by this proposal. F. Minimize impacts on existing vegetation. The following standards shall apply when construction activity is proposed in areas where vegetation is to be preserved. 1. Temporary measures used for initial erosion control shall not be left in place permanently; 2. Work areas on the immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to reduce potential damage to trees and vegetation; 3. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment. During clearing operations, trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area; 4. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees and brush shall be taken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place; 5. Stockpiling of soil, or soil mixed with vegetation, shall not be permitted on a permanent basis. The applicant has submitted a vegetated corridor report as part of the Fishman Environmental Services, LLC that indicates the corridor is in good to degraded condition. The applicant's proposal does not further impact any vegetated areas. In fact, the mitigation required by CWS should enhance the corridor. G. Vegetation mitigation plan. If a Type II or III use is proposed within a water resource site or riparian setback area, or mitigation is proposed as a method to reduce the riparian setback in accordance with Section 18.797.100, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented. 1. The applicant shall be responsible for re-vegetating areas temporarily disturbed by excavation on a 1:1 basis; 2. Where approval is granted to reduce the riparian setback area, the applicant shall be responsible for mitigating for the reduced setback by replacing non-native vegetation within the remaining, protected riparian setback area on a 1.5:1 basis. That is, for each 100 square feet of riparian setback that is lost to development, at least 150 square feet of existing disturbed area within the riparian setback or wetland shall be re-planted with native plant species; 3. The re-vegetation plan shall provide for the replanting and maintenance of native plant species designed to achieve pre-disturbance conditions. The applicant shall be responsible for replacing any native plant species that do not survive the first two years after planting, and for ensuring the RED INK,INC. PAGE 21 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER survival of any replacement plants for an additional two years after their replacement. This criteria has been addressed in part by the mitigation requirement of CWS that is discussed in Section 18.797.080.F above. H. Water and sewer infiltration and discharge. Water and sanitary sewer facilities shall be designed, located and constructed to avoid infiltration of floodwaters into the system, and to avoid discharges from such facilities to streams and wetlands. The proposal includes an on-site detention facility that is designed to filter water prior to being discharged to Fanno Creek. This criterion has been met. On-site systems. On-site septic systems and private wells shall be prohibited within the WR overlay district. This criteria is inapplicable as there are no proposed on-site septic systems or private wells within the WR overlay district. J. Erosion control plan. If a Type II or III use is proposed within a water resource site or riparian setback area, the following erosion control standards shall apply within the WR overlay district: 1. Specific methods of soil erosion and sediment control shall be used during construction to minimize visible and measurable erosion; 2. The land area to be grubbed, stripped, used for temporary placement of soil, or to otherwise expose soil shall be confined to the immediate construction site only; 3. Construction activity will take place during the dry season (June- October), whenever feasible, and the duration of exposure of soils shall be kept to a minimum during construction; 4. Exposed soils shall be covered by mulch, sheeting, temporary seeding or other suitable material following grading or construction, until soils are stabilized. During the rainy season (November through May), soils shall not be exposed for more than 7 calendar days. All disturbed land areas which will remain unworked for 21 days or more during construction, shall be mulched and seeded; 5. During construction, runoff from the site shall be controlled, and increased runoff and sediment resulting from soil disturbance shall be retained on-site. Temporary diversions, sediment basins, barriers, check dams, or other methods shall be provided as necessary to hold sediment and runoff; 6. A stabilized pad of gravel shall be constructed at all entrances and exists to the construction site. The stabilized gravel pad shall be the only allowable entrance or exit to the site; 7. Topsoil removal for development shall be stockpiled and reused on-site to the degree necessary to restore disturbed areas to their original or enhanced condition, or to assure sufficient stable topsoil for re- vegetation. Additional soil shall be provided if necessary to support re- vegetation; 8. The removal of all sediments which are carried into the streets, water resources or on to adjacent property, are the responsibility of the applicant. The applicant shall be responsible for cleaning up and repairing streets, catch basins, water resource areas and adjacent properties, where such properties are affected by sediments or mud. In no case shall sediments be washed into storm drains, ditches or drainageways; 9. Any other relevant provisions of the Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans Technical Guidance Handbook (City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services and Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington RED INK,INC. PAGE 22 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER County, Revised February 1994), required by the Planning Director. The applicant has provided staff with an erosion control plan for site work, but has failed to address erosion control during work within the Water Resource area. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not submitted an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay as required in TDC Section 18.797.080(J). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay. Said plan shall be consistent with the requirements of TDC Section 18.797.080(J). K. Plan implementation. A schedule of planned erosion control and re-vegetation measures shall be provided, which sets forth the progress of construction activities, and mitigating erosion control measures. An approved Erosion Control of Re-vegetation Plan shall be implemented and maintained as follows: 1. Erosion control measures shall be installed prior to any stripping or excavation work. 2. The applicant shall implement the measures and construct facilities contained in the approved Erosion Control Plan in a timely manner. During active construction, the applicant shall inspect erosion control measures daily, and maintain, adjust, repair or replace erosion control measures to ensure that they are functioning properly. 3. Eroded sediment shall be removed immediately from pavement surfaces, off-site areas, and from the surface water management system, including storm drainage inlets, ditches and culverts. 4. Water containing sediment shall not be flushed into the surface water management system, wetlands or streams without first passing through an approved sediment filtering facility or device. 5. In addition, the applicant shall call for City inspection, prior to the foundation inspection for any building, to certify that erosion control measures are installed in accordance with the erosion control plan. These criteria will be addressed by the previous condition and through the site inspection process. This standard is met. B. ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL CRITERIA 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); 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; 18.360.090.8 100-year floodplain); 18.360.090.13 (Parking); 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.15 (Drainage); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled); 18.360.090.15 (Provisions of the underlying zone). RED INK,INC. PAGE 23 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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. The applicant's plans have considered the natural environment on the site by locating the development in a location that will incorporate a majority of the trees into buffering and screening. No buildings or structures are proposed that will hinder air circulation, natural lighting or prevent fire fighting apparatus from performing their jobs. This criteria has been met. 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. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this project and has not indicated concern or objection with the proposal. To ensure that the plan addresses crime prevention concerns, the applicant would need to provide a detailed lighting plan to the Tigard Police Department and the Tigard Planning Department. Additionally, the applicant has proposed vegetation that would allow easy observation of activities that are on-going on the site. The crime prevention standards have not been fully met. FINDING: The proposal fails to address lighting as required by the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan, that shows no projection off site and complies with crime prevention requirements of the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). 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 closest stops are located at the intersection of SW Johnson and SW Grant Street. The stop is not adjacent to an existing or proposed transit route, therefore, this standard does not apply. 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: RED INK,INC. PAGE 24 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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 minor collector street to have a 60-foot right-of-way width and a 40-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 Grant Avenue, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 20 feet of ROW east of the centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate additional ROW to provide at least 30 feet from the centerline. The applicant's plans indicate they will provide this dedication. SW Grant Avenue is currently partially improved adjacent to this site, with adequate pavement width and curbing to meet the current standard. The existing streetlight spacing along this street is also adequate. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should install the necessary driveway approach to the site, along with a concrete sidewalk, and street trees along the site frontage. 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. By constructing the concrete sidewalk along the Grant Avenue frontage, the applicant will meet this provision. 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 are two CWS trunk sewer lines (a 24-inch and a 60-inch) adjacent to the southern property line of this site. There is also an 8-inch public main line in SW Grant Avenue. According to City records, the existing building is connected to public sewer. The applicant's plans are not clear as to where the sewer connection is located, but it does not appear that the applicant will need additional sewer connections. RED INK,INC. PAGE 25 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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). This site is at an elevation lower than the roadway, and may accept a limited amount of street runoff during rainstorms because of the existing asphalt driveway. When this site is improved, the applicant will be installing a new concrete driveway approach that will help eliminate any street runoff from flowing down the driveway. Other than Fanno Creek flowing through the site, there are no other upstream public drainage facilities affecting 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). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. Since this site lies adjacent to Fanno Creek, there is no need to require onsite detention. The applicant's plan shows that they will collect the onsite runoff, treat it in a filter, and then discharge to Fanno Creek. This concept is acceptable. 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. There are no proposed bikeways adjacent to this development, therefore this criterion does not apply. 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. Because of the scale of this business, and the amount of required improvements, It is highly unlikely that bikeway improvements are going to benefit this development. This criterion does not apply. RED INK,INC. PAGE 26 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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. As discussed previously, this criterion does not apply. 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 Grant Avenue. 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 157 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $4,318.00. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: This site is within the City of Tigard service area and is presently served by the public water system. No additional public water line improvements are necessary for this development. 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. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall RED INK,INC. PAGE 27 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant proposes to treat the onsite runoff in a Stormwater Management catch basin filter unit. These units have been approved for use on private property and have shown that they will meet the phosphorus removal criteria of the CWS standards. Therefore, the use of this unit on this site is acceptable. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. The proposed unit from Stormwater Management is acceptable, provided the property owner agrees to hire the manufacturer (or approved equal) to provide the required maintenance of the unit. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. A grading and erosion control plan must be reviewed and approved by the Building Division prior to construction. D. IMPACT STUDY (18.390) Section 18.390.040.B.2.e 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 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 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. 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 $5,358 based on the 2,200 square feet of office usage. Based on the estimate that the total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this project's traffic impact is RED INK,INC. PAGE 28 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER $16,743.75 ($5,358 divided by 0.32). The difference between the TIF paid, proposed improvements to the street system, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the street system. The applicant has proposed dedication of an additional 10 feet of right-of-way at a cost of $15,840 ($12.00 x 1320 SF of dedication) and half-street improvements of 132 feet along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue. The improvements to the street are valued at approximately $19,800 ($150 per lineal foot). Consequently, the unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $-18,896. The Development has mitigated 100% for the impacts that it will contribute to the arterial and collector system. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division commented that the proposed structure is to be converted from an R3 residential structure to a B office use. OSSC Chapter 11 ADA requirements shall be met for accessibility from the parking area to the new addition and throughout the structure by means of ramps or other approved means. Protection of mechanical, lumbing, and electrical items required. No hazmat storage allowed without review. Additions to the existing structure must be flood proofed (Staff Contact: Daryl Jones). The City of Tigard Engineering Department was sent this proposal for review and the comments have been incorporated into this report. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager/Water Department has reviewed this application and has indicated that the existing hydrant would need a minimum 3' setback from the driveway. If the meter is to be relocated contact the Water Department. The applicant shall install double check valve assembly directly behind the water meter. All utility work should be shown in drawings and coordinated with the City prior to site work. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed this application and has provided the following comments: 1. A minimum of 2 fire hydrants shall be provided for this development. One hydrant is shown on the plans directly adjacent to the building. One additional hydrant shall be installed so that no part of the structure is more than 500 feet from the hydrant. (UFC 903.4) 2. Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access roadway that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly. (UFC Sec. 901.4.3) 3. Approved fire apparatus access roadways and firefighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to stockpiling combustibles on-site or the commencement of combustible construction. (UFC Sec. 8704) 4. A building survey and plans, in accordance with TVF&R Ordinance 99-01, Appendix III-F, shall be submitted. A copy of Appendix III-F, the building survey form and the instructions are available on the Fire District web site. To access this information via Internet, follow this link: http://www.tvfr.com/Departments/FireMarshal/new construction.htm City of Tigard Arborist has reviewed this application. His comments have been included in the previous discussion regarding tree preservation. City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed this application, but offered no comments. City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and requested that an exterior lighting plan be submitted to the Police Department for review. Long Range Planning Division has reviewed this application, but offered no comments. RED INK,INC. PAGE 29 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services has reviewed the proposal and offered the following comments and conditions: Developer must address water quality to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this conversion. A 30' wide sanitary sewer easement crosses this property. No Storm Water Connection Permit can be issued on this project until the applicant has satisfied the requirements of Service Provider Letter No. 1104. (Contact Lee Walker or Heidi Berg) Tualatin Valley Water District, Portland General Electric, Tri-Met, NW Natural Gas, US Army Corps of Engineers, Oregon DEQ, and Oregon DSL were given the opportunity to review this proposal and submitted no comments or objections. March 28, 2002 PREPARED B : Brad 'thy DATE Associate Planner March 28, 2002 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewer dorff DATE Planning Maria er RED INK,INC. PAGE 30 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER g _.r -'— Iiii CITY of TIGARD ` / OFOO RA.NIC IN rOAYATION by{T[M bsw PIHAS /:T ■ r , VICINITY MAP t o40„ rillil►c :T::■■: MG SDR2002-0000 I New. ■:� � ~■■Z, SLR2002-00001 S �� ■off U 11111111.k. �iZ� SLR2002-00003 iii i� ��'� `� �� *46".■ RED INK, INC. r � Sw�o1 �� '� M,y FR .��' Jt<,■04.■44 * IlVir,f0AELI2I ■t-4*w 4 ---it.t.. d . , . . , ,,,, „:„...,.,v ..„,„0„.. ,.., ,,,V.7.. 0,,,,T! I ,le!47,7; f, E:I''---:1;_:;-7;,.Si 01-,k: Or* • T __ _ . . _ oe,„*-<4' , ST♦ � ACT Woad Ar•e M.p .. o,..* N • ## 1'° 0 200 a00 800 fNl ' �� 1"=a01 feel is tiy14., 446 . 44 /1- . City of Tigard general Infortnatlon on thls map is for general location only and • s�•, should be verl0ed with the Development Services Division. .. . 99� 73125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 O S . (503)639.1171 . \ http:/Awnv.c1.11pard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Feb 12,2002;C:Unagic\MAGIC03.APR J �� //i / / MI sustumr q / / D` \\ �V lams MOCJnaa PAM \ / •pPR V V �� 17.: / PI.T01•17.001104 m..ar.� OM OM TOTAL WOW IAA ,c, /' �( • • ' ` '/14,* - ty,-f4h7t**4 \ we:rm re earn:7.A. .. ' e 91t1 mom// • / "' \:J 1�,1 7' . aAU a' ' 'QI - �. CI sit!PLAN / / " ...✓ Air..l. �. c srim GRADn4G AND DRAINAGE PLAN -"= 4 co EROSION comma.PLAN �� (MASS \ r amwa/' I ATE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY / • '� - LI LANDSCAPE/TREE PLAN �••i 'c we•A - 4 E.iYAPSON•/_s...6.112C". .' it _.... ' r \ '�/• 7 FLOOR PUN 07.11 444 . 7 .\ s...:‘,. \,, \ \ ,,,,# .. • /9/ GMZU COMM.Pon. .FF.O.wAR cm % f b ...e>ma WM..ag0 WAIL SO ITT...IM../n1Po /1 a 011ml L \ r rr. As''' 6ATVII .bill ","a.W W.Y. / � wA101 f�0 OM , e�, f • wrt a m..n P..m.a W.W a_ nnoroi info L a. L... r�M '6 f —fl—oua uw..0 /7/4.C7 �p'C 1 \ * mom. • u '-)I. • • W . DI uTlitt Y.ILi / L., /� }(- i- ISOlt 1VL. `�. �- IYLI'.WIp L.il1 < K OM i.11...R mlirla. / �CITY of TIGARD T �1 SDR2002.00001 1SLR2002.000011SLR2002.00003 CITY OF '°"°° RED INK, INC. SITE PLAN N (Map is not to scale) 1 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. CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development CITY OF TIGARD Shaping (Better Community PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY APRIL 15, 2002 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY (SLR) 2002-00003 FILE TITLE: RED INK, INC. APPLICANT: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. OWNER: Tom and Lori Hays Attn: Kim McMillan 12220 SW Grant Street 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road Tigard, OR 97223 Tualatin, OR 97062 REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESEN1 WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION LESS THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AN OPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25 ) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER BRAD KILBY AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. �.■... . � ,,. ,; CITY of TIGARD la -mg iIr_ iib�� ! 1 YICINI:Y MAP SDR2002-00001 II ► I! !I1' Is ii SLR2002-00001 11'11-� M,; SLR2002-00003 WWI irW# �r'�\,`�i vt RED INK, INC. Lc � �j��4��;��,�� ••44*.•o� .• PillrbEtOIW sj arAtri v,..4„,„ . . .-,, ,:„.„6,,,,--. _,,, i, ,. •, • ► - 4 ` ��"jam• [ . �,:__� ,,.I,, IPP'4 ter 4‘ lir 4.4, 4N ..(> '''s NA ■ to • ** *'" ,# •.,4 , • M1401 Ym 6. ,,+. ., ' City ofTprd r44. 0..110 NW MAR-2 I-2002(QED) 10 : 18 P. 001/001 0_m- Oregon Division of State Lands 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 Jnhn A.Kilthubcr.M.D..Go�crrur Salem,OR 97301-1279 _� ... (503) 37S-3505 FAX (503) 378-4644 March 22, 2002 n http://s tate1ands.dsl.state.or.us vState Land Board J002/25210 - . . ;-..di John A.litzhaber JOHN HADLEY Governor 2656 FAIRMOUNT ;.;,`, ? 4��%' Bill Bradbury PORTLAND OR 97201 Secretary of State t r=;!.':j •1 I:1 [ -- '7.7r1 Randall Edwards RE: State Application Number 25210-NSF - ' State Treasurer Dear Mr. Hadley: We have received your application to pave an existing gravel drive and build a 600 square foot addition to an exterior building in Section 2, Township 2S, Range 1W, Washington County, Oregon. The Division of State Lands requires a permit if you plan to remove, fill or alter 50 cubic yards or more of material within the banks of most waters of the state. State designated Essential Salmon Habitat streams and State Scenic Waterways are exceptions in that any amount of removal, fill or alteration typically requires a permit. Based on your application, your project involves no removal or filling of material within either a wetland or Fanno Creek; therefore, a State removal-fill permit is not required. You must also receive authorization, when required, from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and local planning department before beginning construction. If you have any questions, please call Colin MacLaren at 503-378-3805, extension 244. Sincerely, Lori Warner Manager Field Operations—Western Region CM:jed J:WrtachmentAwestLAS1NSP No State Permit Required LAS\25210-NSP.d0O c: Kathryn Harris, Corps of Engineers Washington County Planning Kim McMillan, Lewis & VanVleet Consulting Engineers 18660 SW Boones Ferry Rd Tualatin OR 97062 Post-It'Fax Note 7571 DE" f 1°'3•2.7.oz P"aeae To BRAD Kitspyq From K iM manic N.+ coJOepI. T(6 AGO Co. l..Vt Phone p Pnono a q�S p� O_ Fax!Y /0154 7Z.O7 Fax,, V _ GJ� 441k, REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY IiGARD Community cDeveCopment Shaping Better Community DATE: February 12,2002 TO: Dennis Koellermeier,Operations Manager/Water Department RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division MAR 0 4 2002 STAFF CONTACT: Brad Kilby,Associate Planner[x388) Phone: [503)639-4111/Fax: [503)684-1291 CITY OF TIGARD SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDR)2002-00001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR)2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY[SLR)2002-00003 RED INK, INC. Q REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100- year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 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: FEBRUARY 26, 2002. 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 revi wed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please con ct of our office. _ Please re r to the enclosed letter. Writte omments provided below: ( d rti %1/4A S c CIae-10%-s c am' y a - 1-14. .- (please provide thefoCCowing information)Name of Person(s)Commenting IPhone Number(s): 3 I / __--: ''. / NEW 2 ,�Ii 35 w • / RIX .1/ 14, ..b.„ S ii,A# ii• • \....-- / ,,,Isti-o- sc... :Tel .: ' . . :.:Ehtz v-, - ,,,,, / . (43 °- 4:11b . - ';'.: I 7' 1 47410 , ";;..:', :40 Pt ,//441s*It' '' W , 4/4)0* : . ,,"r,,_ k. C("4)1\A C ..1g -5-9.-9-9' / /// / co 'S'4<4"/ uct* on4e *v. , ...4,), ,f, ....., ,.. 0ALA-e-cs 0 /4616,,f 40,,tr. /if' c3 co . , t....4 . 1.--)41/ ti .010... , c-1 ,ii .. ,- 0 0 ...z, ..- wi.,:*: -.. r-. � . { as / nailth,„&c- cifl ' ' 4-,' - , RECEIVED PLANNING y 75 ��, ,,,��,,,,AA 46. • iAR 0 4 2002 4� D • ' c : Air . : { l _:'• :. ' r, .' �� 8 / '$� 74` DEC / w ti } - `� GRASS wf`�'+o ;AN 51 ' tc .0, ,' ' ., . :, tIM 151.36 AG R'4VING �.�, 5AVE EXISTING \ �' TREE EXIST. GRAVEL GRASS \ ry TO REMAIN • �N / v`. Ai$G�µ /R t 44" _ ' '''" ' 414-fil ■C-Cj 4.) -....--- cb —, 1). ittz-,i':._-',.* --:,:. ,-(„,,-:„:11.00c'J . "705.1.:::i. . .:))- ..� ,, 4,1 ^+ 1,` �/•1.,.. ASS r�14: \■° "-o' CLUSTER ■ w ; f `�` .. ASTER Ce-;�� 44" 0 , VI( �'t / t i` / L \ "J •08 30 M1�LNUT'2 � 1Z h J .L - ) •• CP � 7 \ 0 \/,&6-.. • l'% c'T /�O 1 1 r4-5-- X4/5 ..\'c- A.`4 _ ' �` re on Division of State Lands 1 -- a 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 Salem,OR 97301-1279 \:,....:40,.;' John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.,Governor (503)378-3805 i e 5 e FAX (503)378-4844 http://statelands.dsl.state.or.us March 29, 2002 State Land Board John A.Kitzhaber Lori Hays Governor 12220 SW Grant Street Bill Bradbury Tigard, OR 97223 Secretary of State Randall Edwards State Treasurer Re: Wetland Determination for 12220 SW Grant Street located in T 2S R 1W Section 2, Tax Lot 1100 in Tigard; WD #2002-0132 Dear Ms. Hays: I have reviewed the wetland determination report prepared by Fishman Environmental Services, LLC for the project referenced above. Based on the information presented in the report and the March 6, 2002 site visit by Cohn MacLaren, I concur that there are no wetlands or waterways on site. Fanno Creek is located south of the property boundary and there are no wetlands associated with the creek on the subject parcel. This concurrence is for purposes of the state Removal-Fill Law only. Federal or local permit requirements may apply as well. This jurisdictional determination is valid for five years from the date of this letter, unless new information necessitates a revision. Circumstances under which the Division may change a determination and procedures for renewal of an expired determination are found in OAR 141-090-0045 (available on our web site or upon request). A request for reconsideration of this determination may be submitted in writing by the applicant, landowner, or agent within 60 calendar days of the date of this letter. Thank you for your report. Sincerely, � 4,' �, // � ' ,�(� / ; �' Approved by ,` Jennifer Goodridge n E. Lilly Wetland Specialist , ssistant Directo cc: Stacy Benjamin, Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Tigard Planning Dept. Kathryn Harris, Corps of Engineers Cohn MacLaren, DSL k:\wetlands\jennifer\wd letters\wd02-0132.doc REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: February 12,2002 TO: Gary Lampella,Building Official RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division FEB 1 3 2002 STAFF CONTACT: Brad Nilby,Associate Planner 1x3881 CITY OF TIGARD Phone: (503)639-4111/Fax: [5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 2002-00001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR)2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY[SLR)2002-00003 RED INK, INC. REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100- year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 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: FEBRUARY 26, 2002. 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. �i Written comments provided below: / (Please provide thefoflowing information)Name of Person(s) CoLmmenting: IPhone Number(s): ` L3rj� I DATE: March 21, 2002 PLANS CHECK NO SDR2002-00001 PROJECT TITLE COUNTYWIDE Red Ink Inc. Office Addition TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE WORKSHEET APPLICANT: (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) MAILING ADDRESS: CITY/ZIP/PHONE TAX MAP NO.: 2S102BA01100 LAND USE CATEGORY RATE PER TRIP SITES NO.ADDRESS: 12220 SW Grant Ave. RESIDENTIAL $226.00 BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL $ 57.00 X OFFICE $207.00 Estimated TIF INDUSTRIAL $217.00 INSTITUTIONAL $ 94.00 PAYMENT METHOD: CASH/CHECK CREDIT BANCROFT(PROMISSORY NOTE) INSTITUTIONAL ONLY DEFER TO OCCUPANCY LAND USE CATEGORY DESCRIPTION OF USE WEEKDAY AVG. WEEKEND AVG.TRIP RATE 710-A Gen. office TRIP RATE 16.31 BASIS: Applicant proposes change use of 1,600 sq. ft. single family dwelling to office and addition of 600 sq. ft. total office to be 2,200 sq. ft. CALCULATIONS: TIF = ((Basis for trip generation X Weekday Ave trips) — Credit) X Rate per Trip _ $ 5,358 = ((2.200 X 16.31) — 10) X $207 Transit AMT = $442 = X 26 X $17 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION: 26 FEE. $5,358 FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY ADDITIONAL NOTES: Assumed 10 trip credit for single family dwelling ROAD AMT. $442 TRANSIT AMT $4,916 PREPARED BY. S.S. Casper I:TIFWKST.DOC (DST) EFF: 07-01-98 MEMORANDUM City Of Tigard, Oregon Building Department Date: March 6, 2002 To: Brad Kirby, Associate Planner From: Daryl Jones, Sr. Plans Examiner Subject: Red Ink Inc. Site Development Review Reference 18.775.020 (B) 1d 1) The Director shall review the repair, reconstruction, or improvement of an existing structure or utility, the cost of which is less than 50% of the market value of the structure prior to the improvement. Provided no development occurs in the floodway. 600-sf addition @ $90.60/sf. Value $54,360 plus site work, (i.e.: parking, storm, etc.) 2) Elevation of building in flood plain: OSSC 3107.2 Buildings or structures erected within a flood hazard zone shall have the lowest floor, including basement floors located at or above the base flood elevation. Exception: Floors of buildings or structures that are used only for building access, means of egress, foyers, storage and parking garages Approved uses (see exception) below the base flood elevation shall be designed in accordance with OSSC 3107.3 to allow flood waters to automatically enter and exit the space or shall be designed in accordance with OSSC 3107.4 Flood-resistant construction. The proposed structure is to be converted from R3 residential structure to a B office use. OSSC Chpt. 11 ADA requirements shall be met for accessibility from the parking area to the new addition and throughout the structure by means of ramps or other approved means. 3) Protection of Mechanical, Plumbing and Electrical. Shall be placed above the base flood elevation or protected to prevent water from entering or accumulating with in the system components during floods up to the base flood elevation. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY O IIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: February 12,2002 TO: Lee Walker,CleanWater Services/SWM Program FEB 1 3 2002 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division By STAFF CONTACT: Brad Kilby,Associate Planner 1x3881 Phone: [5031 639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDRI 2002-00001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW(SLR]2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY(SLRI 2002-00003 RED INK, INC. REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100- year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 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: FEBRUARY 26, 2002. 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: (Please provide the fallowing information)Name of Person(s) Commenting: IPhone Number(s): I • CleanWater Services Our commitment is clear. RECEIVED PLANNING MAR 0 7 2002 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD DATE: February 28, 2002 TO: Brad Kilby,�Cty, of Tigard FROM: Lee Walker,`�Clean Water Services (the District) SUBJECT: Red Ink, Inc., SDR 2002-00001, SLR 2002-00001 & SLR 2002-00003 WATER QUALITY Developer must address water quality to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this conversion. Credit for the existing single family residence can be considered when designing the facility. SANITARY SEWER A 30'wide sanitary sewer easement crosses the property. Two Clean Water Services trunk mains exist, one 24" diameter and one 60" diameter. SENSITIVE AREA Site contains a sensitive area. No Storm Water Connection Permit can be issued on this project until the applicant has satisfied the requirements of Service Provider Letter No. 1104. 155 N First Avenue,Suite 270• Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 Phone:(503)846-8621 •Fax: (503)846-3525•www.cleanwaterservices.org Bradley Kilby - Red Ink, Inc.doc Page 1 'MOIR Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE • SOUTH DIVISION COMMUNITY SERVICES • OPERATIONS • FIRE PREVENTION March 6, 2002 Brad Kilby,Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Red Ink, Inc Dear Brad, I have reviewed the submittal for the above named project and have the following comments: 1. A minimum of 2 fire hydrants shall be provided for this development. One hydrant is shown on the plans directly adjacent to the building. One additional hydrants shall be installed so that no part of the structure is more than 500 feet from the hydrant. (UFC 903.4) 2. Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access roadway that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line,then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly. (UFC Sec. 901.4.3) 3. Approved fire apparatus access roadways and firefighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to stockpiling combustibles on-site or the commencement of combustible construction. (UFC Sec. 8704) 4. A building survey and plans, in accordance with TVF&R Ordinance 99-01, Appendix III-F, shall be submitted. A copy of Appendix III-F,the building survey form and the instructions are available on the Fire District web site. To access this information via Internet,follow this link: http://www.tvfr.com/Departments/FireMarshal/new construction.htm 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> •6T®.(503)612-7000•Fax(503)612-7003•www.tvfr.com MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: March 4, 2002 TO: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer '� RE: SDR 2002-00001, Red Ink, Inc. 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 minor collector street to have a 60-foot right-of-way width and a 40-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 Grant Avenue, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 20 feet of ROW east of the centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate additional ROW to provide at least 30 feet from the centerline. The applicant's plans indicate they will provide this dedication. SW Grant Avenue is currently partially improved adjacent to this site, with adequate pavement width and curbing to meet the current standard. The existing streetlight spacing along this street is also adequate. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00001 Red Ink, Inc. PAGE 1 In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should install the necessary driveway approach to the site, along with a concrete sidewalk, and street trees along the site frontage. 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. By constructing the concrete sidewalk along the Grant Avenue frontage, the applicant will meet this provision. 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 are two CWS trunk sewer lines (a 24-inch and a 60-inch) adjacent to the southern property line of this site. There is also an 8-inch public main line in SW Grant Avenue. According to City records, the existing building is connected to public sewer. The applicant's plans are not clear as to where the sewer connection is located, but it does not appear that the applicant will need additional sewer connections. 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 ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00001 Red Ink, Inc. PAGE 2 Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). This site is at an elevation lower than the roadway, and may accept a limited amount of street runoff during rainstorms because of the existing asphalt driveway. When this site is improved, the applicant will be installing a new concrete driveway approach that will help eliminate any street runoff from flowing down the driveway. Other than Fanno Creek flowing through the site, there are no other upstream public drainage facilities affecting 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). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. Since this site lies adjacent to Fanno Creek, there is no need to require onsite detention. The applicant's plan shows that they will collect the onsite runoff, treat it in a filter, and then discharge to Fanno Creek. This concept is acceptable. 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. PLANNING ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00001 Red Ink, Inc. PAGE 3 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. PLANNING 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. PLANNING 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 ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00001 Red Ink, Inc. PAGE 4 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 Grant Avenue. 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 157 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 4,318.00. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: This site is within the City of Tigard service area and is presently served by the public water system. No additional public water line improvements are necessary for this development. 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. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant proposes to treat the onsite runoff in a Stormwater Management catch basin filter unit. These units have been approved for use on private property and have shown that they will meet the phosphorus removal criteria of the CWS standards. Therefore, the use of this unit on this site is acceptable. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00001 Red Ink, Inc. PAGE 5 significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. The proposed unit from Stormwater Management is acceptable, provided the property owner agrees to hire the manufacturer (or approved equal) to provide the required maintenance of the unit. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. A grading and erosion control plan must be reviewed and approved by the Building Division prior to construction. 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 Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach, sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue, as well as any other work in the public ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00001 Red Ink, Inc. PAGE 6 right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Grant Avenue as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements; C. driveway apron. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of a building permit, additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue to increase the right-of-way to 30 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 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: ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00001 Red Ink, Inc. PAGE 7 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. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Grant Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 4,318.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. is\e ng\br ian r\com m ents\sd r\sdr2002-00001.doc ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2002-00001 Red Ink, Inc. PAGE 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Brad Kilby FROM: Matt Stine, City Forester RE: Red Ink, Inc. DATE: February 21, 2002 i_ Ti1�- As you requested I have provided some comments on the ` " project. If you have any questions or concerns regarding my comments please contact me anytime. 1. TREE PROTECTION DEVICES 18.745.030 E. PROTECTION OF EXISTING VEGETATION. Existing vegetation on a site shall be protected as much as possible: 1. The developer shall provide methods for the protection of existing vegetation to remain during the construction process; and 2. The plants to be saved shall be noted on the landscape plans (e.g., areas not to be disturbed can be fenced, as in snow fencing which can be placed around the individual trees). 1 .1 . All tree protection devices shall be located on the Tree Protection Plan. Any tree that will not be removed onsite that is within the limits of disturbance of this project must be protected. Any tree that is located on property adjacent to the construction project that will have more than 15% of its root system disturbed by construction activities shall also be protected. 1 .2. Details and specifications are required as to how the trees will be protected on site. 1 .3. Provide a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, or installation of sediment and erosion control measures, and other activities that may be required to implement the tree protection measures. 1 .4. Include in the notes on the final set of plans that equipment, vehicles, machinery, dumping or storage, or other construction activities, burial, burning, or other disposal of construction materials must not be located inside of any tree protection device or outside of the limits of disturbance where trees are being protected. No grading, filling or any other construction activity may occur within the tree protection devices at any time or outside of the limits of disturbance where trees are being protected unless approved by the City Forester. 1.5. All tree protection devices shall be: • Visible. • Well-anchored. • Approved in the field prior to clearing, grading, or the beginning of construction. • Remain in place and maintained until all construction is completed and a final inspection is conducted. 1.6. To determine the size of the tree protection zone follow the guidelines listed below: • For individual trees follow the trunk diameter method. For every one-inch of diameter at breast height (DBH), or 4 1/2 feet above the ground, allow 12 inches of space from the trunk of the tree. For example, a tree that is 15" at DBH must have at least 12' of tree protection zone around the entire canopy of the tree. • For groups of trees the tree protection zone must be outside of the dripline of the trees on the edge of the stand. If there are conifers with narrow crowns on the edge of the stand follow the trunk diameter method or the dripline method, whichever is greater. 1.7. Identify, on the Tree Protection Plan, the location of the stockpile area and the staging area (if different from the stockpile area). 1.8. All of this information must be included in the final plan's notes or drawings. 1 .9. If it is necessary to enter the tree protection zone at any time with equipment (trucks, buldozers, etc.) the City Forester must be notified before any entry occurs. Before entering the protection zone a layer of at least five (5) inches of wood chips or mulch must be placed over the root zone where the vehicles will be driven. This method will minimize the adverse impacts of compaction from the equipment. When access to this area is no longer needed the wood chips or mulch must then be dispersed (somewhere onsite os okay) down to a level of not more than four (4) inches deep. 1 .10. Specific to this project: • The preservation of tree number 93008, a hazardous white ash tree, should not be included in the mitigation totals as a "retention tree". Although the retention of this tree is ideal fo rthe surrounding ecosystem, hazard trees have never been part of the tree mitigation equation. ittE 7� � ROT cToAi pi VA I k L,?S7Wt f�i��' 1t\s, _ 13 E F t- — GD(W ro 197:t,E P R P o%6_► J r o2R •vo7 2. TREE SPECIES SELECTION & PLANTING 8 = 18.745.030 C. INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS. The installation of all landscaping shall be as follows: 1. All landscaping shall be installed according to accepted planting procedures. 2. The plant material shall be of high grade, and shall meet the size and grading standards of the American Standards for Nurberg Stock (ANSI Z-60, 1-1986, and any other future revisions); and 3. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of this title. G. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF EXISTING VEGETATION. The review procedures and standards for required landscaping and screening shall be specified in the conditions of approval during development review and in no instance shall be less than that required for conventional development. 2.1 . It is recommended that all tree planting follow the guidelines set forth by the International Society of Arboriculture's tree planting guidelines as well as the standards set forth in the American Institute of Architects' Architectural Graphic Standards, 10th edition. In the Architectural Graphic Standards there are guidelines for selecting and planting trees based on the soil volume and size at maturity. Additionally, there are directions for soil amendments and modifications. I recommend that these guidelines be followed and adhered to at all times. 2.2. In order to develop tree species diversity onsite it is recommended that the following guidelines be followed: • No more than 30% of any one family be planted onsite. • No more than 20% of any one genus be planted onsite. • No more than 10% of any one species be planted onsite. 2.3. I recommend that all of this information be included in the final plan's notes or drawings. If you have any questions please call me anytime. Thank you for requesting my comments on this project. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: February 12,2002 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: lim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division FEB 2 1 2002 STAFF CONTACT: Brad Kilby,Associate Planner[x3881 CITY OF TIGARD Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: [5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 2002-00001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR)2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY[SLRI 2002-00003 RED INK, INC. REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100- year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 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: FEBRUARY 26, 2002. 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. Iz Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: RegvQ) \t\--1/403 p\An (ho. shoes GA OArb) PThase provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: Iµ \A0\� ,( I Phone Number(s): Ze- I REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community Development S(apingA Better Community DATE: February 12,2002 TO: loLym Roy,Property Manager/Public Works Department RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division FEB 1 4 2002 STAFF CONTACT: Brad Kilby,Associate Planner[x3881 Phone: [5031 639-4111/Fax: [5031 684-1291 CITY OF TIGARD SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 2002-00001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR]2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY[SLR]2002-00003 RED INK, INC. REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100- year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 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: FEBRUARY 26, 2002. 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: (Please provide thefofowing information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: '11W IPhone Number(s): y. • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF IiGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: February 12,2002 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Brad Kilby,Associate Planner(x3881 Phone: [5031639-4171/Fax: [5031684-1297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SORT 2002-00001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW(SLR]2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY[SLRI 2002-00003 RED INN, INC. REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100- year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 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: FEBRUARY 26, 2002. 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: (rP&ase prim&prim thefnllozving information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: IPhone Number(s): i, , CITY TIGARD REQUEST FOR CON :NTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS / / . / �; I %-R a4C;1-5 7(�R2 FILE NAME: oNGG /'AM/6c. FILE NOS.: (�� l�(� ; CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS 14-DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO CIT AREA: t(Central ❑East ❑South ❑West OProposal Descrip.in Library CIT Book CITY OFFICES iitONG RANGE PLANNING/Barbara Shields,Planning Mgr. COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs. _(POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer UILDING DIVISION/Gary Lampella,Building Official (ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineer 4,-WATER DEPT./Dennis Koellermeier,Operations Mgr. _ TY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder �'UBLIC WORKS/John Roy,Property Manager jPUBLIC WORKS/Matt Stine,Urban Forester -'PLANNER-POST PROJECT SITE IF A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM-10 BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING! _C.D./Sherman Casper,Permit Coord.(SDR/CuP re riF) SPECIAL DISTRICTS TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.*l-UALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE * _ TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT ZCLEANWATER SERVICES-4f l Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Lee Walker/SWM Program/ 15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 55 N.First Avenue Beaverton,OR 97006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hi sboccLOR_97124-' LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON * _ CITY OF TUALATIN +* _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE JZ OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS- _ Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue Jennifer Goodridge _ Irish Bunnell,Deveepment Services PO Box 369 PO Box 59 7775 Summer Street NE PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Salem, 973 Beaverton,OR 97076 OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 5 itol Street NE CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1'380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 _ Bob Knight,Data Resource Center(ZCA) US ARM ORPS:�NG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&QVLP. Kathryn Harris �. Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPu✓zOA) Larry French(Comp Plan Amendments Only) Routing CENWP-OP-G —CITY OF KING CITY 111 Jennifer Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 P 'Bex2 446 ) City Manager _ C.D. Manager,Growth Management Services Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 972082946 15300 SW 116th Avenue King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY tit _ OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY(Powertines in Area) _OREGON DEPT.OF TRANS.(ODOT) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Aeronautics Division 155 N.First Avenue _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * Routing TTRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera Tom Highland,Planning Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 3040 25th Street,SE Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 Salem,OR 97310 _Brent Curtis(cPA) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _Gregg Leion(cPA) OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 * Anne LaMountain(IGA/uRB) _CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _Sonya Kazen,Development Review Coordinator _Phil Healy(IGAruRB) 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(cPArzcA)MSr4 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 _Jim Nims(zcA)MS is Portland,OR 97204 Doria Mateja(ZCA)Ms 14 ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A — Jane Estes,Permit specialist 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 Portland,OR 97221-2414 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _PORTLAND WESTERN RJR,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 y'TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations only) Pat McGann of Project is Within V.Mile of A Transit Rouie) 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 V PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _L NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _VERIZON _ QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Jim VanKleek,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. Ken Perdue,Engineering Richard Jackson,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 IApos E0,. sorrow 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: 30-Jan-02) MAILING RECORDS A AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING T CITY OF TIGARD Community Deve(opment Shaping Better Community I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specialist for the City ofTigardd,"Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: {Check Appropriate Box(s)Be■w} E� NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR:. SDR2002-00001/SLR2002-00001/02002-00003 — RED INK, INC. I 4/15/2002 AMENDED NOTICE (File No Name Reference) (Dare of Public rtear ohs) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ® Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council 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 April 30,2002, and deposited in the United States Mail on April 30,2002, postage prepaid. (Person that repared Notice STAfi(E OF OEGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the day of 1� , 2002. OFFICIAL SEAL �� .. ►•:�., :• DIANE M JELDERKS • /-' /NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.326578 A 4( I MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 I t ' I ; I I ' I t My Commission Expi es: EXHIBIT A 120 DAYS = 6/12/2002 CITY OF TIGARD community<Devcfopmcnt Shaping Better Community CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER Case Numbers: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY (SLR) 2002-00003 Case Name: RED INK, INC. Name of Owner: Tom and Lori Hays Name of Applicant: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. —Attn: Kim McMillan Address of Applicant: 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road Portland, OR 97062 Address of Property: 12220 SW Grant Street Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washington County Tax Assessor's Map No. 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW AND WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY. THE CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE HEARINGS OFFICER HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 15, 2002 TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER. Request: ➢ The applicant requested to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. Zoning Designation: I-P: Industrial Park District. Comprehensive Plan Designatiopn: Light Industrial. Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. Action: 5- ❑ Approval as Requested © Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to: © Owners of Record Within the Required Distance © Affected Government Agencies © The Affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator © The Applicants and Owners The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard City Hall. Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 30, 2002 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MAY 15, 2002 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Review Authority 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 18.390.040.6.2. 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. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON MAY 14, 2002. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON Regarding an application by Lewis&Van Vleet,Inc. for ) FINAL ORDER Red Ink,Inc. for Site Development and Sensitive Lands ) SDR 2002-00001 Reviews to convert a single family home into an office in the ) SLR 2002-00001 I-P zone at 12220 SW Grant Street in the City of Tigard ) SLR 2002-00003 A. SUMMARY 1. This final order concerns an application by Lewis&Van Vleet,Inc. for Red Ink, Inc. (the"applicant")to convert an existing single family home into an office and to add 600 square feet to the structure. This requires Site Development Review and Sensitive Lands Review. The applicant also proposes to install a storm water discharge pipe within the Fanno Creek buffer. This requires Sensitive Lands Review. All of the site is in the floodplain or floodway of Fanno Creek. The site contains 35,136 square feet. It is situated on the east side of SW Grant Street at 12220 SW Grant Street; also known as tax lot 110, WCT Map 2S102BA(the "site"). Additional facts about the site and surroundings are provided in the Staff Report to the Hearings Officer dated March 28,2002 (the "Staff Report"), incorporated herein by reference. 2. At the public hearing in this matter,City staff recommended approval,subject to conditions. The applicant accepted the staff recommendations as amended at the hearing and waived its right to have the record held open for final argument. Other than relevant service providers and public agency staff, no one testified orally or in writing with objections or concerns. The hearings officer closed the record at the end of the hearing. 3. For the reasons provided and referenced in this final order,the hearings officer approves the applications, subject to the conditions recommended by City staff with certain changes described more herein. B. HEARING AND RECORD 1. Tigard Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") held a duly noticed public hearing on April 15,2002 to receive and consider public testimony in this matter. The record includes a witness list,materials in the casefile as of the close of the hearing, and an audio record of the hearing. At the beginning of the hearing,the hearings officer made the declaration required by ORS 197.763. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parte contacts,bias or conflicts of interest. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected relevant testimony offered at the hearing. 2. City planner Brad Kilby summarized the proposed development,the applicable approval standards, the Staff Report and recommended conditions of approval. 3. Kim McMillan testified for the applicant. She introduced a letter in which the Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL) stated that the applicant is not required to obtain an ODSIJUSCOE permit for the pipeline that will extend into the buffer of Fanno Creek. She also testifed that the owner of the parcel of land that extends over the top of the creek bank has indicated they will grant an easement for the pipeline. She accepted the findings and recommended conditions of approval in the Staff Report without objections or corrections. She waived the applicant's right to submit a final written argument after the public hearing. 4. Georgie Earl, who is the Realtor for the property owners, testified in support of the application. 5. At the end of the public hearing,the hearing officer closed the public record and announced his intention to approve the application subject to conditions recommended by City staff. C. DISCUSSION City staff recommended approval of the application based on findings and conclusions and subject to conditions of approval recommended in the Staff Report with one amendment. The applicant accepted those conditions as amended. No one disputed the findings in the Staff Report. The hearings officer agrees with those findings,conclusions and conditions as amended by the discussion of testimony above, and adopts the affirmative findings in the Staff Report as support for this Final Order. D. CONCLUSION The hearings officer concludes that the Site Development Review and Sensitive Lands Review applications do or can comply with the relevant standards and criteria of the Tigard CDC as provided in this Final Order,provided the application is subject to conditions of approval that ensure finals plans and certain other information are provided and found sufficient by the Director in a timely manner and that subsequent development will comply with applicable CDC standards and criteria. Therefore those applications should be approved subject to such conditions. E. DECISION Based on the findings and conclusions provided or referenced in this Final Order, the hearings officer hereby approves SDR 2002-00001, SLR 2002-00001 and SLR 2002- 00003 subject to the conditions of approval in Section II of the Staff Report. By submitting the letter from ODSL described above,the applicant complies with condition of approval 12. DATED is 29th d, April,2002. �, ef; .�r Larry Epste ;'i City of Tig ngs Officer SDR 2002-000012, SLR 2002-00001 Hearings Officer Final Order and SLR 2002-00003 (Red Ink, Inc.) Page 2 Agenda Item: 2.2 Hearing Date: April 15,2002 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CITY OF TIdARD Community Development FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Shaping A setter Community 120 DAYS = 06/11/2002 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: RED INK, INC. CASE NOS: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2002-00001 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2002-00001 Water Resources Overlay (SLR) SLR2002-00003 OWNER: Tom and Lori Hays APPLICANT: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. 12220 SW Grant St. Attn: Kim McMillan Tigard, OR 97223 18660 SW Boones Ferry Rd. Tualatin, OR 97062 PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to a Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN and ZONING DESIGNATION: Light Industrial: 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, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797, and 18.810. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find that the proposed Site Development Review, Sensitive Lands, and Water Resources Overlay Review will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended Conditions of Approval: RED INK,INC. PAGE 1 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 388) for review and approval: 1. The addition to the existing structure must not exceed the required height of the district (45 ft.), and shall be verified prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The applicant shall provide a revised access plan that provides a safe pedestrian walkway extending from the entrance of the building to SW Grant Street. The walkway shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and signposts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The walkway 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. 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. 3. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the street tree plan to show compliance with Tigard Development Code (TDC) Section 18.745.040. 4. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan illustrating the placement of trees within the interior of the parking lot that provides a canopy effect for the parking lot. All trees shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. 5. The applicant shall provide a narrative addressing the criteria of one of the 4-methods of compliance for Mixed Sold Waste and Recyclable Storage as established in TDC Chapter 18.755, and provide a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. 6. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the site plan to illustrated compliance with the Solid Waste and recyclable storage design standards. 7. Prior to final occupancy, the parking lot shall be striped in accordance with the TDC Chapter 18.765. 8. Prior to final occupancy, wheel stops shall be provided for all parking areas as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. 9. The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the dimensions of the parking areas in accordance with Table 18.765.1 and indicate bumper overhang areas on the plan. 10. If the applicant proposes to split the spaces between compact and standard, the new plan must reflect the compact spaces and they must be marked as such prior to final occupancy. 11. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to reflect only seven parking spaces as opposed to the eight that are proposed. 12. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. 13. The applicant shall supply the City arborist with a tree protection plan to protect those trees that will remain on the site, and insure that said measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to site work. RED INK,INC. PAGE 2 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 14. Prior to construction, the applicant must attain permission in the form of a utility easement from the adjacent property owner to run the pipe all the way to Fanno Creek. The utility easement must be recorded and a copy provided to the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of any site work permits. 15. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay. Said plan shall be consistent with the requirements of TDC Section 18.797.080(J). 16. Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan, that shows no projection off site and complies with crime prevention requirements of the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 17. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach, sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue, as well as any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 18. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Grant Avenue as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements; and C. driveway apron. 19. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 20. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach, sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue, as well as any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 21. Prior to issuance of a building permit, additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue to increase the right-of-way to 30 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 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: 22. 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. 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Grant RED INK,INC. PAGE 3 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $4,318.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 24. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 25. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The site is currently occupied by an existing single-family residence and an out building. The two buildings were constructed within the floodway and floodplain when they were originally built. Vicinity Information: The site is located within an area that is characteristic of a neighborhood being converted to business and industry. Fanno Creek is located on the west border of this property. There are a variety of other uses including single-family residences and office located to the immediate north south and east of the property. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is currently developed with a single-family home and an out building. The site slopes east to west and is within both the floodplain and the floodway. The structures are non-conforming in that they would not be able to be constructed in their current location under existing regulations, however, the use is permitted subject to site development review. In this instance, the developer is seeking approval to convert the single-family home into an office, locate a stormwater pipe in the buffer area adjacent to Fanno Creek, and add a 600 square foot expansion onto the back of the existing structure. Portions of the existing structure are located in the floodway. The addition is proposed to be located in the floodplain. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to convert a single-family residence into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The applicant is also proposing to add 600 square feet of office space onto the rear of the existing structure. Offices are outright permitted uses within the I-P zoning district. RED INK,INC. PAGE 4 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Summary Land Use Permits: Chapter 18.310 Defines the decision-making type to which the land-use application is assigned. The proposed site development review, and the pipe crossing of the buffer area are typically subject to a Type II staff review. However, because a portion of the site is located within the 100-year floodplain and the associated floodway, all approvals for this request are subject to review before the City of Tigard Hearings Officer as a Type III-HO review. The request will require site development review, sensitive lands and water resources overlay review approval. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET The Tigard Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal and be given the opportunity to provide written comments prior to a decision being made. Staff received no correspondence from citizens regarding this application. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this report are as follows: A. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.360 Site Development Review) 18.390 Decision-Making Procedures) 18.530 Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.705 Access, Egress & Circulation) 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.760 Nonconforming Situations) 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780 Signs) 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) 18.797 Water Resources Overlay) B. Additional Site Development Review Approval Standards (18.360) C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards (18.810) D. Impact Study (18.390) The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following chapters: 18.410 Lot Line Adjustments; 18.600, Community Plan Area Standards; 18.710, Accessory Residential Units; 18.715, Density Computations; 18.720, Design Compatibility Standards; 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standard; 18.740, Historic Overlay; 18.742, Home Occupations; 18.750, Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations; 18.785, Temporary Uses; and 18.798, Wireless Communications Facilities. These chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS Site Development Review (18.360) 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 proposal's consistency with these Code chapters is reviewed in the following sections. RED INK,INC. PAGE 5 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Industrial Zoning Districts (18.530) The subject property is zoned I-P (Industrial Park). Office uses are permitted outright subject to Site Development Review. Development standards in Industrial zones are provided in the following table: TABLE 18.530.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES STANDARD I-P Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 30,492 SF Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 156 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. 15ft Pre-existing - Side facing street on corner & through lots [1] 20 ft. N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3] Met - Rear yard 0/50 ft. [3][4] Met - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a public or private street -- -- Maximum Height 45 ft. Pre-existing Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75%[5] 26% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 74% [1]The provisions of Chapter 18.795(Vision Clearance)must be satisfied. [2]Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3]No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4]Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Policy 11.5.1. [5]Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80%if the provisions of Section 18.530.050.B are satisfied. [6]Except that a reduction to 20%of the site may be approved through the site development review process. The existing building is below the 45-foot maximum height, and the applicant's plan shows that the addition will maintain the existing roofline. As noted above, approximately 26% of the site will be covered with impervious surface area, including the building and parking area. This is well below the 75% maximum allowed in I-P zones. The remaining 74% of the site will be landscaped or revegetated natural areas. The existing structure has a nonconforming front yard setback. There is no applicable rear or side yard setbacks since the properties to the north and south are also zoned for industrial development. FINDING: The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable development standards in industrial zones with the exception of the front yard setback for the existing structure. Nonconforming structures are permitted to continue and expand subject to the criteria within the nonconforming section of the Code, and is discussed later in this report. Because the height of the building and addition are not clear, staff recommends the following condition be imposed. CONDITION: The addition to the existing structure must not exceed the required height of the district (45 ft.), and shall be verified prior to issuance of building permits. RED INK,INC. PAGE 6 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Access, Egress and Circulation (18.705) 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; The applicant is required to improve the frontage along Grant Street including sidewalks, but has not shown a sidewalk connection from the entrance of the building to the street as required by this standard. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The proposal does not provide a walkway from the ground floor entrance to the street, which provides the required access and egress as required in TDC Section 18.705.030(F)(1). 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; and The required frontage improvements will involve crossings of the two driveways. The driveways are proposed to be 25 feet in width, and the sidewalk improvements that are required will meet the requirements for contrasting pavement materials as they are concrete and the applicant has proposed aggregate pavement for the accesses. This criterion is met. 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 indicates that the new curb, gutter, and sidewalks will be constructed to City Standards. This criterion has been met. 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 less than 99 parking spaces is one 30-foot-wide access with a 24- foot pavement width. The applicant has proposed two access points of 30-feet in width with 24-feet of pavement. This criterion has been met. CONDITION: The applicant shall provide a revised access plan that provides a safe pedestrian walkway extending from the entrance of the building to SW Grant Street. The walkway shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and signposts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The walkway 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. 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. RED INK,INC. PAGE 7 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Environmental Performance Standards (18.725) Requires that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 Performance Standards regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the Commercial zoning districts and the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of ure 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. 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. Odors. The emissions 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. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. 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. FINDING: As this is a typical industrial-park use, there is not the typical machinery, emission stacks, or sound creating devices that would potentially create problem environmental conditions that have been listed above. The above performance standards are met. These standards would be subject to code enforcement investigation if for some reason, the above standards were in question. Landscaping and Screening (18.745) Street trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 required 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 applicant has submitted a landscape plan that provides for two "Red Maple" trees and an existing 30-inch pine along SW Grant Street. The continuation of street trees would be difficult beyond this point because of the fall in the grade of the lot. The submitted landscape plan also shows 28 feet on center spacing but does not identify the caliper of the proposed street trees. The plan meets the intent of the street tree standard, but should be conditioned to meet the size standards. FINDING: The proposal fails to meet the street tree size requirements of TDC Section 18.745.040(C)(2)(b). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the street tree plan to show compliance with TDC Section 18.745.040. RED INK,INC. PAGE 8 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Land Use Buffering and Screening: Buffering and Screening is required between different types of land uses. The proposed office is a permitted use within the Industrial park zone and abuts the same industrial zone on three sides and open space on the fourth. As such, it is not subject to any required screening standards of the TDC or the buffering requirements of Table 18.745.1. This criterion has been satisfied. Screening - 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 applicant has proposed to retain 13 of the 15 trees on site that were over six inches in caliper, and has proposed to incorporate the existing trees into the landscape and screening plan for the parking. There is one section at the north end of the parking lot that would require an additional tree to provide the canopy effect as required above. FINDING: The proposal does not meet the criteria set forth in TDC Section 18.745.050(E)(1)(a.)(4). CONDITION: The applicant shall revise the landscape plan illustrating the placement of trees within the interior of the parking lot that provides a canopy effect for the parking lot. All trees shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. 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). 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 applicant has not indicated which of the 4 methods will be used to demonstrate compliance with this chapter, but has shown an enclosure on the site plan. RED INK,INC. PAGE 9 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FINDING: The proposal does not specifically detail which option will be used of the four options available within TDC Section 18.755.040. CONDITION: The applicant shall provide a narrative addressing the criteria of one of the 4 methods of compliance for Mixed Sold Waste and Recyclable Storage as established in TDC Chapter 18.755, and provide a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. 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 site plan shows a trash enclosure with a fence surrounding it within a side yard. The site plan indicates a 27 square foot enclosure dedicated to this purpose. This standard has been met. 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 indicated that a 6-foot chain link fence with vinyl slats will screen the enclosure. However, the applicant has not identified the width of the openings as required in the design standards, and staff was unable to determine the intent from the site plan. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: Because the applicant has not provided evidence of complete compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage design standards, this standard has not been met. If the applicant complies with the condition listed below, the standards will be met: CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the site plan to illustrated compliance with the Solid Waste and recyclable storage design standards. RED INK,INC. PAGE 10 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Nonconforming Situations (18.7601 Nonconforming development. 1. Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this title that could not be built under the terms of this title by reason of restrictions on lot area, lot coverage, height, yard, equipment, its location on the lot or other requirements concerning the structure, such structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following provisions: a. No such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity but any structure or portion thereof may be enlarged or altered in a way that satisfies the requirements of this title or will decrease its nonconformity; or It would be highly unlikely that the existing structure would be able to be built today, and other than a few miscellaneous permits for minor interior remodels, there have been no other permits issued for the building since its original construction. Because of its location in the floodway prior to the current Code, it is a nonconforming development. The applicant has proposed to convert the single-family residence to an office in an industrial zoning district. It is a permitted use in the zone, so the use is not nonconforming. Pursuant to this chapter, the structure may be enlarged as long as it satisfies the TDC or decreases its nonconformity. The applicant has proposed to convert and enlarge the structure in compliance with the chapter. This criterion is met. b. Should such nonconforming structure or nonconforming portion of structure be destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 60% of its current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this title; and The structure has not been destroyed, therefore, this criterion is inapplicable. c. Should such structure be moved for any reason for any distance whatever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the zoning district in which it is located after it is moved. The structure is not being moved. This criterion is inapplicable. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765) 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 parking area has accommodations for one ADA accessible parking space that will meet the requirements for a 7 space parking facility. This criteria has been met. 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. RED INK,INC. PAGE 11 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Access was discussed previously in this report, and visual clearance will be addressed later in this report. This standard can be met. 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 applicant has not indicated that the parking lot will be striped. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not indicated that the parking lot will be striped as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. CONDITION:Prior to final occupancy, the parking lot shall be striped in accordance with the TDC Chapter 18.765. 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. The applicant did not propose nor demonstrate compliance with the above standard. This criterion has not been met. FINDING: The proposal does not address the requirements for wheel stops as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. CONDITION:Prior to final occupancy, wheel stops shall be provided for all parking areas as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Table 18.765.1. outlines the minimum dimensions for angled parking. The proposal identifies 8 spaces with the following dimensions: ini ms 'Compact Stand- 1r, = 1,14, ndard Spaces Spy �k 0 ,� et) (Proposed) (Pro®rj `=rm Parking Angle 90 ■egrees 90 degrees 90 degrees - Stall Width 7.5-8.0/8.5-10.0 8.5' typical 8.5' typical Stall Depth 16.5/18.5 16.5' 18' Aisle Width 24-28/24-28 24' 24' Stall Width Parallel to Aisle 7.5-8.0/8.5-10 +8.5' +8.5' Module Width 58-61/61-65 N/A N/A FINDING: As illustrated in the table, the proposed parking lot fails to meet the minimum standards of Table 18.765.1. If the proposal that the parking angle remain at 90 degrees and a stall width of 8.5 feet stands, then the stall depth should reflect the minimum dimensions for the standards as they apply within Table 18.765.1 for compact spaces and standard spaces independently. The Table must be read directly across and not interchanged to ensure function of the parking areas. RED INK,INC. PAGE 12 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CONDITIONS: • The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the dimensions of the parking areas in accordance with Table 18.765.1 and indicate bumper overhang areas on the plan. • If the applicant proposes to split the parking spaces between compact and standard, the new plan must reflect the compact spaces and they must be marked as such prior to final occupancy. 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. The minimum bicycle parking requirement for office facilities is .4 per thousand square feet of office space. The applicant has proposed 1 bicycle parking space. The proposed 2,200 square foot office building would only require one bicycle space. This criterion has been met. 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 TDC requires a minimum of 2.7 spaces for every thousand square feet, and a maximum of 3.4 spaces for every thousand square feet of space occupied by the proposed use. Assuming a building size of 2,200 square feet, the minimum amount of parking required would be six spaces, and the maximum allowed would be seven spaces. This criterion has not been met. FINDING: The applicant has proposed eight parking spaces, however, the maximum allowed parking for this size building within the zone A parking area is seven. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to reflect only seven parking spaces as opposed to the eight that are proposed. Sensitive Lands (18.775) The Hearings Officer shall have the authority to issue a sensitive lands permit in the 100-year floodplain by means of a Type IIIA procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.775.070 B-E The proposal involves excavation of more than 50 cubic yards of material and construction of an addition to a structure on property that is almost entirely located within the floodplain and largely within the floodway. This proposal warrants consideration by the Tigard Hearings Officer. 18.775.040 General Provisions for Floodplain Areas A. Permit review. The appropriate approval authority shall review all permit applications to determine whether proposed building sites will be safe from flooding. The Hearings Officer reviews all applications for land use consistency, and the Building Official will review all construction plans in compliance with this title and the Oregon Uniform Building Code as required. RED INK,INC. PAGE 13 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER B. Special flood hazard. The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled "The Flood Insurance Study of the City of Tigard," dated September 1, 1981, with accompanying Flood Insurance Maps (updated February 1984) is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter. This Flood Insurance Study is on file at the Tigard Civic Center. The applicant and staff have reviewed these maps and agree that this site is within one of the identified special flood hazard areas. The application is being reviewed under this premise. C. Base flood elevation data. When base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with Subsection B above, the Director shall obtain, review and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a federal, state or other source, in order to administer Subsections M and N below. The base flood elevation has been provided for this site and has been discussed elsewhere in this report. D. Test of reasonableness. Where elevation data is not available either through the Flood Insurance Study or from another authoritative source, applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a local judgment and includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate at least two feet above grade in these sensitive land areas may result in higher insurance rates. As discussed previously, the elevation data is available on the maps that are available within Tigard City Hall. E. Resistant to flood damage. All new construction and substantial improvements, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. All materials and utility equipment is reviewed for resistance to flood damage by the City of Tigard building division. F. Minimize flood damage. All new construction and substantial improvements, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. To ensure that any construction on site minimizes flood damage, the City of Tigard building division will review the proposed construction, and require adjustments where necessary. G. Equipment protection. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air- conditioning equipment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. The equipment will be reviewed prior to building permit issuance by the City of Tigard's commercial plans examiner to ensure that it is flood proofed. RED INK,INC. PAGE 14 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER H. Water Supply Systems. All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the system. There are no new water supply systems proposed with this application. I. Anchoring. All new construction, all manufactured homes and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. Anchoring is also required by the OUBC. Anchoring for all new structures will be reviewed at the time of building permit review. J. Sanitary sewerage systems. New and replacement sanitary sewerage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the systems and discharge from the systems into floodwater. There are no new or replacement sanitary sewerage systems associated with this proposal. K. On-site water disposal systems. On-site water disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. There are no on-site detention facilities associated with this proposal because it lays directly adjacent to Fanno Creek. This criterion is met. L. Residential Construction. 1. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure, including manufactured homes, shall have the lowest floor, including the basement, elevated at least one foot above base flood elevation; 2. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited, or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwater. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect, or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: a. A minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided; b. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade; and c. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices, provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood waters. 3. Manufactured homes shall be securely anchored to an adequately anchored permanent foundation system. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors. This standard does not apply as the purpose of this construction is for industrial purposes. RED INK,INC. PAGE 15 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER M. Nonresidential Construction. New construction and substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential structure shall either have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to the level of the base flood elevation, or together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall: 1. Be flood-proofed so that below the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; 2. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; 3. Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting provisions of this subsection based on their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the Building Official as set forth in Subsection 18.775.030 E2; and 4. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not flood-proofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in 18.775.040 L2. Applicants flood-proofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one foot below the flood- proofed level (e.g., a building constructed to the base flood level will be rated as one foot below that level). As discussed previously, the City of Tigard Building Division will be reviewing the construction plans for this proposal to ensure that they are consistent with the State and Local requirements as they pertain to development within the 100-year floodplain. The applicant has provided a letter from a certified registered engineer that states that the proposed structures will be verified for consistency prior to application. N. Subdivisions and partitions in 100-year floodplain. Subdivisions and partitions in the 100-year floodplain shall meet the following criteria: 1. The design shall minimize the potential for flood damage; 2. Public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems shall be located and constructed so as to minimize flood damage; 3. Adequate drainage shall be provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and 4. For subdivisions or partitions which contain more than 50 lots or 5 acres and where base flood elevation data is not available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or another authoritative source, the applicant shall generate base flood elevation data to be reviewed as part of the application. This proposal does not involve a subdivision or partition. Within the 100-year floodplain The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements and other development unless certified by a registered professional engineer that the encroachment will not result in any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge; The applicant has provided a letter from Kim McMillan, P.E. stating that the encroachments into the floodplain will not decrease the storage function or maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway. Her letter states that, "...the fill can be balanced with an equal amount of cut RED INK, INC. PAGE 16 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER volume." In a second letter, Mrs. McMillan estimates a net cut of 12.07 cy that would prevent any issue of conveyance or storage reduction. In a memo, Greg Berry, City of Tigard Capital Facilities Engineer, concurs with the balance method. This criterion has been satisfied. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.120 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards; The subject property is designated industrial in the Comprehensive Plan. This criterion is satisfied. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood; As discussed earlier, the applicant's engineer as indicated that there will be a net cut of 12.07 cy in the parking lot area that will enhance any storage capacity lost by the overall balance of cut and fills. The parking area improvements are going to be placed at the same elevation of the existing grade, and the addition will be required to be flood-proofed so that it does not increase the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. This criterion is satisfied. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely; The greenway in which the Fanno Creek Trail system would possibly follow is located on the West side of the creek. This parcel is outside of the location of any potential pathway. This criterion is met. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands (DSL) approvals shall be obtained; and It has not been ascertained as to whether or not the applicant would need any approvals from the Oregon DSL for work within the 100-year floodplain, nor has the applicant provided evidence that would indicate that they are not necessary. The applicant's engineer has indicated that a Joint Aquatics Resource Permit Application (JARPA) has been filed with both agencies. Staff has been in contact with the Army Corps of Engineers, and Kathryn Harris with the ACOE has indicated that no permit will be necessary for this project. This criterion has not been satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not provided any evidence that would indicate that no approval from the Oregon DSL is necessary for the work that is proposed within the 100-year floodplain. CONDITION:Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain,.the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. There is no need for additional open land area within and adjacent to this floodplain according to the Long Range Planning Department. This criterion is satisfied. RED INK,INC. PAGE 17 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FINDING: There are no excessive slopes, drainageways, or wetlands associated with the proposal, therefore, the remaining criterion within TDC Section 18.775.070 does not apply to this proposal. Signs (18.780) No sign or sign structure shall hereafter be erected, re-erected, constructed, structurally altered or relocated within the City limits except as provided by this title, and a permit for the same sign or sign structure has been issued by the Director. The applicant has stated in the narrative that the developer does not intend to install any outside signs. This criterion is 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 rovided 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. The applicant has provided a tree survey and protection plan from Halstead Arboriculture Consultants. In the report, the arborist states that there are a total of eleven trees over twelve inches in diameter. Of these eleven trees, three are hazardous and would not be required to be mitigated for if removed. Only two trees are slated for removal as part of this proposal, and the arborist has stated that the third tree could be preserved with proper treatment. The arborist has also provided protection measures for the trees during construction, but the applicant did not indicate that these measures would be followed. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant does not indicate how the existing trees that are to remain on site will be protected during construction as required by the TDC. CONDITION:The applicant shall supply the City Arborist with a tree protection plan to protect those trees that will remain on the site, and insure that said measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to site work. Visual Clearance Areas (18.7951 Section 18.795.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.B. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center Fine grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided alT branches below eight feet are removed. The applicant has stated in the narrative that the visual clearance area requirements will be met. Currently, there is not a visual clearance problem on site and the applicant has not proposed any potential obstructions on the plans. This standard is satisfied. WATER RESOURCES CHAPTER (18.797) Applicability and Generalized Mapping. Section 18.797.030 The WR overlay district applies to all significant wetlands and streams and applicable riparian setback and water quality buffer areas, that appear on the Tigard Wetlands and streams, and riparian setback and water quality buffer areas, that appear on the Tigard Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map. Standard Riparian Setbacks and Clean Water Services (CWS) Water Quality Buffers: Section 18.797.030.C. The applicant shall be responsible for surveying and mapping the precise location of the top of bank, wetland edge, riparian setback and/or CWS water quality buffer at the RED INK,INC. PAGE 18 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER time of application submittal. Table 18.797.1 summarizes riparian setbacks and water quality buffers that apply to significant water resources within the WR overlay zone: FROM TABLE 18.797.1 RIPARIAN SETBACKS AND WATER QUALITY WR STANDARD CWS STANDARD WATER BUFFERS SIGNIFICANT WATER RESOURCE TYPE RIPARIAN SETBACK' QUALITY BUFFER' Tualatin River& associated wetlands 75 feet 25 feet Major streams & associated wetlands 50 feet 25 feet Developed subdivision lot exception 25 feet 25 feet (major streams & associated wetlands) Minor streams &adjacent/isolated wetlands Not applicable 25 feet Measured in feet from the top-of-bank or the associated wetland edge,whichever is greater. 2 Measured in feet from the stream top-of-bank or the wetland edge,whichever is greater. Division of State Lands notification required for all proposed development activities within any wetland. Clean Water Services standards are applicable when development activities are proposed within 25 feet of any wetland or stream. The subject development site includes designated wetlands, floodplain, and a Major stream, Fanno Creek, along the southwestern portion of the site. Table 18 797.1 indicates a 50-foot riparian setback for major streams and associated wetlands. Applicable definitions for major streams and riparian setback area are contained in Tigard Development Code Section 18.797.020. The applicant has submitted a Wetland Determination and Vegetated Corridor Assessment from Fishman Environmental Services, LLC. The applicant has provided mapping of the top- of-bank, floodplain, and riparian setback on the plans and it is discussed within the report. See also, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands in this decision for additional criteria and conditions related to development within the floodplain. Application Requirements: Section 18.797.060 Type II and Ill uses: required studies and mitigation reports. Each of the following studies shall be required whenever any Type II or Ill use is proposed within the WR overlay district. Each required report must consider the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory (Fishman Environmental Services, 1994) shall be in addition to the submission of information required for specific types of development, and shall be prepared by professionals in their respective fields. This is a Type II Water Resource Overlay Review in accordance with Table 18.797.2(h) underground utilities. The following reports are required for Type II Water Resource Overlay Review applications: 1. Hydrology and soils report. 2. Grading Plan. 3. Vegetation report. 4. Streambank conditions report. The applicant has submitted the Wetland Determination and Vegetated Corridor Assessment from Fishman Environmental Services, LLC, which addresses the hydrological, soil, and vegetative impacts to the riparian setback area. The reports indicate that the placement of the 8" pipe in conjunction with the proposed enhancement will minimize impacts of the development to the Water Resource Overlay Zone. No grading is proposed within the Water Resource Overlay Zone. RED INK,INC. PAGE 19 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Development Standards: Section 18.797.080 The following shall apply to all development, including native vegetation removal and excavation, within the WR overlay district. No application for a use identified in Section 18.797.050 shall be deemed complete until the applicant has addressed each of these standards in writing. A. Alternatives considered. Except for stream corridor enhancement, most Type II and Ill uses are expected to develop outside of water resource and riparian setback areas. Therefore, Type II and Ill development applications must carefully examine upland alternatives for the proposed use, and explain the reasons why the proposed development cannot reasonably occur outside of the water resource or riparian setback area. This application is for the placement of an 8" storm water outfall pipe to discharge stormwater into Fanno Creek. Because of the grade of the lot, there are no other reasonable alternatives to discharge the water. The applicant has indicated that they have been unable to contact the owner of the adjacent property about directing the pipe through their property, so there may be a need to consider sheet flow or some other mechanism to get the stormwater discharge to an approved system. FINDING: The applicant does not have permission from the adjacent landowner to install the stormwater outfall pipe across their property as proposed. CONDITION: Prior to construction, the applicant must attain permission in the form of a utility easement from the adjacent property owner to run the pipe all the way to Fanno Creek. The utility easement must be recorded and a copy provided to the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of any site work permits. If the applicant is unable to gain the easement, then they must provide an alternative method of transport consistent with these requirements. B. Minimize siting impacts. The proposed use shall be designed, located and constructed to minimize excavation, loss of native vegetation, erosion, and adverse hydrological impacts on water resources. 1. For Type II and Ill uses, the civil engineer with experience in water quality must certify that any adverse water quality impacts of the development proposal will be minimized consistent with best management practices; No adverse water quality impacts are expected to result from the proposed stormwater outfall pipe installation. A mitigation and enhancement plan has been submitted to Clean Water Services (CWS) for their approval, and the service provider letter requires that the mitigation be complied with as part of the CWS approval. It is anticipated that CWS will require the mitigation to be planted according to the plan that was submitted by Fishman Environmental Services. 2. For all uses, the development shall be located as far from the water resource, and use as little of the water resource or riparian setback area, as possible, recognizing the operational needs of the proposed development. The applicant has proposed to observe the fifty-foot buffer requirement of the riparian setback, and recommendations have been made to ensure the long-term maintenance of the proposed enhancement. C. Construction materials and methods. Where development within the riparian area is unavoidable, construction materials or methods used within the riparian setback area shall minimize damage to water quality and native vegetation. The applicant has indicated that an 8" pvc pipe will be installed, but has not indicated by which method. With the implementation of the recommended erosion control techniques, and the implementation of the enhancement, any damage should be minimal. RED INK,INC. PAGE 20 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER D. Minimize flood damage. Above-ground residential structures shall not be permitted within the WR overlay district, where such land is also within the 100- year floodplain. On-site flood storage capacity shall not decrease as a result of development. The cumulative effects of any proposed development shall not reduce flood storage capacity or raise base flood elevations on- or off-site. Any new commercial or industrial land development proposed within the 100-year floodplain shall be designed consistent with Chapter 18.775, Sensitive Lands. Impacts to the floodplain have been addressed previously in this report under the Sensitive Lands Review Chapter. The effects of this development on the floodplain have been identified in that section. E. Avoid steep slopes. Within 50 feet of any water resource, excavation and vegetation removal shall be avoided on slopes of 25% or greater and in areas with high erosion potential (as shown on SCS maps), except where necessary to construct public facilities or to ensure slope stability. No steep slopes within 50 feet of the Water Resource Overlay will be impacted by this proposal. F. Minimize impacts on existing vegetation. The following standards shall apply when construction activity is proposed in areas where vegetation is to be preserved. 1. Temporary measures used for initial erosion control shall not be left in place permanently; 2. Work areas on the immediate site shall be carefully identified and marked to reduce potential damage to trees and vegetation; 3. Trees shall not be used as anchors for stabilizing working equipment. During clearing operations, trees and vegetation shall not be permitted to fall or be placed outside the work area; 4. In areas designated for selective cutting or clearing, care in falling and removing trees and brush shall be taken to avoid injuring trees and shrubs to be left in place; 5. Stockpiling of soil, or soil mixed with vegetation, shall not be permitted on a permanent basis. The applicant has submitted a vegetated corridor report as part of the Fishman Environmental Services, LLC that indicates the corridor is in good to degraded condition. The applicant's proposal does not further impact any vegetated areas. In fact, the mitigation required by CWS should enhance the corridor. G. Vegetation mitigation plan. If a Type II or III use is proposed within a water resource site or riparian setback area, or mitigation is proposed as a method to reduce the riparian setback in accordance with Section 18.797.100, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented. 1. The applicant shall be responsible for re-vegetating areas temporarily disturbed by excavation on a 1:1 basis; 2. Where approval is granted to reduce the riparian setback area, the applicant shall be responsible for mitigating for the reduced setback by replacing non-native vegetation within the remaining, protected riparian setback area on a 1.5:1 basis. That is, for each 100 square feet of riparian setback that is lost to development, at least 150 square feet of existing disturbed area within the riparian setback or wetland shall be re-planted with native plant species; 3. The re-vegetation plan shall provide for the replanting and maintenance of native plant species designed to achieve pre-disturbance conditions. The applicant shall be responsible for replacing any native plant species that do not survive the first two years after planting, and for ensuring the RED INK, INC. PAGE 21 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER survival of any replacement plants for an additional two years after their replacement. This criteria has been addressed in part by the mitigation requirement of CWS that is discussed in Section 18.797.080.F above. H. Water and sewer infiltration and discharge. Water and sanitary sewer facilities shall be designed, located and constructed to avoid infiltration of floodwaters into the system, and to avoid discharges from such facilities to streams and wetlands. The proposal includes an on-site detention facility that is designed to filter water prior to being discharged to Fanno Creek. This criterion has been met. On-site systems. On-site septic systems and private wells shall be prohibited within the WR overlay district. This criteria is inapplicable as there are no proposed on-site septic systems or private wells within the WR overlay district. J. Erosion control plan. If a Type II or III use is proposed within a water resource site or riparian setback area, the following erosion control standards shall apply within the WR overlay district: 1. Specific methods of soil erosion and sediment control shall be used during construction to minimize visible and measurable erosion; 2. The land area to be grubbed, stripped, used for temporary placement of soil, or to otherwise expose soil shall be confined to the immediate construction site only; 3. Construction activity will take place during the dry season (June- October), whenever feasible, and the duration of exposure of soils shall be kept to a minimum during construction; 4. Exposed soils shall be covered by mulch, sheeting, temporary seeding or other suitable material following grading or construction, until soils are stabilized. During the rainy season (November through May), soils shall not be exposed for more than 7 calendar days. All disturbed land areas which will remain unworked for 21 days or more during construction, shall be mulched and seeded; 5. During construction, runoff from the site shall be controlled, and increased runoff and sediment resulting from soil disturbance shall be retained on-site. Temporary diversions, sediment basins, barriers, check dams, or other methods shall be provided as necessary to hold sediment and runoff; 6. A stabilized pad of gravel shall be constructed at all entrances and exists to the construction site. The stabilized gravel pad shall be the only allowable entrance or exit to the site; 7. Topsoil removal for development shall be stockpiled and reused on-site to the degree necessary to restore disturbed areas to their original or enhanced condition, or to assure sufficient stable topsoil for re- vegetation. Additional soil shall be provided if necessary to support re- vegetation; 8. The removal of all sediments which are carried into the streets, water resources or on to adjacent property, are the responsibility of the applicant. The applicant shall be responsible for cleaning up and repairing streets, catch basins, water resource areas and adjacent properties, where such properties are affected by sediments or mud. In no case shall sediments be washed into storm drains, ditches or drainageways; 9. Any other relevant provisions of the Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans Technical Guidance Handbook (City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services and Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington RED INK,INC. PAGE 22 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • County, Revised February 1994), required by the Planning Director. The applicant has provided staff with an erosion control plan for site work, but has failed to address erosion control during work within the Water Resource area. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not submitted an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay as required in TDC Section 18.797.080(J). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay. Said plan shall be consistent with the requirements of TDC Section 18.797.080(J). K. Plan implementation. A schedule of planned erosion control and re-vegetation measures shall be provided, which sets forth the progress of construction activities, and mitigating erosion control measures. An approved Erosion Control of Re-vegetation Plan shall be implemented and maintained as follows: 1. Erosion control measures shall be installed prior to any stripping or excavation work. 2. The applicant shall implement the measures and construct facilities contained in the approved Erosion Control Plan in a timely manner. During active construction, the applicant shall inspect erosion control measures daily, and maintain, adjust, repair or replace erosion control measures to ensure that they are functioning properly. 3. Eroded sediment shall be removed immediately from pavement surfaces, off-site areas, and from the surface water management system, including storm drainage inlets, ditches and culverts. 4. Water containing sediment shall not be flushed into the surface water management system, wetlands or streams without first passing through an approved sediment filtering facility or device. 5. In addition, the applicant shall call for City inspection, prior to the foundation inspection for any building, to certify that erosion control measures are installed in accordance with the erosion control plan. These criteria will be addressed by the previous condition and through the site inspection process. This standard is met. B. ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL CRITERIA 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); 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; 18.360.090.8 (100-year floodplain); 18.360.090.13 (Parking); 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.15 (Drainage); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled); 18.360.090.15 (Provisions of the underlying zone). RED INK,INC. PAGE 23 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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. The applicant's plans have considered the natural environment on the site by locating the development in a location that will incorporate a majority of the trees into buffering and screening. No buildings or structures are proposed that will hinder air circulation, natural lighting or prevent fire fighting apparatus from performing their jobs. This criteria has been met. 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. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this project and has not indicated concern or objection with the proposal. To ensure that the plan addresses crime prevention concerns, the applicant would need to provide a detailed lighting plan to the Tigard Police Department and the Tigard Planning Department. Additionally, the applicant has proposed vegetation that would allow easy observation of activities that are on-going on the site. The crime prevention standards have not been fully met. FINDING: The proposal fails to address lighting as required by the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan, that shows no projection off site and complies with crime prevention requirements of the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). 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 closest stops are located at the intersection of SW Johnson and SW Grant Street. The stop is not adjacent to an existing or proposed transit route, therefore, this standard does not apply. 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: RED INK,INC. PAGE 24 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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 minor collector street to have a 60-foot right-of-way width and a 40-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 Grant Avenue, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 20 feet of ROW east of the centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate additional ROW to provide at least 30 feet from the centerline. The applicant's plans indicate they will provide this dedication. SW Grant Avenue is currently partially improved adjacent to this site, with adequate pavement width and curbing to meet the current standard. The existing streetlight spacing along this street is also adequate. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should install the necessary driveway approach to the site, along with a concrete sidewalk, and street trees along the site frontage. 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. By constructing the concrete sidewalk along the Grant Avenue frontage, the applicant will meet this provision. 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 are two CWS trunk sewer lines (a 24-inch and a 60-inch) adjacent to the southern property line of this site. There is also an 8-inch public main line in SW Grant Avenue. According to City records, the existing building is connected to public sewer. The applicant's plans are not clear as to where the sewer connection is located, but it does not appear that the applicant will need additional sewer connections. RED INK,INC. PAGE 25 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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). This site is at an elevation lower than the roadway, and may accept a limited amount of street runoff during rainstorms because of the existing asphalt driveway. When this site is improved, the applicant will be installing a new concrete driveway approach that will help eliminate any street runoff from flowing down the driveway. Other than Fanno Creek flowing through the site, there are no other upstream public drainage facilities affecting 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). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. Since this site lies adjacent to Fanno Creek, there is no need to require onsite detention. The applicant's plan shows that they will collect the onsite runoff, treat it in a filter, and then discharge to Fanno Creek. This concept is acceptable. 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. There are no proposed bikeways adjacent to this development, therefore this criterion does not apply. 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. Because of the scale of this business, and the amount of required improvements, It is highly unlikely that bikeway improvements are going to benefit this development. This criterion does not apply. RED INK,INC. PAGE 26 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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. As discussed previously, this criterion does not apply. 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 Grant Avenue. 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 157 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $4,318.00. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: This site is within the City of Tigard service area and is presently served by the public water system. No additional public water line improvements are necessary for this development. 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. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall RED INK,INC. PAGE 27 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant proposes to treat the onsite runoff in a Stormwater Management catch basin filter unit. These units have been approved for use on private property and have shown that they will meet the phosphorus removal criteria of the CWS standards. Therefore, the use of this unit on this site is acceptable. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. The proposed unit from Stormwater Management is acceptable, provided the property owner agrees to hire the manufacturer (or approved equal) to provide the required maintenance of the unit. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management, or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. A grading and erosion control plan must be reviewed and approved by the Building Division prior to construction. D. IMPACT STUDY (18.390) Section 18.390.040.B.2.e 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 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 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. 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 $5,358 based on the 2,200 square feet of office usage. Based on the estimate that the total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this project's traffic impact is RED INK,INC. PAGE 28 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER $16,743.75 ($5,358 divided by 0.32). The difference between the TIF paid, proposed improvements to the street system, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the street system. The applicant has proposed dedication of an additional 10 feet of right-of-way at a cost of $15, 840 ($12.00 x 1320 SF of dedication) and half-street improvements of 132 feet along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue. The improvements to the street are valued at approximately $19,800 ($150 per lineal foot). Consequently, the unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $-18,896. The Development has mitigated 100% for the impacts that it will contribute to the arterial and collector system. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division commented that the proposed structure is to be converted from an R3 residential structure to a B office use. OSSC Chapter 11 ADA requirements shall be met for accessibility from the parking area to the new addition and throughout the structure by means of ramps or other approved means. Protection of mechanical, lumbing, and electrical items required. No hazmat storage allowed without review. Additions to the existing structure must be flood proofed (Staff Contact: Daryl Jones). The City of Tigard Engineering Department was sent this proposal for review and the comments have been incorporated into this report. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager/Water Department has reviewed this application and has indicated that the existing hydrant would need a minimum 3' setback from the driveway. If the meter is to be relocated contact the Water Department. The applicant shall install double check valve assembly directly behind the water meter. All utility work should be shown in drawings and coordinated with the City prior to site work. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed this application and has provided the following comments: 1. A minimum of 2 fire hydrants shall be provided for this development. One hydrant is shown on the plans directly adjacent to the building. One additional hydrant shall be installed so that no part of the structure is more than 500 feet from the hydrant. (UFC 903.4) 2. Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access roadway that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly. (UFC Sec. 901.4.3) 3. Approved fire apparatus access roadways and firefighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to stockpiling combustibles on-site or the commencement of combustible construction. (UFC Sec. 8704) 4. A building survey and plans, in accordance with TVF&R Ordinance 99-01, Appendix III-F, shall be submitted. A copy of Appendix III-F, the building survey form and the instructions are available on the Fire District web site. To access this information via Internet, follow this link: http://www.tvfr.com/Departments/FireMarshal/new construction.htm City of Tigard Arborist has reviewed this application. His comments have been included in the previous discussion regarding tree preservation. City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed this application, but offered no comments. City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and requested that an exterior lighting plan be submitted to the Police Department for review. Long Range Planning Division has reviewed this application, but offered no comments. RED INK,INC. PAGE 29 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services has reviewed the proposal and offered the following comments and conditions: Developer must address water quality to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this conversion. A 30' wide sanitary sewer easement crosses this property. No Storm Water Connection Permit can be issued on this project until the applicant has satisfied the requirements of Service Provider Letter No. 1104. (Contact Lee Walker or Heidi Berg) Tualatin Valley Water District, Portland General Electric, Tri-Met, NW Natural Gas, US Army Corps of Engineers, Oregon DEQ, and Oregon DSL were given the opportunity to review this proposal and submitted no comments or objections. 1:94 March 28, 2002 PREPARED B : Brad ilby DATE Associate Planner } . ;60) - March 28, 2002 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewer dorff DATE Planning Mana er RED INK,INC. PAGE 30 OF 30 4/15/2002 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER .. 1 11 S I / I I Lill CITY of TIGARD WWI. a I . '- tigiELA • LN il VICINITY MAP i ' ■�� .1 c j. Q7. Uri! al SDR2002-00001 pi. ~�6 1/ SLR2gg :gggg 2 1 SSG " ��o� • F�i,a 1 NM§ 3 ' '� 41114ir � � `� ♦ ; .- RED INK, INC. IlL' • i il'co4,7 Mai k-,,c, w •Af �. � � ♦ * ilcs't 5 0 ,s,ss,,,,*,,,„ ,,,„A 131 71 4.11 I I I I I I P4I I*, 40 , , , v\, ..,...„,„_E.,F, „A .,,,.k ., A. ,,,_ . _,.: , 0 4 \,„ . . . ,_, .._. . ..,.„.7 . _. ., i ,, . ,.. _ A,. ., ., : , AO, 46(,), • [ 'SU" Y - 11,.. .r ♦ xi . Tigard Arse Map* IjklN..e* • N •i. 0 200 100 600 Feet vp#'OSA. 6G N• 1"4 401 feet LT �— tiy9� 1 City of Tigard Information on this map is for general location Doty and ‘,,44■ should be verified wdh the Development Services Division. . 13125 igar,O Hall 23 Tigard,OR 9171. (503)659.4171. httpl www.d.tigard,0r.us Community Development Plot date:Feb 12,2002;C:lmagic MAGlCO3.APR i ' i /\\-'\S W 0 P .••. /1////: �0� 59 �•, ;r \ '\\-11--`-'(N'0\�\0 . ,... w.MI TOMEI AMMO. WOO OA I .,. / M.N..TO.11.10 MN. 1.01 /g.,_, , v. ..07 _ . , N..../PLOOLVIAR =•■••4•MA.........rie V Val /).4* .., .4..,-- T er raM.uraire :i4 ' Z• an , 'NS i111.08 1/11.1.0.9.11 MO IMMNIM MOTO IOW 7011. / " I'D —11; r•- G UTE PLAN'dit/ •. + . 1 •�Wa... �••�� I `` a fITi MADAM'AFC D141)lA�ALAN •�� o MUCH ca�+rwa.PLAN a.0 1 sn:uw� t,� I LArolOArem=PLAN �,y le _ J y4 I ELEVATION ..L..•1/4.4.1?C" '' • \‘. ' ... it Bp 2 FLOOR PJN 1. C' \ awn •‘ `� I • 0� MMEINOULINCENZ ©LM..N.O.RA & ADOMILI MAC.PM/41.1.1.14711 LI MVO .MRO.M.rt cSllIpaa�t .1 f v66, .Less.N MWre...y.v.YMR&IMMO �� ar q� L ? ORAL 7'n""..W r.Pro.+m.L wr en m.a rwar.—0.r.r.•.A..Ay..._M W.i011 1 144 `,- '',1.'lW1 rr 1 oC IY-.0. .�.R•rM...4.�W�Ilnorol•Iwfo ' ` ;'. 7{ r g �.—a....--- 1 "•�1 r —.—mom mot /00/0;://$2: X01 \ .,� ow. ow • ••lam • '�O • MM.WALT / \ »M/PM. r.•tl NMaN.l 9;E ?c ...M MN 7Y t._.— a.— C C rw avant..eeMSOa- / A CITY OF TIGARD t SDR2002.00001 ISLR2002-00001ISLR2002.00003 CITY OF MARC SITE PLAN N RED INK, INC. (Map is not to scale) Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. Attn: Kim McMillan SDR2002-00001 RED INK, INC. 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road (Notice of Final Order By the Hearings Officer) Tualatin OR 97062 Tom and Lori Hays 12220 SW Grant Street Tigard, OR 97223 George Earl ReMax Equity Group 12550 SW 68th Parkway Tigard, OR 97224 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF TIGARD Community'Development Shaping Better Community I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specialist for the City ofTigar , Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check App,opnate Box(s)Bebw) ® NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARING FOR: i-./ SDR2002-00001/SLR2002-00001/SLR2002-00003 – RED INK, INC. (4115/2002) File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Heanng) — City of Tigard Planning Director Z Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission _ Tigard City Council A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", and by reference made a part hereof, on March 25,2002, and deposited in the United States Mail on March 25,2002, postage prepaid. y ... &....... Amir4111," L.,. 'dyl,--./(!41) 11111 111V , ii/i.../ (Person th- 'repared Notic: STATE OAP o EGow ) County of Washington )ss. City of 7tgard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 31 day of a l ``-1 , 2002. J 0=` � OFFICIAL SEAL 1 H,. .)• DIANE M JELDERKS i ''' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON N .3 E578 )74 COMMISSION NO.32E57$ � 61bri----) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 N A YPO LIC OF0: E My Commission ! es: 777 63 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: EMU' THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. 4 •I I CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development CITY OF TIGARD Shaping Better Community PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY APRIL 15, 2002 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY (SLR) 2002-00003 FILE TITLE: RED INK, INC. APPLICANT: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. OWNER: Tom and Lori Hays Attn: Kim McMillan 12220 SW Grant Street 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road Tigard, OR 97223 Tualatin, OR 97062 REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESEN-1 WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PRCir'OSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION LESS THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AN OPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25 ) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER BRAD KILBY AT (503)639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. lak CITY of TIGARD �� r , VICINITY MAP r •_T : . . . SDRZOOZ GOOD gm _h. lI..717.1. �� ■°- AM.1. SLRZOOZ 00001 �••-� sad I■No E■`- SLR2002-00003 ,- t-,, 7,4A.11 1,% -0 ,;-''f'N,v 0 % A ,�• �'�` ��;'w RED INK, INC.A„,,,■.>. �i►� ,, #,.4.4 .40 ., . 1��4 '�-#1 1`.., Og `\ • ,+ ma ` fart ♦ I' „' t' .e_. •��•• ,• • sr,``, ., a. _,. . ,_,..... , .: c. .. i4$' 4 ii-��Y � I.♦. ,,�. �, 1 Cm of Tigard .' �.. ,` ♦ .....r r.�....—.ice....... • 0'?' SDiz_2oOL--oo00' 2S 102AB-01900 2S 102BA-00501 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ELLIOTT JAMES R&SHERRY D PO BOX 23144 BY ESP PROPERTY FACTORS INC TIGARD,OR 97281 1522 SW SUNSET BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97201 102A8-0190 2S102AB-01800 AL D ITED PARTNERSHIP GREEN VALLEY DEVELOPMENT LLC PO 144 BY GARY HELMER GARD,0 97281 10585 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102BA-00901 2S 102BA-01000 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP& G' N VALLE DEVELOPMENT LLC ENGEL GEORGE L BY GA- .• MER Go REA KEN 1058 ' • UT ST PO BOX 230365 ARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S 102BA-01503 2S 102BA-01100 BERNARD BRADLEY S&JENNIFER L HAYS THOMAS R&LORI J PO BOX 23608 12220 SW GRANT AVE TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-01500 2S102AB-00302 BERNARD HOLDINGS LLC KRALIK MICHELLE&ROMAN PO BOX 23608 17248 SW BARCELONA WAY TIGARD,OR 97281 ALOHA,OR 97007 2S102BA-00500 2S102BA-02103 CASTILE JAMES&AUDREY LOUGHRAN THOMAS R& 8100 SW DURHAM RD WEIDLING BRENT ERIK TIGARD,OR 97224 9965 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-01502 2S102BA-00390 CEGELKA KRISTIN& MCCALL PROPERTIES INC GUELSDORF KURT F BY NED MCCALL 12330 SW GRANT AVE 5480 NW FRON AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97210 2S 102A8-00207 2S 102BA-01200 CONNOR RALPH A MORLAN PROPERTIES 9535 SW COMMERCIAL 5529 SE FOSTER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97206 102BA-04 2S 102BA-00900 D I RK OWNERS OF LOTS 5-8 MORRIS SHIRLEY A&RAYMOND L 12160 SW GRANT TIGARD,OR 97223 25102BA-01190 2S102BA-00600 ELKINS ALVIN S& MULL GREGORY S AND ELKINS ERNEST TRUSTEES MULL GEORGE E 32224 SW BOONES BEND RD 19350 SW POMONA DR WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 BEAVERTON,OR 97007 2S 1026A-01601' 2S 102BA-00800 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC SEE-ZER PROPERTIES COMPANY 14960 SW TUALATIN-SHERWOOD RD STE 1 121 SW SALMON ST SHERWOOD,OR 97140 PORTLAND,OR 97204 2S102BA-01600 2S102BA-03000 •c'TLAND 'ENERAL ELECTRIC SINGH MAIHEN AND ARUNA CO ' . 9777 SW JOHNSON 121 : MON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 RTLAND, ' 97204 2S 102BA-02000 2S 102BA-02500 REED WILLIAM C& STROUM EVAN P&ANDREA L LUNDBERG LYDIA 12380 SW GRANT AVE PO BOX 12564 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97212 2S102AB-01801 2S102BA-0 01 RISBERG K JOAN TRUSTEE TIG ITY OF 4210 IMPERIAL DR 131 HALL WEST LINN,OR 97068 TI ARD,0 97223 2S102BA-00400 2S 82AB-01'62 ROBERTSON BERWYN A&INGEBURG H TIGA' ITY OF 17691 SW FREDERICK LN 131 : S •LL SHERWOOD,OR 97140 TI ARD,OR •7223 2S102BA-04200 2S1 BA-01 .1 SANDERS GARY R& TIGA' ITY OF RASMUSSEN DARWIN C& 1312 ALL RASMUSSEN E BRENT TI •RD,O' •7223 21730 SW ELWERT RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 102BA-03600 2S •2BA-0 '1 •NDERS GARY ' & TIGA I CITY OF RA SSE 5•RWIN C& 1312 S -ALL RASMU`►:- E BRENT TI'ARD,OR 97223 217 : SW EL • 'T RD .'ERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 102BA-03500 2S 102BA-00304 SANDERS GARY R& TIGARD INDUSTRIAL LLC RASMUSSEN DARWIN C 11336 SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD#104 21730 SW ELWERT RD TIGARD,OR 97224 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 102BA-03300 2S 102AB-00209 • S• I ERS GARY R TROUTMAN DENNIS E&CYNTHIA J RASM I SEN I•'WIN C& 9475 SW COMMERCIAL ST RASMUS'' E BRENT TIGARD,OR 97223 2173* W EL ■ ERT RD RWOOD,0' 97140 2S102A6-00208 2S102BA-03400 SCHUCK EUGENE R&MELISSA K VO TAN T& 9505 SW COMMERCIAL NGUYEN MINHTAM THI TIGARD,OR 97223 12089 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 • 2S 102BA-0140& WOODARD PARK APARTMENTS LLC 2083 NW JOHNSON ST#1 ATTN.ROBERT D BALL PORTLAND,OR 97209 Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. Attn: Kim McMillan 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road Tualatin OR 97062 Jack Biethan 11023 SW Summerfield Drive#4 Tigard, OR 97224 Brooks Gaston 10272 SW Meadow Street Tigard, OR 97223 Don & Dorothy Erdt 13760 SW 121st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Martha Bishop 10590 SW Cook Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Vanessa Foster 13085 SW Howard Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Susan Beilke 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 CITY OF TIGARD - CENTRAL CIT SUBCOMMITTEE (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT Central.doc) UPDATED: December 27, 2001 .., .. _me _ . asis CITY of TIGARD ��■-.. � , GEOGRA►NIC INFORMATION SYSTEM LN Ell VICINITY MAP 11A i TAN � C � , �- y Ilial., +,*' . imaiblb ��Z� SLR2002-0000 sly' \i - � � '�� _'''ll c4i4\Twit."' 'Nor o�4Il ■� _ ■■?� SLR2002 00003 .��■ '� ♦ RED INK, INC. ,o E�, . �i► r'� : �� ► / �,� a f�►�! . ♦ ..**Apc*� ••••• 41 d 1 t4 441,41 - 4:1 72 I• AIQ. $ RR RRD F Y __ ,� n1 ice 2- 4 . 1 , LL I,. • _.-, A .4, f `i` 1/ r ..e., , .4 .4/ , 40o _ ri I F4 ER0/ k v BEfF S JAN f,,, VAIL;311.4: ` `` .1. Iv � S T, 1, TparA Area Map ' • �.. N Q. 0 200 400 600 Feet 4 4 0/r 4 � 1,401 feet /1-W# � 11,1, 1�� #:, City of Tigard . Inionnation on this map is for general bcation ony and should be verified with the Development Services Division 4.■ •T . rn 13(50 SW H41 Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 4 (503)63&4171 . 4 htlp:l/wim ci.ligard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Feb 12,2002;C:lmagic'MAGIC03.APR .i I 1 tlrYr P1/Mr / Rpvl�`� T• w. PAM / N . GPI �.� �„CafTVO NO TOTAL POOP AMA Lp� ii.:�:� \ NpR •ply 58 / F �.� ��a .�STNOMD �1.w.;,w 4.300 IF MAMMA.POMO I .V 11 k' \ / r.1rr11e1a.no `'-nn°-`r.r iiwrorr.1..'i"--.ea�""Ce�.��dw°: °�� w': `..A��. p9MI an o MAO.a PPANTAAO .• '�f / L, tea' '�,l m�- o , �� KEYNOTES • :OAR LAOICAPITO OW/ o- ..�� -�.w. f1[ C \ //<,.- T- .MrWUIWRRW u.YM M.'9.M�1f nL 4 / .. M. Yom. w /� V OI�M 4/04:1 Gi�SITVF'LdNJt /d i �u�r 1ji ,�*Mr \ C2 SITE GRADIW AND DRAINAGE RAN• .f \ -,• C3 EROSION CONTROL PLAN �. R11. �u�a/ , SITE TOPOGRAPHIC 9RVET 1 ' a Li LANDSCAPE/TREE PLAN / -- 'N' I ELEVATION ' "•l `--- 2 FLOOR RAN J \ \` O� 5/ ___ ___ �Q" L c....I:IpppOPATINA RA RAMA & ACL110-•VAS PANCIAA STALL LP sr.u.lam or,Mat, Cy .mow :; cQv :. - q •71, R, warn.MS T M,o,.MT / 09\ 111 1N1 /.N }E` i- *art ran' R < C /ORS CAWS-TM 1 • L4L. CITY OF TIGARD SDR2002-000011SLR2002-00001/SLR2002-00003 CITY Of TIGARD SITE PLAN N RED INK, INC. (Map is not to scale) 120 DAYS = 6/12/2002 CITY OF TIGARD Community'Development Shaping Better Community CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER Case Numbers: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00001 - SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2002-00001 • WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY (SLR) 2002-00003 Case Name: RED INK, INC. Name of Owner: Tom and Lori Hays Name of Applicant: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. —Attn: Kim McMillan Address of Applicant: 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road Portland, OR 97062 Address of Property: 12220 SW Grant Street Tax Map/Lot Nos.: Washington County Tax Assessor's Map No. 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW AND WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY. THE CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE HEARINGS OFFICER HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL I 5, 2002 TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER. Request: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. Zoning Designation: I-P: Industrial Park District. Comprehensive Plan Designatiopn: Light Industrial. Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. Action: ❑ Approval as Requested © Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to: © Owners of Record Within the Required Distance © Affected Government Agencies © The Affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator © The Applicants and Owners The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard City Hall. Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON , 2002 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON , 2002 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Review Authority 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. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON , 2002. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. SDR2002-00001 Attn: Kim McMillan RED INK, INC. 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road (Notice of Final Order By the Hearings Officer) Tualatin OR 97062 Tom and Lori Hays 12220 SW Grant Street Tigard, OR 97223 2S 102AB-01900 2S 102BA-00501 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ELLIOTT JAMES R&SHERRY D PO BOX 23144 BY ESP PROPERTY FACTORS INC TIGARD,OR 97281 1522 SW SUNSET BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97201 102AB-0190 2S102AB-01800 AL D ITED PARTNERSHIP GREEN VALLEY DEVELOPMENT LLC PO 144 BY GARY HELMER GARD,0 97281 10585 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-00901 2S102BA-01000 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP& G. N VALLE DEVELOPMENT LLC ENGEL GEORGE L BY GA- -• MER Go REA KEN 1058 • UT ST PO BOX 230365 ARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S102BA-01503 2S1028A-01100 BERNARD BRADLEY S&JENNIFER L HAYS THOMAS R&LORI J PO BOX 23608 12220 SW GRANT AVE TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-01500 2S102AB-00302 BERNARD HOLDINGS LLC KRALIK MICHELLE&ROMAN PO BOX 23608 17248 SW BARCELONA WAY TIGARD,OR 97281 ALOHA,OR 97007 2S 102BA-00500 2S 102BA-02103 CASTILE JAMES&AUDREY LOUGHRAN THOMAS R& 8100 SW DURHAM RD WEIDLING BRENT ERIK TIGARD,OR 97224 9965 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-01502 2S102BA-00390 CEGELKA KRISTIN& MCCALL PROPERTIES INC GUELSDORF KURT F BY NED MCCALL 12330 SW GRANT AVE 5480 NW FRON AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97210 2S102A8-00207 2S102BA-01200 CONNOR RALPH A MORLAN PROPERTIES 9535 SW COMMERCIAL 5529 SE FOSTER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97206 102BA-04 2S 102BA-00900 D IN RK OWNERS OF LOTS 5-8 MORRIS SHIRLEY A&RAYMOND L 12160 SW GRANT TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-01190 2S102BA-00600 ELKINS ALVIN S& MULL GREGORY S AND ELKINS ERNEST TRUSTEES MULL GEORGE E 32224 SW BOONES BEND RD 19350 SW POMONA DR WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 BEAVERTON,OR 97007 2S 102BA-01t01 2S 102BA-00800 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC SEE-ZER PROPERTIES COMPANY 14960 SW TUALATIN-SHERWOOD RD STE 1 121 SW SALMON ST SHERWOOD,OR 97140 PORTLAND,OR 97204 2S 102BA-01600 2S 102BA-03000 TLAND ENERAL ELECTRIC SINGH MAIHEN AND ARUNA CO 9777 SW JOHNSON 121 MON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 RTLAND, 97204 2S 102BA-02000 2S 102BA-02500 REED WILLIAM C& STROUM EVAN P&ANDREA L LUNDBERG LYDIA 12380 SW GRANT AVE PO BOX 12564 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97212 2S102AB-01801 2S102BA-0 i1 RISBERG K JOAN TRUSTEE TIG -P ITY OF 4210 IMPERIAL DR 131'. HALL WEST LINN,OR 97068 TI CARD,O' 97223 2S102BA-00400 2S 12AB-01'02 ROBERTSON BERWYN A&INGEBURG H TIGA' ITY OF 17691 SW FREDERICK LN 131 . S •LL SHERWOOD,OR 97140 TI ARD,OR •7223 2S102BA-04200 2S1 BA-01 11 SANDERS GARY R& TIGA• • ITY OF RASMUSSEN DARWIN C& 1312 ■ ALL RASMUSSEN E BRENT TI •RD,0' •7223 21730 SW ELWERT RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S102BA-03600 2S '2BA-0 11 NDERS GARY - & TIGA • CITY OF RA SSE :•RWIN C& 1312 S .ALL RASMU 4.- E BRENT TI' •RD,OR 97223 217 : SW EL - •TRD 'ERWOOD,OR 97140 2S102BA-03500 2S102BA-00304 SANDERS GARY R& TIGARD INDUSTRIAL LLC RASMUSSEN DARWIN C 11336 SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD#104 21730 SW ELWERT RD TIGARD,OR 97224 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 102BA-03300 2S 102AB-00209 S• •ERS GARY R : TROUTMAN DENNIS E&CYNTHIA J RASM► SEN i -WIN C& 9475 SW COMMERCIAL ST RASMUS ' E BRENT TIGARD,OR 97223 21730 W EL •ERT RD RWOOD,O' 97140 2S1 02AB-00208 2S1 02BA-03400 SCHUCK EUGENE R&MELISSA K VO TAN T& 9505 SW COMMERCIAL NGUYEN MINHTAM THI TIGARD,OR 97223 12089 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-01400 WOODARD PARK APARTMENTS LLC 2083 NW JOHNSON ST#1 ATTN: ROBERT D BALL PORTLAND,OR 97209 Jack Biethan 11023 SW Summerfield Drive#4 Tigard, OR 97224 Brooks Gaston 10272 SW Meadow Street Tigard, OR 97223 Don & Dorothy Erdt 13760 SW 121st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Martha Bishop 10590 SW Cook Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Vanessa Foster 13085 SW Howard Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Susan Beilke 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 CITY OF TIGARD - CENTRAL CIT SUBCOMMITTEE (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT Central.doc) UPDATED: December 27, 2001 sjk L— — CITY of TIGARD �O GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM �'1F,Q - AREA NOTIFIED -I.. c',14 . (5 00') :, C '� FOR: Red Ink, Inc. SDR2002-00001 c cM�FRc�#40. RE: 2S102BA, 01100 Sri • (I 2220 SW Grant Ave.) owner information is valid for 3 months from .... the date printed on this map. 11011°P. 41111‘ W VProperty �,�' "1"," /".6\c" c � •. ttEttIMAENM 111 IlKssi 1 b *, ' 0 t00 200 300 Feet S�. .. 1"-246 feet > 0#0° 111111 A I (<' City of Tigard 41114 Ake...A ## Information on tins map is for general location only and should be verified wth the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,1 R 97223 (503)639-4171 �1 ^ http:!/w`wv.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Feb 11,2002;C:\rnagic\MAGIC03.APR Si 2S102AB-01900 2S102BA-00501 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ELLIOTT JAMES R&SHERRY D PO BOX 23144 BY ESP PROPERTY FACTORS INC TIGARD,OR 97281 1522 SW SUNSET BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97201 102AB-0190 2S 102AB-01800 AL ITED PARTNERSHIP GREEN VALLEY DEVELOPMENT LLC PO 144 BY GARY HELMER GARD,0 97281 10585 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-00901 2S102BA-01000 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP& G' N VALLE DEVELOPMENT LLC ENGEL GEORGE L BY GA' -' MER Go REA KEN 1058 UT ST PO BOX 230365 ARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S102BA-01503 2S102BA-01100 BERNARD BRADLEY S&JENNIFER L HAYS THOMAS R&LORI J PO BOX 23608 12220 SW GRANT AVE TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102BA-01500 2S 102AB-00302 BERNARD HOLDINGS LLC KRALIK MICHELLE&ROMAN PO BOX 23608 17248 SW BARCELONA WAY TIGARD,OR 97281 ALOHA,OR 97007 2S 102BA-00500 2S 102BA-02103 CASTILE JAMES&AUDREY LOUGHRAN THOMAS R& 8100 SW DURHAM RD WEIDLING BRENT ERIK TIGARD,OR 97224 9965 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102BA-01502 2S 102BA-00390 CEGELKA KRISTIN& MCCALL PROPERTIES INC GUELSDORF KURT F BY NED MCCALL 12330 SW GRANT AVE 5480 NW FRON AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97210 2S 102AB-00207 2S 102BA-01200 CONNOR RALPH A MORLAN PROPERTIES 9535 SW COMMERCIAL 5529 SE FOSTER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97206 102BA-04 2S1029A-00900 D IN RK OWNERS OF LOTS 5-8 MORRIS SHIRLEY A&RAYMOND L 12160 SW GRANT TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102BA-01190 2S 102BA-00600 ELKINS ALVIN S& MULL GREGORY S AND ELKINS ERNEST TRUSTEES MULL GEORGE E 32224 SW BOONES BEND RD 19350 SW POMONA DR WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 BEAVERTON,OR 97007 , J 2S1028A-01601 2S102BA-00800 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC SEE-ZER PROPERTIES COMPANY 14960 SW TUALATIN-SHERWOOD RD STE 1 121 SW SALMON ST SHERWOOD,OR 97140 PORTLAND,OR 97204 2S102BA-01600 - 2S102BA-03000 'e TLAND ' ENERAL ELECTRIC SINGH MAIHEN AND ARUNA COM't 9777 SW JOHNSON 121 : MON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 '-IRTLAND, 97204 2S 102 BA-02000 2S 102BA-02500 REED WILLIAM C& STROUM EVAN P&ANDREA L LUNDBERG LYDIA 12380 SW GRANT AVE PO BOX 12564 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97212 25102A6-01801 2S102BA-0 01 RISBERG K JOAN TRUSTEE TIG ITY OF 4210 IMPERIAL DR 131 HALL WEST LINN,OR 97068 TI ARD,0 97223 2S102BA-00400 2S 12AB-01142 ROBERTSON BERWYN A& INGEBURG H TIGA' ITY OF 17691 SW FREDERICK LN 131 : S - LL SHERWOOD,OR 97140 TI ARD,OR •7223 231028A-04200 2S1 r BA-01 11 SANDERS GARY R& TIGA''. ITY OF RASMUSSEN DARWIN C& 1312 • HALL RASMUSSEN E BRENT TI •RD,O' •7223 21730 SW ELWERT RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S102BA-03600 2S 2BA-0 01 •NDERS GARY R& TIGA CITY OF RA •' SSE s•RWIN C& 1312 S ALL RASMU`►:- E BRENT TI ARD,OR 97223 217 : SW EL -'T RD ERWOOD,OR 97140 2S102BA-03500 2S102BA-00304 SANDERS GARY R& TIGARD INDUSTRIAL LLC RASMUSSEN DARWIN C 11336 SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD#104 21730 SW ELWERT RD TIGARD,OR 97224 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 102BA-03300 2S102AB-00209 S• ••ERS GARY R TROUTMAN DENNIS E&CYNTHIA J RASM► SEN II•'WIN C& 9475 SW COMMERCIAL ST RASMUS' E BRENT TIGARD,OR 97223 2173' WEL• ERTRD • RWOOD,O' 97140 2S102AB-00208 2S102BA-03400 SCHUCK EUGENE R&MELISSA K VO TAN T& 9505 SW COMMERCIAL NGUYEN MINHTAM THI TIGARD,OR 97223 12089 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102BA-01400 WOODARD PARK APARTMENTS LLC 2083 NW JOHNSON ST#1 ATTN: ROBERT D BALL PORTLAND,OR 97209 Yc � � O CITY of TIGARD �A� I GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM ilillor �* 'QCiq4sT '*Ab.... AREA NOTIFIED caw (SOD')... ....,,,,,s, . -,..„..._,s cod . FOR. Kim McMillan iv , , M ' FRS op �'��sT"�`, • RE: 2S 102BA, 0 1 100 - 14 (12220 SW Grant Ave.) 1f10IDA00TW Tneve7esol Property owner information is valid for 3 months from `� the date printed on this map. � 7eet7altetwe l �� 7E107A801907 `� , r ./7 N vc,4# 0 Ol ► 4 k A re 411,p//4.‘ T51029A0400 I 0 100 200 300 Feet'' ,444° / jr TT1071A01700 1"=245 feet J� #0, P . AfTigard Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division OP,_ A_ . 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 C�� fr o ligard 1 http:Jlwww.ntlgar or us Community Development Plot date- Oct 29, 2001;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR 2S 102AB-01900 2S1 02 BA-00501 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ELLIOTT JAMES R&SHERRY D 9380 SW TIGARD ST 29979 SE HEIPLE RD TIGARD,OR 97223 EAGLE CREEK,OR 97022 2S 102AB-01902 2S 102AB-01800 ALLR : I 0 D PARTNERSHIP GREEN VALLEY DEVELOPMENT LLC 9380 . I •"1 ST BY GARY HELMER ARD, OR 9722 10585 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-00901 2S102BA-01000 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP& GRE VALLE EVELOPMENT LLC ENGEL GEORGE L BY GAR MER c/o REA KEN 1058 W UT ST PO BOX 230365 ARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S1020A-01503 23102BA-01100 BERNARD BRADLEY S&JENNIFER L HAYS THOMAS R&LORI J PO BOX 23608 12220 SW GRANT AVE TIGARD, OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 23102BA-01500 2S102AB-00302 BERNARD HOLDINGS LLC HOLUB ANTHONY&WENDY& PO BOX 23608 KRALIK MICHELLE&ROMAN TIGARD,OR 97281 17248 SW BARCELONA WAY ALOHA,OR 97007 2S102BA-00500 2S1020A-02103 CASTILE JAMES&AUDREY LOUGHRAN THOMAS R& 8100 SW DURHAM RD WEIDLING BRENT ERIK TIGARD, OR 97224 9965 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-01502 2S102BA-00390 CEGELKA KRISTIN& MCCALL PROPERTIES INC GUELSDORF KURT F 808 SW 15TH AVE 12330 SW GRANT AVE PORTLAND,OR 97205 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102AB-00207 2S102BA-01200 CONNOR RALPH A MORLAN PROPERTIES 9535 SW COMMERCIAL 5529 SE FOSTER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97206 2 102BA-04500 2S102BA-00900 DUB P OWNERS OF LOTS 5-8 MORRIS SHIRLEY A&RAYMOND L 828 MAHAFFEY RD KELSO,WA 98626 2S 102BA-01190 2S 102BA-00600 ELKINS ALVIN S& MULL GREGORY S AND ELKINS ERNEST TRUSTEES MULL GEORGE E 32224 SW BOONES BEND RD 19350 SW POMONA DR WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 BEAVERTON,OR 97007 2S1U2BA-01601 2S102BA-00800 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC SEE-ZER PROPERTIES COMPANY 14960 SW TUALATIN-SHERWOOD RD STE 1 121 SW SALMON ST SHERWOOD,OR 97140 PORTLAND,OR 97204 2S 1028A-01600 2S 1028A-03000 PO ND G L ELECTRIC SINGH MAIHEN AND ARUNA COMP 9777 SW JOHNSON 121 S MON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 RTLAND, 97204 2S102BA-02000 2S102BA-02500 REED WILLIAM C& STROUM EVAN P&ANDREA L LUNDBERG LYDIA 12380 SW GRANT AVE PO BOX 12564 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97212 25 102AB-01801 2S 102BA-01201 RISBERG K JOAN TRUSTEE TIG OF 4210 IMPERIAL DR 1312 LL WEST LINN,OR 97068 T RD,OR 97223 2S102BA-00400 2 02AB-0180 ROBERTSON BERWYN A&INGEBURG H TIG D OF 17691 SW FREDERICK LN 1312 HALL SHERWOOD,OR 97140 T ARD, R 97223 2S102BA-04200 2S 02BA-017 SANDERS GARY R& TIG D OF RASMUSSEN DARWIN C& 131 HALL RASMUSSEN E BRENT T ARD,0 97223 21730 SW ELWERT RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 102BA-03600 2S 1 4 2BA-01 • SA••ERS GARY R : TIGA• ITY OF RASM END ' IN C& 131 s S' ALL RASMUS '• E BRENT T ARD,0. 97223 21731 EL -:T RD • RWOOD,OR 97140 2 102BA-03500 2S102BA-00304 SA PERS GAR - & TIGARD INDUSTRIAL LLC RAS • SE' DARWIN C& 11336 SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD#103 RASMU • E BRENT TIGARD,OR 97224 217 • SW ELW"T RD RWOOD,OR 97140 2S 102BA-03300 2S 102AB-00209 S• PERS GARY ' : TROUTMAN DENNIS E&CYNTHIA J RAS • SE .ARWIN C& 9475 SW COMMERCIAL ST RASMU :• E BRENT TIGARD,OR 97223 217 • W EL, RT RD RWOOD,OR •7140 2S102AB-00208 2S102BA-03400 SCHUCK EUGENE R&MELISSA K VO TAN T& 9505 SW COMMERCIAL NGUYEN MINHTAM THI TIGARD,OR 97223 12089 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1028,4-01400 208 OOARO PARK AP PTTN ROBERT B ST*1 ORTLAND, OR 9 809 Debra Seeman 13372 SW Clearview Way Tigard, OR 97223 Mary Skelton 10355 SW Walnut Street Tigard, OR 97223 Kathleen Anderson 12132 SW Lansdowne Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brooks Gaston 10272 SW Meadow Street Tigard, OR 97223 Don & Dorothy Erdt 13760 SW 121st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Suzanne Riles 13215 SW Genesis Loop Tigard, OR 97223 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Mary Lindquist 11565 SW Walnut Street Tigard, OR 97223 Christine Garsteck 11774 SW 125th Court Tigard, OR 97223 Jack Biethan 11023 SW Summerfield Drive#4 Tigard, OR 97224 CITY OF TIGARD - CENTRAL CIT SUBCOMMITTEE (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT Central.doc) UPDATED: August 16, 2001 OCT-29-01 02 : 12 PM LEWIS S VAN VLEET INC. 503 8851206 P. 01 i 6117Y CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DE OP .44 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ` PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF TIGARD Commttrrrty Vrveroprnenr 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD .sIapintjit,BelterCommurtity TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PHONE: 503.639.4171 FAX: 503.684.7M(Attn- Patty or Mirky/Flaming) //11 01 1 I Or (11 P ; ; ___________ — Property owner information is valid for 3 months from the date of your request INDICATE ALL PROJECT MAP & TAX LOT.VMBERS (i.e. ISl34AB, Tax Lot 00100) OR THE ADDRESSES FOR ALL PROJECT PARCELS BELOW and INCLUDE A MAP OF ALL LOTS FOR THE PROJECT (preferably assessor's tax map): 222-0 SW KINour_AV_ _ _ Z..1. 02 SA ._0_1 IQ —.. ..__.._— — __....._._. .r_._. INDICATE WHETHER YOU ARE REQUESTING 2 OR 3 SETS OF LABELS: . . .-_..- (NOTE: A minimum of 2 sets of labels will be provided to place on your 2 sets of envelopes that applicants are required to submit at the time of application submittal If a neighborhood meeting is required and you have not yet held that meeting, you should request 3 sets) NAME OF CONTACT PERSON: t<► Ltd- 1 C.M &L.. .M _ PHONE: 5V.3-_15$6_7_ 64206._. This request may be mailed, faxed, or hand delivered to the City of Tigard. Please allow a 2-day minimum for processing requests. Upon completion of your request, the contact person will be called to pick up their request in "Will Call" by their last name, at the Community Development Reception Desk. The cost of processing your request must be paid at the time of pick up, as exact cost can not be pre-determined. PLEASE NOTE: FOR REASONS OF ACCURACY, ONLY ORIGINAL MAILING LABELS PROVIDED BY THE CITY YS. RE-TYPED MAILING LABELS WILL BE ACCEPTED. Cot Description: SI I to generate the mailing list, plus S2 per sheet for printing the list onto labels (20 addresses per sheet). Then, multiply the cost to print one set of labels by the number of sets requested. *EXAMPLE * I * * COST FOR THIS REQUEST * * 4._ sheets of labels x S2/sheet = S8.00 z .1. sets 2 $16.00 .___ sheet(s) of labels x$2/sheet S__-.1 .- x .-: seu = S. 2 sheets of labels x S2/sheet for t:IT area x 1 sets = S 4.00 .1. sheet(s) of labels x$2/sheet for CT area = SL x sets = GENERATE LIST = dap kta� GENERATE LIST = Sj TOTAL = $31.00 Lr1 TOTAL = $g " 4 ii■ SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW !,�- .• TYPE II APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION PRE-APP. HELD WITH: BRAD K.1L.b 4 DATE OF PPW-APP.: q•4 • G tE,a(X)( - Oo6(o3 Property Address/Location(s): I Z22-O 6/{A-11T( ST FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map & Tax Lot#(s): 251-0113A — 1 100 0 Case No.(s): Ja_.eoDOC 00)Cr Other Case No.(s): jL { Site Size: 0 • 70 AC-►r'C S Receipt No.: t " l [ CJ Application Accepted By:,` r_,, Applicant*: LEuJ(S VA Ni VLCE t j1JC_ Date: Address: i S(p(pO Sin/ p3oc 3ES Fep e y �D Zip: -7060 Z Date Determined Complete: City/State:TUALATlll) d Zi I/ Rev.8/21/2001 i:\curpinlmasterslrevised\sdra.doc Primary Contact: Kim m t A I LL A K1 Phone: 603 • X35 - a6,6 S Fax: 503. 3ej5- (214 REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: (Attach list if more than one) (Note: applications will not be accepted 1-OM es, L0�( I�l`( 5 without the required submittal elements) Address: 1 2220 612.ANT ST Phone: SO'b• co Z4.1483 4--A'Application Form City/State: 'r( (aAZ.D Ot. Zip: 87223 ["� ner's Signature/Written Authorization E. /Title Transfer Instrument or Deed * When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written ® opy of Pre Application Conf. Notes authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) IN Site/Plot Plan must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this (#of copies based on pre-app check list) form or submit a written authorization with this appiication. ( , e/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/2"x 11") PROPOSAL SUMMARY Applicant's Statement /(#of copies based on pre-app check list) The owners of record of the subject property request Site Lcj' CWS Sewer Use Information Card Development Review approval to allow(please be specific): /,(pistributed/completed at application submittal) LCD LA . E- THE Ex1STr13Ca E-bu,sc AS /' WS Service Provider Letter Q•FF(C E SPACE W(-CH A P.cPOS€D l_1 2 Sets of Pre-Addressed/Pre-Stamped #10 Envelopes & Copy of 500' Property L 00 5F ppiJSi OiJ Owner List Generated by the City ❑ Neighborhood Mtg.Affidavits&Notes Xing Fee:der$100.000) 800. 2 o°„ ($100,000 4999,999) $1,600.06 ($1 Million&Over) $1,780.00 (+$5/$10,000 over the first million) Urban: (See Washington County fee schedule) List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: SENS tTt JE LA MD5 PeczM t? (T\i PE, m WRTC-12 REsou4ces 00E,2t_ALI APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the"Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. ♦ If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this -' day of Cn- YVk -1 ,20 C) Owner's Signature tf` Owner's Signaturee Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 . i SENSITIVE LANDS _24.1174111 TYPE II or TYPE III APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION PRE-APP. HELD WITH: DATE OF PRE-APP.: Property Address/Location(s): 1 2:Z_2_0 C RAtS1 5T FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map &Tax Lot#(s): Z S L D 2.13A -0 1100 Case No.(s): T` Qsa Site Size: 0 • �70 acre s Other Case No.(s):t ' O ' Receipt No.: fir' ) Applicant*: L E(,U1 G g VAti) V C.EET t (m C_ Application Accepted By: Address: ( Qj(,o(,O SIAJ DOPES FeeAti Date: I 'yt �, City/State: TUA(._A-(I U Oil- Zip: G7 0402- V 1 Date Determined Complete: Primary Contact: I l-% M CH,I LLA N Rev.8/21/2001 \curpin\masters\revised\sla.doc Phone: So3 &5 8(o05 Fax: 603 2) a0 Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: (Attach list if more than one) REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Lt l (-4-A y S (Note: applications will not be accepted without the required submittal elements) Address: IZZZO S T Phone:S03 Co241•74$3 City/State: --ribAgn OA. Zip: of 7 ZZ3 ❑ Application Form ❑ Owner's Signature/Written Authorization *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant ❑ Title Transfer Instrument or Deed must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) ❑ Copy of Pre-Application Conf. Notes must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this n Site/Plot Plan form or submit a written authorization with this application. (#of copies based on pre-app check list) PROPOSAL SUMMARY ❑ Site/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/:"x 11") The owners of record of the subject property request a Sensitive ❑ Applicant's Statement Lands Permit to allow (please be specific): (#of copies based on pre-app check list) UTl Ll�E -me e 6uSTf&k �-oU.5 E As ❑ CWS Sewer Use Information Card (Distributed/completed at application submittal) OPP l C& SPACE w t l t4 (000 SF Io i N S(D?J . ❑ CWS Service Provider Letter STOaM W -1e12 _1i(LL PJE C O( I e C l GD ❑ 2 Sets of Pre-Addressed/Pre-Stamped Tle eir) D P\EL A5ED To j-(EtXT eS #10 Envelopes & Copy of 500' Property EEC. . -114C SO` CREEK F3U FFE r2 Owner List Generated by the City (,()1 f E k) icEi w ({-f PLA t‘frl1, s ❑ Neighborhood Mtg. Affidavits & Notes (The too 2 l(UN c c ( E-F. b1fFE& o •3 IA Filing Fee (Administrative) $ 745.00 (Hearing's Officer)($1,240.00) 1 List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: W�-r€—rz IS e sou tzce s 6U Lle_c_,4 y APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the"Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. ♦ If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this o-S day of IV6gc,A611�-: ,20 _ -en-u+4- A / ) 11C-0-1/0 Owner's Signature Owner's Sig ture Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 Receipt #: 27200200000000000110 _....r.t. Date: 01/10/2002/10/2002 1a T I D E M A R K COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No. Amount Due SDR2002-00001 [LANDUS] Site Development Rev 100-0000-438000 $160.00 SLR2002-00001 [LANDUSI APPLICATION FEE 100-0000-438000 $1,240.00 Payments: Method Payer Bank No Acct Check No Confirm No. Amount Paid Check LEWIS&VAN VLEET INC. 0 3464 0 $1,400.00 TOTAL AMOUNT PAID: $1,400.00 [g Sccrr ity erkee red deceseef. See beck for delelie. 19— - _ ---- _ - -- - - -- ---- LEWIS & VAN VLEET INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 3464 (503) 885-8605 18660 SW BOONES FERRY ROAD e: TUALATIN,OR 97062 24-20111230 DATE- hc%fQr °9-49O/ 57026 PAY TO THE LL a ORDER OF U - -- -- - - --- - $ 1 2/00Aif_D , 1044L 1-'WL- 0-04„_, DOLLARS E 7.�. s } 4 KeyBank National Association Lake'iCEY9o,Oregon 87036 I 1.800 s Sr afrYt.i.n"t - w �/F FOR /a/V,2.0 A4.4.4 7'r4 OFF-We ')7. .(--4,---i--e-a-&-i-z---). w ': t 11 Receipt #: 27200200000000000473 T I D E M A R K Date: 02/07/2002 COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INt Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No. SLR2002-00003 ILANDUS]APPLICATION FEE Amount Due 100-0000-438000 Payments: $149.00 I'i Method Payer Bank No Acct Check No Confirm No. Check LEWIS&VAN VLEET INC. Amount Paid 0 3544 0 $149.00 RECEIVEDTOTAL AMOUNT PAID: $149.00 FEB - 7 2002 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING � `--_, <.•.. "°' --.-••• .-s•• ... lo 5 e c u r i r e n h a n c e d d o r u men t. See back for details.®l +- ... lc I. LEWIS & VAN VLEET INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS icL&-�, 3544 (503) 885-8605 1" 18660 SW BOONES FERRY ROAD TUALATIN,OR 97062 , 24 20U129O �` DATE ' _ 57029 1 PAY ,)/� / $ Q € , TO THE °T l &IZ't* -- ---- -- i— ---- ---- $ /L//e C� fl It ORDER OF Art f_!_ -I� C� -- ! (d`O _ ---- -DOLLARS 8 �°. e, °I l I" KeyBank National Association Lake Oswe$o,Oregon 97036 it •1'800'1 A131.r 71 :1- FOR S L�I2 — L} a Q / 0, , n. eagie_.,,-.er,_, „, ? , gi 3. • LEWIS� consulting engineers �ELJ� OF LJQNB��L_Q_. I 16550 s.w. I7oones ferry road DATE /� JOB NO. tualatin. oregon 97052 ,sC 2 Z(p g (503)BB5.8505 phone (503)B85.1205 fax ATTENTION ` f� a VAN VLEET gel) �T' L 1 L�J y Incorporated RE: /i /� /�—f(c€TO C / T Y a T/6, -4 5�k ►ysuJ)�urTii-L /0LNN/ WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑Samples ❑Specifications ❑Copy of letter ❑Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO DESCRIPTION ( • � '(z x / I sr re P-4/0 . C. , R 401166. 0 ti s. Dtp,-I A)AGE / C- © lok) I}DNI /2-0L - - . L c L 1-1-IUDSc AI & & T7E_F ,ORES -c A l 6,3 i°LA 4141 W4T ak R E. 2 FEt- THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: , For approval ❑Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval r% For your use ❑Approved as noted ❑Submit copies for distribution ❑As requested ❑Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ O FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS RECEIVED FEB - 7 2002 CITY OF 1 IGARD PLANNING/ENGINEERING COPY TO SIGNED: k v i4 If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once. DEC. 17.2001 3:02PM t=RCr! ,R I RsT PimER I Clare r► i L-E 803 790 7872 2001.1" 1.7 NO.334 IMP.4/502/08 S� F.M ' R,C `• ,__ 14° First American Title Insurance Company of Oregon h Washington(OR) Prepared For: Prepared By: Customer Service Depart/teen 1700 SW Fourth Avenue - Portland,Oregon 97201-5512 Phone: (503) 222-3651 Fax; (503) 790-7872 OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Owner :Bays Thomas R&Lori 1 Ref Parcel Number : 2S10213A 01100 CoOwner 7: 025 .R: 01W S:02 Q:250 Site Address : 12220 SW Grant Ave Tigard 97223 Parcel Number :R0462467 Mall Address : 12220 SW Grant Aye Tigard Or 97223 Map Number . Telephone : Owner: Tenant: County :Washington(OR) SALES AND LOAN]IFORMATION Transferred : 10/30/1998 Loan Amount Document# : 122.220 Lender . Sale Price : S95,000 Loan Type . Deed Type : Warranty Interest Rare Owned : 100 Vesting 7,pe :Estate By Entire PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATION Map Page &Grid : 655 E4 MktLand : $42,270 Census ; Tract: 319.03 Block:4 Slkta'tructure : 556,150 Sub thy'sion/Plat MktOther Neighborhood Cd : Y217 .WkiTotat : $98,420 Land Use : 2382 Misc,Under Impravement,Ind Zone MSO Assd Total : $59,840 Legal : ACRES.64 :,s Improved : 57 00-01 Taxes : $899.10 Exempt Amount : Exempt Type : Levy Code :02374 Mlllage Rate ; 15.0253 PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS Bedrooms Lot Acres ; ,64 Year Built .• r'3atirrnnm.4 • Lot F91 :21,818 EtlYearBit , Deal Method Byrn Fin SqFt Floor Cover . Pool &m Unfin Sq•: : Foundation . Appliances Bsm Low SqFt hoof Shape . Dicirwashe7 Bldg SqFt RoofMatl . Hood Fan 1st Flr SqFr lnlerlorMat . Deck Upper Fir SqFt : Paving Mall Garage Type : Porch SqFr Const Type . Garage SF Attic SqFt Ert.Finish • Declt SgFt tin •■.∎•■• .EMI ■•■■■•■w■1111M This title Information has been furnished,without charge,in conformance with tho guidelines approved by tho State of Oregon Insurance Commissioner. The Insurance Division ceutions Intermediaries that this service is designed to benefit the ultimata Insureds. Indiscriminate use only benefiting intermediaries will not be permitted, Said services may be discontinued. No liability le assumed for any errors in this report. DEC.17.20211 3:02PM N0.334 P.5/5 FR�'1M :FIF?^ST AMERICRN TITLE 603 790 7Ea7M 2001 7 11:59 #009 p.OE/08 • • STATE OP OAE00N sZ DO RECOROINti AEAUEsTEO By COWRY eI Weafunptoh • (irr FIDELITY MAMMAL T1TLQ COMPANY OF OREGON I.Jerry 11.Hannon,Dkestor of Anemia• moist and T ation and Ereaflloio CeUnry GRANTOR'S NAME clank or vale courtly,as neMo4OsanlHy gnat theWkninin/frrmemcI}NFr pWs•tO��d WI1l19m WfiQht and recorded Itt book oI Weds at geld dounly, GRANTEE'S NAME — Thomas R.Hove and Lorl J. Kays Jerry A, F f►rro>,LDlrooror of }� co flN TAX STATEMENTS TO ,AeeeeJrld end melon,Ev Th0na8 R. Neva and Lori J. Hays ONldo Caw*Vora 12220 SW Grant Avenue Don t 98122320 -- Tigord.OR 97223 ReCtr 219748 131.00 10/30/1998 11147:01ato Anis 11ECORDINO RETURN TO: Themes R.Hays and Lori J.Plsyo /4541113GRACIIIIII4W1411,141 23410 SW Sr tacks ido Av•: Tigard,OR 87823 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Maim Wright.,grantor,convoy= no warrants to Thomas R.Hay,and Lod J.Hays, Si tenants by the entirety,Grantee.the Talawlna dea:ribed real property,frea and Moor of encumbranaaii mot as epoolfl;uiIY set forth balm,situated in the County of Wothino en,State of Oradell, ' a SEE EXHIBIT ONE ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF • 0 MSubllsrtZa and azcapling: — won End Moments for recreation, navigation and (Mary which may exist over that portion of aid land Wind x beneath the waters of unnaeldd creak running along the Southwesterly property anal Rohm of the public and 1 ggvernmantel agrees in end to any portion or said lend lying within the bounderlea of S.W.Grant Avenue;Easement for sewer recorded January,19, 197x,Book 961,Papa 21321 Palomant for Ovate sr Itory*ewer rarordu l 9epWmber E 16, 1996,Foe No. 95102841; —_ THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USe OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN This INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICA9LE 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 ' PLANNIPIG DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DE1'ERRMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST i FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORE 90.930. THE TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION FOR THIS CONVETANCS IS 995,000.00(See ORS 93.0301 . which Is peld to an aocon modatOT as Dart of an I.R.C, 1031 tax deferred exchange. ' DATED: Oetabar2e, 1995 / r . minim MOM ' — OFo-tr.I 1.MAI. ' : NOTARYpumiCUREOON t' { °.�i. Wa8wb4TON MINTY - %Kln®sroe no.AO~ yt muKta010N WHOM 50119,I99' ;41b4 .1., N„ rr IMAM UV $ 7n(04 • � 1EE Mix WE STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF. -rAu(momnh This Instrument was acknowledged before rra on . _9deter 2 L 1108 -•; ti WARY'RWILIC 0 q MY t0saIS2I oN! eRD; /,e p}5) • Vo D.41a rn.v aIDel STATUTORY WARRANTY QUUO . , r LEWIS & ,E _ u L_,N OF L-ni- dSk C7L_�_� L , consulting engineers 114 1866❑s.w. baones ferry road DATE JOB NO. tualatin. Oregon 97062 ( 2' 10 . 01 Q l 7_(c.e5 [5 03)885.8605 phone [503)885.1206 fax VAN VLF— i ATTENTION ; R AC- RE:Incarp Ora ted R&✓ ( K+K t ( iV C TO CITY OF T(6A 12ZZO GR ST . WE ARE SENDING YOU fa Attached CI separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑Samples ❑Specifications ❑Copy of letter ❑Change order El COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION I Pc T FF I DA V l or Po5TI ►J6 }JCSriC__e. ( A Ff( DA■/VT of hAA (L1/JCa — -4- C oP of LETTelZ-__ THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑Approved as submitted ❑Resubmit copies for approval !!" For your use ❑Approved as noted ❑Submit copies for distribution ❑As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE _ 19 ❑PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO /J SIGNED: r l l/ k.��I LLA If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE WITHIN SEVEN(7)CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Halt Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 I, FSRVA-1.1 tLU4ESSotl , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed OFF LCD affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) ( Z 2-2-0 2 I.Ai-NT 51 , and did on the 21 5-r day of NOVal(6E4-, -. ..44 Z l personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a 5 DR application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 1-14£ CA 1 IE ru)E, IJ E Z Da_ VC l AIDS (state location you posted notice on property) Sign re (In the pr nce of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the It day of , Ago OFFICIAL SEAL • KATHLEEN M CULLISON I / 141, NVP.11 NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.310598 OTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APR.19,2002 My Commission Expires: V /9, ateO.2 (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) (—NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: ED WY-, (J,)C TYPE OF PROPOSED DEV ^MENT: CONNEAT RE-SIPE.JJC.t. -� OFFtCE Name of Applicant/Owner: ()LEK _ I I Address or General Location of Subject Property: I Z.Z.ZO -1+fc ST I !Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): 2.Sl. 0 Z IEA_ CI (OZ) h:Uoginlpatty masterslaftpost.mst AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING • STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. City of Tigard ) I, �K t R tu_A •• • being duly sworn, depose and say that on NOVEI-1 2, Z:CP , 44°°! I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) 1 2220 S 0,4ettn ST 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 MALAY' 1 otz, with postage prepaid thereon. Sign ure (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the /4 -day of `t9 / OFFICIAL SEAL - I ' " KATHLEEN M CULLISON NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON / / , 117 6,e.V_,,,611. "• COMMISSION NO.310598 I MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APR.19,2002 4 TARY PUBLIC OF OREGON My Commission Expires: (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: _Rep INK l N G TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:_COW MT siDENCe Tt5 a I=Fice Name of Applicant/Owner: JOH IJ DL ..M I Address or General Location of Subject Property: 122.2 Q GAJr' Sr !Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): 5 i.0 2 A-o I h:Vog iMpattpmasterslaffmail.msf RED INK, INC NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING 12-12-01 SIGN-IN SHEET NAME ADDRESS '0 DM 169 S /)_z z o a, _ opERTy owN S w G,Q,�N r A- G CDr f C •r/ 156t5 jk/ r141- 1'1e/ I r y w`'g �- E CILe J/ ESTATE AGJI 13g-tt +J Mice ) I S(oGov Sw Soaves Ferry gb. TuAt ,u,Ult ENG WWJLF,g. Iiu-T+4A•An teo•‘A,, Ce &t r 74^ 4(I4 c Mtu_Au Me 503 604,Jes Fri eD ;Tit KcAT 1PJ C I iM c. EN6,14Gea, N o N at U tt-e)oKS A TEnl D Efl . THESE A-1e k0 MEE T(/J G M� Nu"S. SSM IZ• IL0I LEWIS '& RECEIVED PLANNING VAN VLEET NOV 2 9 2001 Incorporated CITY OF TIGARD principals chris E.van vleet.p.e. gary J. lewis. p.e. November 26, 2001 City of Tigard Attention: Diane Park 13125 SW Hall Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Red Ink, Inc. Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. is representing the developer of the property located at 12220 Grant Street. We are considering proposing that the existing house be utilized as office space with a possible 600 sf expansion to the east end of the structure. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Wednesday, December 12,2001 Wells Fargo Tigard Branch 11760 SW Hall Time: 3:30 p.m. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 503-885-8605 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kim McMillan, P.E. Enc. consulting engineers 18660 s.w. boones ferry road tualatin. oregon 97062 [503] 885.8505 phone [503] 885.1206 fax t. I. sw•9.i t s 7..7_--,....-i 1 - ," . . -o -...../,-....'P ,,, ,•_..•, -. .,.:. , N'•,5 --IF . A I ,I-" . 71 i - , 'psi ,, ..d,A t- .r 4 .. '' .GRAVEt...14 C.. ..,vi vpc, 0:. A .'• ..p , al. jef • .b,,) _ r_L / •-• .i■ .,.., ,sqs&i,L.; // pl... ......,;1' ..,,,u. ., 4. 0,.,1 I .._ 1 M a•\,.:P• \.. ',,,t-6 1 Nir) i I r•i•( 241‘1<(.11,--1-.11w 0•d-(1 69■. t __C_7C L-‘>s-' -.-•- ''' b 4 1•',(ar 1,1 6 1. ./- -_ cV -,r- , 1 I 0 0 0 0 i1 Vi_)l ■ . .• , 4. 111 .. u_ . ...,..--, , . .--•-A:.'--•••-). 1 .,:e.,,...yr' •• i I 8 _. _....- .. 6,: ...),.,' __- ge • , z•-•- . Af.-•_t pi I I .,, ' _jtcA•, !3-' ,,,7:-..,=., ap• , \ ..•. L. 3 L _■.\ 1 ' ■ \ •- .16 \ \ -.4'..•LP:c„ .....„-..------ 1 4144-1 -- -- -.....---..■ alM§ga• . r . 1 1 .„,.. . I° 1,12 1-....1 .• :' • ■ ..':: • • - ,,6:, < -*' 111116;.14.:a.1:0 0 I .2- I I 'P I/ 1• 1 1/7' I i.'•1 ,K. / • I li 1 - / . / i •- ./.‘,..c., '1.'• r.; 1 jk■ . ,.. irr , .. 2. ,-,,, . , ,_. (s, r-- t -- .7,77,, . • .w \.__- —-- ' '- 4C) -"b-- n,.\ b • ...rlik..., _,,ls,i ____ I ,.,) ' . II _ •_,-. L .:,.• 1.•,.,,, ..: 0' -.6. `,...._._.•,:'`' 1..-M.' ,;•••• __.--(b.,. - S• ..„...._....7.7_ — \ , 1.r,,,p, i ...,,', AA!. / . ,F2 44 -__•••• .4 0. . : ,,..:„:i:,- 4? - Le. i 1, ,,.,;,,.5...,..t,i ,,,,,,...\\ GRAVEL •-.1' 11' ' •■1 . •''''''' G1R/A/V t.1._ i I 1 i. -;-. 1 ‘ , ,,.. _, S'I''''. \ C. 1 I .., 1 ik Qi( _---- ---- ‘\\\‘‘ O. ,......■ '...'.. ..■''777 )1 . ... ..... _•:,". ' .■''... 7,7:' .....l'C'tk... ..:... .. .... ..11 0 x k < cs ."3:_...-•--- ________ J. ...._------------------....1 \ ' u., .,, / ,,? ...• I .,,,:i.. . \, I I _-..t."',.-- .:;■ ..0•, tr., 1 ,,'• . * V '''..4 1 ttY' .p. .• . • .1/4_,_,_ ,,----------__. ,.„ • . • 1 i l ..,,. 1, \,,X.; \,I,■ i .1 , .... , i 1 i ■. •;/- x SC •• . l i t I I I t • -.. • O7 ‘ '40 V.'•'•7 t • IL I. t ...,, NI L - , 1 ,• x .''.° 1 ...7 1 P.19 1 E / -56 8 ,.\ .\,, ,c, , .....:5...... i . t .• II/, - • . . ..,,,- \.\\\ •\ q- ■ 1:.., -— 7 '''''\ 4 ,F.-oc ,?..., ...., ...4, 1- .„ '.. , . 1, 1 1 .• - ss ..?!..:\ , , ' , CP I• .‘ likk, -- \ . , , ..-- .,..., IL_ ... ,- "..•..■ ..-' c..-3o-d.- -.., - . Lc) . ‘ , , „ ,.....:.. . , , ,..... .., — 3. -- ss i. .--_, i, ..-- \ ,.. %-:„„„.. 1 ..1• .., ( ' .. 2 - 0.• , -7-- ,/ --.."••••\.. `..../.4--- -----.-1./ --'''•---..4..;* __.__:__ 1 ;1". - - i / ... ..... tgl• '• ' -C-27-., -... .....• ri.-4.- .. •--."\ __.- -- -._ •• ....` 414,..44L• ' 04:7503437 SC?. FT , :. . ri y,.... / I -.- 1._ ..,.."---,;/- ( 4. ....,ijr- ..P. 771.: '-- 03-,- 1-,_ 7--.,..0)4 .e.------7--:-.., -. 06' __• -, oo 4 . '*.---'1• 1...--7-..----•-• ----"—' --:-.)_/.---•-•-- - /.,'T't-As. _......-I --.- ''''.... zo .... .... _--- .-. ,.. ,....-• --4-7 6 • ..-: 1 _ k. Smooth Feed Sheets"' Use template for 5161® 2S102AB-01900 2S102BA-00501 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ELLIOTT JAMES R&SHERRY D 9380 SW TIGARD ST 29979 SE HEIPLE RD TIGARD, OR 97223 EAGLE CREEK,OR 97022 2S102A8-01902 � 2S102AB-01800 ALL D LIMITED 1RTNERSHIP GREEN VALLEY DEVELOPMENT LLC 9380 SW D ST BY GARY HELMER TIG , OR 97223 10585 SW WALNUT ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102BA-00901 2S1028A-01000 ALLRED LIMITED PARTNERSHIP& G' N VALLEY DEV ADPMENT LLC ENGEL GEORGE L BY GAR M • c/o REA KEN 10585 S 'LNG T PO BOX 230365 "IQ 'D,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S1028A-01503 2S102BA-01100 BERNARD BRADLEY S&JENNIFER L HAYS THOMAS R&LORI J PO BOX 23608 12220 SW GRANT AVE TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102BA-01500 2S 102AB-00302 BERNARD HOLDINGS LLC HOLUB ANTHONY&WENDY& PO BOX 23608 KRALIK MICHELLE&ROMAN TIGARD,OR 97281 17248 SW BARCELONA WAY ALOHA,OR 97007 2S102BA-00500 2S102BA-02103 CASTILE JAMES&AUDREY LOUGHRAN THOMAS R& 8100 SW DURHAM RD WEIDLING BRENT ERIK TIGARD,OR 97224 9965 SW JOHNSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102BA-01502 2S 1028A-00390 CEGELKA KRISTIN& MCCALL PROPERTIES INC GUELSDORF KURT F 808 SW 15TH AVE 12330 SW GRANT AVE PORTLAND,OR 97205 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102AB-00207 2S 102BA-01200 CONNOR RALPH A MORLAN PROPERTIES 9535 SW COMMERCIAL 5529 SE FOSTER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97206 2S1028A-04500 / 2S102BA-00900 DU: -ARK 0 idEf,S OF LOTS 5-8 MORRIS SHIRLEY A&RAYMOND L 828 MAHAFFEY RD KELSO,WA 98626 2S 1028A-01190 2S 102BA-00600 ELKINS ALVIN S& MULL GREGORY S AND ELKINS ERNEST TRUSTEES MULL GEORGE E 32224 SW BOONES BEND RD 19350 SW POMONA DR WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 BEAVERTON,OR 97007 2S 102DA-0 i 601 2S 102BA-00800 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC SEE-ZER PROPERTIES COMPANY 14960 SW TUALATIN-SHERWOOD RD STE 1 121 SW SALMON ST SHERWOOD,OR 97140 PORTLAND,OR 97204 2S 102BA-01600 2S 102BA-03000 13.9 TLAND GENE:. ELECTRIC SINGH MAIHEN AND ARUNA COWAN 9777 SW JOHNSON 121 AL 6• T TIGARD,OR 97223 '.�RTLAND,OR 97204 2S 1028A-02000 2S 102BA-02500 REED WILLIAM C& STROUM EVAN P&ANDREA L LUNDBERG LYDIA 12380 SW GRANT AVE PO BOX 12564 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97212 2S 102AB-01801 2S 102BA-01201 RISBERG K JOAN TRUSTEE TIGA•5 CITY L 4210 IMPERIAL DR 13125 S ;ALL WEST LINN,OR 97068 TIGA:e,OR ° 3 2S 102BA-00400 2S 102AB-01802 ROBERTSON BERWYN A&INGEBURG H TIGA'w ITY OF 17691 SW FREDERICK LN 13125 SW • SHERWOOD,OR 97140 TIGARD •R 972 25102BA-04200 251c BA-01701 SANDERS GARY R& TIGARD OF RASMUSSEN DARWIN C& 13125 HAL RASMUSSEN E BRENT TIG'•D,OR 97223 21730 SW ELWERT RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 102BA-03600 2S102BA-01400 SAN, RS GARY R& WOODARD PARK APARTMENTS LLC RASMUS D.:AMfC& 2083 NW JOHNSON ST #1 RASMUSS E :'ENT ATTN: ROBERT D BALL 21/78 SW, ELWERT •: PORTLAND OR 97209 .,,SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 102BA-03500 2S 102BA-00304 S NDERS GARY R& TIGARD INDUSTRIAL LLC RAS N DM C& 11336 SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD#103 RASMUS a'ENT TIGARD,OR 97224 21738 W ELWERT •P -KAERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 102BA-03300 2S 102A8-00209 SA DERS GARY R TROUTMAN DENNIS E&CYNTHIA J RASMU • eA WIN C& 9475 SW COMMERCIAL ST RASMMU N E : TIGARD, OR 97223 217330 SW ELWERT RD HERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 102AB-00208 25102BA-03400 SCHUCK EUGENE R&MELISSA K VO TAN T& 9505 SW COMMERCIAL NGUYEN MINHTAM THI TIGARD,OR 97223 12089 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 6 AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5961TM tooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5161® Debra Seeman 13372 SW Clearview Way Tigard, OR 97223 Mary Skelton 10355 SW Walnut Street Tigard, OR 97223 Kathleen Anderson 12132 SW Lansdowne Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brooks Gaston 10272 SW Meadow Street Tigard, OR 97223 Don & Dorothy Erdt 13760 SW 121st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Suzanne Riles 13215 SW Genesis Loop Tigard, OR 97223 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Mary Lindquist 11565 SW Walnut Street Tigard, OR 97223 Christine Garsteck 11774 SW 125th Court Tigard, OR 97223 Jack Biethan 11023 SW Summerfield Drive#4 Tigard, OR 97224 CIT „Driajia,- CENJMJ CIT SUBCOMMITTEE (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT Central.doc) UPDATED: August 16, 2001 F-ROM : HARTEP HOME Fag FAX NO. : 5037230675 Oct. 11 21.301 03:43PM P3 OCT.11.2001. 11!4911 NO.-.79 P.a..'7 Fill Number C1eanWater Services 1177.697 Our comet Uncnt is deal. Clean Water Services Service Provider Latter Jurisdiction Tigard Date Juiy 30,2001 Map&Tax Lot 2$10213A0110C Owner Lnri Hays Site Address 12220 SW Grant Street Content Stn jn-- 2"30 • .a.—.7.OR Address ___4__3._4__�Ni1 Vf�_Ave1 'uicg_304 Proposed Activity Future Devalepment mod, OR 972Qo-35700 Phone 503.224.0333 This form or d the attached oorditiiona will serve du your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (R&O 007). • r YES i NO I YES NO N tunas Resources —___""". "'� ; Alternatives Analysis, i i Assessment(NRA) a ❑ ! aeouired 1 D I ! M Submitted I sen 3 ctio .02.51 District Site visit � C i Tier I Alternatives Analysis !�� Date; i 1 L.J ❑ I Concur with N RAJor ® i❑ Isubmitted information ; Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis ❑ i ❑ —L give Area Present E i ri . ' Concur with Aifemat vex n Q i Analysis 0 ---- _ I Setlsitive Area Present i vegetated Corridor III Off-bits t ❑ Mltipatbn Required i ❑ Vepsrsted Corker 1 ^i f Present On-Sits l .. I On-Sila Mitigation ❑ Q I '` i Width of Vegetated d SO Feel-' . t,;�blr-tgite Mitigation }}-�'�'''�� Corridor Creel Creel L� ❑ Condition of vegetated i 7 g'l�rlal/ I Corridor Degred I = LE -- Y`-- iertt$V+iar, dtyahad I C Enhancement Raqulreb E ❑ i ? Encroachment Into I ' MAT,or EquNatent i l vageteteC Corridor I ❑ ® ; ❑ E i (setzinn 3.0x.4(3)? ! Required Type and square Footage , N/A i concur wiffl RBAT,or of Encroachment 1 Equivalent I AIiaN��••wed USG ' �...,,�--Tit-T(Saoticn 3.02.4(b)) _._.......L_ ❑ _,l 0 1 Conditions Attached Page 1 of 4 FROM : HAFTEP HOME FAX FAX NO. : 5O37230675 Oct.. 11 2001 03:44PM P4 1..!L4E4' fill. ?? F.3 File 1 Number ET/7-54e. . This Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property, in order to comply with Clean Water Services (the District)water quality protection requirements the project must comply with the fallowing conditions 1 No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, applIcatior of chemicals, uncontained are of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of'Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the sensitive area which may negatively impact water quality,except those allowed by Section 3.02.3 (1), (2), or(3). 2. No structures, development, conatruotior activities. gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uricontened areas of hazarcot.s materials es defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any Kirtd, or other activities shall be permitted within the vegetated corridor which may negatively impact water qual ty, except those allowed by Section 3.02.4 (a through h), 3. The vegetated corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum o'50 feet wide,as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary or the sensitive area. M. *,fa 4, Prior to any sate clearing, grading or construction the vegetated corridor end water quality sensitive areas shall be surveyed, staked, and temporarily fenced per approved plan. During Construction the vegetated corridor shall remain fenced and undisturbed except as allowed by Section 3.0,4.a and per approved piens. 5. The applicant shall provide the District with concLrrence of wetland boundaries from D3L and/or USAGE pricr to conducting any Land disturbance. 8. Prior to any activity within the °,ensltive area, the applicant sheil gain authorization for tile project from the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and t,iS Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The applicant shot' provido the District with copies of ail D5L and USAGE project authorization permits. No activity is proposed within the sensitive area at this time. 7. An approved Oregon Department of Forestry Notification is required for one or more trees harvested for sale. trade, or barter, on any non federal lands within • the State of Oregon. Page 2 of 4 EROr1 : HAF,'TER HOME FAX FAX NO. : 5037230675 Oct. 11 2001 03:41PN P. • _ r, 11 .2001 11:50AN r•,0.27; P.4 Fib¢Number B. per vegetated corridors SO feet wide or greater, the frr3t 50 feet closest to the $ensitive area shall be equal to or better than a "good" corridor Condition as defined in Section 3.32.6, Table 3.2. J, Enhancement/restoration of the vegetated corridor shall be conducted either concurrent With or prior to development of tha site Enhancement/restoration activities shall comply with the guidelines provided in Appendix E: landscape Requirements (R&O 007: Appendix E), 10. Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the vegetated corridor snail be removed. During removal of invasive vegetation car-shall be taken to minimize impacts to existing native trees and shrub species. 11. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction, the applicant shall provide the District With the required vegetated corridor enhancementlrestoratlon plan, 12. Protection of the vegetated corridors and associated sensits`ve areas shell be provided by the installation of fencing between the oeveiopmont and the Outer limits of the vegetated corridors 13. Ma1ntenenee and monitoring requirements snail oempty with Section 2.11.2 of R&O 007. 14. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMA's) for Ercaion Control, in accordance with USA's Erosion Control "technical Guidance Manual shall be uoed prior to, duriri, and following earth disterbing activities. 15. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from the District or its designee le required pursuant Ordinance 27, Section 4.8. 16, For any developments, which create multiple parcels or lots intended for ceparete owncrchip, the Distriv shell require that the vegetated corridcr and the senaitivo area be contained in a separate tract. 17. The applicant shall notify the District within 72 hours following completion of the vegetated corridor enhancementiresteration activities, 13 Activities located within the 100-year foodpisin shall comply, with Section 3,13 of R&D 00-7, 1G. Removal of native, woody vegetation sha!! be limited to the extent practicable, 20. Final canetructian plans snail clearly depict the location and dimensions of the wetland end the vegetated corridor (indicating good, marginal, or degraded condition), Sensitive area boundaries shell he marked in the Page 3of4 FROM : HIPTER HOME Eki, Ft�?; HO. 5037230675 Oct.. 11 2001 03:43Fih F 11."_kW1 11:564 File Numoer 2/o9e ] 21. Removal of Invasive non-native species by hand is required in all vegetated corridors rated "good", Replanting is required In any cleared are urger than 25 square Boat. 22. Final construction plants shall include landscape plans. Plans shall include in the details a description of the methods for removal and control cf exotic species, location, distribution, condition) and size of plantings, existing plants and treat to be grseerved, and installation methods for plant ,materials: A Maintenance Plan shall be inalvded on final plans including methOda,dates (at least twice yearly) and responsible party contact information. 23. Should final development plane differ significantly from those submitted tor review by the District, the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and If necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider Letter. Please call ($03) 846-3813 with any questions. s°494, Holed K. Meng Site Assessment Coordinator Page 4 at 4 ? opos ci /Mtr rcr 'e . LEWIS & tit VAN VLEET I n c or p o r a t e d principals chris c. van vleet, p.e. Barg J. lewis. p.e. JANUARY 8, 2002 SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR 12220 GRANT STREET PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Utilize the existing 1,600 sf house as office space. A 600 sf addition to the structure is also proposed. Access, parking and public improvement requirements will be met. Storm water runoff will be collected, treated and released to Fanno Creek. Storm water detention is not required at this location. PROPOSED USE The building will be used as office space for any use allowed by the City of Tigard I-P zoning. No neighbors or members of the Tigard Community Involvement Teams, which were contacted for the public Neighborhood Meeting held on November 12, 2001, attended the meeting. This application is being submitted for a Type IIIA Site Development, Sensitive Lands and Water Resources Overlay District Review. The Site Development Review Application is being made in accordance with Section 18.360 of the "Development Code for the City of Tigard." CODE COMPLIANCE 18.360 Site Development Review An application and the appropriate drawings are being submitted in compliance with the requirements of 18.360.070. 18.360.080A Exceptions to Setback Requirements The existing structure does not conform to the setback requirements. A new trash enclosure will be setback 35' from the right-of-way, in compliance with the requirements. consulting engineers 18650 s.w. boones ferry road tualatin. oregon 97062 (503) 885.0605 phone [503) 885.120 6 fax -Page 2- SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR 12220 GRANT STREET 18.360.90 Approval Criteria 1. The proposed project has addressed the requirements of Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Standards. 2. The existing residence will be converted to office space and a 600 sf addition to the east end of the structure is proposed. The proposed location of the addition and parking best meets the intent of this section as it relates to the natural and physical environment. Both parking and the building addition take advantage of the topography to prevent tree removal, preserve natural drainage as much as possible and provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings. 3. Exterior elevations: Not applicable. 4. This site is surrounded by industrially zoned properties. A 50' wide buffer is required along Fanno Creek and will be enhanced with approved plantings. 5. Not applicable. 6. Not applicable. 7. Not applicable 8. The City has not indicated that the developer will be required to make any dedications of land for open spaces or pedestrian/bicycle pathways. No dedications are included in this proposal. 9. The public spaces are defined by proposed landscaping, curbs, sidewalks and driveways. 10. The mailbox is located along the frontage near vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Wall mounted exterior lighting will provide the appropriate lighting level for parking. 11. There are no transit facilities proposed on this site. Access to existing transit stops on Grant and Johnson(725 feet away) will be via the public sidewalks. 12. The proposed landscaping exceeds the requirements for the Industrial Park District. 13. The storm water drainage plans comply with City of Tigard and Clean Water Services requirements. -Page 3- SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR 12220 GRANT STREET 14. The proposed project provides access for the disabled in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 15. The project design meets the provisions and regulations of the City of Tigard Development Code. 18.390 Type III Procedure Impact Study: The proposed project is to convert an existing residence into an office. An office use will conform to the zoning. A 600 sf addition to the building is proposed along with improvements to the frontage(sidewalk, driveways and street trees) and 8 on-site parking spaces. The type of business proposed is to be broker agricultural and chemical products. There is no product shipped to or from the site. No customers stop in and orders are placed by phone. The only deliveries will be office supplies. This use therefore, has a low impact on the transportation system, including bikeways. The drainage system from this site will discharge to Fanno Creek after water quality treatment. The amount of runoff is so small compared to the drainage basin that it will have virtually no impact. The demand on the water and sewer systems will be minimally impacted. With the low number of trips expected to be generated by this use the noise and emissions impact will be minimal. 18.530 Industrial Zoning Districts This project is located in the I-P, Industrial Park District. The proposed development meets the goals of this district as noted in Section 18.530.020A. The existing structure does not conform with the setback requirements. The proposed addition and trash enclosure will meet the 35' setback requirement. The proposed development also complies with the Development Standards of Table 18.530.2. 18.705 Access, Egress and Circulation The two existing driveways will be used, and modified if needed, to meet the requirements of 18.705.030I and as shown in Table 18.705.3. -Page 4 SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR 12220 GRANT STREET 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards The proposed development will comply with the performance standards set forth in this section. The proposed use should have no problem complying with standards for noise, visible emissions, vibration, odors, glare and heat, insects and rodents. The proposed use has a very low traffic impact. The customer base phones in orders. No product is shipped or picked up from this site. 18.745 Landscaping and Screening The proposed landscaping and natural areas for this site will exceed the 25% area required in the I-P District. Street trees will be planted to meet these standards. The site plan shows the landscaping improvements. There is a 50' buffer required along Fanno Creek. A portion of this 50' is on this property and the appropriate planting plan is attached for City and CWS review and approval. The solid waste and recycling enclosure will be screened by a 6' high chain link fence with vinyl slats. 18.760 Nonconforming Situations The existing building has a nonconforming front setback. The building is currently a residence that will be converted to office use. 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements The required off-street parking has been shown at 3.4 spaces/1000 sf, as required for the I-P District. The existing building is 1,600 sf and there is a 600 sf addition proposed. Therefore, eight(8) parking spaces and one bicycle parking space will be provided. 18.775 Sensitive Lands A portion of this site is within the 100 year flood plain and contains sensitive lands in close proximity to Fanno Creek. Clean Water Services, in their Service Provider Letter of July 30, 2001, has indicated that a 50' vegetated corridor shall be maintained and an enhancement plan submitted for review and approval. A single storm water outfall will be installed across the sensitive area from the site to Fanno Creek. The storm water outfall work is an outright permitted use with no permit required. The installation of an outfall pipe involves less than 10 yards of alteration for trenching, backfill and rock riprap. The native material from the excavation will be used for backfill and native grasses seeded over this area. The rock riprap will be one yard of Class 50 rock to be used for energy dissipation in order to minimize the potential for erosion. -Page 5- SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR 12220 GRANT STREET The 600 sf addition to the structure will be built within the zero-rise fringe area and flood proofed, as required. The fill required to construct this addition will be balanced by the cut required to expand the parking area. The parking/drive area in the flood way will be constructed to elevations that do not exceed existing elevations so that existing conveyance and storage are not reduced. 18.780 Signs The developer does not intend to install an exterior sign. 18.790 Tree Removal The arborist report is included with this submittal. Three trees are noted as hazardous, one of which is not on this property. Tree numbered 93001 will be removed, as recommended. Also recommended for removal is the Filbert tree, 93015. There is no need for tree mitigation based on the arborists' report. 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas The proposed project includes two 24' wide driveways along SW Grant Street. The Visual Clearance Area requirements will be met with these driveways and the proposed frontage improvements. 18.797 Water Resources (WR) Overlay District The proposed development is within close proximity to Fanno Creek,which is considered a major stream. A portion of the site is within the 100 year flood plain and there are sensitive areas identified on the site. The WR Standard Riparian Setback for major streams is 50 feet(according to Table 18.797.1). Clean Water Services has also applied a 50' buffer along this area of Fanno Creek. The only work within this 50' setback will be installation of a storm water outfall pipe from the on-site water quality facility to the creek and enhancement to the Sensitive Areas buffer. This work will comply with the WR Overlay requirements. 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards The proposed development will require two new driveway aprons, sidewalk and street trees. LEWIS & RECEIVED PLANNING JAN 2 5 2002 VAN VLEET CITY OF TIGARD Incorporated principals Chris c. van vleet. p.e. garg J. lewis. p.e. January 24, 2002 Brad Kilby City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Red Ink, Inc. Sensitive Lands Review SLR 2002-00001 Dear Brad: As requested I am submitting additional information to address Section 18.775.070 B 1-7 of Title 18. 1. The proposed land form alterations (paved parking and a 600 sf building addition) will preserve the flood plain storage function. The work will not result in any increase in flood levels (see previously submitted letter). 2. This property is designated I-P, Industrial Park. 3. Calculations will be provided with plan submittal to show a balanced cut and fill, resulting in no increase to the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. 4. Pedestrian/Bicycle pathway not required. 5. Pedestrian/Bicycle pathway not required. 6. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Division of State Lands will be contacted for review and approval of the proposed work. consulting engineers 18660 S.W. boones ferry road tualatin. oregon 97062 (503) 885.8605 phone (5M) 885.120 6 fax r -Page 2- RE: Red Ink, Inc. Sensitive Lands Review SLR 2002-00001 7. The City has not requested dedication for or construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway. Sincerely, VY1k Kim McMillan, P.E. Copy to: John Hadley KSM:kmc LEWIS & VAN VLEET Incorporated principals chris c. van vleet. p.e. gary j. lewis. p.e. January 18, 2002 Brad Kilby, Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Project: Red Ink, Inc. 12220 Grant Street Dear Brad: The proposed project includes a 600 sf addition to the existing structure and a paved parking area. Because this work is located in the fringe area of the floodplain the fill can be balanced with an equal amount of cut volume. Therefore, there will be no increase in flood levels due to this project. Sincerely, yr Kim McMillan, P.E. 0110 PfiOrE3s t 92 Cc: John Hadley (` or. /Q 44. vt4c) t 'fES (2. 51-02 consulting engineers 18650 s.w. boones ferry road tualatin. oregon 97062 [503] 885.8605 phone [503] 8E15.1206 fax • j . ?R i RO\I\°5 / 1•„ ,..::fi e.--;.-N \43i o\\ ' 017%, • -c 5b 02 1 Ilir 1.•--1.-1.1--—- © \,. �y LEWIS 6 iiiiNlibli, . .- jai Ma OTT•V=VC STMOMICIB /',. , s � � VAN VL T • WAS `� V...�� •' •/ 'ti” • ...:116 „,_, 4° 41"" \. /r _r+mo.��r.� O SAS .�"° H e a M1' s > h.".-" DRAWING If"C11D( I--I /\s ; ' \h G SITE PLAN . 1 �)/ \ C7 SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN 1.i `▪`" 3 i' {{� QUA ,4` c3 EROSION CONTROL PLAN el • C 1v i , �1 I SITE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 1 \ �'�,,\L • �a • LI LANDSCAPE/TREE PLAN • L � 1 / �O I ELEVATION W �'' -` ,"- \ ,➢^^— / 2 FLOOR PLAN U ILL APP1101111.1E ang 1101, .1.:. MIDI MEL II/la/01 o Iwm L fr!.'? I 1...LT PAY4.„. .] LI- • 4'/ / \AM sum rum I i 0)1 7 „.\\,,,. . • m�Pnw_cs"A`m Wi�.o°L`�nu�a N / C\441 lirt Al VW 36.66 • • o i in REC1VED �. . VDAV NO /WV 111 I IlaXaMP•ao ma roe FEB - 7 2002 _ MI1 1311, .W_or aox NV AVIV, a/•V vA ID w 011.144CMONT MS. CITY OF TIGARD '°°' C PLANNING/ENGINEERING / R-..,. Y PR m�". '"1 �•:.� Q \H'O\"�\ON / �. m !, /PROJECT -_1 • r`\ �' SITE --f//// �� I Q �... LEWIS 6 S lb. VAN MEET • 4,4 '. r- s / • �� .i o 1 �I \* / VICINITY MAP /\ KT. ; "T.Caibs " A)0•,m G- / - - +� ..� A 1 s •'. � PRAM G A i~j `/7�/\ _Yl \. \ �+ GI SITE PLAN Q / . �� ; C7 SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN Ci .' C3 EROSION CONTROL PLAN MASS ,,,r. \\`_ : 4• 1 I SITE TOPOCr TREE P ARVEI't .Ass U LANDSCAPE/TREE PLAN p•L �'t �O I ELEVATION L ,;, \ ` 2 FLOOR PLAN u. N� (.) L f N'PRO.•R CENTEAUNE }t. \ r OF gEUt O l SITF r ZIP Y/ ra WARP LEAL O. `V rM. Q rPFVpb I �J ��no/a� O.:a •4 1 1• 41 \ \..s. ss PI-AN „� , .�..,.•�. .� , .�ter. Z 1 /7,,,../ KM. ...�.,_ Z �p \ SITE suMMA�zr H_A 0_ • • W AOC SP Ai, 4. ram prAANT 7 TOT.ROOF MLA "fin i CM.AC! TM S P •91 m _- TILY1t3ema AND �i�em•n CC. 11.17.31 MAW, MUHL TO.fIAM LmR/CU W IP DmmO YVr.r PAW. C C [trunrr=MICRON Kt n • M.N.}PAH. ♦rY P •p•P as oxi=..• .•«NV.r.•.) mi Cl ■ ) .. , / / / f29.... . ..... / \RO---- / 04412,1/./ EN simmis • ...•b \ 5a / �� 0 ; um mi■ / ....■ /..;i(lAk, ..itr ...■ Zkt Cri1 I ' 4#41 ..' he ..• -` LEW'S• //OP 4.- is'-,••• -. ---....., Lili;; %. t. I A, .:LEFT !kTTTE/<. " L.• • / . ' u 4/0'1-.4' °74re '71.-- a 076171tOr P.M 24 603=COSI•PT PM GOT 0111.- • " 4ntl M0�r'w•s. 203 mom. RICTM m rIX /.:�. \¢ -.. 1 w1oA ..i�l.R OT.11U.,m+LoD.�.l / �p� CONSMU rtor,NOTES Z • /0 .. 1 "'�'�' :/ /4,-1 r.w.s:rw.ra..wr...i.�r r.w.w n.a�.o.n.1 �r,. rir�.aanun O n.5s H • ..r.,.n.rALL 00,...ar,a.,m./NO NOW H W ',`.. y O � . d Z 4 ` ' •0+.` / owe'-. LC)1. 5 U OL �/ 4Nj' 3 f .rrwo .F _: . Or CRCEx r / // L. Z +i/ioM, iw.oa C•0� 1 \`•'� ~'`- i i[�.� SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE Q �� H H "P"0 • '��' 2s 0 C T ` � ® re C MN. 0.JVCSOM 4l •11404 KAM KO CC TOP OF un MAMMA e sea al CD Cad•colmt MO PAO sarr.rwrraa ' Q 3 H l WH ui m C2 T ▪ EEç/ / /•/ c . 4 1 SME MO LOCA.OF / .. GG ♦ o. 0.09 13 TAROT 33C PM.A. Twee u,l[.o/n/Of NC APIRJOANT/0.1RAC. / RD O. ns Rw.ow,,,CV u.�.w wr[pa,.p nR.,,. �- GPn<Rn..a o 9.a[a �� N mf6WCa Qm....R...aR [ \ ' il..itN 6[ale.[W A p.LL R.G.l,m. -- •Q ■ ;pE tea.R▪ .....,a..rt MI . f Nk cis'''1\--\' / RCOMOMNIS MT MTICPAMO 31M O.000.1 WANG OM • / , A,,, it.,..*Vo. , NM ,_ .4v, • NO SCORACNI-1...PATER DO NOT LEMC MC RTC Me lee MDR ei 40: 0...111:71 .14:4)144"''''''''":7'...... ..... ...SA.....,./.. ,......,......'...........,. . C. The CSC rACAOArl...11C R...OmT SY MC FOLLOWS.A SM.E.111 \" e Lit.+/..itsAff4 ; ' - �l.• MO to•IiRS�.aar■liw VAN VLEET / =_�/ �. '� [l. ��MC.wrtacw m[w�i[.n. ONO.Wuunrw�a,,..y o • R▪C PROJECE S �� ,yI!' +- .b S rm[ c STOW O.I ilm HS co lDRY...m C.i0.. [o Wp fM. MR PAKNO.i . 'I �' r-r- f � �, TOP VIEW . ..u.nom.113.01 .a,..• M. IF MERE i3 EXPOS.3.1.1 011 MI.1 POLLY[.[; a i �a. ,,,� mA a M..�,.a;;`° , , e tea.[., • • STANDARD NOTES FOR SEDIYFNT FENCES O A / 'N I..OWpf.CiR r•A i�Vt M[Rl•�•••lOr 0.0. .u'R®R r �,i RO.H[N e■v �p At 1�n6.PO. 1[O.[.L�O1 r p ,[ ..--- .o.ir.a. ti • '�i�� FRONT vID.i b H TA FO.R0313,p3 RMO.O Qe A.MIL ..on•O Off MT wriO[r a Mr.NM.,wN MC "�/[�/ •r ♦ ,� -'may ue. \�• WASS - . MM..1..Orts. "° . Q{ Y i \ a :�... [.WALL»..,....e,.A.fin , `l w, R[O.m a G O n`�'G lMwc M¢9 M r..,['AIM MCI \ �,.', "'.. Q� pR p U1 Z 51 111 4/ }ti.>j 1°a. da IaRI-.a 6raa r1��Q'�i'ir♦♦�.\ . • �1 /� IL/ �.�:t,Y'`+ „ ° • �m MO....`.owr ICASO l�'c°ai.ii'.i. eon lL�`�o,,.;,�/ \ SIDE VIB! m. a ann..[ �as .u •.<m e.we.1n era.voaoe..l[m.,riv,[ :`T'... rr • o.®�e...a� ..:Ra+®.n..,p,r.R..a or O%.../ OAT.11/10 1• a - .....4,."r ® sFDxr�xr FQiC�Y. .-ter a■ / \ U Z�O 3 \ '.I W �osxaN corrr,xo�P�.nN Z O •/ y� - w� i u z _.. a.a. ...[�. H= hi DIM LAMM "OA 0, ME MOMMO o • c ul WM KM MOM r'�� oasmu,rvr v.•.rm. w� N N W Il... frsl y v.L.1 pet OO'.1t'tl �.c-i M.Aim,BA..w ALSO.�r.61 OM Mm iW Ye..Y.t m.p.0me ® e.o-olr . P.M e. OR 1.OF OMB MCC p,RO.o COMM 107 R MM .0E0 . O 001•.fit C3 / / 7/ TOPOGRAPHIC SITE SURVEY , 7 12220 SW GRANT AVE. •t• '..... / . elfr•.!.=‘,. / \ .... / LOCATED IN LOT 58 OF NORTH TIGARDWZIR ADDITION ,," : "-1/5" I; , c.,,,.1\t....6- /. LOCATED IN THE NI 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 2. 725. R I ei,•77 . - .-/ ..,,' • FIC 1.1"re urn.e, ,r''' 1\7":,'‘") CDT OF TIGAIM WASHOCYVN COUNTZ OREGON ..... / -Nz' .72:94:4."".-rt ,,_.„ ‘ . / .Z.,.:->. ` - -- .c)\'-\., , ,*. ..... .' C.A'• ., .,:-_\ 1. ,..2 , . ......../ ' •,,O' .--`° .:,. ../7/ ., „. ....... .....,,-,. -- :/-/ . .4.....u ....:„.2,-,-., / /f :no ,.., T ,,., ;.._/.../...1.4 -.0 - . -. -- -7, f_s. .4../IN . .... . • '. i •,-ZS).1/.".•:#? 41. 1"%f<<, ,I`., „.-:,,,,ii.........,.. ..,0.. ii:re i•••...: ; 1,"--' ' "e _is„`..<;-,..- ,47 :::*•:',a , ' /4•11,k)g:i i•'.'• ".•'"Tp-I''' -3)..te_., ...,,• "..... -,,,,,,,„„,..„. - /.../ . ....: ... ,,,:.,.. ./,,:.- 4'...,:-.:4;;-',-i' : .,,,-----, -;'' • ,,../ .--. ,.,' ,, isp- 1.,,',:''''',/ -,2:';',...S.-' cAte'.2„,":„. • -7)‹.,.,; Z1:7!::• GPAss. / ....• , • •.•-..-... .........-- • ..2. -...a. LEEEND- - - ,C....0 231.2.01.2 C15.5 .01.5. :-a270/r CP-MM.•04.5 loat ABBREVIATIONS „, ,..._•,.„,, 51.02 I.L02. CC cu.cuT C. 0.1012.0.2 UK CC. C01152. co. .0020 5 C.Ir.1.112 U net 100., .5 12.....21.10a / ' •2.1 1 .`YO \,.... aro:a 5 r.a.cum 1 / ' OiZr" .."1.,"' '- . • -._ -.A.-1-1A- . <Arch w.v. IL.L02 . FACE Cr OM.0.C.f. or ...oz.. //27-‘' N 4, //' '' • ' A:‘--...: ,..„.,_.,Ar-,-.......gru_,;--.'',,.., •• \:;`,4,.,......d i ? OM 0,0004,0 „ mu"901 4 902.arre. . , -. . “-1..... ..1F. 'W. "11. V.>4..:, ■••• ...... t; al.,022 0.0. y, . , , . 1.0 sox / 7. ,‘- riAt-,zid. _ :r ,-.. „ ---i- • il'..7.7.1.7.11=-Z` •- . 0.12200.0.2. • - . , "•..'. '2,4'2.° F/ , ,. .A.' 4, I •,c,471.o.s an...a On.n1tC 011.00.1. -2 00071022 ma T.11 OK.75 . 50...0 00.7 . .0.01 F01 . .. ......,:....,... ,-.A., .. ,/, I . . . \ .' .. . .. ., • • • E ' 2.11 0,Man 011 Or..2. 7,1 200 r.... 9.1¢770 2 rt1 1.41A C . . • •0' .. 1 DV , sgo. I. ‘14, 'C. OF ........... '&4,,S \,-7.'z'" ''' -',..D. \444. \'°".!..i....4.01\)T.'. .\\.- ..-,,,,..;---..\44,....I' - . ..... S.SS ....e, .'"Ce DEDISTORS) PROFESSIONAL 21 L05/0110L.-0.5.010 / .. . i 4,-,.... r -.- -1 LAND 9JRVE,CR .A.1 lio.■¢710 . .0.1 0,e .75 VALVE \ .4's .' N ' ° , / 'I VT -.;-■:,_, ‘ 1.j 4..00 • -.0 ICARlliaiguAnd ./ */ / .. .,: ....... .... N\t'... •.:"....1404, 7. . ..... 041vL WE.0e/30/03 DATE OF=NATURE J /1,1•'gl • ,I•poto.cci.-...?,17.0-• ' '''......,:'.. '.. . \ - 0..‘"./ / / / ■rr".77:5,,,-5.:9":44:.r ..... , - l'ss-..•.1/4. 11 IP:. .. .... // 't,,e,' / „ -• -: '%. Ni.,'„-'•-• '. - •,, "<> '''' •-• ..,--... ' , 1.,,_er....4.,rom 11111 00.E.01C 242E0.00.2.:001.10.7 U.O.LOT ail../110 L'':2612 Cq.".%1 orter0,14171'4J1.4'4 2174:114t1'%0C.!:01,071r170.11t r.'S.'' .1- 47\ .-:. 1 4,..Li tcralla NNW mi paoptg,;plc ,.1 C0070.211....0.CAR,510 CONT./xisf,r0 / .4' 'fr" .• . , //,,. '0 c\4....., • , GRAPHIC SCALE 0 • ,8!! , . '' '' .4..O I DI MIT) + I WA•.. 11. .• • / NV ISMS ■ ' ... 0 0 P.DK IIIMPIPEN111 IC It ,IMA M" ererenralliNEM TOPOGRAPHIC SITE SURVEY A\/POONA■550.1'ES AC 12220 re COAST,05/Sit 110..0.oxecoN LAND SURITIOEZ .... 1. 11t.4• Enlinillillil 1 r 0T ISO LIZ 0T rner[7.CAA 03,EE0 OP 97071 I InErrilatarilip %NM FOR:LLOSS k 2AN AZT DORMS EUALANK OREGON ■. ma.(mo 00-6000,031-et0a rex ,. , • / ,/ ;! / / . /RD / MOMS � ; �1GP '.l" . ..,,e' cZ.1\X .. \CI\ / 0- 55 ,,,...e/. , , -r-----1--- . • • / c'3').' f"'./.,/ ii./. e.ii. . • ..4 v,-. 6. :- ,,, .1 '?-1 ...._ ?` fir► ' ../1 . . / )1/ . \.7"-' ' : -'''''‘.'/i 1'\ `te _ b+y wa�� / tw eYo:o«.. - ... fir: \ . • A � .�,-. ' { t,1�� / nT z � - Z u��., -z ` /��` \r .., H CL �„ t.�" 1 ... / l� / 0. ,„ -......... \# ,gas/ '�' �.� C,. < L_ / 4 1 !- / Ry:�../ \....L) W r' ,/ ' './' ,/ ..\,. ki.1,...... . , . :, H LI) / C.:-..,../. / Wit+.1,1i.al- 11- R C%11,44116 /�IU -. ... .. -...-.. ..:\.../.— • 'I, � a �S 'STIIECT TP.EES t,J Ce• ... ; \ •� 2- AGGR RuBRuN u/ '(-' ,../ o \` Z ,1- �� H 0 / . 'fir- eta pg 2 MP mil L1 . II • P 4 .10 II 1 1 I .. ik• . T 11 t 1 Hi 1 1 . ■'■„ . 'L' _____......,.......____ ._. i ,!.............7 - . . . _ • !A. -I- I = ..„- ... ._____== ____ •, I HI] ___,______ _ . __,________.„ . a . - I 1 I I I 1 1 1111 i 1 I T-11 f--h, 1,1111 „ • , •. •, 1 xi i 1 I I r iloil, ..„....___... , LH . vill ii, 1 , ....7" 11 1 , , . €1 I'I -41 I 1 i ;11 llg 1 I !!INII J i I ---- , 1 1 nun , II ii /I ___.__._......_._. _ :.......2 ......,_. 7=-7_7.7--.--- i m -.\\ waIrsis..... ./ . SW II , 4 4 in .•-•-1 I■ ) t t ■ 111111 % i 1 i • 1 1 1 t 1 74 I ' 4 ,... 0 ■*.r.s ' ' 7'''"..s■._. _____—.1 I ' ' II t. L 1 • :. ( • -- .....-- VI .—..--. JOHN HADLEY'S PROPOSED DRAWING NAME: .....01. ••■••■,, 9555 S.W. 69th ADDITION I-IADLEY ( ) Custom Home 245-8974 DeSign 1 Portland, Or. 97223 . i FAX(50.3)29.3-5025 ____cA0 North-we-si_ coanw.COM v ... _. ,. _______=_________-. I is-- 1 .. , . EXISTIN(7 II rn — I_ 4 i I i 4 r— q 4 s I it \\ \� �, \ \, II., \ ''li \ \ ' 9 \,\ \\.\\•\ ,...; I ,,„ \ ..., \ , , s\ •,,, \ ss \ \\\\ \ II. . „\ .„ ‘,. , , \ , \\ ,,, \ii\ \,�\`♦'`\ ``\ \ \\� `\ 11. - - -��-- -- \ \ \ -- - -� I`�� \� \ , �.\\ \\ \ — — '' I v-r ■ ti y� JOHN HADLEY'S PROPOSED DRAWING NAME- _ 9565 s.w. 69th IH ADDITION HADLEY (503) gas-89�a Custom Home Design Portland, Or. 97223 " FAX(503) 293-5025 —OAD NOft IWWest codnw.COM A rbors+/1?e ? por+ HALSTEAD'S ARBORICULTURE "Specialists in the care and preservation of trees" CONSULTANTS David Halstead, Consultant, B.S. Phillip Whitcomb, Consultant go y P.O. Box 1182•Tualatin,OR 97062 (503)245-1383 .4" • January 4, 2002 . y • ATTN.: Mr. John Hadley 2656 SW Fairmount } Portland, OR 97201 Reference: Tree Assessment w Project: Redink, Inc. 12220 SW Grant, Tigard, Oregon Subject: Mitigation and Preservation Program ..1t . With your approval, I have inspected the site; the trees and site plan dated 1 12.12.01 for the proposed Redink, Inc. Building, located at 12220 SW Grant, 4 Tigard, Oregon. The purpose of this inspection was to list and tag all trees six -4 • •A. inches in diameter measured at 4.5 feet above ground and evaluate the trees twelve inches in diameter and larger measured at 4.5 feet above ground to determine if any of these trees need to be removed due to the proposed {` construction and therefore mitigated per the City of Tigard's "Mitigation Tree veli■ Plan." ti& I have tagged and numbered, both in the field and in this report, all trees pertaining to this report using 93001 through 93015 series tags to easily identify the trees in question. For the purposes of this report, trees will be addressed using the last two digits of the tags. A There are a total of fifteen trees, six inches in diameter measured at 4.5 feet above ground on this site. There are eleven trees twelve inches in diameter and larger measured at 4.5 feet above ground, within this project and located on the tree survey plan. Of these eleven trees, three are hazardous and are not required IV to be part of the mitigation. However, two of the hazardous trees can be preserved with proper pruning and cabling. The remaining eight trees are considered as preservable and will not be mitigated under the City of Tigard's Mitigation Plan. Hazardous trees: Tree numbered 93001. Double trunk (2-14 inch at 4.5 feet above ground) Douglas-fir tree. The trunk is codominant and the trunk between the codominant stems has included bark making the tree structurally unstable. ij Recommendation: Removal Email: hac @spiritone.com www.spiritone.com/-hac CCB#0068646 Page 2 January 4, 2002 Reference: Tree Assessment Project: Redink, Inc. 12220 SW Grant, Tigard, Oregon Subject: Mitigation and Preservation Program Hazardous trees Continue: Tree numbered 93002. Multiple trunk (30 inch at 4.5 feet above ground) Atlas Cedar tree. Tree is a mass of multiple trunks, several that are structurally unstable. However, this is a 100 percent species class tree that is healthy and in an excellent location. The serious codominant stems, heavy limbs and poor structure can be corrected with professional care and taken off the hazardous list. Recommendation: Pruning bracing and cabling. Tree numbered 93008. Multiple trunk (44 inch at 4.5 feet above ground) White Ash tree. The tree has been severely damaged in the past and the main trunk structure is decayed to the point where it could break apart and of fall at anytime. However, this trees is within the 50 foot off set and only a short distance from Fanno Creek and is a perfect example of a dying wetland snag. If this area is to be used by people for any reason the trees needs to be reduced in size so as not to be a threat person and or property. Either way the tree will not be removed. Recommendation: Class Six Pruning which includes topping. Tree To Be Removed: Tree numbered 93015: Multiple stem Filbert tree (4 6 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). This tree is severely diseased and has decay throughout the main stem. Due to the spread of the branches, the aforementioned problems and the forthcoming construction trauma the trees are not stable enough to be preserved. Recommendation: Removal. Page 3 January 4, 2002 Reference: Tree Assessment Project: Redink, Inc. 12220 SW Grant, Tigard, Oregon Subject: Mitigation and Preservation Program Preservable trees over 12 inches in diameter are as follows: Tree numbered 93002: Atlas Cedar tree (with technical care) Tree numbered 93004: Oregon White Oak tree (excellent species, and condition) (44 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Tree numbered 93005: Western Red Cedar tree (14 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Tree numbered 93006: Douglas-fir tree (16 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Tree numbered 93007: European Birch tree (12 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Tree numbered 93008: White Ash tree (with technical care) (44 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Tree numbered 93009: White Ash tree (30 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Tree numbered 93010: Oregon Big Leaf Maple tree (12 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Tree numbered 93013: Pear fruit tree (12 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Tree numbered 93014: Oregon Big Leaf Maple tree (14 inch trunks at 4.5 feet above ground). Due to the fact that only one tree will be removed and 10 trees will be preserved there is no need for tree mitigation per the City of Tigard's "Mitigation Tree Plan." I have enclosed a "Tree Care and Preservation" guide that needs to be observed during the forthcoming construction, If I can be of further assistance and/or if more technical information is needed, please contact me immediately. Sincerely, David Halstead BS CA, ASCA • HALSTEAD'S ARBORICULTURE "Specialists in the care and preservation of trees" • CONSULTANTS David Halstead, Consultant, B.S. • Phillip Whitcomb, Consultant P.O. Box 1182•Tualatin,OR 97062 (503)245-1383 January 7, 2002 1 ATTN.: Mr. John Hadley 2656 SW Fairmount Portland, OR 97201 S / Therapeutic Treatment Care and Preservation Program { Because of the number of trees to be preserved, the particular situation of where ' '• • , the trees are growing, the species of the tree(s) and the proposed construction plans, there will be a certified arborist on-site and/or on-call for the entire project, 414 especially during any excavating and/or the removal of tree(s). In this way, 4 decisions can be made in the field that are only speculations at this writing. tik MEETINGS:• • Before the site clearing and construction begins a pre-construction tree vritO preservation conference will be held on site with the general contractor in charge of tree removal, and/or in charge of heavy equipment, the resident certified arborist and those official representatives who have interest in the project. !� PURPOSE: f The purpose of the on-site meeting will be to introduce all parties to the �l specifications and sensitivity needed in the protection and preservation of trees, their environment and protected areas. PREPARATION / FENCING: We have found through several years of tree preservation that the protected area is the first and most important procedure of tree preservation. If the fencing is placed properly and maintained the root zone of the tree (s)within this protected area will not be compacted nor damaged by needless excavation. Before any site clearing takes place tree fencing needs to be erected out to the drip line (furthest most branches) of those tree/s to be preserved. Tree barrier fencing can be as simple as a seven (7)foot tall steel fence stakes driven into the ground approximately two (2) feet, 6 foot apart and the tree barrier fencing attached to the stakes. II Email: hac@spiritone.com www.spiritone.com/-hac CCB#0068646 Page 2 January 7, 2001 Reference: Tree Assessment Subject: Tree Preservation Report PREPARATION / FENCING: It is further recommended that two (2) heavy gauge wires be attached to each stake. One (1) at the top of each stake and interwoven through the fencing and a second (2) wire attached to the stakes approximately 2 feet above ground and interwoven through the fencing. In some cases the fencing, will need to be adjusted from the drip line to a smaller area in order to accommodate walls, building, sidewalks, excavation and other like building construction. The adjustment of the fencing and any disturbance within the protected area will be done under the supervision of the consulting arborist. If the fencing is adjusted to a smaller diameter it may be necessary to erect a chain link and/or a heavy plywood fence in order to protect the adjusted area. Regardless, any adjustment of the fencing from the drip line, no matter how slight, will require therapeutic care for the tree and its root zone. REMOVALS: Those trees that are structurally unsound and/or unhealthy whether they be in the construction area or in the preservation areas will need to be removed for the safety of person, property and to the surrounding trees as well. Tree removal will be done in such a way so as not to damage other tree/s and their root zone, which are marked for preservation. Removal of these tree/s may require climbing the tree/s and taking them down in small pieces. Stumps of the removed tree/s, which are less than 20 feet from a preserved tree, will be ground-out using a stump grinder. THERAPEUTIC CARE: Therapeutic care is described as that treatment which will be needed to ensure the tree/s within the protected area receive the best chances for survival. In order to accomplish this objective, the tree/s will have to be periodically inspected during the construction process and for at least two years after construction is completed. Page 3 January 7, 2001 Reference: Tree Assessment Location: Lowrie's Market Place, Wilsonville, Oregon Subject: Tree Preservation Report Individual treatment is based on the tree/s needs, it's root zone, structural condition and health. Factors will be taken into consideration, such as species, soil compaction, soil annals, season in which construction is done, how much root zone will be affected by construction, losses of surrounding native plantings and loss of and/or over abundance of surface and sub-surface water. ROOT PRUNING: Excavation when using back-hoe or track-hoe, or other mechanical device, will be done towards the tree rather than along side of the tree. Furthermore, before excavation begins, bridging and tunneling will be considered; especially if tree root/s are found to be in excess of 4 inches in diameter. When excavation needs to be done within the drip line of the tree, it may be necessary to cut roots. The best way is to sever the roots by first excavating the soil with the use of an "Air Spade". Air Spading will remove the soil and expose the roots without damaging them. All roots 2 inches and larger that need to be cut will be cut clean with the use of a saw and or other like sharp instrument. In this way the root/s are severed clean and will start to produce new root hairs. Regardless, any work done within the drip line of the tree will be done under the supervision of the consulting arborist. FERTILIZING: If the tree/s diameter root zone is reduced, the tree/s will need to be therapeutically fertilized. How much and types of mixtures will be determined by the amount of disturbance, root loss, soil analysis, condition of the soil, season, health and condition of the tree/s. Page 4 January 7, 2001 Reference: Tree Assessment Location: Lowrie's Market Place, Wilsonville, Oregon Subject: Tree Preservation Report Those tree/s which will be less than 8 feet from excavation at ground level may require not only therapeutic fertilizer, but root hormones as well. This will help the sealing process of damaged roots and the stimulation of new growth. When a tree root area is severely damaged, it may need additional fertilizing within 6 months and again within a year. ACCIDENTS: With the amount of activity on a major development project, accidents are bound to happen. Limbs are broken, roots are dug-up or root zones are compacted. In most cases, if these problems are addressed immediately by the resident arborist, they will not hamper the trees longevity. Where negligence occurs and the contractor deliberately damages a tree and/or the root zone, the contractor should be held responsible and monetary values arrived at for the repair and or replacement of the tree/s. If I can be of further assistance or if more technical material is required please contact me immediately. Sincerely, David Halstead BS CA ASCA We+loAds Deli`neciafiov) ctvic( 14 ; 4-,:yeciiew) Plcøi LEWIS & VAN VLEET Incorporated principals Chris c.van vleet. p.e. garg j. lewis. p.e. February 5, 2002 To: Brad Kilby, City of Tigard From: Kim McMillan, LVI Cc: John Hadley Re: Red Ink Office 12220 Grant Street I have prepared the following documents for inclusion in our SDR package: 1. A colored map showing the areas of cut and fill, along with the calculated volumes of each area. The proposed fill of 15.56 cy occurs within the zero rise fringe area. To balance this fill a portion of the parking area will be over excavated providing a cut of 27.63 cy. Therefore, this work will provide a net cut of 12.07 cy, thus preventing any issue of conveyance or storage reduction. 2. A portion of the FEMA map that includes our site and on which we based the 100 year flood elevation for the above calculations. Please contact me if you need further information. consulting engineers 113660 s.w. boones ferry road tualatin. oregon 97062 (503) 13135.13605 phone (503) 1385.1206 fax 0\, • / \ iiir�- iN �b ` 3' X GARBAGs �� ENCLOS E ° ,,' / i_ - - 100 YEAR r / . ` % 6� (APPROXIMATE) FLOODPLAIN / ' 1r '`�S Sp. s /� �� Q \`: / EXISTING AVE. ELE 2 �� e DEVELOPED AVE. ELEV 1 4. /IN OODPLAIN) A AVE. FILL = 0.1' DO 0� ' O,QCy FILL AREA = 600 of / o � 600 SF ° -41 VOL. = 420 d x.56 cy) / may,�,_ �� ■, - r9 `, .;ADDITION DS �v � -_ GRASS g54( V 4 'IR +�►A. \ i FRINGE AREA P lk / -S% / ,. EXISTING AVE. ELEV 151.1 /�` �∎ DEVELOPED AVE. ELEV 150.1 , �i . / AVE.FILL = 1.0' - 100 YEAR i0.0 _ C- 50 CUT AREA = "146 of FLOOD1-1AY 148.- .� CUT VOL., _ 146 of (21,6 - ) O / (APPROXIMATE) c,� wi h �o°�o / '�Ij� v• - is �" 1�'��DEC �� . i (7� (e, 16" FIR` ,,, GRASS "S 4 ' b"ifiAAp- 'n ,i if'R i I \ � -1 14-.5 _ 0 ilEE / Jv �,,, Iso fiflD1I. CUT AN1� ILI_�, I _20i ,Gj . �4 k, 0 20 40-- ,..,_kr ' \ 749 .'/ .- U TOTAL CUT VOLUME = 21.63 cy ' // ;. �0 TOTAL FILL VOLUME = 15.56 cy ,i / NET = 12.01 cy (CUT) 2 j�/' r t / , _ \�l f"` �� \\' ! r ..\‘,,,,, ‘,44.\\ \':-. \ ‘..\t, 'NW' \s_ . .-."-\'' . _ .4, .*. • // , , .- v- -,,,,,,----,,,._\,7 S, ,, , y\\.,,,,, ) \\,\\ , , / ./ . / , -,--- ! ,„ -,..\\ 1 • .1.., . . ,. 93 . ./7 ''/. / / . iriP ' * , ., '`,.• \'',• ) 'k,s All....41111.1E,, ' ' / /,1 ,i/ / / If C".. A - .i:. , --,,,,,_. ,_._....._--.. * / , . ,. 'f S '11 / /-17.'",,\0%. \\-.'%Z/ •J.9.1;.*' / / .i ;/ � /� ; ,... , # • / .,0/ ,, ,,, / Vlit, '4 '\ CI ' %1 . (. ‘) I f --,, i.,<,_ 4, , , - .,,, ( „., -,... .„---,,,,, ...,:' . ; ,.... „„ „4,, 1 IF .,f•saile: ..,A e cr/./*010.04.1-.-a=""." -{:, / - 1/P'''s ' .''''' ,A(40. it/ 4 . . V ?,, /,rt r ' ir,r; y; /7/ -7 '-,, , i ` %X4,. // . "1,, . -.,:** ` . r i \,. ,ittk., , , , ,..., ..., „.... • N /�� / -, ! • y ,,,,,,'„,_,-;;,:l. .c",-�„W ,, , st.i . ,-,..„-ity:ii)/ / . , `■Az.i.,„ ?V/‘ ,1 \\.'",„ :: ',, // • n f ' f 1 � ' Z *,......... ,T mo . f 4 \. .it, C' �I`f � � • T-,.'-J r ! 4 1..• ,--2:.! CY ''''..7. a‘ 'I '...\,,, ,N • '<el Dt it,rii:•.+1,-,64 .../ / • i f if 11 l'pli ,,-- ,.., y 47 , <> ,,Illcv.4% ~:-;%'t".-4-1:4 , 1 ' i ; 'I il 4.t i, 4 , ..,......j /\ ..>/iit J&' \ • i / , „,..../7,.. r }'-'.--- . ."*,: " '7,i / '.," 41.0P4 / , ' / '`-6:- ,/ ir . 4r / ''' 191-‘1 '`liffigr ill ' ' "....--"-:..,./...,,- / • -11 ---- -0, ..... , 4 /(, \—(446 / ,„ --.. ji, AY, ,--__.----...-___,"^'------ . i . . ,,,, IP,Jil'. f r0 \ --—--......,INte4k. ,,,, 3 It j ' Iii\ ' Atikk_ . t/. - ':1 1 F. \ i iiiit 0 )qv , a I ,, \' $ 7 \ \ ,ic-- i,,.... i ..f.;/ 4,!-•frA\\•■■ / --"" ''-' Nsi,,%*-* / i k 1p) / ,1,104b;,., . ttt, . -,....., \ \ / - / / . / /14 , ,,,,---..._,__ ,. 7 /i/j/ , \ (, ' • N _,-• , Ai/ ,, or.; . ; : :1440:4004, , • . , . 'ilitt-‘. / , ,,',..., :3,..v.w.Ifili! / I / : ' ' 11": 1 s -‘, ' °' %IA'. -... 4-■ , „ ,-,,111,\ ;. :,:cs __::„}," / ,i . i . ,z 1 , . , , rfr.3,....di.A... ... //I°, A , i . . • c.',. 14 , .4 i •• , . I ' e Bradley Kilby - Grant Office SLR Jan '02. Page 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Brad Kilby, Current Planning FROM: Greg Berry, Engineering PROJECT: Red Ink Office Addition at 12220 SW Grant SUBJECT: Sensitive Lands Permit (TMC 18.775.070 B 1) DATE: January 30, 2002 As we have discussed, Kim McMillan of Lewis and Van Vleet has been asking about approval criteria for this permit. Existing Site: Building in the floodplain with a corner extending a few feet into the floodway. Site is entirely developed and without wetlands. Proposed: An addition to the building that will be entirely within the zero-rise fringe and a paved drive that will extend into the floodway. I told her that my understanding was that: The addition in the fringe must be floodproofed and excavation must be must be balanced as required by CWS rules. (If the addition were in the zero-rise floodway, a zero-rise analysis conforming to FEMA protocol would be further required.) The paving in the floodway for the driveway should be permitted upon a showing that the elevation of the paving would not exceed the existing ground. In this way there is no issue of conveyance of storage reduction. The remaining issue is whether the continued nonconformity of the existing building would prevent approval of the permit. I told her that this is a question for Planning. I told her that these understandings should be confirmed by Planning before she prepares the application. Please let her know. C: Brian Rager • JAN-24-20( 2(1HU) 14 :40 P. 001/001 LEWIS & consulting engineers 19350 5.w.boonii 5 rwrru rood _ry tualatin.ore on 97052 (503)885.0605 phone (503)865.1206 fax VAN VLEFT Inau,po,... FAX T R A N S MIT T A L TO: GITy OF JA D - PLANK)Iii.)_G DATE: 1 • 2-4 ' O Z ATTN: 1:SP.AZ K.I LIS V FROM: K 114 c_M i (-LAX) PROJECT: RE17 (j4JC ( ( yC i - NO. OF PAGES TO FOLLOW:_ e . 4143? I ZZ?,O C el,A&Il ST COPY TO FOLLOW IN MAIL COMMENTS: I ' , I ' 1 I • • ' 1 1 ' , r ; , ' f , , i . 1 . 1 1 ' 1 11 . J u,S'T w A OT ED T�; LET : You: KC'NO1) "T fr AT' s ; ' ' : l , I I 1 F1iu..o oLT' 'A1 ns� colQPS. -so'IUr. APP;L C.ATIoiu I ' b SENT 1 T To to Li Ni , MAC. l ,1 kK : a�' I�SC., ' j _ -tE; RauI2E.s A�J' OFF( 5u&4 Llr 1. s ' I . WILL..-, Nee.D.- To -GET; ---Yau'R., -SIS.N -'Tu RE- o N--•__i_;_,..H:..• I , ', ', . rale APPL,(4.0criczkl , , , . . 1 ! ' , I 1 I I , , , I I i i 1 1 1 , • , , ' , I I I 1 I , I I 1 , I i I , 1 I 1 1 ! . I I , I I I I , 1 14 . I 1• • ' • 1 ' i . 1 • 1 I : I .1 I • •I . ' 1 ' I It ' • 1 • ' ' . ' ' ', ' , I ' . , I I . , I • I I 11 . , ' , ' 1 ( I , • I I 1 1 . 1 • • • 1 111 , 1 • 1 1 • II • I i • , . I • , I . . . i , 1 • ' I I 11 PI it • 1 I 11 I 1 I 1 1 I I I 1•I ' • ' • I I I I • I I 1 • ' I 1 , • 1 ' '• 3 • ' , ' ' 1 , ' ' , 1 ' I ' , I - , . ' ' I . ' II 1 1 1 S • • 1 I II 1 11 , , 1 I , ' 1 , 1 .. � I I 1 i , ) .. .. ' ...,..'.. .. 1 ._... II . • • i I 1 • • , I 1 1 I 1 11 II ' I I ! • I , ' ' , I I ' ' 1 • 1 • , 1 • i 1 • i I ' 11 I I . 1 . . ' I • 1 , I • { : ' 1 I . ' . . 1•' I I 1 = I • ; , 1 1 ' 1 , I ' I , 1 ' I •' . 1 ' ' 1 , I , • I 1 1 1 1 ' I ' I I I t I ' I I I I I 1 ) " ' 1 , 1 , 1 11I+ QQ I1 Q L FISHMAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LLC SULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM S PROPERTY WETLAND DETERMINATION TATED CORRIDOR CONDITION ASSESSMENT 12220 SW GRANT AVENUE, TIGARD T2S, R1W, NW 1/4 SECTION 2, W.M. WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Prepared for: Lori Hays 12220 SW Grant Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Prepared by: Stacy Benjamin & C. Mirth Walker Fishman Environmental Services, LLC onsultants in Ecology and Natural Resource Management 434 NW 6th Avenue, Suite 304 Portland, OR 97209-3600 July 2001 FES Project 01062 0 0 0 q 04 Portland OR 97209-3600 phone:503 224 0333 fax:503 224 1851 www.fishensery.com FISHMAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LLC CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM HAYS PROPERTY WETLAND DETERMINATION & VEGETATED CORRIDOR CONDITION ASSESSMENT 12220 SW GRANT AVENUE, TIGARD T2S, R1W, NW 1/4 SECTION 2, W.M. WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Prepared for: Lori Hays 12220 SW Grant Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Prepared by: Stacy Benjamin & C. Mirth Walker Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Consultants in Ecology and Natural Resource Management 434 NW 6th Avenue, Suite 304 Portland, OR 97209-3600 July 2001 FES Project 01062 0 0 0 I �- 0 434 NW Sixth Avenue,Suite 304 Portland OR 97209-3600 phone:503 224 0333 lax:503 224 1851 www.lishenserv.com TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: July 2, 2001 To: Lori Hays From: Stacy Benjamin, Wetland Ecologist Subject: Wetland Determination and Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment SITE NAME: 12220 SW Grant Avenue, Tigard SITE LOCATION: West of Pacific Highway (99W) and south of SW Tigard Street, at 12220 SW Grant Avenue in Tigard, Oregon. Washington County T2S, R1 W, Section 2 NW 1/4; tax map/lot 1S 1 02BA/1100 OWNER: Lori Hays DATE OF SITE VISIT: June 19, 2001 PROJECT STAFF: Stacy Benjamin, Wetland Ecologist C. Mirth Walker, Wetlands Program Manager FES PROJECT: 01062 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Fishman Environmental Services, LLC (FES) was contracted by Lori Hays to conduct a wetland determination/delineation and vegetated corridor condition assessment to meet Clean Water Services (formerly Unified Sewerage Agency)natural resource assessment requirements. The site is located west of Highway 99W and south of SW Tigard Street,at 12220 SW Grant Avenue in Tigard,Oregon (Figure 1).Fanno Creek flows southeast along the south property boundary.No wetlands are mapped on the site adjacent to Fanno Creek on the Beaverton, Oregon National Wetlands Inventory Map (Figure 2); Fanno Creek is mapped as riverine, upper perennial, open water, intermittently exposed/permanent (R3OWZ). No wetlands were determined to be present on the site, north of Fanno Creek. The top of bank/ordinary high water mark (not to be confused with the top of slope adjacent to Fanno Creek) was staked along accessible portions of Fanno Creek.The top of bank/ordinary high water mark was determined to be approximately 2 to 3 feet higher than the edge of water at the time of the site visit, based upon topography of the vegetated slope in the east portion of the site and the vegetation line on the riprap slope in the west portion of the site. METHODOLOGY The methods for determining the presence of wetlands follow the routine methodology of the Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual(Environmental Laboratory, 1987) used by both the Corps and the Oregon Division of State Lands. Field work was conducted on June 19, 2001. Soils, vegetation,and indicators of hydrology were observed at 1 sample plot location to document site conditions(Attachment A). The upland sample plot was marked with yellow flagging tied to a 3 foot lath stake.The top of bank/ordinary high water mark of Fanno Creek was staked in accessible areas. Vegetation in the 50 foot vegetated corridor setback was sampled at four additional plot locations(Attachment B). Vegetated corridor communities are shown in Figure 4. Site photographs are included in Attachment C. SITE CONDITIONS Fanno Creek flows southeast along the south property boundary. Fanno Creek is confined within a 16 foot wide moderately steep slope. The western third of the slope, adjacent to the Grant Street bridge, is covered with riprap and contains sparse vegetation. Dominant vegetation on the eastern two-thirds of the slope consists of Himalayan blackberry, clustered wild rose, beaked hazelnut and red-osier dogwood. Two Oregon ash trees and one Oregon white oak tree are present at the top of slope. A mowed lawn is present adjacent to (north of) the top of slope. Wetland Determination One wetland determination sample plot (Plot 1) was located on a small, narrow bench adjacent to Fanno Creek in the southeast portion of the site,approximately 3 feet higher than the edge of water. Vegetation at Plot 1 was dominated by bentgrass(Agrostis species, probably FAC),clustered wild rose(Rosa pisocarpa,FAC)and Himalayan blackberry(Rubus discolor,FACU),with tansy ragwort (Seneciojacobaea,FACU),creeping buttercup(Ranunculus repens,FAC W)and common horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC) as subdominants. Soils on the site are mapped as Aloha silt loam in the Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon(USDA SCS 1982; Figure 3). Soils along Fanno Creek are mapped as McBee silty clay loam. Aloha soils may have hydric Huberly soil inclusions, and McBee soils may have hydric Cove and Wapato soil inclusions. Soils at Plot 1 were a very dark grayish brown(1OYR 3/2) silt with no redoximorphic concentrations(mottles) to 10 inches. A soil chroma of 2 with no mottles indicates the presence of non-hydric soils.No hydrology indicators were present at Plot 1; soils were dry throughout. This area receives occasional overbank flooding from Fanno Creek, as indicated by the presence of silt soils. Although Plot 1 met the hydrophytic vegetation criterion, Plot 1 was determined to be non-wetland based on a soil chroma of 2 with no mottles and no hydrology indicators. Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment Clean Water Services requires a 50 foot wide vegetated corridor, measured horizontally from the boundary of the sensitive area(Fanno Creek)for areas with a slope of less than 25%.Site topography is level in the northern portion of the site and slopes downward toward Fanno Creek in the southernmost portion of the site. The average slope of the 50 foot vegetated corridor is 10%. The southern portion of the vegetated corridor adjacent to Fanno Creek consists of 2 forested communities and 1 sparsely vegetated/riprap community. The northern portion of the vegetated corridor, at the top of slope adjacent to Fanno Creek, is a mowed herbaceous community. Community 1, the Oregon ash upland slope, makes up 10% of the vegetated corridor and was determined to be in"good"condition. Community 2,the Oregon white oak upland slope, makes up 10% of the vegetated corridor and was determined to be in "good" condition. Community 3, the Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 01062 Page 2 riprap slope, makes up 10% of the vegetated corridor and was determined to be in "degraded" condition. Community 4, the mowed grass at the top of slope, makes up the remaining 70% of the vegetated corridor and was determined to be in"degraded"condition.Community 4 contained many non-native grass and herb species including perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne, FACU), yellow clover(Trifolium dubium,UPL),white clover(Trifolium repens,FAC),bentgrass(Agrostis species, -), common horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC), bluegrass (Poa species, -), spotted cats-ear (Hypochaeris radicata, FACU), common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale, FACU), ajuga(Ajuga reptans,UPL),crane's-bill(Geranium species,FAC-/FACU+/UPL)and vetch(Vicia species,-).Two small(-5 inch)diameter native trees are present in Community 4, including one lodgepole pine and one black hawthorn. Vegetated corridors should be enhanced to a"good"corridor condition under Clean Water Services guidelines as part of any site development. Additional site photographs are available upon request. CONCLUSION No wetlands were determined to be present on the site, north of Fanno Creek. The top of bank/ordinary high water mark (not to be confused with the top of slope adjacent to Fanno Creek) was staked along accessible portions of Fanno Creek.The top of bank/ordinary high water mark was determined to be approximately 2 to 3 feet higher than the edge of water at the time of the site visit, based upon topography of the vegetated slope in the east portion of the site and the vegetation line on the riprap slope in the west portion of the site. The average slope of the 50 foot vegetated corridor adjacent to Fanno Creek is 10%. The 50 foot vegetated corridor ranges from degraded to good condition. The services provided under this contract as described in this report include professional opinions and judgements based on data collected. These services have been provided according to generally accepted practices of the environmental profession. Wetland determination and wetland boundary delineation is an inexact science, and different individuals may disagree on exact boundaries. The conclusions drawn in this report represent our best professional judgement after examination of the site conditions and background information, taking into consideration the time of year of our delineation.This report is not jurisdictional until reviewed and confirmed by the Oregon Division of State Lands and/or the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers(the Corps is currently only reviewing wetland delineations when accompanied by a wetland removal/fill permit application). Please contact the undersigned with any questions. .t Wetland��1 Report prepared by: % �o ��'a�1 Report reviewed by: if ` rJ j tn • C. Stacy N. Benjamin ° Ns 030415 `t„% C. Mirth Walker, PWS Wetland Ecologist Wetlands Program Manager y�\vititiu+.'� Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 01062 Page 3 REFERENCES Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Kartesz,J.T.,1994.A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume I-Checklist and Volume 2-Thesaurus. Second Edition. In association with Biota of North American Program of the North Carolina Botanical Garden. Timber Press, Portland. Kollmorgen Instrument Corporation, 1998 revised washable edition. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Baltimore. Reed, P.B., Jr., 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands:Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report No. 88 (26.9). Reed, P.B., Jr., et al., 1993. Supplement to List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Naiest (Region 9). USDA SCS, 1982. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. USDA SCS, 1989. Hydric Soils in Washington County Area, Oregon. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, no date. Beaverton, Oregon National Wetlands Inventory map. 1:58,000 CIR, 8/81. USGS, 1961, photorevised 1984. Beaverton, Oregon 7.5' topographic quadrangle. Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 01062 Page 4 jt:-, •I2h'Otl- .. .,...l..-...-1 611X1 '�•� 'm'.. am -- k;' r A;, .,A r ci `7t` r m eto'$ U.0" ' I :14 1` A 12 . t : < 1. 4:'F ,N " `> .l4S1 � T law I ay%[„y r #5, t. ? 7 _ ' t' BORNE T 6 3 © .�. tnrru. sN HARNESS'r U LN Cr' c`TS `1;•6 ' RECREATE'1 ',>y •m I 'tN 00° ;.L/ - <n •O / 0 it l :71,1. 2I wurvct ., 'AQUATIC � � h •••li• t • = a / t: iiii M, a 4 $ 'Ask"vt+tttctf ENT � � � +� �F'✓y O z ill ad rEe m y >z I . aKr.s TL 1 °i_''1'12 sl a 28 Z .e i,.17.-4. C, 4.`„0.R�L.,- o f3ay flr. 0° Q I v"•;It .� 5 I e t . to < sw DR ."rr x .o i x`9100•s[. sr 11YNt[4 v EP @ RO °< a•. r ., t Sir J� yr SM CON ''110' z ci l . , 7: _ SW e. °$ t cv i i;3 fttnn At HAYSTACK i5: E. i MIO -.',. OQ' T �'t,,�4 iry ,"i a „,c.:, ] �t F�„�, «r tt n[to a u ! up,„/"..w.,, Y/ �f .4:11_,-,:r'''t-s/ " s Aft E T i , y 1 .L –0''' z • • ,� e t �� ER ER �r 210 r `� r} � { 3�"�4', �� '�,�'` �,,. aN „ LS t 1 217 „ •7 a;=" a S H0 .� .11V'''.--,',.2?-;. 1 ,� 250Q r34 K .,'x ✓'- r 5 t� it t z s 4 �. N °`-c,. . .�, LN `; i 5-0—• , 5 ..�ti ✓.�?'`w, S 1'0,02 !•-.27..3,, 6ytdr• A -rt. '''�' i e t °'rrrij :' '` C � , �3 eCEME ' 5�___S\ 1tii ;'. _,,.. 2 -`�I ,��,,�v #a LDN(:STA FF -k. n S 3.5''''T.'-'�w R_,-,-;+i 4 kiiiS ORTN n p awl-AA Sa!I T3l/ga - iiy .:air ii. ,- <:. .Y• ,,,!, 1-.,s1. t►' I r &la 15 ,i - } 4. ♦}�1� n g i7' Q' R••,[ ILLYIEM C 'I, ip. �>L 'K ti ,, g<o � i 9I . a r -'" 't�+l�, A !,A4s N R nlppjj''Frt i`[SiF . ' '�' .,'t .$.'� a ,&�' .gip kl kstII "�g^r pn• ulyi il.r..'$,f- sVi-,f;1 R sE�'*DR r3 t 'f, g f.'' yr„ 1. ~' tl' i:l 4! LN r IT ` tr. 'Abp x Ci,.sN uttroHL � rd.'<le 'G I h t°�y 4.,,,.!A„ 1 •t'i s�t A ,.,RL ..{ — i .'� ,, ay q sl'1� SITE r 1 . RILL FALCOX i ”,•'air a, ,+,�T,;} .y rNERINE S,.c ,t. �I�� s. ,. - Ai,, LOCATION ..MOR IIG e_ : �] is4fn f till..'tL t g� '�,Jr�`�N�;. $ fd .r ss 7-' 4�l .. 'S .,Y!t.' 1®e• C o,-„un,, �3SXAIN€RINE _;.. r...,.,,' � 6 .r ., __,,,,e,sI NAr,NEtuNEYYY dares;� • ��,} kN Ar a9«nD ® 1,..1►,_'� ..;_r_. ./ r11 +.pr�� q/ 1111'+4 MITRE�'•- ,tj .4, �F".v;."IA 4d' 'V„ c,„.....,,r ANN sT.tr.• -r 11 MIDI „3 Sls>.CLYDESDy i` Vin (`„,.,,,...„lEf�1,YY�� t< 4; sy• V -Jig • +• � �N 51t NwFI�,,]f �i _E L ,a , I. 1. -Y� rn PL „„ '. }�'!, yT ®rs 61• CG c $ a_ il �, tl 9 • i [ ,. ? t S µ A'N T 1..,% i,.„.x 4:.10, 1« .ctA s� a�h5, t �. ' r � E }e r 2ti v�<-1 e 1[�r�q�1 v--, - i7"P+z .s aeon. . 4?; `� ate r ESNE.:Y ae,,,s‘4, t , E St t SN” ..,,:"°: 4 ,,,��d,4ty±' 'Z..ti r. ,Un[u `r HAKE:H �' SW TIP. '^• WI 2 5 ',:,,„.,,,N,tb' 4a`4 ® ,'� �•' ,,,,,,,,o,,...,- E , n,.ar(dCT qrt V fi'.•y r""� Pn i_ �9�, • e "'I •t .t. L ALNUTa n 41-,.' ..-vim , 2.4 Est' f + c, 2 r`1.. ;'. iN < �' i 1. ,-800 't ?P N .. 4� .r N':r s.Sr {- r 1 t ,t' 1 y{.. j ,',,'[i. � ,,,,,A..-- ,:r�i> '..z- L -"'(: E �. * � r 9'9S� o° u I ,[ SW ALBERTA ST rft1N , S+ Ft,rk 'MA1KI 'r�`, �0.t� t'A i 1 r`Zt'e' ,Tt.. : J 12500 FONNEKr-LS^ '� a v" ',A r yy�"", S £'..P; ;u r� to +� T}t 3 a 12100 1i�q y�A •,•-• ✓ ., s r �$M �, �kt SAw�a s t'..-.-.e `i, -`v+S _MARION ST � g S- rn , pro C•.t'`P gsr t i �t„ ry .:. sy�n _ ~ SN®mom,is ,,till',.., s '2 ,; .,' 'i 1�r�-.:,..o.:.'';,4_t'.` • j�� t 7 rr•vs q' tu.'E y d'`a�iEW P – Jt `t w r i'�k t ""a3 c , • 4t� t, t.s> :!'}Vt 5 77, ■,, 111111ti r,� �� }1��,1 P I }�`` TALON IN F ' iAtlduvE 1,-..-sw . T ifs' 1��.:,5-. t m rF'�T r. I'. Er'%7: i & 'b rnsvm h-1 • i 1,•A . 1 is N (t .tPlo AcC 7• '� ' lam. s?r',•51 ?` o 'i°� ' �sE �a>o Aa i ° fit ~�°° 7,yr}` j� s yp, ?t� f t'EDGEWC �� g p �rztarT 2 � � ti � � Y[STA >ti ,x a r FARx L' � .511. ICLVI •?� SN� r... i..: �•11.1- ;44,:e � 4.DR st 11 l G i„t ,,,f JR 0' `s° �tt�tt[��Y{�i, filLL LEN �i � '� '.,..., .g a t, ,, T"7"4. �.t-y _si4a 1 L,..a ice TA IN 1tyQ . '+r . 2 i Pi.",I RiMVE 4�• .. I •'73 r ..n a tt r °, a. .r's`t :ya �•k- t L. Z u,..a T° SW• --,, .�iJ f' ,��I . '60LFA� it { v: J 'Kw '°. rtNU �' sw woYtur „�� 4 �a t s:, ",.. i e�tnuNr ., .41 1 . fy� t s C , i 94- A R.'; t ) , Aa N(t\ L y , . S f 03M ta0 r L"I P� , Y �. S Cy�Sn '�• r µ t'7 .+J t oral t � 3,P: ..,a to �i+' '' �' r ,11 � � h N ills/ S R'' k, -t,, 1 I 1 �, .i, Y x iof . �R'� '4,,, Yt 4 - . : ',,. . �t�, „►�? .�`t��4,i N��.t.��'M E— ,r '' Naha rt• 4,,,, a L t a W i I IdAO VC ' '— -' 3 ca 17 - r $ � 300 ,k4, 5 a o r:Ut � I 1 IQ� e + y 6�'<: c • b '� ID a A4 7' k M P Y i4'J m• -NE_ LEY ,'`w t t'� s y��'� xt % •/ .,n,. M o 1300034.. -°tt:� � :Jt.. . SM.7. MUR000K"' _�._3�-:2.. tr :li 1 inch=1,900 feet LEGEND ; 0 0 12220 SW Grant Street ..„.4--., Fishman Wetland Determination q Environmental Services, LLC SITE LOCATION MAP CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND Source:Thomas Guide,Portland Metro Area,2001. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Figure # ] I July 2001 I Project#01062 • s / 1 l'N) � •O lll� r q { ol . �> ��# '•••••• •I f[ / + k k t \t r l� � rY\ 'f, ,` 4�... . .y ry .a • i—Q PD Z `� 1.!•. , .. ..,... ,... t\ '• .--*----ILIXLI::•• •••-.,..•••.*.;'' 7--i`... ijr 'l'.. ■J it t4ir-'641 •.: .• ....:_,--,.., /./7( . •• 31 ,Z r . I ,....".. — .. \ \\ ..t... .7-,--- .' ./c4i)WKZx;3••L., .....1 -.it: .:,.w,../ s, r-c.fi ,• . .• ��i , • ` '' ,��‹: •,1 1/l Soh..• -f.i 7� ,z I e ';��I 3p0•\ , _••.•:. ..64- „J.:J.. t r? 1 ...". ./:ii,,....---,�1 N€ tr - �•� - 7 ? • '' -sir . . ] 1 .-7.;16\-C101.5- ; 10(31NKlh-i•. • k ', •j �'E u11W {.IZ ( l • 1 \ .' ,> •b-µr ./yy"a4 rr •''' i :r-rf.;—}&.+..A i _ •i 1 _____/ � �r�`. _ ...-,l Ft�IVY e J �•�i' •C•-' l'::7:1 r 't.'' 'r L- \ _. I. -t '/'� } • �1:■ ��` ':a..�-` LOCATION Y�1f� is\�•• � :`. • yam '/%•-,';'4.:z--. 1 t • r o .' • \ 47.- l � l!: fr... f r .1• ` 1 Nr�•f O f.F ,-;,'":...13:.N 6•1 i •�')� ; of ) )if ' 1• t 0 ® \ "'r G C i� ' o S� •, -,r • ..11.!-_!....!•,-,.- /''7)a :Tit,. 8r ��,ri'! ;V''"a : '� y I y 1� • �,fJ.. f �j """ . - S k : )IcI.sai ; r ,•3i s / J N `4.•,<:• F/ice• ' / ' • y:i i't yo L.... y..-). ;.//: ., -! ,...-1 I...:. •7: .....,,•"*.i'.;.. 7g- -\, l ! j %,2-71-:.•1-1..•.4 1., 1 ,I?.,. •i ::1 1T Lt•� f�I SM ��•- '$i:?: •�r,/ • _+ •Fvj l' .fir •1. .',i i__.l/ti•1 1 , , A I{i .PI.. •e' 1 . r j . , f •/ • \•7....-4.•. - •♦� •. -, J-)'s y/f�,'•lI14194:34)). , :' 1 r" c Bk't•`Lb „ ••C .7-1.i::-1. i1•� 1,! •. !� ',- h;/. ��////j. .j :.• ,\ �l, II• , :',)-:.• i.••-rte •( _�m''.'-f, "1 i .f�f :_-%i.,!_,, ` .�-.. _^``ro r .1 .s s.. t1,7`.'t •t .r'.: "f ri ../ L - .>✓' .,.., j:-; _. 5 ••' • 01 ti'• + .- \\ r l r ( , \`. i}r.- ../:�\. /)? ;t,'.. .. .+ r t/. . _V„ •)-13F f) Y _ a}4. •• j .. Ro'.y.•r� y�•.�_ • \` �-�.�,: .. / �f . - ��1 �F" ./-�if Jr }j• //.J )�7 ? .I .f �•/f1z. (•y _ 1• �, .•,� ) F ;-r ^•C '/ ti i� . .-"7— i: 1 • t 1tf.. r t. �1- 141 iri}; r•'!� ',9b..-- _ i�ielnr-:%, �L� "--.:-.r.:.,..,,... ...,_'�•• T i_ i r,4�. .r .f�� . � t ••\ / . 10. r. •:• ^7t.00 i.i .iF.w \��`_ ! , .� • -. •Y. , . ,l ••r'• M�Y .,:- r /13 "_' r�i S •••.......,...... sr r ga rif- - R •• ° . �!".".;:.':;-..7i--------.-..;;;•.--....•-••;:. I � , r rt 1 V ; (p� j 'tl' Si.,) •M-1' ^". • j 1 l� 1` j 'W� , ' WCZ � ..L Y � ' � . Z / i .•- f � , to 9 f ,/-1•-... ' r' , 2 ' •l/L • t"4 :j• „e;- - —'''..m l inch=2,000 feet LEGEND dW O 0 12220 SW Grant Street o ,,,A-..,_,...1 Fishman Wetland Determination Environmental Services, LLC NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP Source:USFWS Beaverton,Oregon NWI CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND quadrangle, 1:58,000 CIA,8/81. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Figure#2 l July 2001 1 Project#01062 • . o .1. u.wna. >w tom J � /: q i" , Y� • a a.7 �E J � 11 ... % ,, i% 0 • �`4t i� v + i, P' ;y ii4:41. . .0'"7: ts -- ''. '/%11....,...''( I,tt.1. , 44 I iw f til �• f":.,-.. ;' J ' � � �/ Ei " k � ' —:a ryia r i.:,A'vrc v ;0s# t- � rx� �u� � ' F„ ; ' rc* i 2• Al :.�4 ..,',1410:-,4,,,' f k: a C01 t � 4a.. .•7.-5'14, c..9 1f� a A.1/- i�;� `ttb< `C'a �,y.s, /e-s�',it. rAf a 'ry'..4/ 4- R ' �•••' rr �� i f7.� �.;.` ''3" ' +45:f?j ::�•,• n '�y,/ `• yb :i.l� •'` •r`'• ,',� 44 yr 1 s't .., .:1,--,4,..,_'- :#. "tie r2.' J� -f•if �a'W ,_ •r •l4. 1:Sk f:47: ,3ddrZ t• '• A� flft3 ',� tjwdf.a. t%'t f r• `-• .;It,.'V. �', �'�/.s��°e?�j ",£.ri � � �� ,d x „y .. `mss... +'Y ..+r .1 �: ?4,74f L�� , N Y ��. �r •.srEp AA. i c r• �. I . •; 4-ic'�i M}!r s Q O' ,� /, „42,f4-.7.,,_, " "�. •'.',d X va4,,, 'u a •' Qr a 'y 1 9��t t.• i r3 1 Ry. YY''��T��YC w�.u`r... ',j ` ) lilt:, ''iy ' f+.f��r�.i, .•ry't1•C�r g Y by N ' •r a°f�! .::,. ftz' � 3.41-A∎ ID, -i ` i )rhr Hsnl' ". fir ( e• F'' r.i fir-7% + } .r .1 1. '1°7 ` Slej4 :��7gt. c,•;, :41.4!••∎44T f I�. F) i lr «• ^,j• T�••`„�_!' L; 4. . ,1'X� �7t`{.1 r r'-` *' S ..'rn••do�f+t►7��'17r..�Y Y 4�4a i'!'• 1 13rt E t--..---• .\•, t`+.[rr 4; t t ,a {I b?S r'1•►i s i ' ` f.Yi} •.j� r.a •,1*-At,, x , J'`' 'f c,..; - - A N. W F : ?w T - 11` . `°diy��4r A21-17.'1 yt�' �S'q+ ,y�lry 3 f: i run t '' :4430' 1 c i-. ,W1i t"'' . :N '4 •/ d. f q r �y :VA,,, : r 7 t. ` t '. '' S: 1 a ��11i'a• .41.,(- . )r a:' i, (}�.a et, '0,1.,Y.• �''a4��j� 1 t � j� �.dv. \r. ham' i fia"Yf 1 :%r�4 'f - -��0 ""j,, r fi�i,'s � ,.� c?tv 'ia ..V u. A tai .,y r �'s, ;.s, 143,„ .,.)ri lb t; 1 .0—v 4, "r , ` '4",---'-'r.V„ r4xi�Y :', 4s, ∎;-1 /• ^i n f .`a 11 e' 1.. ``� ' d } .a•. 4N.,,,\It..re '�f��g d tld5:i.,"1.4„ ss . : d AJD-i t� .�-c” > • , .. i� •...4 y1 .�1�. Yp 1-` Tr.L.,n-••�: �t � �i • �'a i SITE '. � 1 t «. �,�>r.-.1•7�;..• R,y,--1--;:•;.....S.,-� _ i�," {3,..:: y - .� ? ;' LOCATION r �! t'c'`, "t =r`r�A p s +1"+/3 i !gr �•S ,5t, J.1. '0.,-........,,,,,.....„ .. dr` �a.1. '.r r, ^„ ,..,,k k”,-,,Ir lt, t"4".4W,••• f 5- E u ,;Q�' �� are% cRt \; c 3 y .yt' �h�\�` -- r. ,AJ,r;.'' {'. X14.. `i� ('. ,,r�•yr;. ,Y.�a�i.Ia.00I.f. I. ` •s). 'r�'+' V. � ..t,:•,' ,+•• ,e' a 4� 2 48---., ,. ci h 1,'' s: - 1�•� 13tv''' '-Ill, y id s` � . �k, 3 ,:.;t" .Sf :1. �• N ? : �ISn r `'tir, I �A•. 4 w ► �.r /y_� IT ";R.al.,,,• J.., a ' y.. ' r 1.!....,-.w �iil � r,!' ) v h): raj. 1 t, * .T ' p� p tit °. f .4.x:r -' .@ {, ♦ r M ? y r> -..._•=.1'.',-.- < r E, f;'�' ." Irate✓s • • �� rL.i Ra s r; "At'i►� a :1 •",`�`. ',y f! •.• a: lI ai a vye.t r ay r .� , � r err 11 ^ 17E t.M �.►' c• t t pr ., • '■ ` 1 I:it., 4 a r d�°'ti y "'l∎ "�t S s;, /+aM Ir . •iTr� } . 1 t 1 r rfr Q ^' r'� w. :r .:a:,g, t;x: • , ,.-s , fir t V- 1 � .,.*.k....,114/ a� ��.l*r R�S�;. !' ` 6.4�rt'��, � to , ' ..,,„$641 4(r'lt-i" i•,,•.. .1 i.'',..4.6.!7...Azr,ittgi . ',#411 ?#1.1i1.11**-.i.....ii$44460../ * , '7/ )' '0.,:tk . 9 4 'a 41'7— ._p� 'e�'a�*'C' 1, '>,IJ •,1 .tii " rt. �r*.""k•-'4`� .I -....W.- 411/'" �!�C '�f.�`^ Y.: «" h �tH ,,►,,� '.�'c • �fc�.t' waa{�t :r�, �'`� \�.' S • _ ®/.0 °f es 9.97 r.7t ..:4•T•4!•'... �f'• I Y '� d'1.. �`..) Illm ml. 1 inch=1,667 feet • LEGEND 4 OO IWO 12220 SW Grant Street l -Aloha silt loam(hydric Huberly inclusions) o ~� Fishman Wetland Determination 30-McBee silty clay loam(hydric Cove&Wapato c' t1C . Environmental inclusions) , Services, LLC SOILS MAP Source:USDA SCS Soil Survey of Washington CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND County,Oregon, 1982,sheet 44. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Figure #3 I July 2001 I Project #01062+ • . 0 is J c s r ire ,, . ,, - . Allp'' ,., . %IN% 'Styr_ a „ link,. ,),- 4,--i , , „f.--- PF'i . lilt- 1*- AI; / .. • . 4141111W - ly T ii . p i '4 T r A „,.,.,,...i., ,, 2 / y�/ unity#4 , .. � y, ,� . gym. u,d 'l '1 .- •.A ,4,e, /... .4 . ..._..., *.. .. , .4,, --A„ 8 - i -.It lik I)/ e, *i joitivk $ M 1�/ 4f. R I I £ ty talkolit itie 4 , „,-,,,, ,,,,,i., , yA 0' ar a N. ;1 Sapp",: • *r.tie.7.' or , .+�r .. r f tY.;rt a `� 41k, vl -rip*, �; ” N o° 12220 SW Grant Street NStream A ,,At Fishman Wetland Determination Floodplain + Environmental ''\ 10 foot contours 100 0 100 200 Feet Services, LLC VEGETATED CORRIDOR Ell Tax lots CONDITION ASSESSMENT CONSULTANTS 14 ECOLOGY AND Source: Metro Regional Land Information System,photo date 1997. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Figure# 4 I July 2001 Project#01062 r ATTACHMENT A WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET . . • WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET- 1987 MANUAL Project#:Of 0f2 Site: 1 a a c.) 5/A) (,ra ri-.33. County State:O e Date: JM/a l Plot: A Applicant/Owner: Lori )'lays Sect.(1/4)a /Y.4.) Township;S Range Wet Up) Plot Location: ... o . : n• go- •. -..•• Topographic Location:_Y1arcd 6e r,c / 'u 3 .0 - -' - e c .,e GO A-I€r Do normal environmental conditions exist? Y N Explain: Are soils_ vegetation significantly disturbed?© Explain: VEGETATION *Dominant Plant Species % Cover Ind. *Dominant Plant Species % Cover Ind. Herb Stratum (% total cover: Oa ) (5 ft. radius) Shrub/Sapling Stratum (% total cover: 0' rad.) .) 0A9roSii,S alb P)0 Uk s AiScocr /D FAcCA 2.5 eneC o :Jaco6a c.,, I d FAG/JO _ .. - ? s, _ is, . .: FAc 3.pQ-,LAncr..41o3 r & S 5 � 3.Cerra I er'a Cer'aSi forn„S 4. L,V,Se M d erase S FAG 4. 5.Trr+ e-‘S GaeenSi S(') erk- CLJ 5. 6. 3.inCU,S e{L sL-.S -V Ii[,.) Tree Stratum (% total cover: ) (30 ft. radius) 7. C a-re x S P (no,l oli.tr) -1C — 1. 8. COr, ) d(u1 U S -.. pi l.,40-1 . 4r -AC. 2- 9. 3. Remarks: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-): Q/3 = L3 To Hydrophytic Vegetation Criterion Met? NO NWI Class SOILS Mapped unit name: Ai U h a -Si i-}- )O&n Matches Profile? Y) Taxonomy:_ Acq _i I.G xerDG1-.r_{ -S Drainage Class:,5cxYnel &} pcorki Depth Horizon Matrix Color Mottle A.bund., Size, Color, on Pores/Peds? Texture, Struct., Other V6--- v 3 a- no mAo a r , Si)4- v Y a, no r e d�X 1Gss c ,s 114-w/ Sa-t1 Histosol Reducing Conditions (test) Hi. Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Histic Epipedon Gleyed Organic Streaking Sulfidic Odor Mottled (w/i 10") Organic Pan Prob. Aquic Moisture Regime Concretions (w/i 3", >2mm) On Hydric Soils List Remarks: 5)i91-1-1- Cold Uaria-�-icr\.S T 0-11', iSo ar LA I n Spry 09 Hydric Soil Criterion / Indicators Met? YES mrs4- HYDROLOGY Depth of inundation: Depth to free water: Depth to saturation: seeps:- 1° Indicators 2° Indicators 2° Indicators Inundated Oxidized Root Channels in upper 12" _ Local Soil Survey Data Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves _ FAC-Neutral Test Water Marks Recorded Data Available (aerials, gauge)? Explain: Drift Lines Other: Sediment Deposits Remarks: . i/3 an/ +in ro A0)) c ,l+ Drainage Patterns Wetland Hydrology Criterion/Indicators Met? YESCNID DETERMINATION: Is this plot a Wetland? YES O .3 Comments: 1W - I_ - P. -,.m, - 1 a• • e__ 0 - ( +�i* o a . • . Determined by: u.1:/�. .� .�j� r - L A�-ea • Fishman Environmental Services rev 4/00 ATTACHMENT B VEGETATED CORRIDOR CONDITION ASSESSMENT DATA SHEETS 1 • getated corridor; 1) There • no practicable alternative to the requested developn -nt which will not disturb the sensitive area or vegetated co idor; g) There are public b erns of the encroachments; and h) For lots demonstrated to unbuildable by vegetated corridor regulations, the ve••tated corridor shall be reduced or removed to assure e lot will be buildable while still providing for the maxi[ urn vegetated corridor to the greatest extent practicable. 3.02.6 Tables and Figures Table 3.1 Vegetated Corridor Widths Sensitive Area Definition Slope Adjacent to Width of Vegetated Corridor Sensitive Area per Side Figure 3.1 -Graphic 1 • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% • 10 to <50 acres 15 feet • >50 to 100 acres 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands<0.5 acre 25 feet Figure 3.1 -Graphic 2 • 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 Figure 3.1 -Graphic 3 • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% • 10 to<50 acres 30 feet • >50 to 100 acres 50 feet Figure 3.1 -Graphic 4 • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 ft • Rivers, streams,and springs with year Measure in 25foot increments round flow from the starting point to the top • Streams with intermittent flow draining of ravine(break in > 25% slope), >100 acres add 35 feet past the top of ravine • Natural lakes and ponds Figure 3.1 Vegetated Corridor Width Graphic Storm and Surface Water Rules Chapter 3 - - Page 10 , STARTING POINT <25% o 1. -intermittent streams. 10 to<50 acres drainage 15�I • intermittent streams,>50 to<100 acre drainage H 25. •wetlands<0.5 acre STARTING POINT <25% 2. • wetlands>0.5 acres Niir •rivers,streams,springs with year round flow I� - intermittent streams,>100 acre drainage 50' • natural lakes and ponds STARTING 2010 POINT ; 3. 1 I' 30' ►t •intermittent streams, 10 to<50 acres drainage I1 50, ►I •intermittent streams,>50 to<100 acres TOP OF RAVINE h 35' *I 1♦-41 STARTING 15'WITH GEOTECH POINT 725°1' INTERMITTENT SPRING 4. NNW If 50 ►t F f VARIABLE 200'MAX •wetlands •rivers,streams,springs with year round flow •intermittent streams,>100 acre drainage • natural lakes and ponds Storm and Surface Water Rules Chapter 3 - - Page 11 M/i' Table 3.2 Vegetated Corridor Standards Existing Vegetated Corridor Condition Requirements of Vegetated Corridor Protection, Enhancement,and/or Mitigation Good Corridor Condition • Provide certification,per Appendix C:Natural Resource Assessments,to Agency or City/County • Combination of native trees,shrubs,and that the vegetated corridor meets condition criteria. groundcover covering greater than 80%of the area • Remove any invasive non-native species' within the And corridor by hand. • Greater than 50%tree canopy exists (aerial measure) • If impact is to occur,provide Agency or City with a Or native plant revegetation plan appropriate to the site • Less than 10%of the area is covered by conditions developed by an ecologist/biologist or invasive, non-native species or noxious landscape architect to restore condition. See weeds Appendix E: Landscape Design. • Revegetate impacted area per approved plan to re- establish "good"corridor conditions Marginal Corridor Condition • Provide certification, per Appendix C:Natural Resource Assessments, to Agency or City/County • Combination of native trees,shrubs, and that the vegetated corridor meets condition criteria. groundcovers covering 50%-80%of the area • Remove any invasive non-native species' within the And corridor by hand or mechanically with small • 26-50%tree canopy exists(aerial equipment,as appropriate to minimize damage to measure) existing native vegetation. or• • 10-20%of the area is covered by invasive, • Provide Agency or City with a native plant non-native species or noxious weeds' revegetation plan appropriate to the site conditions developed by an ecologist/biologist or landscape (Enhancement up to "good"corridor condition architect to restore to a good corridor condition. See required regardless of planned impact or not) . Appendix E: Landscape Requirements. • Vegetate corridor to establish "good"corridor conditions Degraded Corridor Condition • Provide certification,per Appendix C:Natural Resource Assessments,to Agency or City/County • Combination of native trees,shrubs,and that the vegetated corridor meets condition criteria. groundcovers covering is less than 50%of the area • Remove any invasive non-native species' within the And corridor by hand or mechanically as appropriate. • Less than 25%tree canopy exists(aerial measure) • Provide Agency or City with a native plant Or revegetation plan appropriate to the site conditions • Greater than 20%of the area is covered by developed by an ecologist/biologist or landscape invasive, non-native species or noxious architect to restore to a good corridor condition. See weeds' Appendix E: Landscape Requirements. (Enhancement up to "good"corridor condition • Vegetate corridor to establish "good"corridor required regardless of planned impact or not) conditions Per State, Metro Native Plant List, or other local plant list, whichever is more comprehensive USA Design and Construction Standards- February 2000 G:\USAstds\USAstdsTable3.l.wpd Storm and Surface Water Rules-Chapter 3 -- Page 14 Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment for Clean Water Services Natural Resource Assessment Page 1 of 4 Site: 12220 SW Grant Street, Tigard Investigator: Stacy Benjamin & Mirth Walker Date: 6/19/01 Community # 1- Forested Oregon ash upland slope adjacent to Fanno Creek % of Corridor Plot # 1 - East portion of slope, 10 feet west of downstream Oregon ash tree Tree Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? -30-foot radius: Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia, FACW), 90%, native Shrub Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? -30-foot radius: clustered wild rose (Rosa pisocarpa, FAC), 20%, native Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU), 20%, invasive beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta, FACU), 5%, native Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis, FACU), 5%, native snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus, FACU), 5%, native ornamental hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna, FACU+), trace, non-native Herb Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? - 10-foot radius: reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), 10%, invasive English ivy (Hedera helix, UPL), 10%, invasive bentgrass (Agrostis species, -), 5%, probably non-native blue wildrye (Elymus glaucus, FACU), 5%, native common horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC), 5%, native fringecup (Tellima grandiflora, UPL), trace, native % Cover by Natives: 135% % Tree Canopy: 90% % Invasive/Noxious: 20% Corridor Condition (if only 1 plot; otherwise average plots for each community): Good Fishman Environmental Services, LLC G:\200I\OI062\VCCApIots.wpd Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment for Clean Water Services Natural Resource Assessment Page 2 of 4 Site: 12220 SW Grant Street, Tigard Investigator: Stacy Benjamin & Mirth Walker Date: 6/19/01 Community # 2 - Forested Oregon white oak upland slope adjacent to Fanno Creek % of Corridor Plot # 2 - Central portion of slope, east of Oregon white oak Tree Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? -30-foot radius: Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana, UPL), 80%, native Shrub Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? -30-foot radius: Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU), 40%, invasive clustered wild rose (Rosa pisocarpa, FAC), 35%, native beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta, FACU), 20%native red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera [[sericea]], FACW), 10%, native Douglas' spirea(Spiraea douglasii, FACW), 10%, native Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis, FACU), 5%, native cherry or plum (Prunus species, FAC-/FACU/UPL), 5%, native Sitka mountain ash (Sorbus sitchensis, UPL), trace, native deodar cedar, trace, non-native Herb Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? - 10-foot radius: common horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC), 5%, native catchweed bedstraw(Galium aparine, FACU), trace, native % Cover by Natives: 170% %Tree Canopy: 80% % Invasive/Noxious: 40% Corridor Condition (if only 1 plot; otherwise average plots for each community): Good Fishman Environmental Services, LLC G:\2001\01062\VCCAplots.wpd 4 Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment for Clean Water Services Natural Resource Assessment Page 3 of 4 Site: 12220 SW Grant Street, Tigard Investigator: Stacy Benjamin & Mirth Walker Date: 6/19/01 Community # 3 - Riprap slope adjacent to Fanno Creek % of Corridor Plot # 3 - West portion of slope, immediately downstream of bridge Tree Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? - 30-foot radius: None Shrub Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? -30-foot radius: I-limalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU), 25%, invasive Herb Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? - 10-foot radius: common horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC), 10%, native tansy ragwort (Senecio jacobaea, FACU), trace, non-native nipplewort (Lapsana communis, UPL), trace, non-native common dandelion (Taraxacum ofJIcinale, FACU), trace, non-native % Cover by Natives: 10% % Tree Canopy: None % Invasive/Noxious: 25% Corridor Condition (if only 1 plot; otherwise average plots for each community): Degraded Fishman Environmental Services, LLC G:\2001\01062\VCCAplots.wpd Vegetated Corridor Condition Assessment for Clean Water Services Natural Resource Assessment Page 4 of 4 Site: 12220 SW Grant Street,Tigard Investigator: Stacy Benjamin & Mirth Walker Date: 6/19/01 Community #4 - Mowed grass at top of slope % of Corridor Plot # 4 -North of Communities 1,2 & 3 Tree Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? - 30-foot radius: None Shrub Species, % Cover, Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? -30-foot radius: None Herb Species, % Cover,Native ?, Invasive or Noxious ? - 10-foot radius: perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne, FACU), 40%, non-native yellow clover(Trifolium dubium, UPL), 25%, non-native white clover(Trifolium repens, FAC),20%,non-native bentgrass (Agrostis species, -), 10% probably non-native common horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FAC), trace, native catchweed bedstraw(Galium aparine, FACU), trace, native bluegrass(Poa species, -),trace, probably non-native spotted cats-ear(Hypochaeris radicata, FACU), trace, non-native common dandelion(Taraxacum officinale, FACU),trace, non-native ajuga (Ajuga reptans, UPL),trace,non-native crane's-bill(Geranium species, FAC-/FACU+/UPL), trace, probably non-native vetch(Vicia species, -),trace, probably non-native % Cover by Natives: Trace % Tree Canopy: None % Invasive/Noxious: None Corridor Condition (if only 1 plot: otherwise average plots for each community): Degraded Fishman Environmental Services, LLC G.\2001\OI 062\VCCAplots.wpd .• , ATTACHMENT C SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 01062 Page 7 12220 SW GRANT STREET � 1 14+ art ti >r ' �-�s ,�._ _.. l a- t :/,' Ire, t � { C yx f � s�^ s4 ti� � is /, ' art. ,1, .rr' 414-/ f�'y�tf -� ., .,-',414,. . -,, ' ' 4i.V.-4,.' --- ,,,,- ' 4,4 , A • �A_ ' s tir x }µ '. � Photo 1. Upland Plot 1 (yellow flagging)and top of bank of Fanno Creek(pink flagging). i .. �. 1� /' tY! r 3{�i N-' s - ....f" ` rd . 1 { . x . ' , '' k '',- ' r ♦ �+1 ��,,. h � '� - l �- l ' l� r ~ �. a am „ . t1 � ,„ , 5 r { Y11.44{4 r r7 r 1 i ` iA• 0,41'r r` e i,. , e S ', :;,..;",3 R 't F w4 / 4Cc S� ' ( t � 7 �1",..ii,,,' 0B Y u1.a t , "5 $ � t r.• f't 1 + jr• t 7;4-44614' r,t t.� se"a` '} g., ; v r r W f - .. 6 s _1, 1 r wi r S r x r 4y. .K �. ll :. uls tr+. • t t r F"• i J S 1.7;°-'...:4.4 .. s $ 11 t 't r ;. IA" ,. a <it J,f { • • d2 1 Photo 2.View south of vegetated corridor, showing mowed herbaceous Community 4 in foreground and forested Communities 1 and 2 in background (riprap slope Community 3 is located to the west). Fishman Environmental Services LLC Project 01062 photos by S. Benjamin 6/19/01 12220 SW GRANT STREET, TIGARD VEGETATED CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT PLAN Planting Specifications: Scientific Name Common Name Size Spacing Planting Location Quantity Berberis aquifolium tall Oregon grape 1 gallon 11 groups of 3; plants 5 feet on center Area A 33 Holodiscus discolor oceanspray 1 gallon 11 groups of 3; plants 5 feet on center Area A 33 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir 2 gallon 15 feet on center Area A 12 Quercus gar,yana Oregon white oak 2 gallon 15 feet on center Area A 6 Symphoricarpos albus snowberry 1 gallon 6 groups of 3; plants 5 feet on center Area B 18 Thula plicata western red cedar 2 gallon 10 feet on center Area B 11 Planting Notes: 1) Plantings should be installed after the onset of the fall rainy season (October or November) or in the spring (April or May). Planting during the fall instead of the spring allows plants a longer establishment period before the start of the dry summer months. 2) Plantings will have protection to discourage weed competition and wildlife damage. Weed free mulch shall be applied in a 3 foot diameter and 3 inch deep layer around all tree and shrub plantings to retain moisture and discourage weed growth. Plastic tubing shall be installed around all tree plantings to protect them from browsing by nutria and/or beaver. Each tube should be slit up the entire length of the tube to ensure that maturing trees are not constrained from growing in diameter by the tubing. Maintenance Plan: 1) Clean Water Services (CWS) requires a two year maintenance period for vegetated corridor mitigation. Irrigation is recommended during the dry summer months. Although the occurrence of invasive species on the site is currently low, weed control is to be conducted twice per year, as per CWS requirements, to prevent invasive species from becoming established on the site. The first weed control site visit is to be conducted by June Pt, and the second weed control site visit is to be conducted by September 30th for two years following planting. Invasive species are to be controlled using a combination of mechanical and chemical treatments, i.e. cut or mow top growth of invasive species to prevent seed set and target spray with Rodeo. 2) Clean Water Services' success criterion for mitigation sites is 80% survival of all tree and shrub plantings. The mitigation site is to be monitored annually to assess survival of tree and shrub plantings. Although it is not currently required, we recommend submitting a report documenting plant survival and occurrence of invasive species to Clean Water Services along with photographs showing site Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 01115 Page 1 of 2 12220 SW GRANT STREET, TIGARD VEGETATED CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT PLAN conditions. If survival falls below 80% at any time during the two year monitoring period, the mitigation site will need to replanted, and other corrective measures, such as species substitution, additional irrigation, etc., may need to be implemented. If replanting is necessary, the monitoring period will be extended for two years from the time of replanting to ensure that the site meets the 80% survival criterion. Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project 01115 Page 2 of 2 ■ ■ 1 ..1. ',4%;,"::',-, r -- ', \ , ‘-, '0 • ,,.. ...11 . r...7,,,,l'' \.L.... \ I* . ''..`. '1 ■ , , ■ , __ ..,. ..:.. .,. „,,,, . .., ,...,. ., cp ,,,,. ,. . . . . •:. -0 .....4. ..• ' •S'i, ---- - - - ` '5° .• 't:5 '`,....,.. --...' ...-.• .- •"1 1-0 .t.- :11, ,/ ,I ‘. ' 40 4.3\\,C., <J.) • , , .N-‘-‘-■ .:'4. .-• .....''' - - \ac.),404._,..,- 2-=:-. , ----- rse 7- p„, . 43 c) -"' ---'-- "N-EDGE OF CREEK ___ ...,_ , Ill Vg. - . Gq- 4silr ,- , - 0 0 .,. .., er), :.4:.:'''' . -T-LPs;4e-fr 4- \-. - IS / - (E)_‘ , -4- in' ', s, '. /'.,,,, ''; , •3 id 4?), T- 0 ' / LC...Q__. • . ' :‘,..■:': "'‘ 4 .,7,,. 7 ,., 0,' ', (CV ■, 7--' ' \q, ,_..114.,,, ,..:.• -. ' / ...3"-- ■ ,c\/ --2.%A..-4•••' ,q,... ..,;' i e \f‘ C 1 flli 4 ., IP.--'-' 1...-7,- ;f .lio .... .i .--/----Q 9 6 k;i t 5 A B „, i_ „i .,/ ..- ,:., iv 3 . '-;.--'-e--:::s..--,..i_ , i----=:;.-_-- , ---> -- - - -- ,.=A,-...-:-,- 475.62_ 56'00, *-------..................... _- ""°°- :-.:': ..c.- 7,C,___,--67-"---j,-+, -.A-7..C. _.2'.--Al...,t -- -,--•t:--z ----------- \ \ 1 I IN ---____________ ... 85.04' s c.-7-,..7- --,---,---_--_-_---,,,--,_--,..--. ,' .,. , -- .. _ . 1 .... ... N ■ 1/4.1 1 00” "I A, •••• ...• \ ) 85.31 ' 4 FA\ . •\`- 4-- NNO , C R E El I ,,‘,,,IY" cc' vcs` LEGEND ..•■■ o Area A(4,055 sq. ft.) Area B (1,702 sq. ft.) 144 o 0 12220 SW Grant Street, Tigard G=tall Oregon grape S =snowberry 0 ,./1141,4-_,/_ Fishman Vegetated Corridor Enhancement Plan 0=oceanspray C=western red cedar 0 \A •••• CZ, Environmental F=Douglas fir .....i■"1". Services, LLC s . WO =Oregon white oak 1 inch=20 feet PLANTING PLAN CONSULTANTS IN ECOLOGY AND Source: Lewis&Van Vleet Engineers, 11/01. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Figure# 1 I November 2001 I Project# 01115 GeO+ CJI Report LEWIS & VAN VLEET Incorporated principals Chris c. van vleet. p.e. gargJ. lewis. p.e. STORM WATER CALCULATIONS FOR TIGARD OFFICE 12220 Grant St. Tigard, Oregon FOR John Hadley co F6ort , '/ X14 2 `i Eh i ( r,? v z, k30, *r )e 4RMA .- EXPIRESI2/31/OL Lewis &Van Vleet, Inc. Job Number 0126R consulting engineers 18660 s.w. hoones ferry road tualatin. oregon 97062 (503] 885.8605 phone (503] 885.120 6 fax CIVIL CALCULATIONS Job TIGARD OFFICE Client JOHN HADLEY Job No. 01268 By BSD Date 12/18/01 Sheet 1 SITE AREAS Total Site Area: 30,604 sf= 0.703 ac Existing Impervious Area: (To be removed) Gravel = 4,290 sf= 0.10 ac With a 40 % pavement equivalent= 1,716 sf Pavement= 480 sf= 0.01 ac Total Equiv. Pavement Area = 2,196 sf= 0.05 ac Proposed Impervious Area: Pavement= 5,180 sf= 0.12 ac Roof= 603 sf= 0,01 ac Total New Impervious Area = 5,783 sf= 0.13 ac New Impervious Area: (Proposed-Existing) = 5,783 sf-2,196 sf= 3,587 sf WATER QUALITY(Stormwater Management Storm Filter) Water Quality Flow = (0.36 in) x (New Impervious Area) (12 in/hr) x (4 hr) x (60 min/hr) x (60 sec/min) Water Quality Flow = (0.36 in) x (3,587 sf) = 0.007 cfs (12 in/hr) x (4 hr) x (60 min/hr) x (60 sec/min) * Provide a Stormwater Management Catch Basin Storm Filter with (1) Cartridge. Storm Filter capacity = 15 gpm (0.03 cfs) per cartridge with a maximum bypass flow of 1.0 cfs. See Attached Detail. DETENTION DETENTION IS NOT REQUIRED PIPE SIZE Q = CiA C= Drainage Coefficient= 0.9 I = Rainfall Intensity (10 yr storm) = 2.10 in/hr A = Drainage Area = 5,783 sf= 0.13 ac Q = (0.9) x (2.10 in/hr) x (0.13 ac) Q = 0.25 cfs SHEET 1 'JA=-a. Q 5 5Tfr OTENERr L NOTES: 1.) STORMFlLTER BY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT INC., PORTLAND, OREGON (800-548-4667). STORMWATER a 2.) CATCH BASIN MUST BE SET LEVEL. MANAGEMENT 3.) EXTERNAL PIPING AND COUPLINGS TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. 4.) FLEXIBLE COUPUNG TO BE USED AT INLET 6 OUTLET. FERNCO OR ENGINEER APPROVED. 2035 N.E. COLUMBIA BL V. • PORTLAND. OR 97211 (800) 548-4667 • FAX: (502) 240-9553 i 5.) STORM FILTER REQUIRES REGULAR MAINTENANCE. REFER TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE , MANUAL FOR DETAILS. SINGLE CARTRIDGE STEEL 6.) CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER SPECIFICATIONS: STANDARD UNIT H-20 UNIT (OPTIONAL) CATCH BASIN LOAD RATING: 12,000 20,000 (MIA) ST O R M F l LT E R® DATA CONSTRUCTION: 10 GAUGE E SlEtt 1/4' STEEL PLATE INLET GRATE: CAST IRON DUCTILE IRON CONCRETE COLLAR: NOT REQUIRED REQUIRED STRUCTURE CALLOUT ID RIM ELEVATION WATER QUALITY FLOW (CFS) PEAK FLOW (CFS) 2-5' 1 RETURN PERIOD OF PEAK FLOW MEDIA TYPE _H-20 LOADING REQUIRED?' L Y/N —NMENIMMINIIII SOLJD COVER AT INLET?' Y/N A FILE PIPE DATA I.E. DIAMETER aMA1MBER INLET . INLET STUB* 2' 2 3/4• OUTLET STUB(9 STD)" BAFFLE CIRCLE CONFIGURATION: r a a, F1LTERj 1._15• . .. OTHER NON—STANDARD ITEMS OR SPECIALS: CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER — SECTION VIEW , STALL 4T-7 'NON—STANDARD ITEMS AVAILABLE AT EXTRA COST B 8' WILE!' PIPE STUB RADIAL FLOW CARTRIDGE r � =sue A DIAMOND PLATE COVER A JIM/� IN:. ,_ `l !IN--,�\I� HINGED CLEANOUi \.%s LID •, PULL/UFT PIPE INLET STUB ANCHOR (TIP) INLET GRATE B (OPTIONAL) CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER — PLAN VIEW s0UL N.1.5. INLET GRATE Agillill Isalrommemilisommuminesea `\ CAPPED CLEANOUT IN \ � OVERFLOW BYPASS WEIR 043'-8 3/10' CORROSION RESISTANT ele=m■ COATING, ALL SURFACES 8' PIPE OUTLET STUB FILTER DWIBER INLET CAMBER 1'-11 11/16' 2'-4 5/8' no S ORMEATER MANAGEMENT StormfYlter° CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER - SECTION VIEW 0.3. PATSNT No. 5.322,820. S.uE N.r I-. No. 5,707,527. No. 8.027,630. No. 5,824.5715• AND O'THER 11.3. AND POREIGN PAT@R'B PENDING SHEET m er.OOW om®eT: o�ONE OWN OWN SWININFIL11, Drew R A4,G +••rim et•. *TM_ooze OWN � 1/I •• P assow Cep _Tw. i MA1 1 1 J TRJM11►A7R SG4E: PROJECT NO. i DRAIww0 FILE TALE NEXT AS 0(ONN 2000 I CSSF_S773.0wC - LAST Win AI•.0 PLOT DAM 1731/2000 LEWIS & VAN VLEET Incorporated principals cFhris c. van vleet. p.e. garg j. lewis. p.e. February 4, 2002 Alvin Elkins 32224 SW Boones Bend Road Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 RE: 12220 Grant Street Tigard, Oregon Dear Mr. Elkins: I am a consultant working for the developer of a project at the above mentioned address. You should have already received notice about our project. The developer wants to use the existing residence as an office. The office use complies with the zoning. One of the requirements for development is to provide 8 parking spaces. The parking and drive areas are required to be paved. The stormwater runoff from the pavement will be collected and treated prior to discharge to Fanno Creek. In order to get the pipe to Fanno Creek it will need to cross your property. A trench would be excavated, the pipe installed, then the backfilled area would be revegetated. We will need your authorization to do this work on your parcel. Please call me to discuss this at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, Kim McMillan, P.E. Copy to: John Hadley Brad Kilby, City of Tigard Georgie Earl, ReMax KSM:kmc consulting engineers 18660 s.w. boones ferry road tualatin. Oregon 97062 (503] 665.6505 phone [503] 885.1206 fax LEWIS & VAN VLEET Incorporate d principals chris c.van vleet. p.e. gary J. lewis. p.e. January 30, 2002 To: Brad Kilby, Planner From: Kim McMillan, P.E. Cc: John Hadley Re: Red Ink, Inc. Hydrology and Soils Report Based on the Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon the soils present on our site are Aloha Silt Loam with the following characteristics: Somewhat poorly drained Found at elevations between 150 and 200 feet Permeability is moderately slow Available water capacity is 11 to 13 inches Runoff is slow and hazard of erosion is slight Hydrologic Soil Group: C Uses for this soil includes habitat,recreation and homesites Properties for Building site development (regarding the 600 sf addition): For dwellings without basements and small commercial buildings there is moderate limitation. A moderate limitation indicates that soil properties and site features are unfavorable for the specified use,but the limitations can be overcome or minimized by special planning and design. A representative profile: Surface layer is dark-brown silt loam about 8" thick Subsoil is a dark-brown and dark yellowish-brown, mottled Silt loam about 38 inches thick Substratum is dark yellowish-brown,mottled silt loam and Very fine sandy loam about 19"thick The profile is medium acid throughout consulting engineers 18650 s.w. boones ferry road tualatin. oregon 97 062 [503] 885.8605 phone (503) 1385.120 6 fax • 88 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 8.—Building site development ["Depth to rock" and some of the other terms that describe restrictive soil features are defined in the Glossary. See text for defini- tions of "slight," "moderate," and "severe." Absence of an entry means soil was not rated] Dwellings Dwellings Small Soil map and Shallow Local roads map symbol excavations without with commercial and streets basements basements buildings Aloha I Severe: wetness __ Moderate: Severe: wetness __ Moderate: Moderate: wetness, low wetness, low wetness, strength. strength. low strength. Amity: 2 Severe: wetness __ Severe: wetness __ Severe: wetness -- Severe: wetness __ Moderate: wetness. Astoria: 3E, 3F Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Briedwell: 48, 58 - Severe: small Slight Slight Slight Slight. stones. 5C Severe: small Moderate: slope __ Moderate: slope __ Severe: slope Moderate: stones. slope. 5D - Severe: small Severe: slope ____ Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. stones,slope. Carlton: 6B . Severe: wetness __ Moderate: low Severe: wetness __ Moderate: low Moderate: strength, strength, low strength, wetness, wetness, shrink-swell. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. 6C Severe: wetness __ Moderate: slope, Severe: wetness __ Severe: slope Moderate: low strength, slope, low shrink-swell. strength, shrink-swell. Cascade: 78 Severe: wetness __ Moderate: Severe: wetness __ Moderate: slope, Moderate: wetness, low wetness, low low strength, strength. strength. wetness. 7C Severe: wetness __ Moderate: slope, Severe: wetness __ Severe: slope Moderate: wetness, low slope, low strength. strength, wetness. 7D, 7E, 7F Severe: slope, Severe: slope Severe: slope, Severe: slope Severe: slope. wetness, wetness. Chehalem: SC Severe: wetness, Severe: Severe: wetness, Severe: low Severe: low too clayey. shrink-swell, shrink-swell, strength, strength, low strength. low strength. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. Chehalis: 9, 10 _ Severe: floods ____ Severe: floods ____ Severe: floods ____ Severe: floods ____ Severe: floods. Cornelius: 1118: Cornelius part __ Moderate: Moderate: Moderate: Moderate: slope, Moderate: wetness. shrink-swell, wetness, low shrink-swell, low strength, Iow strength. strength. low strength. shrink-swell. Kinton part ____ Moderate: Moderate: low Moderate: Moderate: slope, Moderate: wetness. strength. wetness, low low strength. low strength. strength. 1I IC: Cornelius part __ Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Severe: slope Moderate: wetness, shrink-swell, wetness, low slope, low low strength. strength. strength, shrink-swell. 82 - SOIL SURVEY TABLE 6.—Recreational development—Continued Soil name and Camp areas Picnic areas Playgrounds Paths and trails map symbol Xerochrepts: '46F: Xerochrepts part____ Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Haploxerolls part ___ Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. 1 47D: Xerochrepts part ___ Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: depth to Moderate: slope. Rock outcrop part. rock,slope. This mapping unit is made up of two or more dominant kinds of soil. See mapping unit description for the composition and behavior of the whole mapping unit. water table, depth to bedrock, and susceptibility to risk of polluting ground water, and trafficability affect flooding. Stones, boulders, and a shallow depth to bed- the suitability of a soil for this purpose. The best soils rock interfere with installation. Excessive slope may have a loamy or silty texture, have moderate or slow cause lateral seepage and surfacing of the effluent in permeability, are deep to bedrock and a seasonal water downslope areas. Also, soil erosion and soil slippage table, are free of large stones and boulders, and are are hazards where absorption fields are installed in not subject to flooding. In areas where the seasonal sloping soils. water table is high, water seeps into the trenches and Some soils are underlain by loose sand and gravel causes problems in excavating and filling the trenches. or fractured bedrock at a depth less than 4 feet below Also, seepage into the refuse increases the risk of the tile lines. In these soils the absorption field does pollution of ground water. Clayey soils are likely to be not adequately filter the effluent, and as a result ground sticky and difficult to spread. Sandy or gravelly soils water supplies in the area may be contaminated. generally have rapid permeability that might allow Percolation tests are performed to determine the noxious liquids to contaminate local ground water. absorptive capacity of the soil and its suitability for Unless otherwise stated, the ratings in table 7 apply septic tank absorption fields. These tests should be only to soil properties and features within a depth of performed during the season when the water table is about 6 feet. If the trench is deeper, ratings of slight highest and the soil is at minimum absorptive capacity. or moderate may not be valid. Site investigation is In many of the soils that have moderate or severe needed before a site is selected. limitations for septic tank absorption fields, it may be In the area type of sanitary landfill, refuse is placed possible to install special systems that lower the sea- on the surface of the soil in successive layers. The sonal water table or to increase the size of the absorp- limitations caused by soil texture, depth to bedrock, tion field so that satisfactory performance is achieved. and stone content do not apply to this type of landfill. Sewage lagoon areas are shallow ponds constructed Soil wetness, however, may be a limitation because of to hold sewage while bacteria decompose the solid and difficulty in operating equipment. liquid wastes. Lagoons have a nearly level flow area Daily cover for landfill should be soil that is easy to surrounded by cut slopes or embankments of corn- excavate and spread over the compacted fill during both pacted, nearly impervious soil material. They generally wet and dry weather. Soils that are loamy or silty and are designed so that depth of the sewage is 2 to 5 feet. free of stones or boulders are better than other soils. Impervious soil at least 4 feet thick for the lagoon Clayey soils may be sticky and difficult to spread; floor and sides is required to minimize seepage and sandy soils may be subject to soil blowing. contamination of local ground water. Soils that are In addition to these features, the soils selected for very high in organic matter and those that have stones final cover of landfills should be suitable for growing and boulders are undesirable. Unless the soil has very plants. In comparison with other horizons, the A hor- slow permeability, contamination of local ground izon in most soils has the best workability, more or- water is a hazard in areas where the seasonal high ganic matter, and the best potential for growing plants. water table is above the level of the lagoon floor. In Thus, for either the area- or trench-type landfill, stock- soils where the water table is seasonally high, seepage piling material from the A horizon for use as the of ground water into the lagoon can seriously reduce surface layer of the final cover is desirable. its capacity for liquid waste. Slope, depth to bedrock, Where it is necessary to bring in soil material for and susceptibility to flooding also affect the location daily or final cover, thickness of suitable soil material of sites for sewage lagoons or the cost of construction. available and depth to a seasonal high water table in Shear strength and permeability of compacted soils soils surrounding the sites should be evaluated. Other affect the performance of embankments. factors to b• • • ated are those that affect reclama- Sanitary landfill is a method of disposing of solid t'• • • .. • borro -as, s • as slope, erodibility, waste, either in excavated trenches or on the surface and •otential for pl.nt growth. of the soil. The waste is spread, compacted in layers ;wilding site development and covered with thin layers of soil. Landfill areas ar subject to heavy vehicular traffic. Ease of excavatio The de!ree and kind of so' imitations that affect 92 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 8.Building site development—Continued Soil map and Shallow Dwellings Dwellings Small Local roads map symbol excavations without with commercial and streets basements basements buildings 44C, 44D Moderate: slope __ Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Severe: slope Severe: low low strength, low strength, strength. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. Woodburn: 45A Severe: wetness __ Moderate: Severe: wetness __ Moderate: Moderate: wetness, low wetness, low strength, strength, low strength, shrink-swell. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. 45B Severe: wetness __ Moderate: Severe: wetness __ Moderate: slope, Moderate: low wetness, low wetness, low strength, strength, strength. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. 45C Severe: wetness __ Moderate: slope, Severe: wetness __ Severe: slope Moderate: wetness, low slope,low gt stren h. strength, shrink-swell. 45D Severe: slope, Severe: slope Severe: slope, Severe: slope Severe: slope. wetness. wetness. Xerochrepts: 1 46 F: Xerochrepts part Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Haploxerolls part Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. 1470: Xerochrepts part Severe: depth to Severe: depth to Severe: depth to Severe: depth to Severe: depth rock, slope. rock,slope. rock, slope. rock, slope. to rock, slope. Rock outcrop part. 'This mapping unit is made up of two or more dominant kinds of soil. See mapping unit description for the composition and be- havior of the whole mapping unit. shallow excavations, dwellings with and without base- by slope of the soil and the probability of flooding. ments, small commercial buildings, and local roads and Ratings do not apply to soil horizons below a depth of streets are indicated in table 8. A slight limitation 6 feet unless otherwise noted. indicates that soil properties are favorable for the In the soil series descriptions, the consistence of speci use; any limitation is minor and easily over- each soil horizon is defined and the presence of very come A moderate limitation indicates that soil proper- firm or extremely firm horizons, usually difficult to ties a site features are unfavorable for the specified eavate, is indicated. use, but the limitations can be overcome or minimized Lpwellings and small commercial buildings referred by special planning and design. A severe limitation in- to in table 8 are built on undisturbed soil and have dicates one or more soil properties or site features are foundation loads of a dwelling no more than three so unfavorable or difficult to overcome that a major in- stories high. Separate ratings are made for small com- crease in construction effort,special design, or intensive mercial buildings without basements and for dwellings maintenance is required. For some soils rated severe, with and without basements. For such structures, sub- such costly measures may not be feasible. (fig. 14) soils should be sufficiently stable that cracking or sub- Shaost l measures are not be for pipelines, sewer- sidence from settling or shear failure of the foundation p p do not occur. These ratings were determined from lines, telephone and power transmission lines, base- estimates of the shear strength, compressibility, and ments, open ditches, and cemeteries. Such digging or shrink-swell potential of the soil. Soil texture, plastic- trenching is influenced by the soil wetness of a high ity and in-place density, potential frost action, soil seasonal water table, the texture and consistence of wetness, and depth to a seasonal high water table were soils, the tendency of soils to cave in or slough, and also considered. Soil wetness and depth to a seasonal the presence of very firm, dense soil layers, bedrock, high water table indicate potential difficulty in pro- or large stones. In addition, excavations are affected viding adequate drainage for basements, lawns, and • WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON 93 �• lsa, 6° .1. i .k wry d r M"41e,%6VA,,M6.e..,._. "- sk .46"'" 4,4 A-A,WIWgilt „ X 111 7. Figure 14.—Homesites on Lanrelwood silt loam soils. gardens. Depth to bedrock, slope, and the large stones ratings of good, fair, or poor. The texture, thickness, in or on the soil are also important considerations in and organic-matter content of each soil horizon are the choice of sites for these structures and were con- important factors in rating soils for use as construction sidered in determining the ratings. Susceptibility to materials. Each soil is evaluated to the depth observed flooding is a serious limitation. and described as the survey is made, generally about Local roads and streets referred to in table 8 have 6 feet. an all-weather surface that can carry light to medium Road/Ill is soil material used in embankments for traffic all year. They consist of subgrade of the under- roads. The ratings reflect the ease of excavating and lying soil material; a base of gravel, crushed rock working the material and the expected performance of fragments, or soil material stabilized with lime or the material after it has been compacted and adequ- cement; and a flexible or rigid surface, commonly of ately drained. The performance of soil after it is stab- asphalt or concrete. The roads are graded with soil ilized with lime or cement is not considered in the material at hand, and most cuts and fills are less than ratings, but information about soil properties that 6 feet deep. determine such performance is given in the descrip- The load-supporting capacity and the stability of tions of soil series. the soil as well as the quantity and workability of fill The ratings apply to the soil profile between the A material available are important in design and con- horizon and a depth of 5 to 6 feet. It is assumed that struction of roads and streets. The AASHTO and soil horizons will be mixed during excavation and Unified classifications of the soil and the soil texture, spreading. Many soils have horizons of contrasting density, shrink-swell potential, and potential frost ac- suitability within the profile. The estimated engineer- tion indicate the traffic-supporting capacity used in ing properties in table 11 provide more specific in- making the ratings. Soil wetness, flooding, slope, depth formation about the nature of each horizon that can to hard rock or very compact layers, and content of help determine its suitability for roadfill. large stones, all of which affect stability and ease of Soils rated good have low shrink-swell potential, excavation, were also considered. low potential frost action, and few cobbles and stones. Construction materials They are at least moderately well drained and have slopes of 15 percent or less. Soils rated fair have a The suitability of each soil as a source of roadfill, plasticity index of less than 15 and have other limiting sand, gravel, and topsoil is indicated in table 9 by features, such as high shrink-swell potential, high WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON — SHEET NUMBER 44 4 5A (Joins sheet 38) 1C �• 0 :_... ,_ .� q;.�.. : .._ `"- �" F � f �p,,'�t!'i ijs 114 000 4 < j 11Ba.lL � y N •t' � , N +r, 'E ri - ...`7t ,^" rr`� , at�cN ) ] -',. '� -,,,. .:4,.-.4,-. `r`I w ..1 ;i"1 '- re: „+}i .!� a�. .s,! y `\., �, 'Y ."i'x•1 YS' ♦1}.. ?' w 1�4 . ♦' „n -1 'i fir` - .',.1=4.4..'. ate' ,�.C. ,R1 ..r17•.f�1) i,iLL '� psis �'1 �i .. lC1 +�'. :�1 !'G..."t n� - .`jam 1 �? �,...1.,,- -..s. 'c t:.-. , 7 �, ��.v�'�1��7"r i' 0S .. --.7. ARR.Y A_ ,4 ,.: .. 7 •['f Yr'b "I SV �,1 1.,-.29 -t.- , , . . 5---- -.1w.-op"r.--•— .•- NI •. '^ '',f..'0,',", _. _ �' ...` .iy •_J ji'<'!f. { a +St;_ Tye . r , ....i. ... ... .,.. ..,.. ..._ . .. . ,_ _ t = 'Ft. µ �'.13 + ` - .,. "r,•»s �•�a 'te ri � } . Sias** OS ,P. � _„„001:7'. / 99 ,. w ti �n . ,tr„ _52re1^ ,...-... , .. * ✓•• 5,� �5 wrw °0.' g t•1 y vy w i a3T, Y's `a, r �� 'yi. �t e� a'.•M1 w �� _ f ,) fir• 1 �. J "' r V: Y ., ryt t.'` - '; ,. '^ t \ � ,r �'"-'C. :f v.f 1 '`• ';1 1'• r.il , d .�1•.: a�•y, -_; It,a,.,., .it .r••. $, '.�. 1'.", :z?LTr : -:'s A- 4v; ;Nr",4`r,'., _ t- ' -- ". ", 5 - * +.. t-- a 3., x;'r�['.,.., �&- fir--: - t 7 .�p.3.- -- - .,,,..,. 1•:v r L .;y it, R QQ . 7 ..r. -- ?.�, is - r` •u w� I -,+ .' - _ .r. •. ,-i'"� a 'q -.jam. , •!1 . • . It i i d .n a ,: . •J ,i1.,,.*;r.,":4":"1-1,,,,,.',-,." ,,yy✓. :v..:._. ,' 'rte 1 ., l:'. + i";1 � tw i ?s: r ! ■ �,.� III.• ;Y37C• ....i' ' -:iaJ .i... .-y 7^ � - �'"'f • r wq,v - r� ,.` yy ..s,+t C'1 "',.�.q a .A-,5 {•,i "Ty L ----t.,,,, : v.,:. . . ,..r.2.,,,.. ....----; a rY .,• ,.r I" , r „ F r yr, °a ,p�ayy►/' F� • r I W - t _ • H ^t: t 118,, 1� �� «+ A i_ 45C sy t , 1w - i i -1! y, s . '+ vl .c: ? '�� • ' ... ;•'..---,;;; :• ... •off_ • •r ,K. ,,;''•..s{ ('s"',' • -7-.'" -„ 1� r ` r r•• - -a g� �,, rr r - . r ict 1,r# .��,-, xA..._ ., T:�,N°. .� l. _ y,1r J •.L..�. ,�,� ,;,� -. .. >� ;,}. i,,r, yti•.;.�; i g r• �. , . Q f . •- ,.,i, .., .-.t'rI 'ft..,',J.':,-:"-,-...i•[{1 -.. ;s a,. .t.. 1 _, _<• � "z'i y" r: rS ' .�, ;:•s c r• I—.•t�+ _ ">.'�5 'i. f -y.. "4•J't 1 iw ;r "- 1. • ^. �!'� 444.--•• 11 "ti ,'•,.O i- ` 3 • • .- „ :-- -4.40;fr L'..**.-:4 4 - i:.s fi --1:-. r,. .rte:`" :--.1 "yni t �. - — /.'=. r.'�/f . ':::P..4.$,� 1 jn""'r r - •�. :`� '•�- .; :,�. ice' �_ .1i:-. E Z _ ,ti-.0. Vi rJf __r"' r-• r` �� ]s1B 11E. �rr!- } ; r f , •yy ., I. .� t 1 O - a, . 3t� ..3 , �'}.'- ,,, P t s r,r { - A .. y �. -+ "1 s, �y - + -4 -: ! 1 — ..( Ali {: f, .. P _ q .:-, ` -1/1—Jr.. •tL.y't _ i`.33:1 'r- d.r i 1 ♦ _ �'�i. i , F yp,'[. r 01 �1 _ r•.•r r? ,,, ' _ - ;f_,T .. ... _ I1 11= 11' 37- a (Joins sheet/7) Vic' 1 % o % 9L 0 Mile man m e nnrt l nOn 2 000 1 000 0 5 000 Feet ,ai r CITY OF TIOARD Community'Development Sliaping/t(Better Community LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 6/12/2002 FILE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2002-00001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2002-00001 WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY (SLR) 2002-00003 FILE TITLE: RED INK, INC. APPLICANT: Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. OWNER: Tom and Lori Hays Attn: Kim McMillan 12220 SW Grant Street 18660 SW Boones Ferry Road Tigard, OR 97223 Tualatin, OR 97062 PHONE/FAX: (503) 885-8605/503-885-1206 (503) 624-7483 REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family home into an office that brokers agricultural and chemical products. The site is within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district. Offices are permitted outright in the I-P zoning district subject to Site Development Review. The 100-year floodplain and floodway encompasses almost the entire site, and the applicant is proposing to run a water pipe through the Water Resources Overlay of Fanno Creek. LOCATION: The project is located at 12220 SW Grant Street; WCTM 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Light-Industrial. 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, 18.530, 18.705, 18.720, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.760, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. CIT AREA: Central CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I ❑ TYPE II ® TYPE III A ❑ TYPE IV DATE COMMENTS WERE SENT: FEBRUARY 12, 2002 DATE COMMENTS ARE DUE: FEBRUARY 26, 2002 ❑HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: APRIL 15, 2002 TIME: 7:00 PM LI PLANNING COMMISSION (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM ❑CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM I STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) DATE OF DECISION: COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION ® VICINITY MAP ® LANDSCAPING PLAN ® ARBORIST REPORT ® SITE PLAN ® HYDROLOGY/SOILS REPORT ® STORM WATER CALCS. ® NARRATIVE ® WETLAND DETERMINATION Z OTHER:MISC. STAFF CONTACT: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171, Ext. 388 �_ -_.- �l Project: : 0 VIII f SLR 41.LAND USE APPLI ION Date: a 1/(5/0 . COMPLETENESS REVIEW //a/c.-? %COMPLETE INCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: Deed/Title/Proof Of Ownership ILVI Neighborhood Mtg. Affidavits, Minutes, List Of Attendees I1 Impact Study (18.390) VUSA Service Provider Letter ❑ Construction Cost Estimate [ _ # Sets Of Application Materials/Plans [ Pre-Application Conference Notes I Envelopes With Postage (Verify Count) PROJECT STATISTICS: I Building Footprint Size r % Of Landscaping On Site ' El °/n Of Building Impervious Surface On Site Lot Square Footage PLANS DIMENSIONED: ❑ Building Footprint ❑ Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible&Bike Parking) [ Truck Loading Space Where Applicable ❑ Building Height ❑ Access Approach And Aisle [ Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: ❑ Vicinity Map L;(` Architectural Plan ' Tree Inventory yExisting Conditions Plan Z Landscape Plan Site Plan ,------71 Lighting Pram TREE PLAN/MITIGATION PLAN: ❑ - ❑ ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) p ❑ Z,.-1r-LrePr-c Cie;�,cic A[ tats 10,r115.( k1, ❑ ❑ ❑ RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) ❑ 1 8.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) L 18.340(Director's Interpretation) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) ❑ 1 8.350(Planned Development) ❑ 1 8.705(Access/Egress/Grculation) [ 18.780(Signs) ❑ 18.360(site Development Review) I I 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) I1 1 8.785(Temporary Use Permit) ❑ 18.370(Yariances/Adjustments) ❑ 18.715(Density Computations) [ 18.790(Tree Removal) ❑ 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendment) ❑ 1 8.720(Design Compatibility Standards) ❑ 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) Li18.385(Miscellaneous Permit) I I 1 8.725(Environmental Performance Standards) [ 18.797(Water Resources(WR)Overlay District) I I 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) ❑ 1 8.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) [ 1 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) [l 1 8.410(lot line Adiustment) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) L 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.420(land Partitions) U 1 8.742(Home Occupation Permits) ❑ 18.430(Subdivisions) ❑ 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) ❑ 18.510(Residential Zoning Distract) ❑ 1 8.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) I I 18.520(Commercial inning District) [ 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) [] 1 8.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: I:\curpin\masters\revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 17-Jan-01 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: Hed Ink, Inc. COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 1/18/02 GRADING ® Existing and proposed contours shown. ® Does proposed grading impact adjacent parcels? ❑ Yes ® No ® Adjacent parcel grades shown. STREET ISSUES ® Right-of-way clearly shown. • Centerline of street(s) clearly shown. • Street name(s) shown. • Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. Street profiles shown. ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo n/a on adjacent parcel(s), etc. ❑ Traffic Impact Report n/a ® Street grades compliant? ® Street widths dimensioned and appropriate? ❑ Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width n/a appropriate? ❑ Other: SANITARY SEWER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown. ❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? n/a WATER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? • Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? ® Proposed meter location and size shown? • ❑ Proposed fire protection system shown? STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES Existing/proposed lines shown? ® Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention provided? Water quality/detention facility shown on plans? • Detention is not required. Area for facility match requirements from calcs? Facility shown outside any wetland buffer? ❑ Storm stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? n/a The submittal is hereby deemed ® COMPLETE I I INCOMPLETE By: us� - Date: January 18, 2002 REVISED: 01/18/02 4„„4,0 1,,, 1 CITY OF TIGARD February 12, 2002 OREGON Lewis & Van Vleet, Inc. Attn: Kim McMillan 18660 SW Boones Ferry Rd. Tualatin, OR 97062 RE: Red Ink, Inc. Site Development Review, Sensitive Lands Review, and Water Resources Overlay Applications S D R2002-00001/S LR2002-00001/S LR2002-00003 Completeness Letter Dear Ms. McMillan: The City of Tigard received your application submittal for Site Development Review and Sensitive Lands Review on January 9, 2002 and the additional requested materials since then. The development site is located at 2S102BA, Tax Lot 1100. This letter is to inform you that the application has been deemed complete and is scheduled for review. Please understand that additional materials may still be required to make an informed decision on the application. The application has been tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before the Hearing's Officer on April 15, 2002. If you have any questions, please contact me at (503) 639-4171, x388. Sincerely, Brad Kilby Associate Planner c: SDR2002-00001 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 saloN DNEflI4MOD lNiOI ,I,VDI'IddV ilild CITY OF TIGARD a `JULICI' % `', CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON Communi ty ,,. V } D - ENCENOTES shaping A Better Community {Pre-Ap idati ei otes are Valid forSb (6)Months) NON-RESIDENTIAL FFEAVP MG DE SAFAITTISTR BKi [3R APPLICANT: \-VA OL�,�( AGENT: I��A Phone: (503) 01160 -ooa g Phone: ( ) PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: GRftm-7 SZRF,ei TAX MAP(S)/LOT#(S): ' S>nav\-o«ao NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: S•,re vEveLoPmeas YEA.tF L.P)-105 PER.miT (TupE.TE)j WW1 ER RES°us'c -5 CA1 ERLALA PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: LI- '1\ E THE E,k G N(i0SE As OFFICE SO',CE- SSt%LE �uTU2E Fx4AN510V-1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: O VieN SiRC F/I 1J0uSTR∎ L ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: Z-P T, PAR' CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM (C.I.T.)AREA: CE+.)-TRA, ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18. 530.649 MINIMUM LOT SIZE: No),sE, sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: So ft. Max. building height: `is ft. Setbacks: Front 3S ft. Side 0/S0 ft. Rear 0/so ft. Corner a0 ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: '1S % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: %. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET AND THE APPROPRIATE CIT FACILITATOR AND THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S) 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 NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18290) 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. Er IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.0501 As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. rei ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.765) IF Less -4,A " PA'QK',J% S"c6s Minimum number of accesses: 1 Minimum access width: 30 . Minimum pavement width: RE uire4 All driveways and parking areas, except for some feet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: }I/R (WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.705.030) WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. [SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) D STREETS: O feet from the centerline of GRAna NE. D LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. ➢ FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. [SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.BJ BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: > A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; > All actual building setbacks will be at least half('/2) of the building's height; and D The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. Rt/BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.745) 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: )S -30 feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: IJ/y • [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. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. (y�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. Q'PARKING (Refer to Code Section 18.165.0401 REQUIRED parking for this type of use: 3.H/1000 mnxtmum (ZOUC A Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): IUQ►JC SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: kifr 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: • 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. :- 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. [► LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.765.0801 0 F OVER \C),000 I-1 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 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. 127SENSITIVE LANDS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1151 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. ❑ STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Code Section 18.715.080.01 When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. [CLEANWATER SERVICES[CWS)BUFFER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 31 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION &ORDER 96-44 ` ♦ TO EN ITIV - AREA ♦ Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 10 to <50 acres 15 feet >50 to <100 acres 25 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands>0.5 acre <25% 50 feet ♦ Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres ♦ Natural lakes and ponds • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% 10 to <50 acres 30 feet >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. f SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) 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: 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 18.790.060.11 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 damages 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: 0 The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. CLEAR VISION AREA (Refer to Code Chapter 18.195) 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. I WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT (Refer to Code Section 18.197.030) 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. Major 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). ➢ 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. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section D. . 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 efer to Code Section 18.810.0601 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet nless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition st have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS ALL NOT EXCEED 2'% TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 time he minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. CODE CHAPTERS 18.330(Conditional Use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design 18.765 (Off-Street Parking/Loading Standards) Requirements) 18.340(Director's Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) Center) 18.350(Planned Development) ✓ 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) 18.780(Signs) 18.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(Tree Removal) 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) 18.725(Environmental Performance 18.797 (Water Resources (WR) Overlay Standards) District) 18.390(Decision Making 18.730(Exceptions To Development 18.798(wireless Communication Facilities) Procedures/Impact Study) Standards) 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) _..y: 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste/Recyding Storage) N7 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: Ckcrii in L1cF_ PP ;i■PS 46SC'klaCkeli heel act, t 9p3.'s N-CG To be Sen-(' ►.Y�_7i rg� wry TA2 Ftoo.D PRA.N Qns1 in Cknc9 r,ax;f.,,; -#o c. , 1 y c{or Smeprv.. V✓.R 3avNcsA;JP Lc cL RestEw Qrt WQ--er Resco,rps q,eerlaI CTVPE it{! eF.UIeW) RF(1 J es (caned+na4.,o)3 t,.livN crk∎iiGCS PocSAIct OniPej d c�0 o c s4- E. L A N D_S CI (3,,)■Iainc, eeuc�;on (MA Cj c rc dCA;Qt need 4o he. r\ecis--an.� SEF 44,&1-11 i6E4TFO SFCTiOxl cW NANQQuT xsn c'P,P1u;t`PmenT< LIP n Q SL7 P (MA acF. Cat rt . 1O1FrT TtzcA V \on r lne (Sortie,, ilr.',-(-■Qll� eta P(ars �ik�, C,�\ desie�n) c'an YW• �n_rpop.n xr aked 1a-cr * F x .FC T Lo-(1% .1.)EE.KS- (3Uc:e PTO;C' A-i dr. i s cle,eint9A rry t P}e 'car c7�r,s e1�1. C UEs�-torts P(a�";ns' 4a 4+o 3 1 -411 '�1 ( IE•1An1 fAIA-rEp s=RvicF : f-/ ; % gvn3 !o`' -,'Cod 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 ur 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 C,� Counc,t . 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 to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: ‘-- 2 fad +� QY CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503)684-7297 E-MAIL:(staffs first name)@Ci.tigard.or.US TITLE 18 (CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE) INTERNET ADDRESS: ci.tigard.or.us H:\patty\masters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 18-Jan-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) 639-4171. Staff: bQ AI) X5;1 Date: 1 (p(Cl 1. BASIC INFORMATION ALL LAND USE APPLICATIONS REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING: Completed Application Form with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization Title transfer instrument or grant deed Written summary of proposal Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria (as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes) Two (2) sets of stamped, addressed #10 envelopes for all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. Mailing envelopes shall be standard legal-size (#10), addressed with 1" x 4" labels (see envelope submittal requirements). Property owner mailing lists must be prepared by the City for a minimal fee (see request for 500' property owner mailing list form). Documentary evidence of neighborhood meeting (if required) Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2.(e) Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes Filing Fee 2. PLANS REQUIRED In addition to the above basic information, each type of land use application will require one or more of the following maps or plans. PLEASE SUBMIT EACH OF THE PLANS CHECKED BELOW WITH YOUR APPLICATION (Section 5 of this checklist provides details on what information to include on each plan): 1�f Vicinity Map Er Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan C�' Existing Conditions Map lE(' Preliminary Utilities Plan ❑ Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map Eli Storm Drainage Plan ❑ _ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan 112" Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan 137 Site Development Plan Cd Architectural Drawings 3' Landscape Plan ❑ Sign Drawings Q' Public Improvements/Streets Plan 3. NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED The City requires multiple copies of submittal materials. The number of copies required depends on the type of review process. FOR AN APPLICATION SUCH AS YOU ARE PROPOSING THE CITY REQUIRES _ COPIES OF ALL APPLICATION MATERIALS. City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 1 of 5 4. 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: ❑ Traffic Study ❑ Local Streets Traffic Study IEK Wetlands/Stream Corridor Delineation and Report ❑ Habitat Area Evaluation Q Preliminary Sizing Calculations for Proposed Water Quality and/or Detention Facility ❑ Geotechnical Report ❑ Other 5. 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 81/2 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 ❑ 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 ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 2 of 5 => Locations of existing dedicated right-of-ways ❑ 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 [J 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) LJ • 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 ❑ 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%) H 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 ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 3 of 5 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 n 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 n ♦ Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ • Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions U 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 ❑ 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 ❑ y 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 ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 4 of 5 Grading/Erosion Control Plan The locations and extent to which grading will take place LJ • Existing and proposed contour lines U 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 fire hydrants ❑ 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 ❑ is\;curpin\masters\revised\checklist.doc 5-Jun-00 City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 5 of 5 PIE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ENGINEERING SECTION. City oof Tigard,Oregon Development shaping A Battier Community PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map[sl: 2S1 02BA Tax Lolls): 1100 Use Type: ladistriatilsisSiruczgre (=lakA^�«�a.r op c The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: ® SW Grant Avenue to 30 feet from centerline. SW to feet SW to feet SW to feet Street improvements: ® Partial street improvements will be necessary along SW Grant Avenue, to include: feet of pavement concrete curb storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 5-foot concrete sidewalk along the frontage. ® street trees spaced per TDC standards. street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Engineering Deportment Section [ I Other: street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: 1 1 feet of pavement concrete curb [ I storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: [ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb I storm sewers and other underground utilities [ [ -foot concrete sidewalk street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: feet of pavement concrete curb storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk street trees [ 1 street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. [l Other: I [ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: I [ feet of pavement I I concrete curb I storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 Engineering Department Section [l street trees • street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district. The following street improvements may be eligible for such an agreement: (1.) (2.) Overhead Utility Lines: Fl Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW Grant Avenue. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 24 inch line which is located along the south property line near the creek. Connection to that line can be permitted by the City, but inspections shall be performed by Clean Water Services (CWS). There is also a 60-inch CWS trunk line in the same location, but CWS will not allow connection to that line. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to provide a sewer lateral to the new building if needed. Water Supply: The City of Tigard (Phone:(503) 639-4171) provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 Engineering Department Section Tualatin Valley Fire and RE ie District (South Division) [Conta Eric McMullen, (503) 612-7010] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. The applicant should be advised that any proposed outfalls toward Fanno Creek may need additional Sensitive Lands or Water Resources Overlay approvals from the City. Onsite detention will not be required since the site abuts Fanno Creek. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: X Construction of an on-site water quality facility. I Payment of the fee in-lieu. A facility is required if the impervious area of the site will increase over 1,000 sf. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Auplicatlon Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 Engineering Department Section In 1990, Washington Count .opted a county-wide Traffic Impa ee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. Pay TIF. PERMITS Engineering Department Permits: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a permit from the Engineering Department. There are two types of permits issued by Engineering, as follows: Street Opening Permit (SOP). This permit covers relatively minor work in a public right-of-way or easement, such as sidewalk and driveway installation or repair, and service connections to main utility lines. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. This type of permit requires a non-refundable $150.00 fee. In certain cases, where City costs may exceed the $150.00 fee, an administrative deposit will be required. In addition, the permittee will be required to post a bond or similar financial security for the work. Compliance Agreement (CAP). This permit covers more extensive work such as main utility line extensions, street improvements, etc. In subdivisions, this type of permit also covers all grading and private utility work. Plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. This type of permit requires a deposit to be submitted with the construction plans. The amount of the deposit depends upon the overall value of the public improvements. The City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. The permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security, and execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. Prior to City acceptance of any permitted work, and prior to release of work assurance bond(s), the work shall be deemed complete and satisfactory by the City in writing. The permittee is responsible for the work until such time written City acceptance of the work is posted. NOTE: If an Engineering Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: /( fct ENGINEERING DEPA TMENT ST F Phone: (503)639-4171 Fax: [503)684-7297 i.\eng\brianr\templates\preap notes-eng dot CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE REQUEST CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION ( i FOR STAFF USE ONLY Applicant: r \ k Address: 5t, 5 cu,{+ hone: gat, 0040 Case No.: i/eL- Z / (03 Receipt No.: - S5 z' • City: Zip: Application Accepted By: G 3 Phone: .0.-41‘.1— Date: Z.i / 1 Contact Person: 5vinc..- t t (a Property Owner/Deed Holder(s): 'l? 1*. Otels / Iduk. ackd DATE OF PRE-APP.: ( te'0/ TIME OF PRE-APP.: q„,p. Address: So-'‘,..x a5 Orervc Phone: PRE-APP. HELD WITH: City: Zip: Rev.12/6/2000 is\curpin\masters\revised\Pre-App Request.doc Property Address/Location(s): I 2ZZO &ro .. 9 . (, I er9- REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS SAA' (Note: applications will not be accepted /� without the required submittal elements) Q` Tax Map & Tax Lot#(s): �cI 0? l 14s• ' 0(� 00 L2 Pre-Application Conf. Request Form Site Size: 2j S SS- 1 2 COPIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING: Brief Description of the Proposal and any site-specific questions/issues that PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE INFORMATION 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 Site Plan. The site plan must show the minimum of one (1) week prior to officially scheduling a proposed lots and/or building layouts conference date/time to allow staff ample time to drawn the subject ject property show the location to pre-application of the subject property in relation to the prepare for the meeting. nearest streets; and the locations of driveways on the subject property and A pre-application conference can usually be scheduled within 1-2 across the street. weeks of the Planning Division's receipt of the request for either The Proposed Uses. Tuesday or Thursday mornings. Pre-application conferences are one (1) hour long and are typically held between the hours of & Topographic Information. Include 9:00-11:00 AM. Contour Lines if Possible. ❑ If the Pre-Application Conference is for a PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCES MUST BE SCHEDULED IN MONOPOLE project, the applicant must PERSON AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER FROM attach a copy of the letter and proof in 8:00-4:00/MONDAY-FRIDAY. the form of an affidavit of mailing, that the collocation protocol was completed IF MORE THAN 4 PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND THE (see Section 18.798.080 of the Tigard PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IN YOUR GROUP, PLEASE Community Development Code). INFORM THE CITY IN ADVANCE SO THAT ALTERNATE ROOM Filing Fee $240.00 ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROUP. Pre-Apps (CD Meetings) September2001 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 Thursday, September 06, 2001 30 8:00 8:30 9:00 Pre-app John Hadley / Mark Harter 916.0098 SDR Residental to Commercial Use 12220 SW Grant 9:30 10:00 Pre-App 10:30 11:00 Pre-app 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 10:43AM Wednesday,August 29, 2001 a • ;.,e• . .v-a `ADC c,,,,,,,-,._�r , ..,--' ----N .,. , -;,,,-.....,:i „.,,,, , ' / mot"` , . ...it,....''. 'oi all*"' 'r,,,,;,, . ,,-'... .,,.. ..,,,,,i1.:1't'''''' 1 sv }� � jam.. cith .R i.Yi4 AS , ` a raj`# *o k#' Y i y qG��. ''':4" '''44thtlik*".4.- `: ' � 3* =' h`sue z y '"max * F * .. x .� , 2 & ; M. '§�C 'r aw e X r �.. , k, ' s k ' au .A''-w-:.'",,„ k �� s sw• ".1 w t n r� � s, ,y, ,7� y sad [ ..+:»w x > ss ' r -,,. r "� +� .. „t' tr s 4 ,3 `^a! �'�, '�i ` "Lr- Community Development Plc v ' W 35 M.H. ,1� 44 MH.o WO A 0 // ..' OU� - /0)(0/ p 4 fiii N / d © �R 160.0 ! , 0/,/ 163.53 ,,,//0 ) R 7 W / 159.• T / � R/ Gq C/44 © 0 // �� S z. "co. M.H.i/Q :0 N 65 2 -- .N0.13' EL.157.90 asp 0 � * •1# -1- 44111111 ' Q00� / x / \ © 11 158. D a`,(7 i \ ii‘ 1 a 0/ r.7 �\ �\© c3 © / //i, .. . ...., 144.7 ` // O ♦ �� ._ X . . _x ... 16 c3 // Vs io�!:Ai: 6 # 0 w �/// �� / //H ,�� . 152.5 �// P 44 Il ' ` / X50 ii�� / X 150.6 (MH) `_ t ) : ' 41%1004.„) 0 0 ‘ o ( -. to,-r lif 4 / \' \■ ■ N,, o V-_- Aht, .sb .ind 1' e.X.........„......_' 41 \‘ } S\ r, 156.3 .\\> N*--.9 \ �`\ \ Ir.e S4 5 �� O��i 9ss9 -�'•47 • •• 1 iO4C 1/' VO __ a 0 3500 ro^ s4, _ 4 40 1 to 0 ? ni 3400 fC'1/4' 4 • C9•1,, 1 0. i.6, S• a 4,P T gr, 2c po 6 4 0 f , h ` - 1 " I C0M ). N • (Cl 1 X o 50 o I Zg,69 6. S• 1400 s cOf ON a 'r C/ t 0 I.30A c ,'d q Is/3 NN n Sa a P. w 501 �° _ C ^ ° � ' 4ss '? /"A 0 2.434c SO? 00 a , , .G, (/1" '6•19 0.eT ° CI r _ u I 2 1 I icy gg63e /_ N o �J /3 600 / 3.& F. ; /o .69Ac. I Tc,, N64;O i so o ',q G R 3 4610 .0 S /'o /.07 Ac. D , 4$ . e 6O r 3/ N I f 1 y d p 0 __ • h 500 p° 01 ,0 ,. 0/0 1 . H 43Ac I ^ a, N =°/a o (C.S.No.11701) ,7' 1 _3' b h P v. q .T p. o O C /� 3I 4r .. i, N m N n R h0C� 496 -- h =°12 8� 0 y ' 59 J 900 z r K. eo 1 !u �i• 35Ac_ 90I N �N 6 g0g9 ii, 0 9* n 43Ac. • 40 60 b y' 4/ a p 9c� w '`o.o a by J N ryy 1000 � ti," 4* 2..34 Ac �..J ' I r� .D VA-- V o �O 9 0 5 l' 1 oQ D� °� 9?J 8 1 0 v 2 PS �� 0 " /se c, _ s, a 1100 so,' e 41 e A. CO O� by .64 Ac. w e�4 e cr 0 57 A -k, 4 Oa b ^'0b 4, i 4, 0 roa A 7,P J �6` 0' r o~ �'F‘*0 �,' 1190 y 40) s 4F .16 Ac q, t 1M O P cap6` 0 S• Q` yea d. Ya 15 01 /�� 90,1:0 `'a ,, 78 40 s'o e' 0. 45 •�: � ss 4 ' b �, 701 / b �6F .15Ac. b 23 - 74 .. N �� sa C o�{P^ 1502 4c4 ,, °00.w �o`�ss Q F 1400 �> >\ij Z r � 1500 .e NN 3.73Ac. a 1 '� 1503 .284c. . • a 04 Ac. h ?s s Nm. a 1601 '' 0 1S (C.S.No.11449) �qry o• 1.04 Ac. I qo w o X406 a i? bb °� ?� 41'•b ? _ >/ c .T 0 N, ./ h ^ ,� ,tic 1200 �yy�. ,iti•s9 = 2.78 Ac. 0 e o.1) Cam, am--A Ad uyt;Ai La,-- Q40(4,4- 441ruiunt, 9'`--82WQ)-K G-c I (q K 3or. a .L°S 7;� X..k_S IIlrilt -LI-LUULIMGU) lu . It n�y, �, - Y. UU1/ UU1 LJ70/)-��/ sraoe -o0o0) ) ,-,., o1 O1 1 Division of State Land_ IN S.:. _ • 1 775 S��mmer Street NE,Suite 101 Salem,OR 97301-127' John A.Iut�hubcr.M.D..Governor (503)378-380: FAX (503) 378-484. March 22, 2002 n http://statelands.dsl.state.or.0 1:)lf .tvJ State Land Boart JD02/25210 a . john A.Kitzhabe JOHN HADLEY Governo 2656 FAIRMOUNT :, ? N? 7 2Jg? sill Bradbur PORTLAND OR 97201 Secretary of Stat. 1-71'.::3 . ' '! t.•I r',:•.- r7.1n Randall Edward RE: State Application Number 25210-NSP - State Treasure Dear Mr, Hadley: We have received your application to pave an existing gravel drive and build a 600 square foot addition to an exterior building in Section 2, Township 25, Range 1W, Washington County, Oregon- The Division of State Lands requires a permit if you plan to remove, fill or alter 50 cubic yards or more of material within the banks of most waters of the state. State designated Essential Salmon Habitat streams and State Scenic Waterways are exceptions in that any amount of removal, fill or alteration typically requires a permit. Based on your application, your project involves no removal or filling of material within either a wetland or Fanno Creek; therefore, a State removal-fill permit is not required. You must also receive authorization, when required, from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and local planning department before beginning construction. If you have any questions, please call Colin MacLaren at 503-378-3805, extension 244. Sincerely, Lori Warner Manager Field Operations—Western Region CM:jed J.AttachmentAwestLAS1NSP No State Permit Required LAS125210-NSP.doC c: Kathryn Harris. Corps of Engineers Washington County Planning Kim McMillan, Lewis & VanVleet Consulting Engineers 18660 SW Boones Ferry Rd Tualatin OR 97062 Post-It'Fax Note 7671 oate3.Z7'OZ Pa©e8� TO e4� 1 From KiK `•cmiu o 1 CoiDeepI..►1.1.1e.,Aar Co. (� 1-0 �l /V� Phono# �JJ Phono# e:i5S exio 05 Fax I to 84 7 2 17 Fax** APR-19-2002 (FRI ) 08 : 56 P. 001/001 LEWIS & VAN VLEET I L C u r p p r a t O d principals chrl5 E. van vleL. gary j. lewls. p.e. April 19, 2002 To: Brad Kilby, Planner From: Kim McMillan, P.E. Project: Red Ink, Inc 12220 Grant Street Cc: John Hadley; Eric McMullen I met with Eric McMullen, Deputy Fire Marshall TVFR,this morning to review our plans for fire hydrant coverage. Regarding his four comments listed in your staff report under Section VII Other Staff Comments: 1. A minimum of 2 fire hydrants shall be provided. There is one hydrant in front of the property and another hydrant at the intersection of Grant and Tigard Streets. These two hydrants meet the requirement for spacing and coverage. 2. If these two hydrant locations do not have the blue reflective markers that TVFR use, then they will provide them to the developer to install at the centerline of the street(s). 3. Access, as proposed, is acceptable. 4. No building survey is required for this small addition. consulting vnonoors IB66❑ s.w. boones ferry rood tualatin. ❑regon 97062 (503) BB5.86 135 phone [503) 685.12115 fax 04/23/02 09:28 '$503 625 6179 PRIDE DISPOSAL Z1001 p *R *1 *D* E DISPOSAL COMPANY P.O. Box 820 Sherwood, OR 97140 (503)625-6177 FaX 503-625-6179 To: d r() From: At l • Fax:(5o3) PF3"1,20 6 Date: / 43//a� Phone: Pages: Re: Atten: Comments: /('oz\ .S-- -/,wr'uC+' )7)/d-e ./9/p05q/, .1y\eors Ccr\M o a Printed on 100°a recycled paper. 'LEWIS & eonsu [g engineers 4.P ' 1866[]s.w boones ferry road 4 • It tualatin. Oregon 97052 [503) 885.8505 phone [503] 885.1205 fax VAN VLEET Incorporated FAX TRANSMITTAL TO: Pg iDe ^D(5POSAC_- DATE: 4 • t ' d 2 ATTN: C R4tCa FROM: K IM PLM (LLAlJ PROJECT: 12 2 Z 0 612,AKT ST--T)'ARD NO. OF PAGES TO FOLLOW: I CC: _.NO H ki K A D LI.N.1 COPY TO FOLLOW IN MAIL COMMENTS: -rm 5 OFFt GE SpACE i (G50 Sf W t TH A fRoPo5ED Lood SF FL. TL ADD(TrcN . PR Mk/ DES cttssroNs (A) )714 Lailuy 14IN6 WE Pk-Ke R' oPo5oJc e FocL6 u)//4 Z - 1O Ca 4L-4_OIu "7T0TE5 ( # a L. ()Fria.- PA-e ) I ,QED 8(k Fog. M spf-i06/ --1 Cu0)5IDE Pic uP ' 11-0, IOAR.D % N c c--T v C.'�T l A)4r-(---V NEKT Tv Tt-t€ Co ict-w .S -Me- 3` Kg ' &JJCL OSL KE 15 LOCATED 0AI 7 A.)021 1-1 SIDE OF THE 6uLWOJJC , SE BACK 35 FA01-4 k/ W. 6NCI-OSuiE (L LL BE CIA,iJ e..rNk FEN uJ l Th 5(T E OPT S ,fir N6 S CATS . PLEASE PUIEuJ FoR APPROUi . T64PriJK Yoi 4=K•L-ky...._ c 79 z17 . 774(p . --- . 01",,i0V o-f-)- .os.u:ee'c2- 1 , j (.. 6, I N 0 __------- 35' SETBACK 18.5' / 4-1-.\.4. 33.33' g ■-.3 / / O 160.35. - S 56'50'0" E A .. A .... ,..., ■all& 011111111■ o' V '------ ° • ...,... —7 ----------_ u ,- s," cfr\ in r..... Kr-1 Cill° , . • , • _.. -oz '2; i lir Vilv , 49QQ'S749' QC? of i < / rr E < _ /.L LL, • , „,_,L, /•, / / Z 41 . _ , .-..-... // ._J o PORCH ; , .4, 1 I ■ 1 1 ril - LA , m 1— z , ., —7-- [ N . ! TN r. 0 , • Ne.■,./ ! . -. / CE (r) I N 4 : \ , • ._,„v m iri / •-:-. ; ,. (i) / ( ■ t . ---i, I ■ ' 1 _ . 1 . / ,. \ \ .1111 t . ''.., ,15'.. 1....•;` • Il t L., I 0 -El) 1 1 ,z.......P 1,1 ...-' - . ' C C ‘t) CO Ertl ) ' 1 • ... 0 rag 1 411 . _____.- \... . _ I 10.0' 12Y--.is:C''117';'(:1":"'1:' s''\C- ' 14..;... :, .5::SPACES AT 83' = 593' 20.0' / ___Ls,S.N .1\l'''.. / -*------V CI `Ni, 7(...A bl c0 b I -N-R 1.4 DEDICATION VI , tO < — " - - j•.4e-P. . - . .. --. .. _ . .. _ - .-. - I .P.a , - - --II: .,-•''.■'' .., ";".-- c°0 -----7:-;':---.•! ,\:,,.....u.z,.-,,,-::-.."_S:-.In A . , C-) 1 III 6,0 . ,, , : ...4% •,„;1,,,,,,,t:: .'( 0 111 i- )GE 1 ---.:44..,,„ ScD S op• ,-. 1-•. N C F' 1‘.■D\:5 1 I S _too I r") 1:-.• ...C1 ■ , - 'fi,) +0 eprr- ---___ ..,s....., —........ .4 q .,t:. i -, , - CDCD 1 ln .(< ..91 • e 5/15/02 A CITY OF TIGARD 11:12:06AM 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 Conditions Associated with Case #: SDR2002-00001 CONDITION STATUS STATUS. ORDER# CONDITION TITLE/WORDING STATUS* DATE 1.00 BLDG PERMIT ISSUANCE REQ'RMNTS N BMK 1.The addition to the existing structure must not exceed the required height of the district(45 ft.),and shall be verified prior to issuance of building permits. 2.00 REVISED ACCESS PLAN N BMK 2.The applicant shall provide a revised access plan that provides a safe pedestrian walkway extending from the entrance of the building to SW Grant Street. The walkway shall be a minimum of four feet in width,exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes,benches,bicycle racks,and signposts,and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The walkway 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. 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. 3.00 REVISED STREET TREE PLAN N BMK 3.Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the street tree plan to show compliance with Tigard Development Code(TDC)Section 18.745.040. 4.00 REVISED PKNG.LOT TREE PLAN N BMK 4.The applicant shall revise the landscape plan illustrating the placement of trees within the interior of the parking lot that provides a canopy effect for the parking lot. All trees shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. 5.00 MIXED SOLID WASTE APPROVAL N BMK 5.The applicant shall provide a narrative addressing the criteria of one of the 4-methods of compliance for Mixed Sold Waste and Recyclable Storage as established in TDC Chapter 18.755, and provide a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. 6.00 SOLID WASTE/RECYC.COMPLIANCE N BMK 6.Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the site plan to illustrated compliance with the Solid Waste and recyclable storage design standards. 7.00 STRIPE PARKING LOT N BMK 7.Prior to fmal occupancy,the parking lot shall be striped in accordance with the TDC Chapter 18.765. 8.00 PROVIDE WHEEL STOPS N BMK 8.Prior to fmal occupancy,wheel stops shall be provided for all parking areas as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. 9.00 REVISED PKNG.PLAN DIMENSIONS N BMK 9.The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the dimensions of the parking areas in accordance with Table 18.765.1 and indicate bumper overhang areas on the plan. 10.00 COMPACT/STANDARD SPACES N BMK 10.If the applicant proposes to split the spaces between compact and standard,the new plan must reflect the compact spaces and they must be marked as such prior to fmal occupancy. 11.00 REVISE PKNG.PLAN TO 7 SPACES N BMK 11.Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the parking plan to reflect only seven parking spaces as opposed to the eight that are proposed. 12.00 PROVIDE DSL APPROVAL M 3/27/02 BMK 12.Prior to site work,the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. P1ngCaseCond.rpt Page: 1 of 3 NAR-Li-LUEILUJ iu : io P. UU1jUUI . i Division of State Land Awl Jahn A.Kllregon 775 Sumuter Street NE,Suite 1( 1:' Salem.OR 97301-12i diul f.M.D..Governor (503)378-38 FAX (503) 378-4134 C 0 ry http://s to telands.dsLstate.or.c March 22, 2002 State Land Boar JD02/25210 a ; John A.Kitahlbf JOHN HADLEY Govern( 2656 FAIRMOUNT ? ^ ?J�7 Bill Bradbus PORTLAND OR 97201 Secretary of Stal I t_ 3 ^. •! t 1 r,:-.- 7.7n Randall Edwarc RE: State Application Number 25210-NSP State Trcasur' Dear Mr. Hadley: We have received your application to pave an existing gravel drive and build a 600 square foot addition to an exterior building in Section 2, Township 2S, Range 1W, Washington County, Oregon. The Division of State Lands requires a permit if you plan to remove, fill or alter 50 cubic yards or more of material within the banks of most waters of the state. State designated Essential Salmon Habitat streams and State Scenic Waterways are exceptions in that any amount of removal, fill or alteration typically requires a permit. Based on your application, your project involves no removal or filling of material within either a wetland or Fanno Creek; therefore, a State removal-fill permit is not required. You must also receive authorization, when required, from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and local planning department before beginning construction. If you have any questions, please call Colin MacLaren at 503-378-3805, extension 244. Sincerely, Lori Warner 1 ' I p�E ry Cord%4, 6r) 4/-2 Manager Field Operations—Western Region CM:jed • J.\AttachmentAwestLAS\NSP No State Permit Required LAS\25210-NSP.doc c: Kathryn Harris, Corps of Engineers Washington County Planning Kim McMillan, Lewis & VanVleet Consulting Engineers 18660 SW Boones Ferry Rd Tualatin OR 97062 -• Post-It'Fax Note 7671 Date 3•Z7.0L IPeaea► To gAD Kt(..&4 Frorn y'H �C�l'�A. comm. 1-16 Ago Co. [` LVi ,'1 ,V� Phonol p Phono# (,p,,� pf_O5 Fox I G 7 al 7 Fax k S�S� G� RETRUN RECORDED DOCUI? ""T TO: CITY HALL RECORDS DEPA: :NT, CItY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR 97223 Washington County,Oregon 2002-080398 07/17/2002 09:43:16 AM D• D Cnt•l Stn■19 J STEEL INDIVIDUAL 515.00 56.00 511.00 •Totals$32.00 !.' IIIIIIIIIIIIN 111111 1111111 11 1 11 III \‘'? File No. S 2�oZ-V Leo, 00130280200200803980030033 I,Jerry Hanson,Director of A ment and Taxation r • and Ex-OffIeio County Clerk for Washington County, :, ' do hereby certify that the within Instrument of writing M 1.: a+ was received and recorded In the book of records of v„2„,,,-.,..4,-„ ` said county. ,4_ • '� DEDICATION DEED gd” `�1 Jerry R.Hannon,Director mint and Taxation, 421',,,yr� Ex•Offlclo County Clerk FOR ROAD OR STREET PURPOSES Space above reserved for Was ington County Recording informa'6J:1-5'Q k#N. Li 1 1 (Ckifr\ � 0.C11-- -CxvZ■ V\--1 does hereby dedicate to the public a perpetual right-of-way for street,road,ari'd 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 I 1 day of 9 WLY. ,20 01— Signa e Signature a b S b j w ra t r rn t,olett, Pn't16,4-1; I Z.22-0 S�w �i-aht ►'-t.. Tax Statement Mailing Address Property Address o (t 41 go i . ,or- 571,73 STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. County of Washington ) IC,1 n This ins ent was acknowledged before me on 6 J� (It, (date)by: c414-11-' - �"'""t) '� >-i -b-,t-L_ if . att-th (name of person(s)). l .*'�'b OFFICIAL SEAL J J R � NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ( 16z,),,, .1 KATHY M. FODE 1 COMMISSION NO.333921 Notary's Signature 9 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 16, 2004 _ / G - My Commission Expires: /1 - %&' 'et) v1� Accepted on behalf of the City of Tigard this 2 day of, t! 20 o24' . 01,.., 19. a4...................„„ City Engineer I:IENGWublk:kvmelDedicationDeedROWIndv.dot 2002-80398 EXHIBIT "A" 10' ROAD DEDICATION S . W . GRANT AVENUE TAX LOT 2S 1 2 BA - 1190 A 10 . 00 foot wide strip of land located in a portion of Lot 58, AMENDED PLAT OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION, located in the Northeast of the Northwest of Section 2, Township Two South, Range One West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows : Beginning at the most northerly corner of said Lot 58; thence following the northwesterly line of said Lot 58 (also being the centerline of S.W. Grant Avenue) South 33°10 ' 00" West a distance of 242. 00 feet to the most northerly corner of that property described in Document No. 98-122220; thence following the northeasterly line of said property, South 56°50 ' 00" East a distance of 20 . 00 feet to a 5/8" iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked "Paris & Assoc. PLS 2284" marking the intersection of the northeasterly line of said property with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue, which is the "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; thence following the said southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue, South 33°10 ' 00" West a distance of 156. 96 feet to the intersection of the southwesterly line of said property with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue; thence following said southwesterly line, South 33°19 ' 51" East a distance of 10. 90 feet; thence following a line lying 10 . 00 feet southeasterly of and parallel with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue, North 33°10 ' 00" East a distance of 161 . 31 feet to a point on the northeasterly line of said property; thence following the northeasterly line of said property, North 56°50 ' 00" West a distance of 10 . 00 feet to the "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING", containing 1, 591 square feet, more or less . SUBJECT TO: All easements, restrictions and rights-of-way of record and those common and apparent on the land. REGISTERED ROFESSEONAL 4 ND SURV_ O,• / JULY 14,107$ GARY W.HICKYAN 1870 RENEWAL.WEQ(/I./Li aaE OF sritunat1.1 0 , , " B " , NW CORNER OF LOT 58 E XHIBIT /7 FND. 5/8" IR & YPC 10' RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION SKETCH '''''.7 /� PER SURVEY #24,563 12220 SW. GRANT AVE. PORTION LOT 58 OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION \ LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 2, / S�\ T 2 S, R 1 W, W.M., / / / \ I/CA CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON / ,. 0 \ \ ST / 76 \eT r0 \ 2p, \ `U\ // / p ryo ./� ryV // h�0) ✓/ //6,N. ,.D /..f U O OOi 1� / AO/ / 00 00 / O ~7/1✓ /1<oo / co/c)/ cvl 1 //"TRUE POINT OF BEG." C^i u� / cv / / / FND_ 5/8" IR & YPC ,/ / / ■ PER SURVEY #24,563 \� / ►\ S \rte / / / ■ S6. / `/ SO' FND. 5/8" IR & YPC u, C� / )11, 10 /S pp,F PER SURVEY #24,563 / / /ro •pp• o3 S' 76 V� .�� , / /00 �O 10' RIGHT-OF-WAY // Q�/ o DEDICATION REGISTERED i ^). 1,591 SQ. FT. :ROF:ESS!•N / _ ' NDSU- E,�R / ./ /- 10' TAX MAP 2S 1 2 BA - 1100 // `i�1'/��` / Gj' FEE NO. 98-122220 0/ N. l / JULY 14 / 'o . RY W.h ICKYAN / `�o. / 1878 / / ul. / < / REEA Da P.E./12/.0/ / so / mo \'o / DATE OF SGURQ(� /.e .� //' ` / DWG. NO. 11101B DATE: 5/3/02 / APPROXIMATE CENTERLINE OF CREEK A \ QQ GRAPHIC SCALE +� 50 0 25 50 100 200 (../ /1116MIldillIMIMM. 1.111.11.1111MMMidi 0 ( IN FEET ) �� 1 inch = 50 ft. 1 11 1111111 11 1 1111 2002-80398 CONDITION STATUS STATUS ORDER# CONDITION TITLE/WORDING STATUS* DATE BY 13.00 PROVIDE TREE PROTECTION PLAN M 6/25/02 BMK 13.The applicant shall supply the City arborist with a tree protection plan to protect those trees that will remain on the site,and insure that said measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to site work. 14.00 RECORD UTILITY EASEMENT M 6/25/02 BMK 14.Prior to construction,the applicant must attain permission in the form of a utility easement from the adjacent property owner to run the pipe all the way to Fanno Creek. The utility easement must be recorded and a copy provided to the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of any site work permits. 15.00 SUBMIT EROSION CONTROL PLAN M 5/22/02 BMK 15.Prior to site work,the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay. Said plan shall be consistent with the requirements of TDC Section 18.797.080(J). 16.00 SUBMIT DETAILED LIGHTING PLAN M 5/22/02 BMK 16.Prior to site work,the applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan,that shows no projection off site and complies with crime prevention requirements of the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). 17.00 OBTAIN ST. OPENING PERMIT N BDR 17.Prior to issuance of a site permit,a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach,sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue,as well as any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five(5)copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 18.00 GRANT AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS N BDR 18.The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Grant Avenue as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements;and C.driveway apron. 19.00 PROVIDE H2O QUAL.FACILITY M 6/10/02 BDR 19.The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards(adopted by Resolution and Order No.00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department(Brian Rager)for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition,a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 20.00 VOIDED-DUPLICATE OF#17 M 5/15/02 BDR 20. THIS IS A DUPLICATE CONDITION OF#17,THEREFORE,THIS CONDITION IS VOID. 21.00 GRANT AVE.ROW DEDICATION M 6/26/02 BDR 21.Prior to issuance of a building permit,additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue to increase the right-of-way to 30 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. 22.00 OBTAIN ROW WORK APPROVAL N BDR 22.Prior to a fmal building inspection,the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way(or public easement)and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 23.00 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES OR FEE N BDR 23.The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Grant Avenue underground as a part of this project,or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be$27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen,the amount will be$4,318.00 and it shall be paid prior to a fmal building inspection. 24.00 H2O QUAL.DESIGN ENGINEER N BDR PingCaseCond.rpt eED (1 �< 1 �r\rv-, -l.t (page: 2 of 3 Jerry R. Hanson, Ex Officio Receipt# : 17531 6/21/2002 2:31 PM Washington County Clerk N 155 N 1st Avenue Suite 130, MS 9 HADLEY, JOHN W a. Hillsboro, Or 97124 PHONE 503-846-8752 Cashier RECORDS1 Station 22 Comments: RECORDING mo Document# Recording Survey Vacation Transfer A&T Fund NonStd US Other Total nt 2002-70884 D-E 40.00 6.00 11.00 _ 57.00 co CD cn 57.00 N Cr) \V O If) V' ) V t-'s . b I, Ci 0 n 1 a, v ...j.j) n7 c t 0 0 iv o Thank You in Retain this receipt for your records co 0 N Receipt Total $57.00 m CHECK 1209 57.00 N Receipt# : 17531 Page 1 of 1 c 3 , Jun 26 02 06: 51a John Hadley 503 296 8403 p. 3 After recording. return to. O py Mr. and Mrs.John W. Hadley 2656 SW Fairmont Blvd. Portland, OR 97201 NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT THE PARTIES hereto are ALVIN S. ELKINS, Trustee, and ERNEST ELKINS, Trustee, hereinafter the "Grantor"and JOHN W. HADLEY and BARBARA A. HADLEY, husband and wife, hereinafter the"Grantee". RECITALS The Grantor is the owner of real property legally described on the attached Exhibit 1. The Grantee is the owner of real property contiguous to that property owned by the Grantor. The Grantee's property is legally described on the attached Exhibit 2. The Grantee desires a 15 foot storm sewer easement ("the Easement") from the southwest border of Grantee's property through Grantor's property to Fanno Creek. A legal description of the Easement is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit A, and a sketch of the Easement is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit B. The Grantor desires to grant the above described Easement to the Grantee. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED as follows: 1. For the sum of One Dollars ($1.00) and other valuable consideration paid to the Grantor by the Grantee, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor hereby grants, bargains, sells and conveys onto the Grantee the Grantee's heirs,successors and assigns, a perpetual non-exclusive Easement across the real property described on Exhibit 1. A legal description of the Easement is attached hereto as Exhibit A. A diagram of the Easement is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Page-I-NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT Jun 26 02 06: 51a John Hadley 503 296 8403 p. 4 2. The Grantee, its agents, independent contractors, invitees and guests shall use the Easement for the placement of a storm sewer and in conjunction with such use may construct, reconstruct, maintain and repair the storm sewer as required. 3. The Grantee and Grantor shall cooperate during periods of construction, reconstruction, maintenance and repair so that each party's use shall cause a minimum of interference to the other. 4. The Grantee agrees to indemnify and defend the Grantor from any loss, claim or liability to Grantor arising in any manner out of Grantee's use of the Easement. Grantee assumes all risks arising out of Grantee's use of the Easement and Grantor shall have no liability to the Grantee for any condition existing thereon. 5. This Easement shall benefit Grantee's real property described on Exhibit 2 and shall burden the Grantor's real property described on Exhibit 1. The Easement is appurtenant to the real property owned by the Grantee described on Exhibit 2. 6. This Easement is granted subject to all prior easements or encumbrances of records. 7. If litigation is instituted with respect to this easement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party in addition to all other sums and allowable costs, its reasonable attorneys fees both in the preparation for and at trial and any appeal or review. Such amount to be set by the court before which the matter is heard. GRANTOR: GRANTEE: AL VIN S. ELKINS J Date: ��/�ae, Date: g �[ rD 2/ (-----y„sd..„. ERNEST ELKINS B RBA A. HADLEY Date: 2 t/aZ Date: (Q f 2..j (a 2 Page-2-NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT Jun 26 02 06: 51a John Hadley 503 296 8403 P. 5 STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of ) On this day of , 2002, the within named ALVIN S. ELKINS appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the foregoing Non-Exclusive Sewer Easement as his voluntary act and deed. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of ) On this day of , 2002, the within named ERNEST ELKINS appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the foregoing Non-Exclusive Sewer Easement as his voluntary act and deed. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of ) On this oN/: day of , 2002, the within named JOHN W. HADLEY appeared before me and acknowledged h�si signed the foregoing Non-Exclusive Sewer g g er Easement as his voluntary act and deed. y' OFFICIAL SEAL ti 0 J P', ; KATHY M. FO D E /• c '.' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON 1 Notary Public r Oregon MYCOMMISSIONMEXPIRESJOUNE 16,2004(1 My Commission Expires: toll Page-3-NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT Jun 26 02 06: 51a John Hadley 503 296 8403 p- 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of ) On this 2i day of 94442-e— , 2002, the within named BARBARA A. HADLEY appeared before me and acknowledged that she signed the foregoing Non-Exclusive Sewer Easement as her voluntary act and deed. J,��/e f"�%. OFFICIAL SEAL Notary Publi for Oregon � r` i R KATHY M. FODE ) NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON My Commission Expires: COMMISSION NO.333921 111 MY COMMISSION WIRES JUNE 16, 2004 0 EXP Page-4-NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT Jun 26 02 06: 52a John Hadley 503 296 8403 p. 7 That portion of Lot 58, North Tigardville Addition, amended, a recorded subdivision in Washington County, Oregon, lying northeasterly of the center line of Fanno Creek and southwesterly of that tract of land conveyed to Ralph A. Fuller by Book 516,page 72, Washington County Deed Records. SUBJECT TO AND EXCEPTING: Rights and easements for recreation, navigation and fishery which may exist over that portion of said land lying beneath the waters of unnamed creek running along the Southwesterly property line; Rights of the public and governmental agencies in and to any portion of said Iand lying within the boundaries of S.W. Grant Avenue; Easement for sewer recorded January 19, 1972, book 851, Page 292; Easement for private sanitary sewer recorded September 16, 1986, Fee No. 58102641. EXHIBIT/ Jun 26 02 06: 52a John Hadley 503 296 8403 p. 8 EXHIBIT 2 A tract of land in the Southerly part of Lot 58, AMENDED PLAT OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the center line of County float No. 1496, and which point bears South 330 10' West 242.0 feet from an iron pipe at the roadway terminus and the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 58; thence, from the true point of beginning, South 33010' West 146.44 feet to a point on the center line of the road, and which bears North 33010' East 30.0 feet from the Southeast corner of the lot, which is on the center line of a creek; thence from said point on the creek bank South 33045' East and parallel to the creek 21.77 feet to an iron pipe on the Easterly line of the county road; thence continuing parallel to the creek South 330 56' East 126.23 feet to an iron pipe and angle point; thence South 40051' East 42.22 feet to an iron pipe which bears North 330 42' East 18.36 feet from a point on old creek center line and the Southeast corner of the lot; thence from said iron pipe and passing over an iron pipe, at a distance of one foot North 33042' East 215.84 feet to an iron pipe; thence North 560 60' West 158.68 feet to an iron pipe on the Easterly line of and county roadway; thence continuing North 56060' West 20.0 feet to the true point of beginning. Jun 26 02 06: 52a John Hadley 503 296 8403 P• 9 EXHIBIT "A" 15' STORM SEWER EASEMENT TAX LOT 2S 1 2 BA - 1190 A 15.00 foot wide strip of land located in a portion of Lot 58, AMENDED PLAT OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION, located in the Northeast 'I of the Northwest of Section 2, Township Two South, Range One West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as lying 7.50 feet on each side of the following described centerline: Beginning at the most northerly corner of said Lot 58; thence following the northwesterly line of said Lot 58 (also being the centerline of S.W. Grant Avenue) South 33°10'00" West a distance of 242.00 feet to the most northerly corner of that property described in Document No. 98-122220; thence following the northeasterly line of said property, South 56°50'00" East a distance of 20.00 feet to a 5/8" iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked "Paris & Assoc. PLS 2284" marking the intersection of the northeasterly line of said property with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue; thence following the said southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue, South 33°10'00" West a distance of 156.96 feet to the intersection of the southwesterly line of said property with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue; thence following said southwesterly line, South 33°19' 51" East a distance of 75.40 feet to the "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING" for this described centerline; thence South 37°54 '46" West a distance of 29.36 feet to the centerline of Fanno Creek which is the southwesterly line of said Lot 58, which is the terminus of this described centerline. SUBJECT TO: All easements, restrictions and rights-of-way of record and those common and apparent on the land. The side line of the above described 15.00 foot wide strip are to be lengthened or shortened to intersect with property line. REGISTERED OFESS1• • i' NDS ;.,413gR OREGON JULY 1/,107 1878 OF$U3 DJ H ul 2,. E J 2- Jun 26 02 06: 52a John Hadley 503 296 8403 p. 10 I , uU 1. UU 1 EXHIBIT "B" \ �� N J W CORNER OF LOT 58 15' ...$22..' RM SEWER EASEMENT SK TCH ' FNO. 5/B" IR & YPC 12220 SW. GRANT AVE. �/' PER SURVEY X24,563 PORTION LOT 58 OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION / ER \ \ LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 2, / T 2 S. R 1 W. W.M., CITY OF TIGARD. WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON / / //6S:* �CARO / • / / ST�FFT\ \.v ` <0� /! o '‘30./I ti0 / O/ / �� ---) 1 '. p.^ / Dry ZO /! It- 00� //0C1�/ // O. / O �/ / Q h i k. / /y '1. / / ' FND. 5/8" IR & YPC / / PER SURVEY #24.563 •'C� / �/! ` FTID. 5/8" IR & ?PC / �O / J`C/ ��o / PER SURVEY p24,563 ` ,` ,w/ ^ / / L. Q" Iv/ \ ' 00/ ! . y / 4 / .1// / ' / TAX MAP 25 1 2 E:A — 1100 / / FEE NO. 98-122220 / / / %.?.. ! / / / / / .1'% ts. / F DWG. NO. 111018 /! // ��, "TRUE POINT OF BEG." DATE: 5/3/02 ! /N 29.36" E i'4,'17.5. / ! 15• WIDE STORM SEWER EASEMENT ! 7.5' ON EACH SIDE OF CENTERLINE / T�� / / APPROXIMATE CENTERLINE x e0,, / of cRE E .4 \ -5,'90 GRAPHIC SCALE & SW'LY LINE OF LOT 58 .e. �y 26 o ss ta KC ,o, '1'p ur 111.1 J rM.1 ' J C1�� ( IN FEET ) �� I inch 50 [L LEWIS, & consulting engineers IL�77 A OF L-HA NU E--71- 18550 s.w. boones ferry road DATE JOB NO tualatin. Oregon 97 052 g• �Q Z D 1 2-4.0o(503)B135.8505 phone (503)885.1205 fax ATTENTION / /J VAN VLEi I �IR.i t�'t� f1/r `�/�`-�.'r��/ TO �/i i Q T( riEVUVED AUG 0 8 2002. G1 ►',( OF TIGARD WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑Shop drawin ❑Prints ❑ Plans ❑Samples ❑Specifications ❑Copy of letter ❑Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO DESCRIPTION ( : WW oED/64"ri O J 6rQ,ept 7" THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑Approved as submitted ❑Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑Approved as noted ❑Submit copies for distribution As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO , ,( ^ A SIGNED iil A4 C�1"1 / L�A A If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once. EXHIBIT "A" 10' ROAD DEDICATION S .W . GRANT AVENUE TAX LOT 2S 1 2 BA - 1190 A 10 . 00 foot wide strip of land located in a portion of Lot 58, AMENDED PLAT OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION, located in the Northeast 4 of the Northwest 4 of Section 2, Township Two South, Range One West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most northerly corner of said Lot 58; thence following the northwesterly line of said Lot 58 (also being the centerline of S .W. Grant Avenue) South 33°10 ' 00" West a distance of 242 . 00 feet to the most northerly corner of that property described in Document No. 98-122220; thence following the northeasterly line of said property, South 56°50 ' 00" East a distance of 20. 00 feet to a 5/8" iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked "Paris & Assoc. PLS 2284" marking the intersection of the northeasterly line of said property with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S .W. Grant Avenue, which is the "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; thence following the said southeasterly right-of-way line of said S .W. Grant Avenue, South 33°10 ' 00" West a distance of 156. 96 feet to the intersection of the southwesterly line of said property with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S .W. Grant Avenue; thence following said southwesterly line, South 33°19 ' 51" East a distance of 10. 90 feet; thence following a line lying 10 . 00 feet southeasterly of and parallel with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue, North 33°10 ' 00" East a distance of 161 . 31 feet to a point on the northeasterly line of said property; thence following the northeasterly line of said property, North 56°50 ' 00" West a distance of 10 . 00 feet to the "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING", containing 1, 591 square feet, more or less . SUBJECT TO: All easements, restrictions and rights-of-way of record and those common and apparent on the land. REGISTERED ROFESSIO ,1+ "NDSU - YR e ORE c'• ULY 14,- W.IH WM1 ICKMAN 1070 RENEWAL DATE.262(2/1.Z DATE OF gIONNOAE PI PP \ . NW CORNER OF LOT 58 E)<HIBIT ,7 10 RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION $KETCH FWD. 5/8 IR & YPC 12220 SW. GRANT AVE. PER SURVEY #24,563 PORTION LOT 58 OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION / \ \ LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 2, / 211-,, ,,i. T 2 S, R 1 W, W.M., / / CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON // �pgc0 STR \ / / FET �ry / �p%/ .� o/ / Cb / .111f. h v� ry�N / o`y C /-P).„ / O �� / O O 1141 O .moo/ / �O U /� o �/ / -� ,2 - v� / rV v „ / / , / /"TRUE POINT OF BEG." p� �FND. 5/8" IR & YPC / / PER SURVEY #24,563 / S / / / , / ``6 Sp�0,FNO. 5/8" IR Sc YPC / / ...Ck7/ h 11, 1p / F PER SURVEY #24,563 ld / ' .00/ /* ■ ,/ / $ :: ,moo 00 10 RIGHT-OF-WAY/ / ^D o DEDICATION REGISTERED �'�' / , 1,591 SQ. FT. 'ROI:ESSI•N / / %• ND SU- E,OR 4. / TAX MAP 2S 1 2 BA — 1100 r r / . / i 10' FEE NO. 98-122220 / riME IM1774 / ORE cOIL Me/ ,/ \.%) y• °) G . RY W.HICKMAN o. 1878 / `r /c�� / / / ( s,�'� RENEWAL 0/n..62/.312/JO \ o / DATE OF SIGNATUIEQ�/ /� / / ,� / / 1.--,s, XI' \ DWG. NO. 11101B \. DATE: 5/3/02 APPROXIMATE CENTERLINE OF CREEK �QQ GRAPHIC SCALE 4, 50 0 25 50 100 200 i c p ( IN r'r:�:'i ) V� 1 inch = 50 ft. • Hickman &Associates, Inc. 1705 Lee Street \ Lake Oswego, OR 97034-6003 'LC F (503) 697-6869 / (503) 697-6960 Fax `is,. Email: hickman @spiritone.com TRANSMITTAL NOTICE TO: Name: 1j 0,4 vg('7/f p¢jVo Date: (z;(7.--570a. Job Number: I) Company: ' / PP r ' /tWl'V 5 Address: Prepared by: ScO/J Submitted by: 0 Enclosed ,__.›E' Mail ❑ Fax ❑ Fedex Phone: Fax: ❑ Messenger ❑ Other Description: l� r x Poi,)-eft Pe' (V pf/Ory 4)v lom , �t"1C'l/(1vry A&W 7 A/4-1.7- A 6).- f-c 62( Peo cef, Remarks: Copies to: Hickman & s ites, Inc. Yv � __ ..... ... ........« .ay... RETRUN RECORDan DOCUMENT TO1 CITY RA LE E RECORDS DEPARTMENT. CITY OF T CARD 1312 sus Hill Illyd. 2 Tigard.OR 9711] / !N@IYI�lAI, I , Far Nu. DEDICATION DEED '. '"1\-1)(\j\'_„,/#'/V.°°.e'P'I--IC)I %ill' FOR ROAD OR STREET PURPOSES 1 �.��. sods.above tinned fw Washington County Recwdfng Nlornwlb. JI does hereby dedicate to the publle a perpetual rightof•way for atrcct, ,and utility purposes On.ever,aeaesa,under,along,and within the following described real propety in ashington County.Oregon. Attached Exhibit"A" To have and to held the above-described and dedicated rights unto the public forever far uses and purposes hereinabove stated. The grantan herby covenant that they are the owner in foe simple and the property is flee of all liens and encumbrances,they have good and legal right In gent their nght abovc-dcsuibcd,and they will pay all tuts and asacsarncnts duo and owing on the property. The true canaideratiau for this conveyance is S 0_00, However,the acpal consideration consists of or urcludeer other property or value given or promised which is the whole aonsidoadun. IN A rs ESS WHEREOF,I hereunti my hand on thin:2s`7 _day of_! 1 (1! A.,V ,70 CI L III _ _ slaw Signature 9iJ .fir 50J �lShv ; ii 4(. 2_ T Statement Mailing Address Mailing Address t'( ; Qta.u..zii/1)f ti 7 J- < STATE OF OREGON ) . )lia . • Cowry of Wa,Maaroa ) Ibis setuahot was atJS owledged Oefbrc me m`71:r l/��-(doo)!y. �h..! �U �� #11-14-4', '^'4-� (ame sf._ a)), ��..- - -`,' ' -._.--^�-��-ti��-� �'�". _ OFFICIAL SEAL (� • J l yi� w.yy KATHY M. FODE () �� : Lt ,) '4# CO NOTARY PUBUC-OREGON ( N /9. I SSION NO.333921 CO MISSION EXPIRES JUNE 16,20040 MyCnu>miwioilE MS: t'llEkrf .-... -...-.--.�- :�.�•.�.,:;. -�-�-`v IlAteep le on half of the City of this y of, 20 City Engine r e+rac.rveoawa a.o•,w mr • • • le-stAdp a 54414.1? diimiet.ous. 4+.4... /id .... 0 its. Cht(8 664):frot,A0 w o • LEWIS & L , ,E1 JU Old '--H ]L NSIJVIJr`-,a, consulting engineers 18660 s.w. boones ferry road DATE JOB NO tualatin. Oregon 97062 �• 2_1 • D Q 1 2 .p, VAN VLEE I (5 03]885.8505 phone (503]8E15.1206 fax ATTENTION �� i—orporaf 0 BE: et ED I r \� TO O I-f N 1( N 2-‘0 5-62 FAt Q M,Ou isr- PoA -LA/JD Ore. 97 Zo l WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑Plans ❑Samples ❑Specifications ❑Copy of letter ❑Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION I Cc) CPYaFDDICATONDEED 4. ore !C jN A-c_ SuIUEL(O4s c-Niqf-t6!1-5 "A '` g `'B " PLec5 ( PCETE iFa&.M Z. t e(u e_riJ 1-14 ,5 Z 3 5Z-T5 TO 6 R r ifI-nJ KA--Q F-2 c6 'Mc. C-1 IN d F T( Ca.A THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑Approved as submitted ❑Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑Approved as noted ❑Submit copies for distribution ❑As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO SIGNED: RIM PI l -1 IN If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once. Jerry R. Hanson, Ex Officio Receipt# : 17531 6/21/2002 2:31 PM Washington County Clerk 155 N 1st Avenue Suite 130, MS 9 HADLEY, JOHN W Hillsboro, Or 97124 PHONE 503-846-8752 Cashier RECORDS1 Station 22 Comments: RECORDING Document# Recording Survey Vacation Transfer A&T Fund NonStd US Other Total 2002-70884 D-E 40.00 6.00 11.00 57.00 57.00 Thank You Retain this receipt for your records Receipt Total $57.00 CHECK 1209 57.00 Receipt# : 17531 Page 1 of 1 After recording. return to: 0 py Mr. and Mrs. John W. Hadley 2656 SW Fairmont Blvd. Portland, OR 97201 NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT THE PARTIES hereto are ALVIN S. ELKINS, Trustee, and ERNEST ELKINS, Trustee, hereinafter the "Grantor" and JOHN W. HADLEY and BARBARA A. HADLEY, husband and wife, hereinafter the "Grantee". RECITALS The Grantor is the owner of real property legally described on the attached Exhibit 1. The Grantee is the owner of real property contiguous to that property owned by the Grantor. The Grantee's property is legally described on the attached Exhibit 2. The Grantee desires a 15 foot storm sewer easement("the Easement") from the southwest border of Grantee's property through Grantor's property to Fanno Creek. A legal description of the Easement is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit A, and a sketch of the Easement is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit B. The Grantor desires to grant the above described Easement to the Grantee. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED as follows: 1. For the sum of One Dollars ($1.00) and other valuable consideration paid to the Grantor by the Grantee, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor hereby grants, bargains, sells and conveys onto the Grantee the Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns, a perpetual non-exclusive Easement across the real property described on Exhibit 1. A legal description of the Easement is attached hereto as Exhibit A. A diagram of the Easement is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Page-1-NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT 2. The Grantee, its agents, independent contractors, invitees and guests shall use the Easement for the placement of a storm sewer and in conjunction with such use may construct, reconstruct, maintain and repair the storm sewer as required. 3. The Grantee and Grantor shall cooperate during periods of construction, reconstruction, maintenance and repair so that each party's use shall cause a minimum of interference to the other. 4. The Grantee agrees to indemnify and defend the Grantor from any loss, claim or liability to Grantor arising in any manner out of Grantee's use of the Easement. Grantee assumes all risks arising out of Grantee's use of the Easement and Grantor shall have no liability to the Grantee for any condition existing thereon. 5. This Easement shall benefit Grantee's real property described on Exhibit 2 and shall burden the Grantor's real property described on Exhibit 1. The Easement is appurtenant to the real property owned by the Grantee described on Exhibit 2. 6. This Easement is granted subject to all prior easements or encumbrances of records. 7. If litigation is instituted with respect to this easement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party in addition to all other sums and allowable costs, its reasonable attorneys fees both in the preparation for and at trial and any appeal or review. Such amount to be set by the court before which the matter is heard. GRANTOR: GRANTEE: AL VIN S. ELKINS 9:‘111'N.:1 H . LEY Date: /t//o2... Date: ( � ERNEST ELKINS B RBA A. HADLEY S Date: 21162— Date: (Q t 2 j 7b 2- Page-2-NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of ) On this day of , 2002, the within named ALVIN S. ELKINS appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the foregoing Non-Exclusive Sewer Easement as his voluntary act and deed. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of ) On this day of , 2002, the within named ERNEST ELKINS appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the foregoing Non-Exclusive Sewer Easement as his voluntary act and deed. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of ) On this cW day of , 2002, the within named JOHN W. HADLEY appeared before me and acknowledged hat he signed the foregoing Non-Exclusive Sewer Easement as his voluntary act and deed. +f OFFICIAL SEAL JQ' ' KATHYM. FODE 1) I NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ) Public r Oregon COMMISSION N0.333921 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 16,2004?) My Commission Expires: 10-14 Page-3-NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of ) On this day of 9i44LL , 2002, the within named BARBARA A. HADLEY appeared before me and acknowledged that she signed the foregoing Non-Exclusive Sewer Easement as her voluntary act and deed. A.OFFICIAL SEAL Notary Publi for Oregon J 1 KATHY M. FODE 1J NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ) My Commission Expires: O COMMISSION NO.333921 (� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 16,2004 9 Page-4-NON-EXCLUSIVE STORM SEWER EASEMENT That portion of Lot 58, North Tigardville Addition, amended, a recorded subdivision in Washington County, Oregon, lying northeasterly of the center line of Fanno Creek and southwesterly of that tract of land conveyed to Ralph A. Fuller by Book 516, page 72, Washington County Deed Records. SUBJECT TO AND EXCEPTING: Rights and easements for recreation, navigation and fishery which may exist over that portion of said land lying beneath the waters of unnamed creek running along the Southwesterly property line; Rights of the public and governmental agencies in and to any portion of said land lying within the boundaries of S.W. Grant Avenue; Easement for sewer recorded January 19, 1972, book 851, Page 292; Easement for private sanitary sewer recorded September 16, 1986, Fee No. 58102641. EXHIBIT EXHIBIT 2 A tract of land in the Southerly part of Lot 58, AMENDED PLAT OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the center line of County float No. 1496, and which point bears South 330 10' West 242.0 feet from an iron pipe at the roadway terminus and the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 58; thence, from the true point of beginning, South 33010' West 146.44 feet to a point on the center line of the road, and which bears North 33010' East 30.0 feet from the Southeast corner of the lot, which is on the center line of a creek; thence from said point on the creek bank South 33045' East and parallel to the creek 21.77 feet to an iron pipe on the Easterly line of the county road; thence continuing parallel to the creek South 330 56' East 126.23 feet to an iron pipe and angle point; thence South 40051' East 42.22 feet to an iron pipe which bears North 330 42' East 18.36 feet from a point on old creek center line and the Southeast corner of the lot; thence from said iron pipe and passing over an iron pipe, at a distance of one foot North 33042' East 215.84 feet to an iron pipe; thence North 560 60' West 158.68 feet to an iron pipe on the Easterly line of and county roadway; thence continuing North 56060' West 20.0 feet to the true point of beginning. 11.1 I. UU , UU • EXHIBIT "A" 15' STORM SEWER EASEMENT TAX LOT 2S 1 2 BA — 1190 A 15.00 foot wide strip of land located in a portion of Lot 58, AMENDED PLAT OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION, located in the Northeast 11 of the Northwest ;s of Section 2, Township Two South, Range One West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as lying 7.50 feet on each side of the following described centerline: Beginning at the most northerly corner of said Lot 58; thence following the northwesterly line of said Lot 58 (also being the centerline of S.W. Grant Avenue) South 33°10'00" West a distance of 242.00 feet to the most northerly corner of that property described in Document No. 98-122220; thence following the northeasterly line of said property, South 56°50' 00" East a distance of 20.00 feet to a 5/8" iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked "Paris & Assoc. PLS 2284" marking the intersection of the northeasterly line of said property with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue; thence following the said southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue, South 33°10'00" West a distance of 156.96 feet to the intersection of the southwesterly line of said property with the southeasterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Grant Avenue; thence following said southwesterly line, South 33°19' 51" East a distance of 75. 40 feet to the "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING" for this described centerline; thence South 37°54'46" West a distance of 29.36 feet to the centerline of Fanno Creek which is the southwesterly line of said Lot 58, which is the terminus of this described centerline. SUBJECT TO: All easements, restrictions and rights-of-way of record and those common and apparent on the land. The side line of the above described 15.00 foot wide strip are to be lengthened or shortened to intersect with property line. REGISTERED ''OFESS!• • 4' ND S R AFAMMIZINS OREGON JULY 14.,)CIS GARY W Mang"! "! 1870 40, RENEWAL DATE a°! 1 0 DATE OF 91oNATuRE�� .11.1;-:U :,UL,:I,NJ.I! i1,-t- I. uLi. UU) • EXHIBIT ''B" ` . NW CORNER OF LOT 58 i FND. 5/8" IR de YPC 15 _STORM SEWER EASEMENT $K ETCH 12220 SW. GRANT AVE. PER SURVEY #24,563 PORTION LOT 58 OF NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION ''''''.7 / LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SECTION 2. / Sh\ ` � T 2 S, R 1 W, w.M., / / /� nG CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON // 4�"0 5'4_ . \\ryo - \ /Q% C ''''''''..? % O/ / h5P / itt 6 V / ary / ^h Y ° , 0 �o o / i o / _ hc."o yy/ / , / / � ....yi ` 4 �0�. ).? I ND. 5/8" IR & YPC / /1/ / / PER SURVEY 1124.563 '�� / / .. /. / / / , FNO. 5/B" IR & YPC O\ 4, �o / PER SURVEY #24,563 / /' �J/�� ` mac. / / , / o/ / /7 ,/ *7 ..,r// 4.C..1/ 27 TAX MAP 25 1 2 BA - 1100 / / FEE NO. 98-122220 / / / /' ,/ J! / / / ', / // ��sus / DWG. N0, 111016 / / � "TRUE POINT OF BEG.' DATE: 5/3/02 7 p. ■ / / /N 2453646 E 4 ii 7.5' / / 15' WIDE STORM SEWER EASEMENT / 7.5' ON EACH SIDE OF CENTERLINE // A PPROXII.4ATE CENTERLINE <Oj / OF CREEK ■,9 GRAPHIC SCALE & SWLY LINE OF LOT 58 '4.1.4. O •Y 00 0 75 74 100 7a 0 1116111%.11;11 0.n ( IN FEET ) �� 1 inch - 50 IL 2/25/03 Conditions Associated With 9:16:37AM 37AM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00001 COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. Condition Status Updated Cody Tide Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By 1 REVISED ACCESS PLAN None Met 5/21/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 2.The applicant shall provide a revised access plan that provides a safe pedestrian walkway extending from the entrance of the building to SW Grant Street. The walkway shall be a minimum of four feet in width,exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes,benches,bicycle racks,and signposts,and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The walkway 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. 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. 1 REVISED STREET TREE PLAN None Met 5/22/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 3.Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the street tree plan to show compliance with Tigard Development Code (TDC)Section 18.745.040. 1 REVISED PKNG.LOT TREE PLAN None Met 5/22/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 4.The applicant shall revise the landscape plan illustrating the placement of trees within the interior of the parking lot that provides a canopy effect for the parking lot. All trees shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. 1 MIXED SOLID WASTE APPROVAL None Met 5/22/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 5.The applicant shall provide a narrative addressing the criteria of one of the 4-methods of compliance for Mixed Sold Waste and Recyclable Storage as established in TDC Chapter 18.755,and provide a sign-off letter from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. 1 SOLID WASTE/RECYC.COMPLIANCE None Met 5/22/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 6.Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the site plan to illustrated compliance with the Solid Waste and recyclable storage design standards. NM( 1 STRIPE PARKING LOT None , 'f MET BMK 5/15/02 PLL 7.Prior to final occupancy,the parking lot shall be striped in accordance with the TDC Chapter 18.765. 1 PROVIDE WHEEL STOPS None MET y BMK 5/15/02 PLL 8.Prior to final occupancy,wheel stops shall be provided for all parking areas as required by the TDC Chapter 18.765. 1 REVISED PKNG.PLAN DIMENSIONS None Met 5/22/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 9.The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the dimensions of the parking areas in accordance with Table 18.765.1 and indicate bumper overhang areas on the plan. 1 COMPACT/STANDARD SPACES None MET Q1\4 BMK 5/15/02 PLL 10.If the applicant proposes to split the spaces between compact and standard,the new plan must reflect the compact spaces and they must be marked as such prior to final occupancy. 1 REVISE PKNG.PLAN TO 7 SPACES None Met 5/22/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 11.Prior to site work,the applicant shall revise the parking plan to reflect only seven parking spaces as opposed to the eight that are proposed.STAFF RECALCULATED THE AREA TO 2200SF WHICH ALLOWS FOR EIGHT. SEVEN COMPACT/STANDARD SPACES AND ONE ADA ACCESSIBLE SPACE. 1 PROVIDE DSL APPROVAL None Met 3/27/02 BMK 5/15/02 PLL 12.Prior to site work,the applicant shall provide evidence in writing from the Oregon DSL that indicates that the proposal does not need their approval. 1 PROVIDE TREE PROTECTION PLAN None Met 6/25/02 BMK 6/26/02 BMK 13.The applicant shall supply the City arborist with a tree protection plan to protect those trees that will remain on the site,and insure that said measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to site work. 1 RECORD UTILITY EASEMENT None Met 6/25/02 BMK 6/26/02 BMK 14.Prior to construction,the applicant must attain permission in the form of a utility easement from the adjacent property owner to run the pipe all the way to Fanno Creek. The utility easement must be recorded and a copy provided to the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of any site work permits. Page 1 of 3 CaseConditions..rpt Conditions Associated With 2/25/03 9:16:38AM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00001 COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC. Condition Status Updated Code Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By 1 SUBMIT EROSION CONTROL PLAN None Met 5/22/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 15.Prior to site work,the applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for work within the Water Resources Overlay. Said plan shall be consistent with the requirements of TDC Section 18.797.080(J). 1 SUBMIT DETAILED LIGHTING PLAN None Met 5/22/02 BMK 5/22/02 BMK 16.Prior to site work,the applicant shall submit a detailed lighting plan,that shows no projection off site and complies with crime prevention requirements of the TDC Section 18.360.090(10). 1 OBTAIN ST.OPENING PERMIT None Met 7/1/02 BDR 7/11/02 BDR 17. Prior to issuance of a site permit,a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway approach,sidewalk and street tree installation on SW Grant Avenue,as well as any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five(5)copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 1 GRANT AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS None Met 7/1/02 BDR 7/1/02 BDR 18.The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Grant Avenue as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B.street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements;and C.driveway apron. 1 PROVIDE H2O QUAL.FACILITY None Met 6/10/02 BDR 6/10/02 BDR 19.The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards(adopted by Resolution and Order No.00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department(Brian Rager)for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 1 VOIDED-DUPLICATE OF#17 None Met 5/15/02 BDR 5/15/02 PLL 20. THIS IS A DUPLICATE CONDITION OF#17,THEREFORE,THIS CONDITION IS VOID. 1 GRANT AVE.ROW DEDICATION None NOT MET BDR 10/18/02 BDR 21.Prior to issuance of a building permit,additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Grant Avenue to increase the right-of-way to 30 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 OBTAIN ROW WORK APPROVAL None Met 10/9/02 BDR 10/9/02 BDR 22.Prior to a fmal building inspection,the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way(or public easement)and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 1 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES OR FEE None NOT MET BDR 5/15/02 PLL 23.The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Grant Avenue underground as a part of this project,or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be$27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen,the amount will be $4,318.00 and it shall be paid prior to a fmal building inspection. 1 H2O QUAL.DESIGN ENGINEER None Met 10/17/02 HAP 11/26/02 HAP 24.To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards,the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages,and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection,the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard(Inspection Supervisor)with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins,Building Division. 10 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT None NOT MET BDR 5/15/02 PLL 25. Prior to a final building inspection,the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management,or another company that demonstrates they can meet the maintenance requirements of the manufacturer, for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. Page 2 of 3 CaseConditions..rpt --- 2/25/03 Conditions Associated With 9:16:37AM TIDEMARK Case #: SDR2002-00001 COMPUTER SYSTEMS. INC Condition Status Updated Code, Title Hold Status Changed By Tag Date By 10 BLDG PERMIT ISSUANCE REQ'RMNTS None NOT MET BMK 5/15/02 PLL 1.The addition to the existing structure must not exceed the required height of the district(45 ft.),and shall be verified prior to issuance of building permits. Page 3 of 3 CaseConditions..rpt E r Service COME RAIN,WE SHINE. STORMWArR r MANAGEMENT Agreement 12021-B NE Airport Way Portland,OR 97220 MB Project Name: I Term: T:800.549.4667 F:800.561.1271 Red Ink Inc. I From: 10/10/2002 To: 10/102003 d , er; Contact Name: /Red Ink Inc. Art Grobe Phone: Fax: Agency: Federal Tax Ideanlleation Number. (503)906-1015 ((503)906-1063 IClty of Newberg Street/Mailing Address: 12220 SW Grant Ave. Tigard,OR 97223-5261 Site Addreu: \220 SW Grant Ave Tigard,OR 97223-5216 S I Number: Vault Size: Cartridges: Media Type: Annual Maintenance Estimate*: 556.01 CB-S 1 Perlite 200.0 Total Estimated Maintenance Cost: $200.00 •See reverse for information reguarding price increases. Stormmwater Management,-lac(MI)does out establish credit accounts for contracts totaling$1,000 or iess.SMI-will require payment prior to preforming maintenance services.SMI accepts Visa and Mastercard. Services provided by Stormwater Management,Inc: 1.Mid-season inspection: test/evaluate the filter media for hazardous constituents.(regional composite annually) 2.Evaluate the condition of mechanical filter components. 3.Remove and replace exhausted cartridges and remove accumulated sediment from the vault as necessary. 4.Notify regulatory agency and owner,via written confirmation,that maintenance has been preformed. Services not provided by Stormwater Management,Inc: 1.Maintenance of other stormwater treatment devices or appurtenances,except as noted in Attachment A if applicable. NOTE: the owner is encouraged to maintain these facilities as needed. K._ ...--- The services to be preformed and the related charges have been based upon the assumption of unrestricted access, reasonable-sedimentation loading, dry conditions, non-hazardous materials and no inappropriate discharges. Work arising from the presence of regulated materials in excess of permitted levels will be billed as extra services. Regulated materials include but are not limited to: Pesticides,Herbicides, Insecticides,Solvents, Fuels, Strong Acids or Bases, Free Oils and/or Greases. Maintenance services will be performed during the dry months (typically July through September). This contract must be signed and returned no later than May 31st to guarantee maintenance in the current calendar year. Price not to exceed estimate without prior approval from owner. This agreement is subject to and includes the Service Agreement Terms and Conditions printed on the reverse side of this sheet. This section to be updated/completed by owner or authorized representative: 0 fir` � Ii s 90 -- // /5--- This is a legally binding contract.Stormwater Management,Inc.agrees to provide and Customer agrees to accept the specified services. CUSTOMER STORMWATER MANAGEMENT,INC. ._.:: Representatives Signature ,%if o�tr'— .4 :::;eriz t) Date Date 2 0.0' TREES IrlEjc PEMKiu6 S 33'10'0"W DU12,KG. A SITE V rS(T j.- 2:30 THE EX(5T0( TEES SHADED ALI,4057r f� LC OF TIC E PA-12K I N G Arm, • Gv rnnirprTF TII T-UP BUILDING 1 o c-P 04_ - 1 • 35' SETBACK S�\-�' f 18.5' 1 F', C, 33.33' \(:)] r / ® 1 .35 S 56'50'0" E MI AI Ili. 114I o OX o o �c` o — 0 qt• I -.CO Igi PI' - -. ___ _H. ... , 1 X m ..,..,. P I F \' rte 1 s ' 8 Po eii . , 1 Luw J 1 I �4 5 I /0--1 I �n m �' gm D � W +„,,w, .. ..,, ‘il,c, ,,, ,...... ,,, _,., , . ,,, 0 . .,, �� ®� �I // o m 0 /, / Z _ ` . 0 I r / ` ',1 0 L.,_ , ,.IL Q a f- t rIj2 . ,,,,1.) co ,_.. . ,., . ,_ �GO` © i :�: ' \1y% .• c ( A-- • .• c_TX's i as 'Ll !-r_ G�4 C 3 10.0' 1 `_ •`�W4CES AT 8.5' = 59.5' 20.0' �,�' (1-1”` ......, - .......;„*.:‘, \,(`:•:::(..:::,.:-..._. (..7E,'..'. C_i_. / 71:.0'-- PP P) Q 1 PP N o gr4/I-. .1":-_f r•,7,-,_,. L, ,,,,,.. . ,,c,. 7 _ , v) w . ,..... r. :.,.,.,...__ „....„ . im I(:4 ....... \\.,, ....., , ., ,, ,,,, ,,,,,.. , ... •,,,,,,,,,,f ot- -t- ® G r., G IT6 LI6HT1kUy , 1 \ u•.-: S \\J N END OF BRIDGE u 1 1 O •V ( sTaus ) I I Y,< _ 9,1- I lei co P 94-