Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
SDR2000-00022
SDR2000 - 00022 AT &T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00022 . CITY OF TIGARD AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER Community Development Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 4/27/01 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER CASE NO: Site Development Review SDR2000-00022 PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot-high monopole tower with a 336 square foot electronic equipment building on a 3,750 square foot portion of the PGE substation site. The facility will be surrounded by a six-foot-high chain link fence and landscaping. APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless Services OWNER: Portland General Electric Attn: Real Estate Manager 121 SW Salmon Street 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Portland, OR 97201 APPLICANT REP: Spencer Vail, Planning Consultant AT&T Wireless Services 4505 NE 24' Avenue Portland, OR 97211 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial. ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G; General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where nonconforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 10955 SW 65th Avenue; WCTM 1S136AD, Tax Lot 06300. The subject site is located south of SW Pacific Highway. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has.APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 1 OF 20 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be MATHEW SCHEIDEGGER in the Planning Division (503) 639-4171.) 1. Submit an agreement that will allow collocation in the future. 2. Submit a plan showing that all trees will be planted at a minimum 2-1A inch caliper. 3. The tower must be constructed so that it is no closer than 120 feet away from the nearest residence, which is to the east of the subject site. 4. The proposed tower is required to be lighted with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. 5. The tower is either required to collapse within itself or will be setback 120 feet from all property lines. Plans for a collapsible tower must be submitted to the Planning and Building Divisions. 6. Submit noise data that all associated equipment will operate within the City's allowable decibel levels. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The site is currently developed as PGE's West Portland substation. No other land-use decisions were found. Vicinity Information: The property abuts a residentially zoned property at its easterly property line. This property line is also the City limits between the City of Tigard and the City of Portland. Properties to the south of the parcel are zoned MUE and properties to the east and north are zoned C-G. Site Information and Proposal Description: The proposed wireless communications facility consists of a 120-foot tall monopole with an associated electronic equipment building on a 3,750 square foot portion of the PGE substation site. The monopole will be a galvanized metal pole that will weather to a dull gray color. The electronics equipment shelter will have an earth-toned exposed aggregate finish. The entire site will be fenced and landscaped. SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET Two letters were sent to Staff from Mary Ann Brown, dated January 11 , 2001 and January 15, 2001 . These letters listed the following concerns: ♦ Cell towers have been banned in other states. ♦ Cell towers emit Electro Magnetic fields which cause breast cancer. ♦ The proposed cell tower will lower property values. ♦ Could Tigard afford a lawsuit in the future in placing this pole so close to residences? To answer the concerns of the neighbors notified, cellular towers are allowed in the City of Tigard and are permitted and are governed by the Federal Communications Commission. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 2 OF 20 The Tigard Develop. ant Code has a Section (18./ "Wireless Communication Facilities") which regulates cellular towers and their locations. There has been no substantiated proof that towers omit fields causing cancer and because of the Federal Communications Commission, cities may not deny construction on that basis. There is no proof that property values may be effected by the proposed cellular tower and it is not a requirement for cellular sites. However, the applicant has met all of the Site Development Review criteria and cellular towers are allowed in commercial zones. Conditions have been put in place to assure the safety and aesthetic value of surrounding properties to the extent that the Community Development Code allows. The fourth concern of the neighbors is whether Tigard could support a lawsuit against neighboring residential properties. Staff has no choice but to approve a proposed land use if the applicant meets all of the criteria. Therefore, the City of Tigard has approved this project within the perimeters of the law and is comfortable in its decision. Appeals are made to a Hearings Officer and then to the Land Use Appeals Board. The decision is based on the local code standards as well as those of the FCC. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Tigard Triangle Design Standards Landscaping and Screening B. Specific SDR Approval Criteria 18.360 C. Additional Applicable Development Code Standards 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed SolidWaste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street parking and loading requirements) 18.780 Signs 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) 18.798 Wireless Communication Facilities) 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards) D. Impact S udy 18.390 SECTION VI. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS A. TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS (18.620): Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principals adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. The following design standards apply to all development located within the Tigard Triangle. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. The criteria may be adjusted if the adjustment approval criteria, which are found in Section 18.620.090.C.1-4, have been met. The criteria provides that an adjustment NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 3 OF 20 may be ranted if gr�. ..ng the adjustment will continue _. meet the purpose of the standar s) to be modified in an acceptable alternative manner; and the proposal will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of an area and the proposal will be consistent with the desired character of the area; and if more than one adjustment is being requested, the cumulative effect of the adjustments as well as each individual adjustment results in a project which is still consistent with the overall purpose, goals and standards of the zone; and granting the adjustment is the minimum necessary to allow the proposed use of the site; and any impacts resulting from the adjustment are mitigated to the extent practicable. Street Connectivity: All development must demonstrate how one (1) of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.134 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. Design Option: a. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet; b. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more than 330 feet. Performance Option: a. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight (8) street intersections per mile; b. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance; c. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. Based on the location of the proposed monopole, the street connectivity standards do not apply. The Triangle Street Plan shown on 18.620-12 and 13 does not show either SW 65'h Avenue nor does it show any access into the Triangle area from the east at any point north of SW Atlanta. Therefore, the standard does not apply. Building Setback: The minimum building setback from public street rights-of-way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features, shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. The proposed monopole site is setback approximately 21 feet from SW 65`h right-of-way. The intent of the Tigard Triangle Design Standards is to construct buildings that are pedestrian orientated thus the above requirement to place building as close to city streets as possible. Because the croposed site is unmanned and does not promote pedestrian traffic In any way, the standarc does not apply. Front Yard Setback Design: Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one (1) street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L-1 standard on public streets. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.620.070. The proposed monopole site is abuts SW 65' Avenue, which only exists on paper as a public road right-of-way. Therefore, Staff finds it unnecessary to require a hard-surfaced expansion or sidewalk between the proposed site and SW 65' Avenue. Walkway Connection To Building Entrances: A walkway connection is required between the building's entrance and the public NOTICE OF TYPE H DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 4 OF 20 street or accessway ,.roviding access to the property. This walkway must be at least six (6) feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.620.070. The proposed monopole site is accessed via an existing gravel roadway serving the existing PGE substation. The gravel roadway is accessed via SW 64"' Avenue. This street is within the City of Portland and is not improved to City of Tigard standards. Again, the standard was designed to serve buildings with pedestrian access, which are not applied to monopoles. Parking Location And Landscape Design: Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The proposed monopole site does not have an associated parking lot. The site will be visited a maximum of once a month for routine maintenance. Landscaping is addressed in greater detail under Chapter 18.745 later in this report. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Building Design Standards: All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 (Criteria for Granting a Variance) is satisfied. Ground Floor Windows: All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50 percent of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three (3) feet above grade to nine (9) feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50 percent of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. The intent of ground floor windows is to make buildings and their occupants more accessible and friendly to pedestrian foot traffic. Because SW 65"' Avenue does not physically exist, and the proposed site is for an unmanned monopole, ground floor windows will not be required. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Building Facades: Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one (1) of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off-set of at least 1-foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. The proposed monopole site does not exceed 50 feet along unimproved SW 65' Avenue. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Weather Protection: Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 5 OF 20 The proposed site is a cellular tower not a building. The site will not attract pedestrians and the only entrance is a vehicular maintenance entrance. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Building Materials: Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. The proposed pad that the monopole will be located is concrete. The site is surrounded with a 6-foot chain-link fence and screened with arborvitae. The site is considered an unmanned site and not a building. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Roofs And Roof Lines: Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. No false fronts or roofs are proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Roof-Mounted Equipment: All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. The proposal is for a 120-foot cellular tower. Screening of the facility is addressed later in this decision under Chapter 18.745. The aesthetics of the pole itself are address under Chapter 18.798. Therefore, this standard has been met. Signs: In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code, the following standards shall be met: Zoning District Regulations: Non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone (18.780.130.D). Sign Area Limits: The maximum sign area limits found in Section 18.780.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Height Limits: The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Sign Location: Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. No signs are proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Entry Portals: Entry portals shall be required at the primary access points into the Tigard Triangle. 1. Location — Entry portals shall be located at the intersections of 99W and Dartmouth; 99W and 72"d; 1-5 and Dartmouth; Hwy. 217 and 72'; and at the Hwy. 217 Overcrossing and Dartmouth. 2. Design — The overall design of entry portals shall relate in scale and detail to both the automobile and the pedestrian. A triangle motif shall be NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 6 OF 20 incorporated J the design of entry portals. The location is not an entry, portals are not required with this project. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Landscaping and Screening: Two (2) levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. L-1 (Low Screen): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 31/2 inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3-foot high screen and a 90 percent opacity within one (1) year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two (2) years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. This proposal does not involve a parking lot, nor is it adjacent to a major or minor arterial. Therefore, this standard does not apply. L-2 (General Landscaping): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 21/2 inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two (2) years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. As indicated on the site and landscape plans, the enclosure is to be screened with 8 Norway Maples planted at a 2-inch caliper and 59, 1-gallon Arborvitae planted 3 feet on center. The L-2 landscaping standard requires all trees to be provided at a minimum 2 1/2 inch caliper. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards have not been fully met. If the applicant complies with the condition listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITION: Submit a plan showing that all trees will be planted at a minimum 2-1/2 inch caliper. Site Development Review - Approval Standards: Section 18.360.090(A)(1) Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.800, Street and Utility Standards; The proposed project complies with the Comprehensive Plan's General Commercial designation for the subject property because it complies with the applicable provisions of the Community Development Code, which implement the plan. Compliance with the majority of specific regulations and standards will be addressed further within this decision. Section 18.360.090(A) provides other Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 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: Residential Use), 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use), 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces), 18.360.090.11 (Public Transit), 18.360.090.14 (Provisions for the Disabled) and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 7 OF 20 Buildings shall be: ...sated to preserve existing tree_ 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 has not proposed to remove any existing trees to construct this facility. The topography and natural drainage is not proposed to be altered in any way. However, drainage and will be reviewed later in this decision under Section 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards). Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.360.090.4(A) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, for example, between single-family and multiple-family residential, and residential and commercial uses, and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer: The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; The size of the buffer required to achieve the purpose in terms of width and height; the directions (s) from which buffering is needed; the required density of the buffering; and whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. As indicated on the site and landscape plans, the enclosure is to be screened with 8 Norway Maples planted at a 2-inch caliper and 59, 1-gallon Arborvitae planted 3 feet on center. This will screen the facility from the residential properties located to the east of the property. Staff is confident that the proposed level of screening is adequate to provide a visual barrier and buffer to help decrease noise levels. However, more strict landscaping requirements and noise buffering will be addressed under Section 18.798.050.B.7.(b) and Section 18.798.050.B.8. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Section 18.360.090.4(B) states that on-site screening from view of adjoining properties of such things as service and storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops, i.e., air cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: What needs to be screened; the direction from which it is needed; how dense the screen needs to be; whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; and whether the screening needs to be year around. As indicated on the site and landscape plan, the enclosure will be completely screened from adjoining properties. Viewers of the proposed monopole will be stationary which solidifies the need for the condition to plant four evergreen trees at least 15 feet in height at the time of planting between the proposed monopole and the adjoining residential properties, which is discussed under Section 18.798.050.B.7. (b). Therefore, this standard has been met. Crime prevention and safety: Section 18.360.090(A).10 requires that 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. The proposed monopole site is an unmanned site. A six-foot chain link fence is proposed to surround the entire site with (3) strands of barbed wire along the top. Pedestrians will not be visiting the site or directed to the site. The site is visible to the east by residentially zoned property. The Tigard Police Department reviewed the project and did not indicate the need for lighting. Therefore, Staff will not condition outside security lighting due to problems with glare and the attraction of pedestrians. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 8 OF 20 Landscaping Plan: ..tion 18.360.090(A).12 requires , all landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745. In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and a minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. The applicant has submitted a plan indicating the number, type, and location of existing and proposed shrubs to screen the lease area. However, the above section requires the Pproperty to have a minimum of 20 percent landscaping which is attributable to the monopole ease area. According to the landscape plan the site will have approximately 750 square feet of landscaping, which is 20 percent of the 3,750 square-foot lease area. Underlying Zoning Provisions: Section 18.360.090(A).15 states that all of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments. Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. These standards have been reviewed elsewhere within this decision. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Site Development Review Standards have not been met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. Dimensional Requirements: The C-P Zoning District standards are contained in Table 18.520.2. , STANDARD C-G PGE Proposed Substation Monopole Minimum Lot Size 276,837sq. ft. 3,750sq. ft - Detached unit - - Boarding, lodging, rooming house - Minimum Lot Width 50 ft >50 ft 75 ft Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 0 ft 70ft. Oft. -Side facing street on corner& - - - through lots [1] -Side yard 0/20 ft[3] 116 ft. 20 ft -Side or rear yard abutting more - - restrictive zoning district - Rear yard 0/20 ft[3] 46 ft. <20 ft - Distance between front of garage& - - property line abutting a public or private street. Maximum height 45 ft -45ft. 120 ft Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85 % -85% -85 % Minimum Landscape Requirement 15 % +15% +15 % The table above compares the applicant's proposal with the minimum dimensional standards of the C-G zone and the entire site that the tower is being constructed. The entire area proposed for this use is 3,750 square feet of the PGE substation property. Therefore, this criterion has been satisfied. Setbacks: Table 18.520.2 states that there is no front, side, or rear and setback except 20 feet shall be required where a commercial use abuts a residential zoning district. The proposed monopole and residential zoning district to the east of the property is divided by SW 65' Avenue right-of-way. Therefore, the setback requirements for the C-G zoning NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 9 OF 20 district have been met. However, more strict setback requirt,,.,ents are addressed later in this decision under Chapter 18.798. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Commercial Zoning District Standards have been met. 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 proposed monopole is an unmanned site that will be accessed by repair personnel only. Therefore, no pedestrian access is required. 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; No pedestrians will be visiting the site and no accessway will be required. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. No walkway is required. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 provides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with 0-99 parking spaces is one 30-foot access with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The proposed site plan shows a 12-foot gravel access easement to the proposed utility lese area off of an existing gravel access, which provides access to the PGE Substation. The intent of the standard is to pave access drives so that gravel is not spread onto paved streets. Because a gravel road accesses the parcel itself, to condition a 30-foot paved access drive would be impractical. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Access Egress and Circulation standards have been fully met. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street or a private drive more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 10 OF 20 The proposed monopole site has frontage on SW 65' Avenue right-of-way. However, SW 65th Avenue is not improved, nor will it be required as part of this application. Therefore, street trees will not be required because SW 65`h Avenue has not been constructed. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.050 states that buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses, which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Table 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right-of-way, buffering, but not screening, shall be required as a specified in the matrix. Properties surrounding the subject site to the north and west are zoned C-G. The property to the south is zoned MUE and has an 80-foot natural buffer between the adjoining property and the PGE substation located on the subject property. Table 18.745.2 (Buffer Combinations for Landscaping and Screening) requires a buffer between properties zoned C-G and properties zoned MUE. However, the table only requires a minimum 10-foot buffer of lawn or living groundcover. The property to the east is zoned residential, but separated by SW 65t Avenue right-of-way. Therefore, this standard has been met. 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. According to the plans, only one parking space is needed for the proposed monopole. No parking lots are associated with this project. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 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; Plans indicate all service facilities will be located within the fenced lease area. The lease area will be screened from adjoining properties with 59 1-gallon Arborvitae and 8 Norway Maples. Therefore, this standard has been met. Screening Of Refuse Containers. Except for one- and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. No refuse container is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have been fully met. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Location of vehicle parking: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 11 OF 20 Off-street parking spu_.;s for single-family and duplex .ellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwellings. Off-street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building with the following exceptions: a) commercial and industrial uses which require more than 40 parking spaces may provide for the spaces in excess of the required first 40 spaces up to a distance of 300 feet from the primary site; The 40 parking spaces which remain on the primary site must be available for users in the following order of priority: 1) Disabled-accessible spaces; 2) Short-term spaces; 3) Long-term preferential carpool and vanpool spaces; 4) Long-term spaces. No parking lot is associated with this application. The proposed application is for a wireless monopole that will produce one vehicle trip per month. The lease site has one space to be utilized by a service vehicle only. Therefore, this standard has been met. Joint Parking: Owners of two or more uses, structures or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same parking and loading spaces when the peak hours of operation do not overlay, subject to the following: 1) The size of the joint parking facility shall be at least as large as the number of vehicle parking spaces required by the larger(est) use per Section 18.765.070; 2) Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the Director in the form of deeds, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; 3) If a joint use arrangement is subsequently terminated, or if the uses change, the requirements of this title thereafter apply to each separately. Joint parking is not proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Parking in Mixed-Use Projects: In mixed-use projects, the required minimum vehicle parking shall be determined using the following formula. 1) Primary use, i.e., that with the largest proportion of total floor area within the development, at 100% of the minimum vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060; 2) Secondary use, i.e., that with the second largest percentage of total floor area within the development, at 90% of the vehicle arking re uired for that use in Section 18.765.060; 3�Subsequent use or uses, at parking of the vehicle parking required for that use(s) in Section 18.765.060; 4) The maximum parking allowance shall be 150% of the total minimum parking as calculated in D.1.-3. above. This project is not considered a mixed-use project. The intended use for the site is wireless communication only. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Visitor Parking in Multi-Family Residential Developments: Multi-dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces above the minimum required for the use of guests of residents of the complex. These spaces shall be centrally located or distributed throughout the development. Required bicycle parking facilities also be centrally located within or evenly distributed throughout the development. This project does not involve a residential use. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Preferential Long-Term Carpool/Vanpool Parking: Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long-term parking spaces shall provide preferential long-term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students _ d other regular visitors to the site. At least 5% of total long-term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool/vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpools/vanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated for use by the disableu. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Disabled-Accessible Parking: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 12 OF 20 All parking areas sh, oe provided with the required n_ .ber 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. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Access Drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. The access drive has been addressed previously in this decision under Chapter 18.705 (Access Egress & Circulation). Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 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. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 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. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Bicycle Parking Location and Access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 13 OF 20 within parking aisles, .-ndscape areas or pedestrian way_, outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle arking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. Bicycle parking is not required for wireless communication facilities. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased-except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. Bicycle parking is not required for wireless communication facilities. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. Bicycle p arking is not required for wireless communication facilities. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 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. Table 18.765.2 of the Ticard Development Code does not require parking for wireless communication facilities. T erefore, this standard does not apply. Off-Street Loading Spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40, 000 gross square feet or more. Parking is not required for wireless communication facilities. However, the site will provide one parking space for a service vehicle, which will visit the site once a month. The site is under 10,000 square feet. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have been fully met. 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 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 14 OF 20 • standards and meths.. ., that will be used by the applica,. ..o protect trees during and after construction. The applicant is not proposing to remove any trees. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Tree Removal standards have been met. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. No obstructions have been proposed where the access connects to the gravel access road for the PGE substation. Because the lease area is accessed by a private drive from a public street, a 30-foot visual clearance area shall be maintained on both sides of the access drive. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Visual Clearance Standard has been met. Wireless Communications Facilities: Section 18.798.050 provides the following review criteria for new communications towers within commercial zoning districts. Uses Permitted: Towers in Commercial Zones and the I-P Zone - A tower, including antennas, other support equipment and/or accessory equipment buildings, in any commercial or I-P district, provided that such a tower shall be set back from any existing off-site residence by a distance equal to the height of the tower; The proposed tower is 120 feet tall. The applicant will therefore, be required to show that the tower itself is 120 feet away from the nearest residence, which is to the east of the subject site. Public Open Space - A tower, including antennas, other support equipment and/or accessory equipment buildings, provided that such a tower shall be set back from any existing off-site residence by a distance equal to the height of the tower. A Type II adjustment may be obtained to reduce this setback, subject to criteria of approval contained in Section 18.370.020 C8a; No public open space is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Collocation in Commercial and Industrial Zones - Collocation of an antenna(s) that extends more than 20 feet above an existing tower or non-tower structure or when collocating more than three providers in commercial and industrial zones; Collocation is not proposed at this time but will be feasible in the future based on the design of the proposed tower and associated pad. However, the applicant will be required to submit an agreement that will allow collocation in the future. Collocation within a residential zoning district that extends more than 10 feet above a non-tower structure or an existing structure; This property is not designated as residential. Therefore, this standard is not applicable. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 15 OF 20 Accessory Equipmeri1 Shelter - Installation of additiL,.1al accessory equipment shelters or related equipment if required existing landscaping is removed and cannot be replaced on the site to achieve the original intent, or to sufficiently screen any proposed new shelter and/or equipment if the original intent is no longer applicable Accessory equipment is proposed to be located on the concrete slab pad where the tower is located and will not alter the original intent of the site or require any required landscaping to be removed. Therefore, this standard has been met. Towers and Antennas in Public Richts-of-Way - Installation of any tower or antenna within any public right-of-way, provided that such tower or antenna shall be set back from any off-site residence by a distance equal to the height of the tower. This standard is not applicable because the proposed monopole will not be placed in the public right-of-way. Review Criteria: Aesthetic: New towers shall have a non-reflective surface and a neutral color or, if required by the FAA, be painted pursuant to FAA's requirements; The applicant has indicated the surface type to be a non-reflective gray finish. Therefore, this criterion has been satisfied. If collocation on an existing tower is requested, the design of any antenna(s), accessory structures or equipment shall, to the extent possible, use materials, colors and textures that will match the existing tower or non-tower structure to which the equipment of the collocating provider is being attached; and Collocation is not proposed at this time for this project. Therefore, this standard does not apply. If collocation on an existing non-tower structure is requested, the antenna(s) and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment shall be a neutral color that is the same as the color as the supporting structure so as to make the antenna(s) and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. This proposal does not involve a non-tower structure. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Setbacks: Towers designed to collapse within themselves shall be set back in accordance with the setbacks contained in the base zone; The applicant has not produced evidence that the tower will collapse within itself. Therefore, the applicant will be required to build a tower that will collapse within itself or setback the proposed tower 120 feet from all property lines. Towers not designed to collapse within themselves shall be set back from the property line by a distance equal to the height of the tower; The applicant has to meet the setback standard if he chooses not to build a collapsible tower. No new tower shall be allowed within 500 feet of an existing tower. If, having completed the collocation protocol outlined in Section 18.798.080 without success, the provider will be required to build a tower less than 500 feet from an existing tower, it will be required to obtain a Type I adjustment governed by Section 18.370.020 C8b; The applicant has provided evidence in the form of letters from competing wireless communication companies that there are no other existing towers within 500 feet of the proposed monopole. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 16 OF 20 Tower height shall not exceed 100 feet for a single user or 125 feet for multiple users; The applicant has proposed a tower height of 120 feet, which will allow for collocation of other users. Therefore, this standard is met. No lighting shall be permitted on a tower except as required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); The applicant has not proposed any lighting on the tower. However, Staff has received a letter from the Oregon Department of Aviation stating that the location of the proposed tower is in line with flight paths along the 1-5 corridor. Therefore, the applicant will be required to light the proposed tower with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. For security purposes, towers and ancillary facilities shall be enclosed by a minimum 6-foot fence; The applicant has proposed to enclose the lease area around the tower with a 6-foot-high chain link fence. Therefore, this standard has been met. Landscaping shall be placed outside the fence and shall consist of evergreen shrubs, which reach 6 feet in height and 95% opacity within 3 years of planting; The applicant has proposed that the fence enclosure will be screened with 8 Norway Maples planted at a 2-inch caliper and 59, 1-gallon Arborvitae planted 3 feet on center. However, the applicant has not provided information regarding what height and opacity the Arborvitae will be within 3 years of planting. Therefore, the applicant will be conditioned to submit information addressing height and opacity of the Arborvitae within 3 years of planting. When adjacent to or within residentially-zoned property, free-standing towers and accessory equipment facilities shall be screened by the planting of a minimum of four evergreen trees at least 15-feet in height at the time of planting. The planting of said trees shall be rescribed in number by a plan prepared by a registered arborist in locations that (11) most effectively screen the wireless facilities from residential uses and (2) promote the future survival of the trees while limiting adverse effects of the trees on abutting properties. Existing evergreen trees at least 15-feet in height may be used to meet the screening requirement of this section if the arborist demonstrates that they provide screening for abutting residential uses; and The proposed monopole site is separated from the residential zone to the east by SW 651i Avenue. Therefore, this standard coes not apply. Noise generating equipment shall be sound buffered by means of baffling, barriers or other suitable means to reduce the sound level measured at the property line to 50 DBA (day)/40 DBA (night) when adjacent to a noise sensitive land use and 75 DBA (day)/60 DBA (night) when adjacent to other uses. The applicant has indicated that the equipment shelter associated with the monopole has an air conditioning unit, which operates within the allowable DBA levels. However, the applicant has not provided evidence that the air conditioning unit will operate under the allowable DBA levels. Therefore, the applicant will be conditioned to provide evidence that all associated equipment will operate within the City's allowable decibel levels. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that not all of the Wireless Communication Facility standards have been fully met. If the applicant meets the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: ♦ Submit an agreement that will allow collocation in the future. ♦ Submit evidence that the tower itself is 120 feet away from the nearest residence, which is to the east of the subject site. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 17 OF 20 ♦ Provia, evidence that the proposed tower wh„ oe lighted with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. ♦ Submit information addressing height and opacity of arborvitae within 3 years of planting. ♦ Submit evidence that the tower will collapse within itself or submit evidence that the proposed tower will be setback 120 feet from all property lines. ♦ Submit evidence that all associated equipment will operate within the City's allowable decibel levels. Transportation 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 The site is accessed via a private driveway within an unimproved ODOT right-of-way, commonly known as "SW 64' Avenue". This roadway is located within the City of Portland city limits, serves as a frontage road to SW Pacific Highway and Highway 217, and serves as a private access to 13 parcels of land (9 homes total), including the subject site. We have no authority to require improvements in Portland, nor is the development impact proportional to the cost of improving 64' Avenue. 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 the Unified Sewerage Agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream flows that affect 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 the Unified Sewerage agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) 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 storm water 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 ofyim impervious surfaces provide on-site 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 18 OF 20 This project will encor..rass an area of approximately 3,756 ...quare feet and will consist of an equipment shelter and the tower. The remaining area will be gravel. The equipment shelter will only comprise an area of approximately 336 square feet. This is an insignificant increase in impervious area. No detention or water quality treatment is required. Other Requirements: At the time a provider requests a building permit, it must demonstrate compliance to all applicable state, and Federal regulations, including but not limited to the Oregon Uniform Structural Code, Building Codes and FAA requirements. The applicant is required to comply with the applicable approval standards through the process of obtaining the necessary building permits. Impact Study: Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The site will only have 12 feet of frontage on a 30-foot private drive, which connects to SW 64'1 Avenue. Therefore, the only impact of the site will be the vehicle access to service the site. No traffic impact fee is associated with a wireless communication facility and no street improvements are required. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objections or comments. The City of Tigard Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objections or comments. The City of Tigard Long Range Planning Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objections or comments. The City of Tigard Operations Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objections or comments. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Unified Sewerage Agency has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or within 200' of the site. This pre- screening site assessment does not eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on the property. No further site assessment or service provider letter is required. Oregon Aviation has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 19 OF 20 This proposed tower lies adjacent to the 1-5 corridor, South of Portland. Aircraft and helicopters fly this route to reach accident victims, often in marginal weather conditions. If this tower is approved, it should be lighted with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. QWEST Communications has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objection or comments. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: _ THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 13, 2001 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 1, 2001 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 5:00 P.M. ON FEBRUARY 28, 2001. 1 Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Bo . -vdrd, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. air _,may. February 13, 2001 P' 'P A R a . 'ath- .cheidegger DATE Assistant Planner • ('"r February 13, 2001 APPROVED BY: Richard Be ,e sdorff DATE Planning Manager is\curpin\Mathew\sd r\sd r2000-00022.dec.doc NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 20 OF 20 • L COY Of 110■11.0 • ° :: 29; H 0. ` / n Z • • • .,• :'" `��,.• fSosE eft C Le I- iyv /:' . :!AREA.• - �`' Q j REA .. -/> ` •` '•t:FUZURE LEASE ›� W• • ' •. /4„ Ce LL :::'':•;...I I- 1 CNORTH SITE PLA\ z o '' ° ,0,-0- NOT FOR CONS I HUCTON SITE PLAN 1 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER EXHIBIT MAP N SDR2000-00022 (map is not to scale) CITY of TIGARD Q S w PALATINE sr GEOGP APn is INrOZ4Ar ON .,r„rE4 .0,00-0 .pg ____________ ________ ± c, c VICINITY MAP ST 1S136AD, 06300 $1DE PAC1f A, SW' 1G Go' AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER &W.CORONADO SDR2000-00022 101 • •Mil lipLI .1111 J - alcis § IIIIIIIIIIIIIII .r 0 z 3 CD vii [SUBJECT SIT: Ilk` N / 0 100 200 300 Feet 1,243 feel <n P‘( .- R S.W. `EggE 0. • .. t Q City of Tigard Information on this map is for general location only and •zt A i should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 I (503)639-4171 _ http/lwww ci tigard or us Community Development Plot date: Jan 2, 2001;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER CI Community y Development opment Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 4/27/01 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER CASE NO: Site Development Review SDR2000-00022 PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot-high monopole tower with a 336 square foot electronic equipment building on a 3,750 square foot portion of the PGE substation site. The facility will be surrounded by a six-foot-high chain link fence and landscaping. APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless Services OWNER: Portland General Electric Attn: Real Estate Manager 121 SW Salmon Street 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Portland, OR 97201 APPLICANT REP: Spencer Vail, Planning Cons. AT&T Wireless Services 4505 NE 24th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial. ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G; General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where nonconforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 10955 SW 65th Avenue; WCTM 1 S136AD, Tax Lot 06300. The subject site is located south of SW Pacific Highway. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25 ) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 13, 2001 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 1, 2001 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. I THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON FEBRUARY 28, 2001. I Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Mathew Scheidegger at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. / re Lu °'4,C' © �^ •'x` ..1,.�;�.'•Y• O ,~ ;s; • 4** 4' ''''.:: ': ?.!?.,::.:.!:•:41 . 0 1.16144,4),•;N:':,.:.: SITE AN q45 s ,o 4, " r•lPLa 0 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION • SITE PLAN AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER EXHIBIT MAP N SDR2000-00022 ma.n 5d a•�: I ST ii .� WI" a VICINITY MAP l/ 1S136AD,06300 a"� AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER saw.conoNAoo SDR2000-00022 IIII m Airill67 0 MOW ��/---,r, MIMI ....... ,\ .., Eo B ♦ 111111' YI I SUBJECT SITE] Ait'til i‘,,N, „,, . W^Y i wimp*P , Cm of T3anf I .a NM AM 1.47,:lr" I vim date Jan 2.207;i∎r te;;AG,CO3 APR NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIE )LDER,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQU rLj THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE i ,:MPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR2000-00022 �� CITY OF TIGARD AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER DevC�y Shag A t3ettes- Con&IY DATE OF NOTICE: January 2, 2001 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 2000-00022 FILE NAME: AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot high monopole tower in the City of Tigard to provide wireless communication service. ZONE: C-G; General Commercial APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. LOCATION: South of SW Pacific Highway at 10955 SW 65th Avenue, WCTM 1 S136AD Tax Lot, 06300. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the City. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON January 16, 2001. All comments should be directed to Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at (503) 639-4171. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 1, 2001. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: ♦ Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; • Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Planning Commission must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: ♦ The application is accepted by the City ♦ Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. ♦ The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. ♦ City Staff issues a written decision. ♦ Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." ippityme- Noir CITY of TIGARD Ta . VICINITY MAP ST 1S136AD, 06300 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER S.W.CORONADO SDR2000-00022 • _ J l N . grf SUBJECT SITE � • al o ,ro :ro wo »i All +� S.W. J �I I City of Tigard REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: February 7, 2001 TO: Matt Scheidegger, Assistant Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SDR 2000-00022, AT&T Wireless Monopole Tower I offer the following as comments with regard to this application: Transportation 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. The site is accessed via a private driveway within an unimproved ODOT right-of-way, commonly known as "SW 64th Avenue". This roadway is located within the City of Portland city limits, serves as a frontage road to SW Pacific Highway and Highway 217, and serves as a private access to 13 parcels of land (9 homes total), including the subject site. I reviewed the access situation and believe that the applicant should not be required to make any further improvements to the roadway, as their impact will be insignficant, and the roadway currently functions adequately without causing any problems to the public ROW of SW Pacific Highway. 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 the Unified Sewerage Agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream flows that affect 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 the Unified Sewerage agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) 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. This project will encompass an area of approximately 3,750 sf and will consist of an equipment shelter and the tower. The remaining area will be gravel. The equipment shelter will only comprise an area of approximately 336 square feet. This is an insignificant increase in impervious area. No detention or water quality treatment is required. If you have further questions, let me know. I\eng\brianr\comments\sdr\sdr2000-00022.doc PAGE 2 S J ucc _Z ORE0(0) U] Oreicon RECEIVED PLANNING DEPARTMENT OF 9 j John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.,Governor �. L B 0 2 2001 � 1 3040 - 25th Streeet SE CITY OF Salem, OR 97302-1125 Phone: (503) 378-4880 (800) 874-0102 Jan, 31 , 2001 FAX: (503) 373-1688 Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planner City of Tigard Planning Div. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: Comments regarding the Proposed 125 foot Cellular Tower AT&T Wireless Cell Tower WCTM 1 S 136AD Tax Lot, 06300 ODA 01-0043CitTig This proposed tower lies adjacent to the 1-5 corridor, which is utilized as a navigation reference by aircraft and helicopters in the Portland area. In concert with FCC Fact Sheet #2, September 17,1996, 10, concerning sharing structures to house transmitters, it is preferred that tower proponents co-locate on existing towers wherever feasible prior to erecting new structures. If this tower is approved, to increase visibility for safety of flight, the tower should be lighted with a dual fitted, steady burning, red, L810 obstruction light in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. Sinc ly, i T o arr�s E. HigGGGh---I d Aviation Planner Form 802-9801(8 00) I f te ' iggit w�4' 1� �� • i,s •-• -f...;,. vim. �S . 1: 3+'he 4½ 1; (: ...'• . . 1. ` 1 --1 y�1p�y `S) 'k t V.---.-.'"--< .•:.� -.. - ' .: :�_ ... 41-. a,\ \\ .{. •: it+ is ( � Y-••"` SW a k _•';( 1 koi f 1 _ 4,s ' � •�'I - ' F` . -, - . :Wide' r ` -3:4 /rte,, s-- iY qfi . " - / • _ \ '• :X• VOpA -G0d13/ foot�Ow6 • , y'/,� iJ.. •ar . 1an(1 •` f... • .* -01Ci+ts� - ' • -• } ;• • ;_,I.53 ,, > , -r �-'`'� 7. •_' _ . x . � ' - ._:„. ,, < -_ ;�_,▪ .__.•„` .. >Zia •!! 1 1. /1 15 foot IOwer f••- S� , • �• •j� - r.• •S(.•A:� • •6 �. r • ' 1• , t •!j; ,t• - ,• L 1 •• •I�� g t9 :..,. :_ - ..L-1 .IN -. 1 w ._ • ;: __ c•.•1; t ai• '•▪ • I. •.ICE7!"4• •.1..•.. ` ..Z � --� , _ '.k,:__.....:•• , I•. • _•:... rta {�7-•7 NNW.. '• '`F `•rte\'�� �•- ▪ .�▪ ,1/n ., ...-_ /• /�� _ '.;.• . �Z (: •f • r LH►I A A S OG- �+— 1 ; ..i _a•• --'•"'•J�-� V • "ff % j•,• • • a•-~, • ' '= \•':� ' h .. it .-, _ I •. • ' _h S_ \ y ._ j .. .4 � �i � . r J ' et � .� • •'l s- — _ , dNl02i13E/1 foeitowe. . . < • �'-'�...'•�. `� • • l.-\ ° ( .� • . _ '! ` \.` ) Mao-as. • ftii)ii4. ;• lake Oftwego '1.'. _ ) •,,'. ''-•-•”' . .,• ..i.•••,:__-•:...••.,-;"...-•'.‘.7-:•• I sakl. : ; ... 'r..,•;:.,,s .LA :fir J I t ...,4. A ' ==,''',i)isz. jai 41%. _ ,,. ..-- -"4-7,-.... ic-....v. •--) - ' ..--•//,' --" 7', Z-r�/�-y - itw.BV•l14I! �_ . \� -� a• 4.:!' I . •_-.• ,..'J ..▪ s••+. `" /'E" ,e . ;+ r ?--c k. 3 :Hunt •,',;""•_, ) )'O + ... w N• ..y 2i1 {:n.,e.'— y�. 1CIuLi1 a� �• AA PARK ••� •' �! •, • ._ (. ?if " Twin Pain �` p IAKL ARO-Y_L E V „: -- ' --- ..0 ; '' .: ::\,,:c4\4. m <o �`,er�rvoo`u e” of NE _ i K T' ;1Tr 1 .e•S'aYk •�. r ] j a fire p:'` f—�` y i Copyright(C)1997.MaPtech 'ic --, e , ....___ --Zoo i 1--: f*\ - RECEIVED JAN 1 2001 /0-61,k. 7-114,", idizz_e_62 commiry OE VELOPMEN ? (/ • 3'5 Uhia) ,ved--t-a-z-z)---- -( c.iyo.e, A,e_z_itax;e6e:i_11 0.1 1:a i',..;_f7 c-/2-tc,-,12.6.L. _(..„' , kee...4,,_ ,6 eti4----- , 6K.,,z, .6 oxari ; , / act_i) ,a,e..2__. ,i-i _ L, , h, „ „diet 7 '/ , •-d,„ (--3/0,5. -641, ) ie>aid.c.- 4_'e,',4 ---robLia- elfeeeLc - 644.„_,, ,e, Cextee 77 -1 6 4.e66; Aetir-761 , 0 etiae, '_fri:_„"--tiby-lf ' ---CLE-i-- r-fkl-a-a-71.ele&bl X--4"-e--0 761°-i in,a)tea-119ee at g9-44-A- ,I,IALeell- ,e9-e,c)L, (6,2.-t,4-ezz-eci ,..,ti-, I&Le__, - alei-- tx4e ..,4,e)teyid se*, 61)1- tic. ArE de9-24L0 i t , :(2 6 .,Z--) --71-e--0- 7 • l/, moo/ a ri ,/ a‘11 W 5 6, l � � �Dv-cbo 2y //GV. >41ee4 �a& evtwel 9 z Jetd U e ,„ , !..' 144 e' a ' a - Qkdee >eczAex_) eIzzAJ , 6a)1 aewt-e, flzy ,e)tiC_ /W d-e'e`C./ i/CJC/(((JJJ///jjj ").-L4rAL4 , 6i4,ceipezte.t,4) Wce. Al- ztJ_e€4.4 toWy a.lbett.i th) eeV&L)cl "tCitea, //' `n0 e.t..e . • -r , • eeL-Acea> -c_eAlcs a_124tel< dieJ leztee,te_,? 6eziel tle WL )Z/Ze /t66 SW 6 y t/eiotod7iPx_ 94 ,e-t,413//a_tzttx., di ize/e / tztte Alwowow 7, , 74,gb ri7s1.1 4A-Let r I - / //6/5" r •C 6 CO 0,JO i'qAAtiG • F=1" V3‘\ tk leC( ‘1 413/fir:il ) r()) CIA)) friA444fradC1 (5) C)1 teila■at;4Ce) fe24-464(4Z /i/f i'! r ORE 1 LI 7 i:4717�r1;. re on DEPARTMENT OF F au��ooa John A.Ki17Jlaber,M.D.,Governor \ 3040 - 25th Streeet SE Salem, OR 97302-1125 Phone: (503) 378-4880 (800) 874-0102 FAX: (503) 373-1688 Dec. 19, 2000 Dave Wand Senior RF Engineer AT&T Wireless Services 1600 Fourth Ave. Portland, OR 97201 Subject: Comments regarding Proposed Tigard North- East Cell Site Aeronautics reference number 00-0559AT This proposed tower lies adjacent to the 1-5 corridor, South of Portland. Aircraft and helicopters regularly transit this route. Medical evacuation and rescue helicopters fly this route to reach accident victims, often in marginal weather conditions. If this tower is approved, it should be lighted with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4,5 and 12. Thank you for your attention to this response. Sincerely, ,/ /4---e----, / I,r, Thomas E. Highlan. Aviation Planner CC City of Tigard Planning Department Form 802-9801(8-00) ' ye- w ,ff4yripor , ..3 4 i ii ,,„...v„., V.„1111,_....4,=.e. 9-1°,1,,":„.ica,..,..,..-if...ki,‘,-. .,,,, .0114*1...,--,,, ,o-,A....: as, ..s.,-.- ,.'' 171.414,-,..ii-t--•'.- • • .-AIREAleinta:". , :,;::..-,..--,. ...: ,-. . '.16;.,,,,,APAr,,,,- --...,----4-•,1 -:4, ,',;,Ailnio7;./.:-7:':,--., '.:i.-/-""--..,- - ::-....... '':. -.4. ' . . q if ,i .....________ ...._\.___:...,.._/..,/,,,.,...-.,,•,,,, :,,,,-, ,,-. •. .\ a.'tvh.11:..• , ,- ,I, ----• ''' alr,•„;-'••••-t•4110.-:-..a . ,.;.4 _.. .e____,.._. .,,, ., __:- .„....._____. 1: .;.. .,. .. __,„,,,.,1c, _..„...,....„..- ...,22..:, 4iistowt, __ ...., ._, . , t j /1:' ' •AP( ''4',.i-4441titir''' -' • — -'1'"--- '' .... -.• ' .e4 .1 '. '''''''' '...' r-- g•-••,•,-.368-t . .r :_i )iiba. • 1-', kti.\.— t„,0.....‘''•,• \O•1-;'r__- ,_„.-,_,-,...„, : .•,,,....,„:_ , . , , . , : , 37„ , fr \--,r.,: , ea Copyright(C)1997,Maptech,Inc. . 40,1, REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY O TIIGARD Cam Deivelo-p► t Shapi-ny,A Better Co-vvunwvu:.ty DATE: January 2,2001 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Richard Jackson,Engineering,QWEST Communications ANN 1 0 2001 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner Phone: [503)639-4111/Fax: (5031684-1297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR)2000-00022 ‘ AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot high monopole tower in the City of Tigard to provide wireless communication service. LOCATION: South of SW Pacific Highway at 10955 SW 65th Avenue WCTM 1S136AD Tax Lot, 06300. ZONE: C-G; General Commercial. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Mali and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 16, 2001. 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: X 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: (Pr, e,pro-v c fauow&no,i lfo-r tro-vv)Name of Persontsl Commenting:4 K iC c.4s e+rJ I Phone Number[sl: 5-6 3- 42_- SDR2000-00022/AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CIc OF TIGARD COMITIAANlity DeNe2OpmeAlt Shapt.4tLWA Bettor Co-wm AAirtity DATE: January 2,2001 TO: Nadine Smith,Long Range Planning,Supervisor RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division JAN 0 8 2001 STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner CITY OF TIGARD Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: [5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR)2000-00022 '.-AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER — REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot high monopole tower in the City of Tigard to provide wireless communication service. LOCATION: South of SW Pacific Highway at 10955 SW 65th Avenue WCTM 1S136AD Tax Lot, 06300. ZONE: C-G; General Commercial. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 16, 2001. 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: (P pro-vi t w .{orwlati,on)Name of Person[sl Commenting: Phone Number[s): SDR2000-00022/AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY O TIIGARD Co-m,wu.wuty Deve2op►nevt Slip A Bettor Cry DATE: January 2,2001 TO: Jim Wolf,Police Department,Crime Prevention Officer RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division JAN 0 5 "001 STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner CITY OF TIGARD Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: [5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SCR)2000-00022 ,AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER — REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot high monopole tower in the City of Tigard to provide wireless communication service. LOCATION: South of SW Pacific Highway at 10955 SW 65th Avenue WCTM 1S136AD Tax Lot, 06300. ZONE: C-G; General Commercial. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 16, 2001. 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: (Pre pro-vLde t w bvio,i,nfrn-v. to-w)Name of Person[s]Commenting: J \olf• I Phone Numherlsl: q,4 't , o—\ '( -2.2.0 SDR2000-00022/AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIIGARD Co-wuntkytity Deve-top vneAftt Shop,A Bettor Covvitin uinity DATE: January 2,2001 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Roy,Operations Dept.,Property Manager >t� � 0 4 2001 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TfGARD STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner Phone: (503)639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR)2000-00022 >,AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot high monopole tower in the City of Tigard to provide wireless communication service. LOCATION: South of SW Pacific Highway at 10955 SW 65th Avenue WCTM 1S136AD Tax Lot, 06300. ZONE: C-G; General Commercial. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 16, 2001. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. It 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. PLEASS 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: (pL.ec provrae/t f Uowixg- matu )Name of Person(sl Commenting: Phone Number(s): I SDR2000-00022/AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MAILING RECORDS AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING T' CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Shirley L. Treat, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist I for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appropriate Box(s)Below) ❑ NOTICE OF: PENDING APPLICATION FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Type/Kind of Notice) (File No./Name Reference) (14-Day Comment Period) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ® NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION FOR: (SDR)2000-00022/AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) © City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: [ 7 ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File NoJName Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: i7 ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICELSI of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B",on February 13, 2001, and deposited in the United States Mail on February 13. 2001, postage prepaid. (Pet on that Prepared Notice) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 12_ day of VA•..ck v.c. , 2001 . °SCI SEAL NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON NOTAMP euc-ORE_pON U,, COMMISSION NO '32,7409 My Commission Expires: f V (3 2 u 03 MY COMMISSION apiRr: 3,2003 EXHT ITA NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER CITY OF D Community Development Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 4/27/01 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER CASE NO: Site Development Review SDR2000-00022 PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot-high monopole tower with a 336 square foot electronic equipment building on a 3,750 square foot portion of the PGE substation site. The facility will be surrounded by a six-foot-high chain link fence and landscaping. APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless Services OWNER: Portland General Electric Attn: Real Estate Manager 121 SW Salmon Street 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Portland, OR 97201 APPLICANT REP: Spencer Vail, Planning Cons. AT&T Wireless Services 4505 NE 24th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial. ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G; General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where nonconforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 10955 SW 65th Avenue; WCTM 1 S136AD, Tax Lot 06300. The subject site is located south of SW Pacific Highway. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25c ) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: NoTmailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 13, 2001 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 1, 2001 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON FEBRUARY 28, 2001. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Mathew Scheidegger at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. ` +r. F n z /., • w CC ,[[y,, Q % 4 MUM 444 - ILI 'JT r / �� O �y� 7 , r .Q ' Z J / a .. �/ 4 `L o 'L.1111. < W:41:; ;:"• 4" ::::-:'-':::!::):':1-',: Q if*vot 4`.* '..:i.:';,1 .:?-; /# . u. o -v,,�`a /;.;p 1�, N SITE_ PLAN 14:_:_j____2?, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SITE PLAN • AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER EXHIBIT MAP N SDR2000-00022 O I rs mi b .alel ■■ i ,`, o'g �� L� VICINITY MAP ST ' 1S136AD, 06300 •"jA` a AT&T WIRELESS 1 1 ■C— MONOPOLE TOWER s w coRoNA00 SDR2000-00022 __ – , fra y a t g w SUBJECT SIT ES rialto . . N ', I w''r a SW. 0 City orris./ I ` : .,o mod./.Jan z.:r.:Z . ,o3,.. 1 S 136AD-06000 1 S 136AD-06507 ` 71 AMERICAN REAL ESTATE JHCB PROPERTIES LLC �� HOLDINGS LIMITED PTNSHIP BY BAXTER THEODORE E&JUDY H C BY NW RESTAURANT OREGON INC 11460 SW PACIFIC HWY 17331 135TH AVE NE#B TIGARD,OR 97223 WOODINVILLE,WA 98072 1st 36AD-04300 1 S 136AD-05400 BANNING MARK A&PATRICIA E TRS LANGER RESIDENCE REVOCABLE 3895 TAMARACK LN LIVING TRUST LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 6614 SW PINE STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DA-00100 1 S 136AD-05901 BENENSON 68TH PARKWAY MERRILL JACK D TRUSTEE KEY LLC THE do DAYAL RAMESH B&LALITA R BY PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM 8810 SW PACER DR 4706 NE GLISAN#101 BEAVERTON,OR 97008 PORTLAND, OR 97213 15136AD-06200 1 S 136AD-05600 BLANCHARD MALCOLM A PALMER DAVID E& do ADAMS MICHAEL J JONES LINDA V 11420 SW PACIFIC HWY 6716 SW PINE ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S1 36AD-04200 1S 136DA-02600 CARLSTON DORIS A POLLOCK DONALD E CARLSTON HAROLD E 1834 SW 58TH AVE STE 202 6808 SW PINE ST PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 1st 36AD-05700 ' 136DA-02500 DALEY CHARLES A POL PCK DON• P E 6726 SW PINE ST 1834 S :si AVE STE 202 TIGARD,OR 97223 •:•TLAND,O' •7221 1 S 136A0-06700 1S1 36AD-06300 DESAI MARK PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC 14320 SW 134TH DR COMPANY TIGARD,OR 97224 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND,OR 97204 136AD-06504 1 S 136AD-06390 D •I MA-• REIDT WILLIAM 14320 .•• 134TH DR do H L CLARK MGR P G E ARD, • 97224 621 SW ALDER PORTLAND,OR 97205 1 S 136AD-05800 1S 136AD-06100 EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC SCHOLIBO GEORGE E JR AND PO BOX 4453 SCHOLIBO STEPHEN A HOUSTON,TX 77210 12241 SW TERWILLIGER BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 1 S 136AD-05500 1 36A0-05100 HATHAWAY DANNY L SCH• BO GEORG JR AND 6710 SW PINE ST SCHOLIB• •HEN A TIGARD,OR 97224 1224 :• TE• LLIGER BLVD ••RTLAND,OR 9 • 9 1S136AD-04301 15136DA-02400 SHAPIRO ENTERPRISES LLC WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC BY MIKE LEVY 5210 SE 26TH ST 17310 SE 45TH ST PORTLAND,OR 97202 BELLEVUE,WA 98006 is 136A0-05200 1 S 136AD-05300 SIMPSON S C C A WILTON STEVEN L AND 6600 SW PINE ST ANITA R J PORTLAND,OR 97223 6606 SW PINE PORTLAND,OR 97223 151 36AD-07200 TIGARD BP SERVICE CO INC 11440 SW PACIFIC WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 S 136AD-06400 TI ••D BP SERV O INC 11440 .1, '• IFIC HWY T ' •RD,O' • 223 t:136DA-02401 TIG•" OF 1312 -•LL T ARD,OR •• 23 136AD-06506 TIG•'I C ' OF 1312 :Iry ALL ARD,OR • 223 1S136AD-05900 VIP'S RESTAURANT INC 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 15136AD-06502 WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR 5210 SE 26TH PORTLAND,OR 97202 1 136AD-06503 W• W LEE GE. RAL CON '•C s' 521 s : .TH •SRTLAND, c' 97202 136AD-06505 WA • L ENERAL CONTRACTOR I 5210 : ST •RTLAND,O' 97202 . 1S1E31BC, 1400 1S1E31BC, 2300 BLAKESLEE TRACY J NULL DONALD L & CHARLOTTE L PO BOX 6354 11645 SW 64TH PORTLAND, OR 97228 PORTLAND, OR 97219 1S1E31BC, 1501 1S1E31BC, 2400 SHEPPARD ROBERT F TR LAHM ROBERT J 12730 NE ROSE PKY 11705 SW 64TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97230-1546 PORTLAND, OR 97219-7026 1 E31 BC, 150 1S1E31BC, 2500 SHE : e 'OBERT F TR PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO 12731 IE R• _ PKY 121 SW SALMON ST PO 'TLAND, OR 9 230-1546 PORTLAND, OR 97204-2901 1S1E31BC, 1503 1S1E31BC, 2600 S "1" e 'OBERT F TR OREGON STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 127 e E ' :_ 'KY 9002 SE MCLOUGHLIN BLVD '•RTLAND, OR 97230-1546 MILWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 1700 1 ' 31CB 11 BROWN MARY ANN OREGSA. STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11605 SW 64TH AVE 901 E M : _ GHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219-7024 * ILWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 1800 1 1 E31 CB 100 CASTRO GILBERTOA OR . • I STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11615 SW 64TH AVE 900 E ' . OUGHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219 LWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 1900 1.1 E31 CB, 00 SIEBER MARK OR • • ■ TATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11625 SW 64TH AVE 900 0 LOUGHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219-7024 WAUKIE, : ' 97222-7312 1 1 E31 BC, •it 31CB, 1 e0 SIEB" A RK ORE c► : ATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 116 ' S .4TH AVE 900 : M •UGHLIN BLVD " •RTLAND, OR 97219-7024 ► WAUKIE, OR •7222-7312 1S1E31BC, 2100 1E31CB, 1 :1 WRIGHT VALDA K O' O■ ATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS PO BOX 230115 901 LOUGHLIN BLVD TIGARD, OR 97281-0115 ILWAUKIE, O' 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 2200 HILTON LAWRENCE & ALYSA PO BOX 490 SHERWOOD, OR 97140-0490 • • Naomi Gallucci CITY OF TIGARD 11285 SW 18th Avenue EAST CIT SUBCOMMITTEE Tigard, OR 91223 is\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc UPDATED: 29-Sept-00 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 91223 John Snyder 11100 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 91223 Jack Biethan 11043 SW Summerfield Drive, Apt. 3 Tigard, OR 97224-3376 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 91224 Jim Petersen 10815 SW 74th Avenue Tigard, OR 91223 Dieter Jacobs 1175 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 91223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 91223 • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITYO Atik TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Shirley L. Treat, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist I for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check App,opnate Boxts)Below} ❑ NOTICE OF: PENDING APPLICATION FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Type/Kind of Notice) (File No/Name Reference) (14 Day Comment Penod) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ® NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION FOR: ESDIH2000-00022/AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) City of Tigard Planning Director 7 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: , ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council (� NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEESI of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", on February 13, 2001, and deposited in the United States Mail on February 13, 2001, postage prepaid. 4t di4d- (R' rson that Prepared Notice) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the / _ day of Civet k , 20( % . sue; OFFICIAL SEAL. NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREG N "z =- SHERMAN S.CASPER NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON COMMISSION NO,32.3409 My Commission Expires: (3 acs I MY COMMISSION DPIREe 3,2003 PUT NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00022 u'"!'I� CITY OF TIOARD AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER Community Development Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 4/27/01 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER CASE NO: Site Development Review SDR2000-00022 PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot-high monopole tower with a 336 square foot electronic equipment building on a 3,750 square foot portion of the PGE substation site. The facility will be surrounded by a six-foot-high chain link fence and landscaping. APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless Services OWNER: Portland General Electric Attn: Real Estate Manager 121 SW Salmon Street 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Portland, OR 97201 APPLICANT REP: Spencer Vail, Planning Consultant AT&T Wireless Services 4505 NE 24th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial. ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G; General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where nonconforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 10955 SW 65th Avenue; WCTM 1S136AD, Tax Lot 06300. The subject site is located south of SW Pacific Highway. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 1 OF 20 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be MATHEW SCHEIDEGGER in the Planning Division (503) 639-4171.) 1. Submit an agreement that will allow collocation in the future. 2. Submit a plan showing that all trees will be planted at a minimum 2-1/2 inch caliper. 3. The tower must be constructed so that it is no closer than 120 feet away from the nearest residence, which is to the east of the subject site. 4. The proposed tower is required to be lighted with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. 5. The tower is either required to collapse within itself or will be setback 120 feet from all property lines. Plans for a collapsible tower must be submitted to the Planning and Building Divisions. 6. Submit noise data that all associated equipment will operate within the City's allowable decibel levels. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The site is currently developed as PGE's West Portland substation. No other land-use decisions were found. Vicinity Information: The property abuts a residentially zoned property at its easterly property line. This property line is also the City limits between the City of Tigard and the City of Portland. Properties to the south of the parcel are zoned MUE and properties to the east and north are zoned C-G. Site Information and Proposal Description: The proposed wireless communications facility consists of a 120-foot tall monopole with an associated electronic equipment building on a 3,750 square foot portion of the PGE substation site. The monopole will be a galvanized metal pole that will weather to a dull gray color. The electronics equipment shelter will have an earth-toned exposed aggregate finish. The entire site will be fenced and landscaped. SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET Two letters were sent to Staff from Mary Ann Brown, dated January 11 , 2001 and January 15, 2001. These letters listed the following concerns: ♦ Cell towers have been banned in other states. • Cell towers emit Electro Magnetic fields which cause breast cancer. ♦ The proposed cell tower will lower property values. ♦ Could Tigard afford a lawsuit in the future in placing this pole so close to residences? To answer the concerns of the neighbors notified, cellular towers are allowed in the City of Tigard and are permitted and are governed by the Federal Communications Commission. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 2 OF 20 The Tigard Developrn.. t Code has a Section (18.79u `Wireless Communication Facilities") which regulates cellular towers and their locations. There has been no substantiated proof that towers omit fields causing cancer and because of the Federal Communications Commission, cities may not deny construction on that basis. There is no proof that property values may be effected by the proposed cellular tower and it is not a requirement for cellular sites. However, the applicant has met all of the Site Development Review criteria and cellular towers are allowed in commercial zones. Conditions have been put in place to assure the safety and aesthetic value of surrounding properties to the extent that the Community Development Code allows. The fourth concern of the neighbors is whether Tigard could support a lawsuit against neighboring residential properties. Staff has no choice but to approve a proposed land use if the applicant meets all of the criteria. Therefore, the City of Tigard has approved this project within the perimeters of the law and is comfortable in its decision. Appeals are made to a Hearings Officer and then to the Land Use Appeals Board. The decision is based on the local code standards as well as those of the FCC. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Tigard Triangle Desi n Standards Landscaping and Screening B. Specific SDR Approval Criteria 18.360 C. Additional Applicable Development Code Standards 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation) 18.745 Landscapingg_and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street parking and loading requirements) 18.780 Signs 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) 18.798 Wireless Communication Facilities) 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards) D. Impact S udy 18.390 SECTION VI. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS A. TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS (18.620): Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principals adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. The following design standards apply to all development located within the Tigard Triangle. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. The criteria may be adjusted if the adjustment approval criteria, which are found in Section 18.620.090.C.1-4, have been met. The criteria provides that an adjustment NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 3 OF 20 may be granted if gral—og the adjustment will continue meet the purpose of the standard(s) to be modified in an acceptable alternative manner; and the proposal will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of an area and the proposal will be consistent with the desired character of the area; and if more than one adjustment is being requested, the cumulative effect of the adjustments as well as each individual adjustment results in a project which is still consistent with the overall purpose, goals and standards of the zone; and granting the adjustment is the minimum necessary to allow the p roposed use of the site; and any impacts resulting from the adjustment are mitigated to the extent practicable. Street Connectivity: All development must demonstrate how one (1) of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.134 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. Design Option: a. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet; b. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more than 330 feet. Performance Option: a. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight (8) street intersections per mile; b. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance; c. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. Based on the location of the proposed monopole, the street connectivity standards do not apply. The Triangle Street Plan shown on 18.620-12 and 13 does not show either SW 65' Avenue nor does it show any access into the Triangle area from the east at any point north of SW Atlanta. Therefore, the standard does not apply. Building Setback: The minimum building setback from public street rights-of-way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features, shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. The proposed monopole site is setback approximately 21 feet from SW 65" right-of-way. The intent of the Tigard Triangle Design Standards is to construct buildings that are pedestrian orientated thus the above requirement to place building as close to city streets as possible. Because the oroposed site is unmanned and does not promote pedestrian traffic In any way, the standarc does not apply. Front Yard Setback Design: Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one (1) street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L-1 standard on public streets. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.620.070. The proposed monopole site is abuts SW 65th Avenue, which only exists on paper as a public road right-of-way. Therefore, Staff finds it unnecessary to require a hard-surfaced expansion or sidewalk between the proposed site and SW 65` Avenue. Walkway Connection To Building Entrances: A walkway connection is required between the building's entrance and the public NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 4 OF 20 street or accessway d...1viding access to the property. i his walkway must be at least six (6) feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.620.070. The proposed monopole site is accessed via an existing gravel roadway serving the existing PGE substation. The gravel roadway is accessed via SW 64 Avenue. This street is within the City of Portland and is not improved to City of Tigard standards. Again, the standard was designed to serve buildings with pedestrian access, which are not applied to monopoles. Parking Location And Landscape Design: Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The proposed monopole site does not have an associated parking lot. The site will be visited a maximum of once a month for routine maintenance. Landscaping is addressed in greater detail under Chapter 18.745 later in this report. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Building Design Standards: All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 (Criteria for Granting a Variance) is satisfied. Ground Floor Windows: All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50 percent of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The round floor wall area shall be measured from three (3) feet above grade to nine (9) feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50 percent of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. The intent of ground floor windows is to make buildings and their occupants more accessible and friendly to pedestrian foot traffic. Because SW 65'h Avenue does not physically exist, and the proposed site is for an unmanned monopole, ground floor windows will not be required. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Building Facades: Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one (1) of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off-set of at least 1-foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. The proposed monopole site does not exceed 50 feet along unimproved SW 65'" Avenue. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Weather Protection: Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 5 OF 20 The proposed site is a cellular tower not a building. The site will not attract pedestrians and the only entrance is a vehicular maintenance entrance. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Building Materials: Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be lain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. The proposed pad that the monopole will be located is concrete. The site is surrounded with a 6-foot chain-link fence and screened with arborvitae. The site is considered an unmanned site and not a building. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Roofs And Roof Lines: Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. No false fronts or roofs are proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Roof-Mounted Equipment: All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. The proposal is for a 120-foot cellular tower. Screening of the facility is addressed later in this decision under Chapter 18.745. The aesthetics of the pole itself are address under Chapter 18.798. Therefore, this standard has been met. Signs: In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code, the following standards shall be met: Zoning District Regulations: Non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone (18.780.130.D). Sign Area Limits: The maximum sign area limits found in Section 18.780.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Height Limits: The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Sign Location: Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. No signs are proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Entry Portals: Entry portals shall be required at the primary access points into the Tigard Triangle. 1. Location — Entry portals shall be located at the intersections of 99W and Dartmouth; 99W and 72"d; 1-5 and Dartmouth; Hwy. 217 and 72"; and at the Hwy. 217 Overcrossing and Dartmouth. 2. Design — The overall design of entry portals shall relate in scale and detail to both the automobile and the pedestrian. A triangle motif shall be NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 6 OF 20 • incorporated int., the design of entry portals. The location is not an entry, portals are not required with this project. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Landscaping and Screening: Two (2) levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. L-1 (Low Screen): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 31/2 inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3-foot high screen and a 90 percent opacity within one (1) year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two (2) years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. This proposal does not involve a parking lot, nor is it adjacent to a major or minor arterial. Therefore, this standard does not apply. L-2 (General Landscaping): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 21/2 inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two (2) years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. As indicated on the site and landscape plans, the enclosure is to be screened with 8 Norway Maples planted at a 2-inch caliper and 59, 1-gallon Arborvitae planted 3 feet on center. The L-2 landscaping standard requires all trees to be provided at a minimum 2 1/2 inch caliper. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards have not been fully met. If the applicant complies with the condition listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITION: Submit a plan showing that all trees will be planted at a minimum 2-'/2 inch caliper. Site Development Review - Approval Standards: Section 18.360.090(A)(1) Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.800, Street and Utility Standards; The proposed project complies with the Comprehensive Plan's General Commercial designation for the subject property because it complies with the applicable provisions of the Community Development Code, which implement the plan. Compliance with the majority of specific regulations and standards will be addressed further within this decision. Section 18.360.090(A) provides other Site Development Review approval standards not necessaril y covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 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: Residential Use), 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use), 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces), 18.360.090.11 (Public Transit), 18.360.090.14 (Provisions for the Disabled) and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 7 OF 20 Buildings shall be: ,_.sated to preserve existing tree, 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 has not proposed to remove any existing trees to construct this facility. The topography and natural drainage is not proposed to be altered in any way. However, drainage and will be reviewed later in this decision under Section 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards). Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.360.090.4(A) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, for example, between single-family and multiple-family residential, and residential and commercial uses, and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer: The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; The size of the buffer required to achieve the purpose in terms of width and height; the directions (s) from which buffering is needed; the required density of the buffering; and whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. As indicated on the site and landscape plans, the enclosure is to be screened with 8 Norway Maples planted at a 2-inch caliper and 59, 1-gallon Arborvitae planted 3 feet on center. This will screen the facility from the residential properties located to the east of the property. Staff is confident that the proposed level of screening is adequate to provide a visual barrier and buffer to help decrease noise levels. However, more strict landscaping requirements and noise buffering will be addressed under Section 18.798.050.B.7.(b) and Section 18.798.050.B.8. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Section 18.360.090.4(B) states that on-site screening from view of adjoining properties of such things as service and storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops, i.e., air cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: What needs to be screened; the direction from which it is needed; how dense the screen needs to be; whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; and whether the screening needs to be year around. As indicated on the site and landscape plan, the enclosure will be completely screened from adjoining properties. Viewers of the proposed monopole will be stationary which solidifies the need for the condition to plant four evergreen trees at least 15 feet in height at the time of planting between the proposed monopole and the adjoining residential properties, which is discussed under Section 18.798.050.B.7. (b). Therefore, this standard has been met. Crime prevention and safety: Section 18.360.090(A).10 requires that 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. The proposed monopole site is an unmanned site. A six-foot chain link fence is proposed to surround the entire site with (3) strands of barbed wire along the top. Pedestrians will not be visiting the site or directed to the site. The site is visible to the east by residentially zoned property. The Tigard Police Department reviewed the project and did not indicate the need for lighting. Therefore, Staff will not condition outside security lighting due to problems with glare and the attraction of pedestrians. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 8 OF 20 • Landscaping Plan: St.,tion 18.360.090(A).12 requires that all landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745. In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and a minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. The applicant has submitted a plan indicating the number, type, and location of existing and proposed shrubs to screen the lease area. However, the above section requires the property to have a minimum of 20 percent landscaping which is attributable to the monopole lease area. According to the landscape plan the site will have approximately 750 square feet of landscaping, which is 20 percent of the 3,750 square-foot lease area. Underlying Zoning Provisions: Section 18.360.090(A).15 states that all of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments. Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. These standards have been reviewed elsewhere within this decision. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Site Development Review Standards have not been met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. Dimensional Requirements: The C-P Zoning District standards are contained in Table 18.520.2. STANDARD C-G PGE Proposed Substation Monopole Minimum Lot Size 276,837sq. ft. 3,750sq. ft - Detached unit - - Boarding, lodging, rooming house - Minimum Lot Width 50 ft >50 ft 75 ft Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 0 ft 70ft. Oft. - Side facing street on corner & - - - through lots [1] - Side yard 0/20 ft [3] 116 ft. 20 ft - Side or rear yard abutting more - - restrictive zoning district - Rear yard 0/20 ft [3] 46 ft. <20 ft - Distance between front of garage & - - property line abutting a public or private street. Maximum height 45 ft -45ft. 120 ft Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85 % -85% -85 % Minimum Landscape Requirement 15 % +15% +15 % The table above compares the applicant's proposal with the minimum dimensional standards of the C-G zone and the entire site that the tower is being constructed. The entire area proposed for this use is 3,750 square feet of the PGE substation property. Therefore, this criterion has been satisfied. Setbacks: Table 18.520.2 states that there is no front, side, or rear and setback except 20 feet shall be required where a commercial use abuts a residential zoning district. The proposed monopole and residential zoning district to the east of the property is divided by SW 65`h Avenue right-of-way. Therefore, the setback requirements for the C-G zoning NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 9 OF 20 • district have been met. I,owever, more strict setback requirements are addressed later in this decision under Chapter 18.798. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Commercial Zoning District Standards have been met. 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 proposed monopole is an unmanned site that will be accessed by repair personnel only. Therefore, no pedestrian access is required. 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; No pedestrians will be visiting the site and no accessway will be required. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. No walkway is required. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 provides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with 0-99 parking spaces is one 30-foot access with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The proposed site plan shows a 12-foot gravel access easement to the proposed utility lese area off of an existing gravel access, which provides access to the PGE Substation. The intent of the standard is to pave access drives so that gravel is not spread onto paved streets. Because a gravel road accesses the parcel itself, to condition a 30-foot paved access drive would be impractical. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Access Egress and Circulation standards have been fully met. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street or a private drive more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 10 OF 20 The proposed monopole site has frontage on SW 651h Avenue right-of-way. However, SW 65`h Avenue is not improved, nor will it be required as part of this application. Therefore, street trees will not be required because SW 65`h Avenue has not been constructed. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.050 states that buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses, which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Table 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right-of-way, buffering, but not screening, shall be required as a specified in the matrix. Properties surrounding the subject site to the north and west are zoned C-G. The property to the south is zoned MUE and has an 80-foot natural buffer between the adjoining property and the PGE substation located on the subject property. Table 18.745.2 (Buffer Combinations for Landscaping and Screening) requires a buffer between properties zoned C-G and properties zoned MUE. However, the table only requires a minimum 10-foot buffer of lawn or living groundcover. The property to the east is zoned residential, but separated by SW 65`h Avenue right-of-way. Therefore, this standard has been met. 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. According to the plans, only one parking space is needed for the proposed monopole. No parking lots are associated with this project. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 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; Plans indicate all service facilities will be located within the fenced lease area. The lease area will be screened from adjoining properties with 59 1-gallon Arborvitae and 8 Norway Maples. Therefore, this standard has been met. Screening Of Refuse Containers. Except for one- and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. No refuse container is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have been fully met. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Location of vehicle parking: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 11 OF 20 Off-street parking spas for single-family and duplex u„iellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwellings. Off-street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building with the following exceptions: a) commercial and industrial uses which require more than 40 parking spaces may provide for the spaces in excess of the required first 40 spaces up to a distance of 300 feet from the primary site; The 40 parking spaces which remain on the primary site must be available for users in the following order of priority: 1) Disabled-accessible spaces; 2) Short-term spaces; 3) Long-term preferential carpool and vanpool spaces; 4) Long-term spaces. No parking lot is associated with this application. The proposed application is for a wireless monopole that will produce one vehicle trip per month. The lease site has one space to be utilized by a service vehicle only. Therefore, this standard has been met. Joint Parking: Owners of two or more uses, structures or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same parking and loading spaces when the peak hours of operation do not overlay, subject to the following: 1) The size of the joint parking facility shall be at least as large as the number of vehicle parking spaces required by the larger(est) use per Section 18.765.070; 2) Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the Director in the form of deeds, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; 3) If a joint use arrangement is subsequently terminated, or if the uses change, the requirements of this title thereafter apply to each separately. Joint parking is not proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Parking in Mixed-Use Projects: In mixed-use projects, the required minimum vehicle parking shall be determined using the following formula. 1) Primary use, i.e., that with the largest proportion of total floor area within the development, at 100% of the minimum vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060; 2) Secondary use, i.e., that with the second largest percentage of total floor area within the development, at 90% of the vehicle arking required for that use in Section 18.765.060; 3�Subsequent use or uses, at parking of the vehicle parking required for that use(s) in Section 18.765.060; 4) The maximum parking allowance shall be 150% of the total minimum parking as calculated in D.1.-3. above. This project is not considered a mixed-use project. The intended use for the site is wireless communication only. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Visitor Parking in Multi-Family Residential Developments: Multi-dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces above the minimum required for the use of guests of residents of the complex. These spaces shall be centrally located or distributed throughout the development. Required bicycle parking facilities shall also be centrally located within or evenly distributed throughout the development. This project does not involve a residential use. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Preferential Long-Term Carpool/Vanpool Parking: Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long-term parking spaces shall provide preferential long-term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5% of total long-term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool/vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpools/vanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated for use by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Disabled-Accessible Parking: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 12 OF 20 • All parking areas shah oe provided with the required nui.,oer 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. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Access Drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. The access drive has been addressed previously in this decision under Chapter 18.705 (Access Egress & Circulation). Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 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. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 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. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. No parking lot is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Bicycle Parking Location and Access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 13 OF 20 within parking aisles, ....1idscape areas or pedestrian way.; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle arking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. Bicycle parking is not required for wireless communication facilities. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased-except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. Bicycle parking is not required for wireless communication facilities. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. Bicycle parking is not required for wireless communication facilities. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 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. Table 18.765.2 of the Tigard Development Code does not require parking for wireless communication facilities. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Off-Street Loading Spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. Parking is not required for wireless communication facilities. However, the site will provide one parking space for a service vehicle, which will visit the site once a month. The site is under 10,000 square feet. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have been fully met. 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 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 14 OF 20 standards and methoc that will be used by the applicant Lo protect trees during and after construction. The applicant is not proposing to remove any trees. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Tree Removal standards have been met. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. No obstructions have been proposed where the access connects to the gravel access road for the PGE substation. Because the lease area is accessed by a private drive from a public street, a 30-foot visual clearance area shall be maintained on both sides of the access drive. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Visual Clearance Standard has been met. Wireless Communications Facilities: Section 18.798.050 provides the following review criteria for new communications towers within commercial zoning districts. Uses Permitted: Towers in Commercial Zones and the I-P Zone - A tower, including antennas, other support equipment and/or accessory equipment buildings, in any commercial or I-P district, provided that such a tower shall be set back from any existing off-site residence by a distance equal to the height of the tower; The proposed tower is 120 feet tall. The applicant will therefore, be required to show that the tower itself is 120 feet away from the nearest residence, which is to the east of the subject site. Public Open Space - A tower, including antennas, other support equipment and/or accessory equipment buildings, provided that such a tower shall be set back from any existing off-site residence by a distance equal to the height of the tower. A Type II adjustment may be obtained to reduce this setback, subject to criteria of approval contained in Section 18.370.020 C8a; No public open space is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Collocation in Commercial and Industrial Zones - Collocation of an antenna(s) that extends more than 20 feet above an existing tower or non-tower structure or when collocating more than three providers in commercial and industrial zones; Collocation is not proposed at this time but will be feasible in the future based on the design of the proposed tower and associated pad. However, the applicant will be required to submit an agreement that will allow collocation in the future. Collocation within a residential zoning district that extends more than 10 feet above a non-tower structure or an existing structure; This property is not designated as residential. Therefore, this standard is not applicable. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 15 OF 20 Accessory Equipment Shelter - Installation of additional accessory equipment shelters or related equipment if required existing landscaping is removed and cannot be replaced on the site to achieve the original intent, or to sufficiently screen any proposed new shelter and/or equipment if the original intent is no longer applicable Accessory equipment is proposed to be located on the concrete slab pad where the tower is located and will not alter the original intent of the site or require any required landscaping to be removed. Therefore, this standard has been met. Towers and Antennas in Public Rights-of-Way - Installation of any tower or antenna within any public right-of-way, provided that such tower or antenna shall be set back from any off-site residence by a distance equal to the height of the tower. This standard is not applicable because the proposed monopole will not be placed in the public right-of-way. Review Criteria: Aesthetic: New towers shall have a non-reflective surface and a neutral color or, if required by the FAA, be painted pursuant to FAA's requirements; The applicant has indicated the surface type to be a non-reflective gray finish. Therefore, this criterion has been satisfied. If collocation on an existing tower is requested, the design of any antenna(s), accessory structures or equipment shall, to the extent possible, use materials, colors and textures that will match the existing tower or non-tower structure to which the equipment of the collocating provider is being attached; and Collocation is not proposed at this time for this project. Therefore, this standard does not apply. If collocation on an existing non-tower structure is requested, the antenna(s) and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment shall be a neutral color that is the same as the color as the supporting structure so as to make the antenna(s) and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. This proposal does not involve a non-tower structure. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Setbacks: Towers designed to collapse within themselves shall be set back in accordance with the setbacks contained in the base zone; The applicant has not produced evidence that the tower will collapse within itself. Therefore, the applicant will be required to build a tower that will collapse within itself or setback the proposed tower 120 feet from all property lines. Towers not designed to collapse within themselves shall be set back from the property line by a distance equal to the height of the tower; The applicant has to meet the setback standard if he chooses not to build a collapsible tower. No new tower shall be allowed within 500 feet of an existing tower. If, having completed the collocation protocol outlined in Section 18.798.080 without success, the provider will be required to build a tower less than 500 feet from an existing tower, it will be required to obtain a Type I adjustment governed by Section 18.370.020 C8b; The applicant has provided evidence in the form of letters from competing wireless communication companies that there are no other existing towers within 500 feet of the proposed monopole. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 16 OF 20 Tower height shall not exceed 100 feet for a single user or 125 feet for multiple users; The applicant has proposed a tower height of 120 feet, which will allow for collocation of other users. Therefore, this standard is met. No lighting shall be permitted on a tower except as required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); The applicant has not proposed any lighting on the tower. However, Staff has received a letter from the Oregon Department of Aviation stating that the location of the proposed tower is in line with flight paths along the 1-5 corridor. Therefore, the applicant will be required to light the proposed tower with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. For security purposes, towers and ancillary facilities shall be enclosed by a minimum 6-foot fence; The applicant has proposed to enclose the lease area around the tower with a 6-foot-high chain link fence. Therefore, this standard has been met. Landscaping shall be placed outside the fence and shall consist of evergreen shrubs, which reach 6 feet in height and 95% opacity within 3 years of planting; The applicant has proposed that the fence enclosure will be screened with 8 Norway Maples planted at a 2-inch caliper and 59, 1-gallon Arborvitae planted 3 feet on center. However, the applicant has not provided information regarding what height and opacity the Arborvitae will be within 3 years of planting. Therefore, the applicant will be conditioned to submit information addressing height and opacity of the Arborvitae within 3 years of planting. When adjacent to or within residentially-zoned property, free-standing towers and accessory equipment facilities shall be screened by the planting of a minimum of four evergreen trees at least 15-feet in height at the time of planting. The planting of said trees shall be prescribed in number lay a plan prepared by a registered arborist in locations that (1) most effectively screen the wireless facilities from residential uses and (2) promote the future survival of the trees while limiting adverse effects of the trees on abutting properties. Existing evergreen trees at least 15-feet in height may be used to meet the screening requirement of this section if the arborist demonstrates that they provide screening for abutting residential uses; and The proposed monopole site is separated from the residential zone to the east by SW 65th Avenue. Therefore, this standard coes not apply. Noise generating equipment shall be sound buffered by means of baffling, barriers or other suitable means to reduce the sound level measured at the property line to 50 DBA (day)/40 DBA (night) when adjacent to a noise sensitive land use and 75 DBA (day)/60 DBA (night) when adjacent to other uses. The applicant has indicated that the equipment shelter associated with the monopole has an air conditioning unit, which operates within the allowable DBA levels. However, the applicant has not provided evidence that the air conditioning unit will operate under the allowable DBA levels. Therefore, the applicant will be conditioned to provide evidence that all associated equipment will operate within the City's allowable decibel levels. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that not all of the Wireless Communication Facility standards have been fully met. If the applicant meets the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: • Submit an agreement that will allow collocation in the future. ♦ Submit evidence that the tower itself is 120 feet away from the nearest residence, which is to the east of the subject site. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 17 OF 20 • ♦ Provide evidence that the proposed tower win be lighted with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. ♦ Submit information addressing height and opacity of arborvitae within 3 years of planting. ♦ Submit evidence that the tower will collapse within itself or submit evidence that the proposed tower will be setback 120 feet from all property lines. ♦ Submit evidence that all associated equipment will operate within the City's allowable decibel levels. Transportation 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. The site is accessed via a private driveway within an unimproved ODOT right-of-way, commonly known as "SW 64" Avenue". This roadway is located within the City of Portland city limits, serves as a frontage road to SW Pacific Highway and Highway 217, and serves as a private access to 13 parcels of land (9 homes total), including the subject site. We have no authority to require improvements in Portland, nor is the development impact proportional to the cost of improving 64' Avenue. 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 the Unified Sewerage Agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream flows that affect 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 the Unified Sewerage agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) 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 storm water 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 ofyimpervious surfaces provide on-site 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 18 OF 20 • This project will encompass an area of approximately 3,750 square feet and will consist of an equipment shelter and the tower. The remaining area will be gravel. The equipment shelter will only comprise an area of approximately 336 square feet. This is an insignificant increase in impervious area. No detention or water quality treatment is required. Other Requirements: At the time a provider requests a building permit, it must demonstrate compliance to all applicable state, and Federal regulations, including but not limited to the Oregon Uniform Structural Code, Building Codes and FAA requirements. The applicant is required to comply with the applicable approval standards through the process of obtaining the necessary building permits. Impact Study: Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The site will only have 12 feet of frontage on a 30-foot private drive, which connects to SW 64' Avenue. Therefore, the only impact of the site will be the vehicle access to service the site. No traffic impact fee is associated with a wireless communication facility and no street improvements are required. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objections or comments. The City of Tigard Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objections or comments. The City of Tigard Long Range Planning Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objections or comments. The City of Tigard Operations Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objections or comments. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Unified Sewerage Agency has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or within 200' of the site. This pre- screening site assessment does not eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on the property. No further site assessment or service provider letter is required. Oregon Aviation has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 19 OF 20 This proposed tower lies adjacent to the 1-5 corridor, South of Portland. Aircraft and helicopters fly this route to reach accident victims, often in marginal weather conditions. If this tower is approved, it should be lighted with a dual fitted, steady burning, red L810 light mounted atop the structure in accordance with FAA AC 70/7460, Chapters 4, 5 and 12. QWEST Communications has reviewed the proposal and has offered no objection or comments. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON FEBRUARY 13, 2001 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 1, 2001 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 5:00 P.M. ON FEBRUARY 28, 2001. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Bo -yard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. 2 �— : ., , . February 13, 2001 P R. a : . ' f ath- , = heidegger DATE Assistant Planner ����'► February 13, 2001 APPROVED BY: Richard Be Iii._e dorff DATE Planning Manager is\curpl n\Mathew\sdr\sd r2000-00022.dec.doc NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PAGE 20 OF 20 Portland General Electric 121 SW Salmon St. SDR2000-00022 Portland, OR 97204 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER AT&T Wireless Services Attn: Real Estate Manager 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97201 Spencer Vail, Planning Consultant AT&T Wireless Services 4505 NE 24th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 Mary Ann Brown 11605 SW 64th Avenue Portland, OR 97219 David & Denise Craver 11635 SW 64th Avenue Portland, OR 97219 Maria Cortex and Gilverto Alcantor 11615 SW 64th Avenue Portland, OR 97219 Thomas E. Highland Oregon Department of Aviation 3040 25th Street SE Salem, OR 97302-1125 CITY Of '-r'-0, ce ti , /. FURJRE'L'EA$E.... • .. .s•`` \\ Q�� /. .. .. .. .. •FUTURE LE9SE ` ••.".••.... \\�. W �•�w`•.. J',0, CI c �L. /x ` : • .�. .Th E'LEASE •;1 % Z• ;.! / / . •• .• ,.. , ..ARA••• • :i Z• ICC /1;•0.••# "'.`•- .--- ••• ... .• ..• ..,, • :o fURJRE"LEASE; ... , I- b�. . . © LL . 20',0„ < ; : C) Ci,• • N NORTH SITE PLAN Q z•14 ,Q_ zo () ,• - 1a'-o' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SITE PLAN I AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER EXHIBIT MAP N SDR2000-00022 (map is not to scale) CITY of TIGARD Q S W PALATINE ST GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM tAtklaejll.1Trlil 1P11 ± VICINITY MAP Ci ST . / 1 S 136AD, 06300 i1GNw F SW.5IDEPAO1f1G AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER S.W.CORONADO SDR2000-00022 1111111111111 • \ . ...r, . § h 0 J N 7-------- >ui , 0 7 Z CV SUBJECT SITE • N / 000 200 300 Feet 1,243 feet h W pY \_ESSER r s.w. �� cd ,� ..,I.d�!!i ... . Iii City of Tigard 111 Information on this map is for general location only and \\\ I should be verified vith the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 (503)639-4171 .� I A http://www.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date: Jan 2,2001;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR CITY OF i .v- RD 0,10 06, 33,,s, ,- CITY HALL/PLANNING DIV. yi�,PPY- ' , 1317c. SW HALL BLVD o ,,`y i-LW, ' TiGi,RD, OR 97223 m ez JAN 1,°'"' `� v' 20J� ths.poS..ae= +sPf•C P Q\'‘'ss ,V)\}JQ�� 6�`c'P�O\ 'E'' \ 0"‘'l �\4 6, 1 S 1 1 BC, 1900 , SIEBE ARK A\\ 11625 S dTH A\, 2. CC V PORTLAND, 5IEB625 97219018 1899 /S 01/• '01 'L? 1/ i FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND 5IEBER`MARK 1 >* CANTERBURY - Vd RETURN TO 5 ■ • y ly l l ` St t y i 1':' }f r ' ltlttlitiiti iiiillilitrilllii ilirl itil AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF TIG�TI ARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Shirley L. Treat, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist I for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appropnate Box(s)Beiow) ® NOTICE OF: PENDING APPLICATION FOR: ISDR12000-00022/AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Type,Kind of Not,ce) (File No./Name Reference) (14-Day Comment Penod) City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: . ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) ❑l City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEIS) of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B", on January 2, 2001, and deposited in the United States Mail on January 2, 2001, postage prepaid. Aft../ (Per-on that Prepared Notice) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the -5 day of Ce ,r. , 20 c NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON OFFICIAL SEAL e' SHERMAN S. CASPER My Commission Expires: 4,<<y 1.3) 2oaJ NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON MY COMMICOMMISSION I S MAY 13,2003 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIEN _DER,VENDOR OR SELLER: EXIT THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION lk SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR2000-00022 CITY O T R. CITY OF TIGARD Coinnumity AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER D&v Shaping,-A Bette+' C o-ntivrutivuty DATE OF NOTICE: January 2, 2001 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 2000-00022 FILE NAME: AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot high monopole tower in the City of Tigard to provide wireless communication service. ZONE: C-G; General Commercial APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. LOCATION: South of SW Pacific Highway at 10955 SW 65`h Avenue, WCTM 1 S136AD Tax Lot, 06300. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the City. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON January 16, 2001. All comments should be directed to Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at (503) 639-4171. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 1, 2001. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: • Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; ♦ Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; ♦ Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Planning Commission must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to addres ie relevant approval criteria with 'cient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Lai Id Use Board of Appeals or Circus. Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: ♦ The application is accepted by the City ♦ Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. ♦ The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. ♦ City Staff issues a written decision. ♦ Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." I �.' '- CITY o TIGAPD I \_ 1111011 VICINITY MAP ST 3 1S136AD, 06300 bw.s °" w ^Y AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER S.W.CORONADO SDR2000-00022 067 WWI MIME MBE N wv MINIM lippr / > SUBJECT SIT: •� • -rte dipowo, y S.W. J / WI 1 S 136AD-06000 1 S 136AD-06507 AMERICAN REAL ESTATE JHCB PROPERTIES LLC HOLDINGS LIMITED PTNSHIP BY BAXTER THEODORE E&JUDY H C BY NW RESTAURANT OREGON INC 11460 SW PACIFIC HWY 17331 135TH AVE NE#8 TIGARD,OR 97223 WOODINVILLE,WA 98072 1st 36AD-04300 15136AD-05400 BANNING MARK A&PATRICIA E TRS LANGER RESIDENCE REVOCABLE 3895 TAMARACK LN LIVING TRUST LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035 6614 SW PINE STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DA-00100 1 S 136AD-05901 BENENSON 68TH PARKWAY MERRILL JACK D TRUSTEE KEY LLC THE Go DAYAL RAMESH B&LALITA R BY PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM 8810 SW PACER DR 4706 NE GLISAN#101 BEAVERTON,OR 97008 PORTLAND, OR 97213 1 S 136AD-06200 1S 136AD-05600 BLANCHARD MALCOLM A PALMER DAVID E& c/o ADAMS MICHAEL J JONES LINDA V 11420 SW PACIFIC HWY 6716 SW PINE ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 is 136AD-04200 is 136DA-02600 CARLSTON DORIS A POLLOCK DONALD E CARLSTON HAROLD E 1834 SW 58TH AVE STE 202 6808 SW PINE ST PORTLAND,OR 97221 • TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136AD-05 700 '.136 DA-02500 DALEY CHARLES A POL •CK DON• • E 6726 SW PINE ST 1834 S ::i AVE STE 202 TIGARD, OR 97223 •.'TLAND,0• •7221 1S1 36AD-06700 151 36AD-06300 DESAI MARK PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC 14320 SW 134TH DR COMPANY TIGARD,OR 97224 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND,OR 97204 136AD-06504 1 S 136AD-06390 D •I MA'• REIDT WILLIAM 14320 .0 134TH DR Go H L CLARK MGR P G E ARD, • 97224 621 SW ALDER PORTLAND,OR 97205 1S1 36AD-05800 1 S 136AD-06100 EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC SCHOLIBO GEORGE E JR AND PO BOX 4453 SCHOLIBO STEPHEN A HOUSTON,TX 77210 12241 SW TERWILLIGER BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 15136AD-0550U 1 36AD-05100 HATHAWAY DANNY L SCH• BO GEORG JR AND 6710 SW PINE ST SCHOLIB• •HEN A TIGARD,OR 97224 1224 :I TE' LLIGER BLVD ••RTLAND,OR 9 9 1S136AD-04301 1S136DA-02400 SHAPIRO ENTERPRISES LLC WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC BY MIKE LEVY 5210 SE 26TH ST 17310 SE 45TH ST PORTLAND,OR 97202 BELLEVUE, WA 98006 is 136AD-05200 1 S 136AD-05300 SIMPSON S C C A WILTON STEVEN L AND 6600 SW PINE ST ANITA R J PORTLAND, OR 97223 6606 SW PINE PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 S 136AD-07200 TIGARD BP SERVICE CO INC 11440 SW PACIFIC WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 S 136AD-06400 TI •'D BPSERV OINC 11440 N,, `•CIFIC HWY T ' •RD,O' 223 T:136DA-02401 TIG•'I OF 1312 -•LL T ARD, OR •- 23 136AD-06506 TIG•'I C ' OF 1312 :n .ALL ARD,OR • 223 1 S 136AD-05900 VIP'S RESTAURANT INC 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 131 36AD-06502 WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR 5210 SE 26TH PORTLAND,OR 97202 1 136AD-06503 W• W LEE GE k RAL CON '•C 5211 : .TH •RTLAND, .' 97202 136AD-06505 WA • L ENERAL CONTRACTOR I 5210 : ST ' •RTLAND,O' 97202 1S1E31BC, 1400 1S1E31BC, 2300 BLAKESLEE TRACY J NULL DONALD L & CHARLOTTE L PO BOX 6354 11645 SW 64TH PORTLAND, OR 97228 PORTLAND, OR 97219 1S1E31BC, 1501 1S1E31BC, 2400 SHEPPARD ROBERT F TR LAHM ROBERT J 12730 NE ROSE PKY 11705 SW 64TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97230-1546 PORTLAND, OR 97219-7026 1 E31 BC, 150 " 1S1E31BC, 2500 SHE`'' ' : "OBERT F TR PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO 12731 'E R• _ PKY 121 SW SALMON ST TLAND, OR 9 230-1546 PORTLAND, OR 97204-2901 1S1E31BC, 1503 1S1E31BC, 2600 S "OBERT F TR OREGON STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 127 I E ' :_ "KY 9002 SE MCLOUGHLIN BLVD '•RTLAND, OR 97230-1546 MILWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 1700 1 31CB iI BROWN MARY ANN OREG•• STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11605 SW 64TH AVE 901 E M : _ GHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219-7024 ILWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 1800 1 1 E31 CB 100 CASTRO GILBERTOA OR . • 1 STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11615 SW 64TH AVE 900 E ' • OUGHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219 ►• LWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 1900 1`1 E31 CB, 00 SIEBER MARK OR . • ► TATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11625 SW 64TH AVE 900 : 0 LOUGHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219-7024 WAUKIE, ." 97222-7312 1 1 E31 BC, 1:1 31CB, 1 ►.0 SIEB" ' RK ORE ►`. : ATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 116 ' S .4TH AVE 900 : M •UGHLIN BLVD " •RTLAND, OR 97219-7024 ► WAUKIE, OR •7222-7312 1S1E31BC, 2100 1 E31 CB, 1 $1 WRIGHT VALDA K O' O► ' ATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS PO BOX 230115 901 ' LOUGHLIN BLVD TIGARD, OR 97281-0115 v ILWAUKIE, O' 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 2200 HILTON LAWRENCE & ALYSA PO BOX 490 SHERWOOD, OR 97140-0490 N CITY OF TIGARD Naomi Gallucci 1 1285 SW 78th Avenue EAST CIT SUBCOMMITTEE is\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc Tigard, OR 97223 UPDATED: 29-Sept-00 Sue Rorman 1 1250 SW 82od Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 John Snyder 11100 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Jack Biethan 11043 SW Summerfield Drive, Apt. 3 Tigard, OR 97224-3376 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Jim Petersen 10815 SW 74th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Dieter Jacobs 7715 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Portland General Electric 121 SW Salmon St. Portland, OR 97204 SDR2000 00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER AT&T Wireless Services Attn: Real Estate Manager 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97201 Spencer Vail, Planning Consultant AT&T Wireless Services 4505 NE 24th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIIGARD Cottivvucvi ty DeveZopvvt,evtt Shapivy/A Setter Co-vmuvuu i.Ity DATE: January 2,2001 TO: Per Attached FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner Phone: 15031639-4171/Fax: [5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot high monopole tower in the City of Tigard to provide wireless communication service. LOCATION: South of SW Pacific Highway at 10955 SW 65th Avenue WCTM 1S136AD Tax Lot, 06300. ZONE: C-G; General Commercial. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JANUARY 16, 2001. 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: (t Lea,seprov(.de/the/ffuo-wbvy,ixt.{orn .tw-vv)Name of Person[s)Commenting: I Phone Number[sl: I SDR2000-00022/AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITI F TIGARD REQUEST FOR CO' LENTS NOTIFICATION LW' FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FILE NO(S).:= 2 FILE NAME(S): /IT'/ 7),✓P r�<--44, CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS I4-DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO CIT AREA: ❑Central ['East ['South ]West OProposal Descrip.in Library(IT Book CITY OFFICES LONG RANGE PLANNING/Nadine Smith,Supervisor COMMUNITY DVLPMNT. DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs. POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer BUILDING DIVISION/Gary Lampella,Building Official ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager.Dvlpmnt Review Engineer WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,Utilities Manager CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,Property Manager _ _ OPERATIONS DEPT./Matt Stine,Urban Forester ✓ PLANNER - TIME TO POST PROJECT SITE! SPECIAL DISTRICTS TUAL. HILLS PARK& REC. DIST.* __ TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE &RESCUE * _ _TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT * UNIFIED SWRGE.AGENCY Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Julia Huffman/SWM Program 15101 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 145 155 N.first Street Beaverton,OR 91006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 91015 Hillsboro,OR 91124 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON * _ CITY OF TUALATIN * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue 775 Summer Street NE Irish Bunnell,Development Services PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem,OR 97301-1279 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Beaverton,OR 97076 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 _ Carol Hall,Data Resource Center(ZCA) _US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. 333 SW First Avenue Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPAIZOA) Larry French(Camp Pian Amendments Only) PO Box 2946 _CITY OF KING CITY * _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(we(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 Portland,OR 97208-2946 City Manager C.D. Manager,Growth Management Services Salem,OR 97301-2540 15300 SW 116th Avenue WASHINGTON COUNTY King City,OR 97224 OR. DEPT.OF ENERGY(Powerhnes 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(DEC)) ODOT,REGION 1 * _Anne LaMountain(IGANRB) `,...CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) Sonya Kazen,Development Review Coordinator Phil Healy)iGAURB) David Knowles,Planning Bureau D. 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 icpoacoi MS 14 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 Jim Nims acA)MS 15 Portland,OR 97204 _Dona Mateja(ZCA)MS.14 ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A * Jane Estes,Perms Specialist 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 h\patty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List 2.doc (Revised: 30-Nov-00) Portland,OR 97221-2414 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _PORTLAND WESTERN RJR,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burl■ngton Northern Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Robert I. Melbo,President&General Manager 110 W. 10th Avenue Albany,OR 97321 _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations only) Pat McGann (If Project is Within Y.Mile of A Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 _PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _VERIZON ' QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Jim VanKleek,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer 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 _TCI CABLE(Apps EofHawNof99W) Marsha Butler,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist,Demographics&Planning Dept. Diana Carpenter 13137 SW Pacific Highway 16550 SW Merlo Road 3500 SW Bond Street Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Portland,OR 97232 *INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANT/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). t_a_ CITY of TIGARD Q Q 1 GE OGRIIPNIG INFORMATION SYSTEM N--_- _- - � - -�_-� - _� •_ - - - /i ■ ----- P\NF ,S,6A005400 15,36pDU5,UD o AREA NOTIFIED ,S 136AD05500 - 1 - _ i 1S136A005600 ,S73fiA005300 __-_- _. _ -L-1- __ f_ 15736AD05700 151360005200 s 00■ ST 1s1360006100 `° 1S,36A00590, ,S1360D0600BI J 'ypn�w �, 1S1360004700 1S736Aoosaoa 'I� ✓ 3w --- 15136A005800; 1! -- —I— ----��� -- I 1S1360004301 S.W.CORONADO_ ] IS136A004300 ,5,36pDD64DD FOR: Spencer Vail y. ,5,36ADD6501 RE: I S 136AD, 6300 \leo \\\N, ..,1S13fiA006507 - �� > Property owner information ,s,aepoossq P r is valid for 3 months from cp 1S1asp0o65o21.' - _�� I I o the date printed on t„is map. \-1S136A006566 N, kt,,,,,,,\\\ ‘1*"" . u, 151300602400 W Allir 17 • - YtillantIM�. 11, S.W. �Ee' Q!: A R ��S� ti 4 , ... a fa,1 N i /1111111 0 100 _200 300 400 500 Feet I a ,i_ikik / - i ` 1-354 feet 4,. ..____ 1 Nil Eli 1 City of Tigard Information on this map is for general location only and J yl �_ should be ven6ed with the Development Services Division. L f= T �- 13125 SW Hall Blvd A --- 1 S.W. Tigard.OR 97223 _ r-HAINES (503)839-4171 _ �_ _ --_� 1 LL 1JL t �1 Mtpl7wvnv.ci.ligartlorus 'Community Development Plot date Nov 7,2000;C:\magic\MAGICO3.APR /3/,36P/10) (40C 500 ft Notification of taxiots in Clackamas Co Tlid Ownerl Owner2 Owneraddr Ownercity Ownerzip 1S1E31BC 1400 BLAKESLEE TRACY J P 0 BOX 6354 PORTLAND, OREGON 97228 1S1E31BC 1501 SHEPPARD ROBERT F TR 12730 NE ROSE PKY PORTLAND, OREGON 972301546 546 1S1E31BC 1700 BROWN MARY ANN 11605 SW 64TH AVE PORTLAND OR 972197024 1S1E31BC 1800 CASTRO GILBERTOA 11615 SW 64TH AVE PORTLAND, OREGON 97219 1S1E31BC 1900 SIEBER MARK 11625 SW 64TH AVE PORTLAND OR 972197024 14G -S--3W -6 TH—AVE 1S1E31BC 2100 WRIGHT VALDA K P 0 BOX 230115 TIGARD,OR 972810115 1S1E31BC 2200 HILTON LAWRENCE & ALYSA P 0 BOX 490 SHERWOOD,OR 971400490 1S1E31BC 2300 NULL DONALD L & CHARLOTTE L 11645 SW 64TH PORTLAND, OREGON 97219 1S1E31BC 2400 LAHM ROBERT J 11705 SW 64TH AVE PORTLAND OR 972197026 1S1E31BC 2500 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND, OREGON 972042901 1S1E31BC 2600 -OREGON STATE OF (DEPT OF TRANS> 9002 SE MCLOUGHLIN BLVD MILWAUKIE OR 972227312 _ - . . . •- • • • • . . . - :• _ ♦� . - P. . . : :_ _ • . • :- -•- - , • • - - • ••- - :: . . G „ . • - .- - - - Ile •• • 1 • - • - . . . - - ----- - - • u •r • - - - - - - - . • • • ---- -- : - .. . . _ _ . . • I I - • . ' • • - = - - - - • 1S 136AD-06000 1S 136AD-06507 AMERICAN REAL ESTATE JHCB PROPERTIES LLC HOLDINGS LIMITED PTNSHIP BY BAXTER THEODORE E&JUDY H C BY NW RESTAURANT OREGON INC 11460 SW PACIFIC HWY 17331 135TH AVE NE#B TIGARD,OR 97223 WOODINVILLE,WA 98072 1 S 136AD-04300 1 S 138AD-05400 BANNING MARK A&PATRICIA E TRS LANGER RESIDENCE REVOCABLE 3895 TAMARACK LN LIVING TRUST LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 6614 SW PINE STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 151 36DA-00100 1 S 136AD-05901 BENENSON 68TH PARKWAY MERRILL JACK D TRUSTEE KEY LLC THE Go DAYAL RAMESH B&LALITA R BY PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM 8810 SW PACER DR 4706 NE GLISAN#101 BEAVERTON,OR 97008 PORTLAND,OR 97213 1 S 136AD-06200 1 S 136AD-05600 BLANCHARD MALCOLM A PALMER DAVID E& c/o ADAMS MICHAEL J JONES LINDA V 11420 SW PACIFIC HWY 6716 SW PINE ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S136AD-04200 15136DA-02600 CARLSTON DORIS A POLLOCK DONALD E CARLSTON HAROLD E 1834 SW 58TH AVE STE 202 6808 SW PINE ST PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 is 136AD-05700 -136DA-02500 DALEY CHARLES A POL !CK DON• • E 6726 SW PINE ST 1834 S =:• AVE STE 202 TIGARD,OR 97223 •%•TLAND,O• •7221 1 S 136AD-06700 1S 136AD-06300 DESAI MARK PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC 14320 SW 134TH DR COMPANY TIGARD,OR 97224 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND,OR 97204 136AD-06504 1 S 136AD-06390 D I MA REIDT WILLIAM 1432 134TH DR c/o H L CLARK MGR P G E ARD, 97224 621 SW ALDER PORTLAND,OR 97205 1S1 36AD-05800 1 S 136AD-06100 EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC SCHOLIBO GEORGE E JR AND PO BOX 4453 SCHOLIBO STEPHEN A HOUSTON,TX 77210 12241 SW TERWILLIGER BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97219 1 S 136AD-05500 36AD-05100 HATHAWAY DANNY L SCH• BO GEOR . JR AND 6710 SW PINE ST SCHOLIB• •HEN A TIGARD,OR 97224 1224 :I TE• LLIGER BLVD ••RTLAND,OR 9 ' 9 • 1 S 136AD-04301 1 S 136DA-02400 SHAPIRO ENTERPRISES LLC WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC BY MIKE LEVY 5210 SE 26TH ST 17310 SE 45TH ST PORTLAND,OR 97202 BELLEVUE,WA 98006 1 S 136A0-05200 1 S 136AD-05300 SIMPSON S C C A WILTON STEVEN L AND 6600 SW PINE ST ANITA R J PORTLAND,OR 97223 6606 SW PINE PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 S 136AD-07200 TIGARD BP SERVICE CO INC 11440 SW PACIFIC WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 S 136AD-06400 TI •D BP SERV O INC 11440 ' - • IFIC HWY T ' •RD,O' • 23 136DA-02401 TIG• 'S OF 1312 -•LL T ARD,OR • 23 136AD-06506 TIG C OF 1312 ALL ARD,OR 223 1S136AD-05900 VIP'S RESTAURANT INC 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 15136AD-06502 WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR 5210 SE 26TH PORTLAND,OR 97202 1 136AD-06503 W• WLEEGE. RAL CON ' •C 5218 = • H •RTLAND, :' 97202 136AD-06505 WA L ENERAL CONTRACTOR I 5210 ST RTLAND,0 97202 1S1E31BC, 1400 1S1E31BC, 2300 BLAKESLEE TRACY J NULL DONALD L & CHARLOTTE L PO BOX 6354 11645 SW 64TH PORTLAND, OR 97228 PORTLAND, OR 97219 1S1E31BC, 1501 1S1E31BC, 2400 SHEPPARD ROBERT F TR LAHM ROBERT J 12730 NE ROSE PKY 11705 SW 64TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97230-1546 PORTLAND, OR 97219-7026 1 E31 BC, 150 1S1E31BC, 2500 SHE • 'OBERT F TR PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO 1273 E R• - PKY 121 SW SALMON ST P TLAND, OR 9 230-1546 PORTLAND, OR 97204-2901 1S1E31BC, 1503 1S1E31BC, 2600 S • ` ' e OBERT F TR OREGON STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 127343-1VE ` KY 9002 SE MCLOUGHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97230-1546 MILWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 2 1S1E31BC, 1700 1 ' 31CB, i BROWN MARY ANN OREGG -, STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11605 SW 64TH AVE 901 EM : , GHLINBLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219-7024 ILWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 1800 1 1 E31 CB 100 CASTRO GILBERTOA OR . • I STATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11615 SW 64TH AVE 900 E ' . OUGHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219 M1'LWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 1900 1.1 E31 CB, 00 SIEBER MARK OR . • ■ TATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 11625 SW 64TH AVE 900 0 LOUGHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219-7024 M-YCVVAUKIE, s ' 97222-7312 s1 1B E31 BC, �.80� 31CB,CB, 12.00 SIEB M RK ORE ►' k = ATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS 116 S TH AVE 9002._' M •UGHLIN BLVD RTLAND, OR 97219-7024 MItWAUKIE, OR •7222-7312 1S1E31BC, 2100 4,S1E31CB, 13470 WRIGHT VALDA K ORS OJ �ATE OF > DEPT OF TRANS PO BOX 230115 9092 LOUGHLIN BLVD TIGARD, OR 97281-0115 ILWAUKIE, O 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 2200 HILTON LAWRENCE & ALYSA PO BOX 490 SHERWOOD, OR 97140-0490 Naomi Gallucci CITY OF TIGARD 11285 SW 78`h Avenue EAST CIT SUBCOMMITTEE Tigard, OR 97223 UPDATED: 29-Sept-00 East.doc Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 91223 John Snyder 1 1100 SW 82"d Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Jack Biethan 11043 SW Summerfield Drive, Apt. 3 Tigard, OR 97224-3376 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 91224 Jim Petersen 10815 SW 74th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Dieter Jacobs 7775 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 91223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 4. PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF TIGARD Communtty 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD Shaping Better(Development TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PHONE: 503-639.4171 FAX: 503-684-7291(Attn: Patty or Shirley/Planning) MOUNT POR 0 e 1illE PROPER Y OWNER MAILING. LIST Property owner information is valid for 3 months from the date of your request INDICATE ALL PROJECT MAP & TAX LOT NUMBERS (Le. ISI34AB, 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): 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: Q `1 t / PHONE: S�3- 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 VS. RE-TYPED MAILING LABELS WILL BE ACCEPTED. Cost Description: • $11 to generate the mailing list, plus $2 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 * * * COST FOR THIS REQUEST * * 11 4 sheets of labels x $2/sheet = $8.00 x 1 sets = $16.00 sheet(s) of labels x $2/sheet = $ p x sets = 2 sheets of labels x $2/sheet for CIT area x 2 sets = $ 4.00 _L sheet(s) of labels x $2/sheet for/CIT area = $2,x sets = GENERATE LIST = $ILQ0 ' GENERATE LIST = $11.00 TOTAL = $31.00 it TOTAL = $�� 1 _ N' W i [.................1c ! v U p » J i' Mf � .S/Ac _• toy Ne. ItE!3 1 ° 0 m o ° N N ° • ,n 8 -4 ` O . we.2 to G•A-• V 1 D`4� t — T Ito �, I ■ ,8+•a� o 0 z4:77-----',200 o 9 Ac `'2T6400 ^ I • 4.Ac • ° A °� Nsr t as w o p ll •ti. 10 s.se 2e sow - ( C.S. No.13200) N 90 9S I I' /-1 sans 4 tai w 6300 g•/w 6504 I _ i 6.49 Ac. s .77 AC. I ."10 • �—, r o I ;' ITS - Is 0 11, tt.coR. O ` 29591 STOTTDLC TH LINE THOMAS STOTT DLC. 53—. 0P- • . • T • %3 A h •h 3 a tip ._, VI°V'' N 40 'd *0 0 _ WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF co ASSESSMENT&TAXATION tir FEB 1 4 1996 • / • r-.1 r--1_, FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES• r' r / ONLY-DO NOT RELY ON —' 0 FOR OTHER USE . // 0 • 1 - N w /,vu u'AI - INITIAL'/ �.g3�0 ry fTGA NoT / I o RD SEE MAP IS I 36DA 36AD .' _ . 7 4,QD /VE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW A 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: M S/ 6t. DATE OF PRE-APP.: t t ( f C 11 on 5's ¶ ) 66 1 Property Address/Location(s): �;;_ FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map &Tax Lot#(s): ('S 1 36 A it Coo if ' Case No.(s):5 D e. -'"< F fr)oca a Other Case No.(s): i f Site Size: .4/ ,4d '5 Receipt No.: , , Application Acc pted By: F. Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: Date: la(S a/ Address: ' Z ( 5 J .4(141.0i/1 Phone:5 %3 464 F '7 ttt City: 1 o R -tom_ d� Zip:ei� 7 Date Determined Complete: :"rr°?�� / � * A T4'-7 G✓iRQ - t/'CQS 6Y Rev.8/4/2000 is\curpin\masters\revised\sdra.doc Applicant*: - _ . L 4,L. _,v Con • rG Address: -43d.5' it/Z_ a--Q Phone:SO3-?S1 41Z-45- City: Pa L Tt4vt' , R. Zip: 17 Z I( REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS (Note: applications will not be accepted *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant without the required submittal elements) 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) ffiApplication Form must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this Ld Owner's Signature/Written Authorization form or submit a written authorization with this application. lei Title Transfer Instrument or Deed Vic- Copy of Pre-Application Conf. Notes PROPOSAL SUMMARY [i Site/Plot Plan The owners of record of the subject property request Site (#of copies based on pre-app check list) Development Review approval to allow(please be specific): [ Site/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/z"x 11") A (..cs t R'2-i 55 CePh-t i,.t tfn Lam,, 7rn S [K Applicant's Statement (#of copies based on pre-app check list) ,.-:,,.-:, l� �` 1 q a� A / [�USA Sewer Use Information Card Jt(( Mr dPe'� i A I2 /x 2„ 1x 4D ' /(Distributed/completed at application submittal) P /�� n f e s P�v t�i � / ✓jJ{ USA Service Provider Letter ( / Nai 2 Sets of Pre-Addressed/Pre-Stamped #10 Envelopes & Copy of 500' Property Owner List Generated by the City Neighborhood Mtg. Affidavits & Notes Filing Fee: (Under$100,000) $ 800.0 151 W0 ($100,000-$999,999).... 1,600.00 ($1 Million&Over) $1,780.00 (+$5/$10,000 over the first million) Urban: (See Washington County fee schedule) 1 • List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: 1\1OV'�� 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 D'-`=e''''t ,20 ° Owner's tute Owners Signature tit v't • Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 410 411)", AO- CITY OF TIGARD COTYLVVIAkility De/ve2op Yte�v.t Shap ,4 getter Comma—pu(y LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS =4/27/01 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)2000-00022 FILE TITLE: AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless Services OWNER: Portland General Electric Attn: Real Estate Manager 121 SW Salmon Street 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Portland, OR 97201 APPLICANT REP: Spencer Vail, Planning Consultant AT&T Wireless Services 4505 NE 24th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 120-foot high monopole tower in the City of Tigard to provide wireless communication service. LOCATION: South of SW Pacific Highway at 10955 SW 65th Avenue, WCTM 1S136AD Tax Lot, 06300. ZONE: C-G; General Commercial. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, CRITERIA: 18.765, 18.795 and 18.798. CIT AREA: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request [—DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I ® TYPE II ❑ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV DATE COMMENTS WERE SENT: January 2, 2001 DATE COMMENTS ARE DUE: January 16, 2001 ❑HEARINGS OFFICER [MOH DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:00 PM ❑PLANNING COMMISSION [MOH DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:30 PM LJ CITY COUNCIL (IDES] DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:30 PM STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) DATE OF DECISION: 2/1/2001 COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION ® VICINITY MAP ® LANDSCAPING PLAN ❑ ARBORIST REPORT ® SITE PLAN ❑ ARCHITECTURAL PLAN ❑ TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ® NARRATIVE H GEOTECH REPORT ® OTHER: ELEVATIONS PLAN STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext. 317 SDR2000-00022 AT&T WIRELESS MONOPOLE TOWER LAND USE PROPOSAL a„,,„,„,„„'ufi' 1\ CITY OF TIGARD December 29, 2000 OREGON Spencer Vail 4505 NE 24th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 RE: Notice of Complete Application Submittal SDR2000-00022 (AT&T Wireless Monopole Tower) Dear Mr. Vail: The City has received the additional information necessary to begin the review of your Site Development Review application. Staff has, therefore, deemed your application submittal as complete and will begin the review process. The estimated time for rendering a decision from the date an application is deemed as complete is 6-8 weeks. If you have any questions regarding your application, or if I can answer any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me at (503) 639-4171, x317. Sincerely, • Ma ew Scheidegger Assistant Planner i:\curpin\mathew\Sdr\SDR2000-00022.acc c: SDR2000-00022 Land Use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 1. - ..10 Nye lid. _ - - - ... r • __ . ,. See Attached Deseriptioa. • . • • • • i. .... .. . ., _. .• ...• • . • ' _ ,:, - ins•- _� �._ - •. • • . 41,33_:� •�•;:.. :'::iu1" ueeessors Mb8iw�dmHoattwlio.ed_�edadd + �!—.-3 •∎ __ A..rre sa=jiiitai8.diecorsionttbet_te•Ar: twdattyta edlnheadaspieaitt• • drestadymmieee6eetalos al!nlaoms!<ISeetl' ..?• . --s- - - . yam - .. • '' 1-.• . . , .:R- - --. - sad th0 ' r' wD als ,ancatan and ithrdiattitanisatel Iwalrad and Awn.. y •—_' - defe ad the abon trd.p®iwy add awe,pal a rd.poo r teedi a the l awl af derma ••• di�mde elan • - • wbmeoer .. - 'si.:.__± ' �• - III '/- • k • ,and Na r- er' -e , ipp+orefia,..1 y lyZ. _ , ..-.- • . " 6," .... (seal. )--:t '•• -, • r H •/ jSeal)` � % ' O • STATE OP O . , - � e l�O W.tF (�y� • • ee. "RI+,• ethZ.,hinder • .. . . . Ontbie.LGr'S',da -.1b.. i�C1-.I9.5j7, ' . e mr,the amdaeidred,a Notary. to aid hi and boiaibstd3esbr ►aPP�ed the. �: •• . ... .iyh trjjmit;n•TLF.Y And TEL• T - •TLFII "h•4•stili end.vjl,t.." -lO $7$. :_ .- -- •• lawn loam to b rthi dermiod frefIriduaL5 QeratIedln sad'Ai aomled the within --7..-- ' - '•4. 'a,... "''.•:-hrtenniwt,amdaciasekdted to me that...theysnarted the snow Maly awl rodzstaily... -:- �4 AS me as .. '-.! ...in_amigo z•;� ,.B" &� - •;: Y _ �; � +- ��ij � r i- Half?Ugh)larO !, ; ,� -,. 13 y: D - -- : ..starsaPOR OON, .. • David-N:• eder° ' • an. •.■• ' ,• �as�a+g ,. . r • that the within tmttw• • A Utocdrot+:----- �s F. s.: - • ` "011-1110#11,0;;:12.1 was for wised MI the < Le, - -�p' I•w�'� ,9' n�S5 95 7D • . -. -_ : I rsY�f(..7*.mar•- ..� �ael�dl - - . - G Grr�11f1��''1ii1 -, a �! • •.'Oezieral Tlectri&i e t . `• �' 2.. w . "' handdDrededapidt:Weij. w s'an Dl�:$Or1. • LorAa •r'l�• . •of -ticn. - : • ' ••' ~�%s ,. • -..4).. e`-' Maw>i�8elld ao!ant't11 It - wrean enaewso I-:• i 'C>}�' .- - . bead. • • Oeaeral E .N , . ._ ..;? tta e' DMZ County Celt 'Electric Co •r, • Attentitm:•.Chet:Zrelan `""� • I • • - • y - • - -• •. _ - - v .1. - 4 - • _ • . • •,• . • .■0Z• ..,:... .'" —V 1 a.r L - +'�: _ - ter: '.ni i=•.:may-3 '` k1 r.- - + t._^..._ ____;551.- tsf- .. I vino• wpm y; J.�esrg;::f:v•.. .t I . )P '.1.:,,ILii .n.u).1:.•.• .•.r ..N- ..a :!►lfPrH,. ./I +lfl� •/R:w ....• !fl - +. �''ar� .n.'..w.w •II I-• . . .l 4 '!'" x'..JF-'fki nf1 .a.1R • rf i.Y Y!'-1 11, ff 1 {.iS'l :A k.11Ni. .f yam." .1•• .l . - - .� S I '� ••,y.,k •f _+.- .. ♦ _ . ice` •-011111016-- -. ,.,-;...,,_.±,sii,t,......,,,...:....c54.,....:}2.7.ts..,,..7.•■••:.:a ...--.,--...... .,........3166,e..--....0;namesz:,_r, 1... . ..11. irirmegrebi_.___,..,....... ...„......:... .4.4...,..„....z.. ....7.G.;:.,.....:....... fir• V •+. - .rte .SH -4.- --- inn_ .$.A ,,,- , . q• _: :. :ad e; a 5. ` __ � ` =-� .. � + , ^ y�raatt+++ Mcm + _ ---,4- �— ��.�r ti ^yyn � fir . yla-trw , te !raga."Z1363:6.""- -',.. ..W"-:.sit: *---m=r th i 4 suainst'. .11e:+wltPil33Z�e r33gM _ _ : iat } i x's '� ..- 2 4theatte_ 1011+ .�.D Mess-dtimaalacri ago o 2'e �• -- ;m,i1..'loa �' a sl3aat. 8 ` " `'�'' ikemis-�- .:8' wt's lie •� �{ `� i� +- ' r Z �.� 3 Jliie �iie L�. _ ;r7--. 2 a 3l�e Wit•z d 36,- . s--- .. _3aeael3amt aor: e ?� " 3 -.:-c *na►.22bi-m •ws�s� lt! II36a .Z.Z'smma1�3 �• f -�'7 P-- a.:' ,rM.e••� '' '. yam 4-� . '>t - Z ''z —, ' 1.,!,21- fKfir,.. ' .,a:i .A11.�-y.r`i"'.y --,�i°�w a'"..;a es- f'�)• --+ t+c''' w �w -i•- .'r y .;...i`3t' a w. 6A :•1 �'k'" .w�`yal -�^"+..T,.�. • _. . `- _ • - _ - - . 1 — r - .. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE WITHINSEVEN(7)CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING'RETURN THIS AI'NIDAVI' TD City of Tigard. Planning Division 13X25 SW Haii Boidevard • Tigard,OR 97223 • I, , ems 1'1- OA, L do affirm that I am AM,- , the party initiating interest in a proposed ;01-5"-' T+l( &fitrik / '1k)) ' affecting the land located at (state the approximat location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) /i 3-S 'j65 A? Pc r Sob -Wet-ti,i , and did on the i s- , day of Ne2 dee- vJ-ec , •Zwperson. ly post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a rf � application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at /c.1.5- Sc,) 6SZ ,�,j(; (y F -e .,<-r s�6s /-n (state location you posted notice on prop- ) gnat -'i 'n the ',mil- / - of a otary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 1-1" day of 1bt ( ��4�,� OFFICIAL SEAL _ e �';;y ERIKA BETH BORGESON NOTAR P :LIC O GON NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ""'ior COMMISSION NO.331079 My Commission Expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN.30,2004 (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: Ts - _ : 81. £ •X17 cr ' TYPE O1 PItOPOSEU•llEVELOI'MENT: ����_ I Natne of Applicant/Owner: . , �%T1 - e ' v I Address or General Location o Subject Property: i CO S.5" g G) 6S LSubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot it(s): 1 5 /w YeAD T< CI ) ------ ------ -------- ------- -------- h-Voga,�etly4nastc(S 3ffposl.fist AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON • ) • )ss. City of Tigard ) I, S c-=P . /4. •••1(i1/-• _ __ . being duly sworn, depose and s4 that on VA Will beR 1S , 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) iei gf5 Se,J GS 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 i dicated above ii the United States Post Office located at AIL... k--- .14 Sc� R_ PG--- r,-4,-1 , with postage prepaid thereon. Iti/a/i;%-41111■-_ /A ig Cr- (In th- •r- ence of . Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the (1 day of I OJL`vt(aer- V�� rt., OFFICIAL SEAL ERIKA BETH BORGESON _ _ L'.. ' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION N0.331079 t_ _■4� 1 !� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN.30,2004 NO ARY ` B IC OF O"EG ea My Commission Expires: (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) rNAMI:OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME ! '4 h . E I'I'YPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: a li .. _ " Cl/ •• — I Name of ApplicanUOwner: _ 5--. -_' .1 ��1 �i . ee Address or General Location o Subject Property: 16c7 (5 S c) ' 'subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot ll(s): �S _1_� _�4b r -I-------- -- --------- ---- —— - -- __ _ h Vogokpa11y1ina51er5VaffmJil M51 SPENCER VAIL ° PLANNING CONSULTANT ■Slirm November 14, 2000 RE: Neighborhood Meeting Dear Property Owner I represent AT&T Wireless Services. We propose to develop a portion of the property adjacent to PGE's West Portland substation located at 10955 SW 65th with a wireless communications facility consisting of a 125'tall monopole and a 12'by 28'electronics equipment shelter. The property, legally described as Tax Lot 6300 on map 1S 1W 36AD. The general location of the proposed cell site location is shown on the map on the reverse side of this letter. Before to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals and permits, I would like to discuss the proposal with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to a meeting on: Thursday, November 30,2000 Tigard City Hall—Red Rock Creek Conference Room 13125 SW Hall Tigard, Oregon 97223 6:45- 7:45 PM Please note that this is an informational meeting on Preliminary development plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to Washington County. We look forward to meeting with you and discussing the proposal. Please feel free me if you have questions. Very truly yours 4491L �.--141 .Vail 4505 N.E. 24TH AVENUE • PORTLAND, OREGON 97211 • 503/281-8245 • FAX 503/284-5506 I A x v t� v MK \ \ . k mi, t , ,.,,;,,..c• o f .S GS !t•tAw W \\ 1 EL ' 3 •w.tog 46 1....14•shiagl si 0 moo to.G° trrl 1 eew a i E 6w 71 t AV. ��-. ,..:77< 1 S 136AD-06507 0136AD-04301 1S136AD-06000 AMERICAN REAL ESTATE JHCB PROPERTIES LLC SHAPIRO ENTERPRISES LLC HOLDINGS LIMITED PTNSHIP BY BAXTER THEODORE E&JUDY H C BY MIKE LEVY BY NW RESTAURANT OREGON INC 11460 SW PACIFIC HWY 17310 SE 45TH ST 17331 135TH AVE NE#B TIGARD,OR 97223 BELLEVUE,WA 98006 WOODINVILLE,WA 98072 • 1 S 136AD-05400 15136AD-05200 1S 136AD-04300 BANNING MARK A&PATRICIA E TRS LANGER RESIDENCE REVOCABLE SIMPSON S C C A LIVING TRUST 6600 SW PINE ST 3895 TAMARACK LN LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 6614 SW PINE STREET PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136AD-05901 1 S 136AD-07200 1 S 136DA-00100 BENENSON 68TH PARKWAY MERRILL JACK D TRUSTEE TIGARD BP SERVICE CO INC Go DAYAL RAMESH B&LALITA R 11440 SW PACIFIC WAY KEY LLC THE BY PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM 8810 SW PACER DR TIGARD,OR 97223 4706 NE GLISAN#101 BEAVERTON,OR 97008 PORTLAND,OR 97213 15136AD-05600 S 136AD-06400 1S 136AD-06200 BLANCHARD MALCOLM A PALMER DAVID E& TI ••D BP SERV 0 INC Go ADAMS MICHAEL J JONES LINDA V 11440 N•• '•CIFIC HWY 11420 SW PACIFIC HWY 6716 SW PINE ST T ' •RD,O• • 223 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DA-02600 T-136DA-02401 15136AD-04200 CARLSTON DORIS A POLLOCK DONALD E TIG•• OF 1834 SW 58TH AVE STE 202 1312 ••LL CARLSTON HAROLD E 6808 SW PINE ST PORTLAND,OR 97221 T ARD,OR • 23 TIGARD,OR 97223 136DA-02500 136A0-06506 1S 136AD-05700 POL •CK DON• E TIG••• C • OF DALEY CHARLES A 1834 S :'• AVE STE 202 1312 :0 .ALL 6726 SW PINE ST TIGARD,OR 97223 •L'TLAND,O• •7221 ARD,OR • 223 1 S 136AD-06300 1 S 136AD-05900 1 S 136AD-06700 • PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC VIP'S RESTAURANT INC DESAI MARK COMPANY 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD 14320 SW 134TH DR 121 SW SALMON ST TIGARD,OR 97224 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 PORTLAND,OR 97204 1S 136A0-06300 1S136AD-06502 136AD-06504 REIDT WILLIAM WAY W LEE D •I MA'• Go H L CLARK MGR P G E GENERAL CONTRACTOR 14320 134TH DR 621 SW ALDER 5210 SE 26TH ARD, •' 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97205 PORTLAND,OR 97202 1 S 136AD-06100 1 S 136AD-05300• 1S 136AD-05800 EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC SCHOLIBO GEORGE E JR AND WILTON STEVEN L AND SCHOLIBO STEPHEN A ANITA R J PO BOX 4453 12241 SW TERWILLIGER BLVD 6606 SW PINE HOUSTON,TX 77210 PORTLAND,OR 97219 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 36AD-05100 136AD-06505 1 S 136A0-05500 SCH• BO GEORG JR AND WA • L ENERAL CONTRACTOR I HATHAWAY DANNY L SCHOLIB• •HEN A 5210 s I ST 6710 SW PINE ST TIGARD,OR 97224 1224 : TE• LLIGER BLVD -•RTLAND,O' 97202 ••RTLAND,OR 9 ' 9 Naomi Gallucci 1S1E31BC, 1400 1S1E31BC, 2300 1 1285 SW 18th Avenue BLAKESLEE TRACY J NULL DONALD L & CHARLOTTE Ti ard, OR 91223 PO BOX 6354 11645 SW 64 H g PORTLAND, OR 97228 PORTLAND, OR 97219 Sue Rorman 1S1E31BC, 1501 1S1E31BC, 2400 1 1250 SW 82"' Avenue SHEPPARD ROBERT F TR LAHM ROBERT J Ti ard, OR 91223 12730 NE ROSE PKY 11705 SW 64 AVE g PORTLAND, OR 97230-1546 PORTLAND, OR 97219-7026 John Snyder 1 31 BC, 151 1S1E31BC, 2500 'e SHEP` ` : Z 'OBE RT F TR PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRI I I SW 82 Avenue e ' 121 SW SALMON ST Tigard, OR 91223 127 . � E •SE PKY SRTLAND, •' 97230-1546 PORTLAND, OR 97204-2901 Jack Biethan 1 1 E31 BC 1503 1S1E31BC, 2600 SH ' " I." ROBERT F TR OREGON STATE OF > DEPT OF 1 1043 SW Summerfield Drive, Apt. 3 9002 SE MCLOUGHLIN BLVD Tigard, OR 97224-3376 12 1 NE "' • E PKY "ORTLAND, OR 97230-1546 MILWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 Ellen Beilstein 1S1E31BC, 1700 1 E31 CB, 701 14630 SW 139th Avenue BROWN MARY ANN ORE it . . ATE OF > DEPT OF Ti ard, OR 97224 11605 SW 64TH AVE 9002 . M •UGHLIN BLVD g PORTLAND, OR 97219-7024 ►' WAUKIE, OR • '222-7312 Jim Petersen 1S1E31BC, 1800 1 31 CB, 1111 10815 SW 74th Avenue CASTRO GILBERTOA GREG• ` ' ATE OF > DEPT OF Tigard, OR 97223 11615 SW 64TH AVE 900 ' M • GHLIN BLVD PORTLAND, OR 97219 WAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 Dieter Jacobs 1S1E31BC, 1900 E31 CB, 1100' 7115 SW Spruce Street SIEBER MARK ORE * - `TE OF > DEPT OF Ti ard, OR 97223 11625 SW 64TH AVE 9002 . ►. OUGHLIN BLVD g PORTLAND, OR 97219-7024 a AUKIE, O' '7222-7312 Alexander Craghead 1 1 E31 BC, 2100 1 ' E31 CB, 10 12205 SW Hall Boulevard SI • ' "K OR • • STATE OF > DEPT OF 116 - ' vi -4TH AVE 901 E ■ OUGHLIN BLVD Tigard, OR 97223 .•RTLAND, • 97219-7024 LWAUKIE, OR 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 2100 1 ' E31 CB, 1 .10 WRIGHT VALDA K OR . O► TATE OF > DEPT OF PO BOX 230115 900 ' cLOUGHLIN BLVD TIGARD, OR 97281-0115 1.' WAUKI• •R 97222-7312 1S1E31BC, 2200 HILTON LAWRENCE & ALYSA PO BOX 490 SHERWOOD, OR 97140-0490 ATTENDANCE ROSTER MEETING DATE: ut �3O CO PLEASE PRINT! NAME ADDRESS CITY, STATE ZIP CODE PHONE # 593 5-1921./v-e& ,! 4 S _ /if_ Z� P t ..77Z I ( fir-b- f _ (ravti', 11635 SW 6/tk 4 Rei4 Cul . 9721� g773b(2 Obeg , 11 4s- 5c., G41 ttf A yr pee 714,)-1,a/ 97 V 9 z..93-�.?56 - - 3- StrtetalAdt //G`/S" Sw 6 -�� • Po-f- a97=2 9 -75-5/ ,4,44; yzz,d/ /'/- ce5-- .5eV 6 cir telt-- ,,77a/1 y a,,t, „6/2. -1,1, _ //6o� /, 'Y � ,so 3 � 3667 g:lforms197conwaylsign_i n.doc MINUTES OF MEETING November 3012000 Spencer Vail, Planning Consultant for the developer, opened the meeting at 6:45 PM in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room in the Tigard City Hall complex. He explained that he represented AT&T Witless Services and that stated that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss preliminary plans for a wireless communications facility to be developed on the PGE substation property. He indicated that the facility would consist of a 120 foot tall monopole, a 12' by 28' by 10'tall electronic equipment building on a 50'by 75' leased portion of the PGE substation site. He passed out copies of the site plan and asked for questions. Following is a listing of the general categories of concern and the responses thereto: Q 1. What about emissions for the tower and their possible interference with household items like telephones and TV's? A. Vail stated that the facility would operate at 100 Watts of power or less . He indicated that antennas are mounted on office and residential apartment building throughout the region and that there are no known complaints about interference with such items. Q2 What about health concerns from radio emissions? A. Vail responded that the facility's emission levels are more that 1/10 of 1% of the FCC standard. He also pointed out that Oregon Health Sciences University had recently authorized the placement of antennas on a roof top within the hospital complex. Q3 How much traffic with be going to the site? A. Vail indicated that, after the initial construction period,the one to two vehicle trips per month would come to the site. Q.4 Any chances of filing any of SW 64th pot holes? A. Vail indicated that they would be responsible for any damage to the road but that road maintenance is really the concern of the city or county. Q.5 How is the area zoned? A. Vail indicated that the area was zoned commercial and that the proposed use was a permitted use in that zone subject to Site Development Review and hence the reason for tonight's meeting. Minutes of Meeting November 30, 2000 page 2 Q6. What happens next? A. Vail explained the process and that the City would be sending them a letter about the proposal once it was submitted and deemed to be complete. He told them of the two sets of envelops he had to submit and that if they got the letter about this meeting they would be getting two other letters from the City. Vail then distributed his business card and told the attendees to keep the site plan handout and to call him if questions come up later in the process. Meeting was adjourned at 7:45PM. Resp'c lly ' 041 ' . •, cer H. Vail Spencer H. Vail 2845506 P. 01 ■Smirmi SPENCER VAIL o PLANNING CONSULTANT December 8, 2000 Diane Parke City of Tigard 13125 SW flail Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Via Facsimile Transmission Re: AT&T Wireless Services Tigard NE Cell Site Dear Diane Please be advised that the current estimated cost for the proposed above referenced cell site is $75,000. Ve ruly yours ncer H. Vail • • 4505 N.E. 24TH AVENUE • PORTLAND, OREGON 97211 ;• 503/281-8245 • FAX 503/284-5506 it eLe August 9, 1996 Spencer Vail, Site Acquisition Consultant AT&T Wireless Services 4505 NE 24th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 SUBJECT: Failure Modes for Poles and a Description of the Design Criteria 0 `� Dear Mr. Vail: CO ppcZ CI 7 93� I have been asked to write to you about the mode of failure for pole type structures used to su, 3O3� cellular antennas and equipment, and give some information to allow you to judge ��billtt9he chances of that failure occurring would be. I think it would be appropriate to start o by a brief description of the design criteria that are typically used. The design loads generated, including wind. the weight of the members, and ice loads if applicable ) are used to size members of the pole in accordance with nationally recognized standards. The wind must exceed all estimates for magnitude, duration, be at the worst orientation and overcome the factor of safety in order for a pole to become overloaded. This situation is highly unlikely. But, for the purposes of this discussion, let us assume that a pole becomes overloaded. The typical consequence of this overloading is "local buckling" where a relatively small portion of the shaft distorts and "kinks" the steel. This does not cause a free falling pole. There are 3 mechanisms which prevent the pole from a free fall type failure. First, as the pole distorts this distortion may relieve the load from the pole either by orienting the pole more favorably in the wind or, if buckling has occurred, by reducing the moment arm of the wind force. The second mechanism involves a redistribution of the stress in the pole after buckling toward the remaining portion of the cross section that has unused capacity. That is, even after a local buckle,the pole has significant capacity. The third phenomenon and most important, is the nature of the force being applied. We expect the wind to produce this force. A wind that would cause a buckle would be larger than the basic wind speed, the gust factor, and the factor of safety combined. A gust would soon dissipate and, after this peak wind is gone, the stress in the pole would be reduced. Poles are flexible, forgiving structures which are not generally susceptible to damage by impact loads such as a wind gust or earthquake shocks. It takes some time for the entire structure to "see" the impact loading. To summarize, it is the post buckled capacity along with the transitory nature of the loading that prevents a pole from "falling over." After the buckle, although the cross section of the pole is capable of carrying the entire vertical (weight) load and a substantial portion of the load that caused buckling, the pole is likely to be out of plumb. This may be somewhat dramatic and the buckled section should be replaced. In conclusion, pole design and testing have provided the public with a very safe product. Poles have gone through extensive full scale testing, resulting in a history of being extremely reliable. The public I think, has been well served. Valmont has provided structures that have performed well ,during the earthquakes in California, the hurricanes in the South, and a number of tornadoes. To my knowledge, Valmont has never experienced an in service failure of a communication pole due to weather induced overloading, even though, as in the cases of Hurricane Hugo and Hurricane Andrew, the wind speeds may have exceeded the design wind speed. I hope this has helped. Please feel free to call with any comments you may have. I can be reached at 1-402-359-2201- ext 3757 and will be glad to discuss any concerns you may have. Sincerely, //lif J. L. Resler, PE enior Professional Engineer ICPD, Valmont Industries Inc. • P,ro�o s & / hrróvt 01/30/2001 16: 08 5032845506 SPENCER VAIL PAGE 01 Fifer August 2, 1999 Dave Strutz AT & T Wireless Services 25977 SW Canyon Creek Rd. Suite E Wilsonville, OR 97070 Dear Mr. Strutz: We understand that there is some concern on the part of local building officials regarding the potential for failure of communication monopoles. Communication monopoles are designed in accordance with the Electronic Industries Association Standard EIA-222-F, "Structural Standard for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures." This standard is modeled after the ANSI A58.1 standard, which is now known as ASCE-7- The ETA standard was introduced to thoroughly address all of the design criteria specifically applicable to steel communications structures. Much of these specific design criteria are often missing in local building codes. The wind loading requirements in ASCE--7 are also the basis for building codes throughout the United States. FWT monopoles can be designed to withstand wind speed specified by the local government agency and will be in accordance with the Electronic Industries Association Standard ETA-222-F, "Structural Standard for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures." With the factor of safety included, the wind speed has to exceed that as specified by the local building code for the monopole to fail. This simply means that by the time there is a failure all surrounding man-made structures, buildings, trees, cars, etc. have already been destroyed. The probability of failure is remote considering the high wind and the factor of safety used in the design. For your information, FWT has designed and manufactured more than ten thousand communications structures in the last thirty-five years and have never experienced a structural failure. I hope this will clear your doubt in the integrity of our monopole. If you need more information please call me at 1-800-433-1816, ext. 5050. AUG 0 2 X9.9 ,5, ROFE-s,',\\ Sincerely, Reviewed by N� `SAD 169136 Ta-Wen Lee, Ph.D., P.E. arttn L. de la Rosa, P. . oaE�o�l Senior Design Engineer Vice President of Engine i �`�tfl,\99 t. 2/10.DE\-P ' CC: Laura Guy-CSR Eenew Date 9 EXHIBIT 6 P.O.Sax 8597 Fort Worth,Texas 76124-0597.81 7.255-3060•Fax 817-255-2957 1.800.433-1816•701 Highlander,Suite 200 AAingtDn.Texas 76015.4325 01/30/2001 16: 08 5032845506 SPENCER VAIL PAGE 02 . rinPAUL J . FORD AND COMPANY STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 250 East Broad Street • Suite 500 • Columbus, Ohio 43215 July 30, 1999 West Tower Communications 25977 Southwest Canyon Ck. Rd. Suite E Wilsonville,OR 97020 Attn: Dave Strutz Re: Monopole Design Method Dear Mr. Strutz: PAUL J. FORD AND COMPANY designs monopoles in accordance with the Electronic Industries Association Standard EIA-222-F, "Structural Standard for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures." This is a nationally recognized standard, which is modeled after the American National Standards Institute document ANSI A58.1. The ANSI standard is based upon equations that were developed using wind tunnel testing to accurately predict the effect that wind has upon poles. This ANSI standard is now known as ASCE-7. The EIA standard was produced by professional engineers experienced in the design of communication structures, to more thoroughly address all of the design criteria specifically applicable to steel communications structures_ Much of these specific design criteria are often not available in local building codes. The wind loading requirements in ASCE- 7 are also the basis for the Uniform Building Code(UBC). I hope that this answers your questions adequately. If you„are in need of any additional information, please call. /'''.:: -4,1.`a vtr' Sincerely, '� "° `-�� Paul J. Ford & Company I pE 1 09 d . 2 X-ev/--- ----7--- --e (/_:]ae.:7 ;(77.: ,.(J27-- R ussell K. Teal, EIT Andrew Martin, P.E. Project Engineer Project Manager Email:rteaka4pifweb.tom Oregon License#18439PE Copy: Brian Reese!Summit Manufacturing Exhibit 7 COLUMBUS, OHIO • ATLANTA, GEORGIA • ORLANDO, FLORIDA 614-221-6679 404-266-2407 407-898-9039 FAX 614-221-2540 FAX 404-869-4608 FAX 407-897-3662 . to SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION SDR 2000-00022 APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless Services Attn: Real Estate Manager 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97201 REPRESENTATIVE: Spencer H. Vail, Planning Consultant 4505 N.E. 24th Portland, Oregon 97211 DEEDHOLDER: Portland General Electric 121 SW Salmon Portland, Or 97204 SITE LOCATION: 10955 SW 65th LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 1S1 36AD TL 6300 SITE SIZE: 6.49 acres 50'by 75'or 3750 sq.ft. leased for cell site ZONING: CG-General Commercial ZONING CODE: Chapter 18.620--TIGARD TRIANGLE: Discussion: Although the proposed cell site is within the geographic perimeters of the "Tigard Triangle" it is not subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.620 for the following reasons: 1. The Triangle Street Plan shown on 620-12 and 620-13 does not show either SW 65th nor does it show any access into the Triangle area from the east at any point north of SW Atlanta. 2. The proposed cell site is accessed via an existing gravel roadway serving the existing PGE substation. 3. The gravel roadway cited above is accessed via SW 64t. This street in within the City of Portland and is not improved to City standards. 4. SW 65th is not an improved street. It exists on paper only. Supplemental Information SDR 2000-00022 5. SW 65th separates the proposed cell site from the existing development to the east. 6. SW 65th is also the City limits and county line between the City of Tigard and Washington County to the west and the City of Portland and Multnomah County to the east. 7. The PGE site is developed with a power substation. The public does not have cause to come the substation nor would the public have a need to come to the proposed cell site. 8. There are no improved roadways into the subject area nor are there any adjoining business that cater to the public. 9. Traffic generated by the cell site(one trip per month as detailed in the initial submittal material)does not warrant any street improvements. 10. The proposed cell site will have no employees. 11. The proposed cell site does not require water or sanitary sewer connections as it is an unmanned facility. CONCLUSIONS: The Purpose statement contained in Chapter 18.620.010 indicates that design standards are required in order to create a high-quality mixed use employment area, convenient pedestrian and bikeway system and to utilize streetscape to create a high quality image. Neither the proposed cell site or the PGE substation are considered to be employment centers as envisioned by the Code. These developments do not cater to the general public. SW 65th is not an improved street. Any improvements aimed at improving its "streetscape"would not serve any useful public purpose as there is no real street to enhance. The application should be approved as submitted. February 5, 2001 SHV/me -page 2- SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICANT: AT&T Wireless Services Attn: Real Estate Manager 1600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, OR 97201 REPRESENTATIVE: Spencer H. Vail, Planning Consultant 4505 N.E. 24th Portland, Oregon 97211 DEEDHOLDER: Portland General Electric 121 SW Salmon Portland, Or 97204 SITE LOCATION: 10955 SW 65th LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I S 1 36AD TL 6300 See Exhibit I SITE SIZE: 6.49 acres 50'by 75' or 3750 sq.ft. leased for cell site ZONING: CG-General Commercial PROPOSAL: The applicant,AT&T Wireless Services(AWS)seeks Site Design Review approval to construct a wireless communications facility. Tigard AT&T Wireless Se . D NE Cell Site Services DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: . AWS proposed electronic consisting of20cf°nstruct a wireless. PGEsubstetli.equipment building m°nopla°nununi�tio The n1pno site. °n a 54'by 12'by 28'by 10'f facility gray color.Pole is a galvanized m Portion of the mane electronics meta/ that will ufacd equipment deer to a dull an COinish.nons�c re and does and landscaped.` exposed 1 s,tall Pre, See es n°t '4uir 7?li egate site SITE facrlity, the attached, °r sewer T E above. e die°clonal stilts 2'5, fora visual DESCRIPTION: The .lest attic and landscape depiction Pro 99Wsub. Pro play Posed Portland and West ply is a described SURROUNDING dle ad west nW 65'Ae rectangular parcel lying ub access row sea Proposed fo Ped with south,°f flwy `SEA; The e servicing the northernmost s West G Avenue°levy'line of substatio is to City fn the City e is 0SUbJ�t parcel a n the I bu P° mod and � and Washington limits h county Improved SW o e site is bounded oruah County on on � qty line e Vest 64u g both sides °�the north east- The ast and the Is a Hwy 99 acid r S area° west Is the _ Freeway f single o the east and between cO1ercial Z� i°the souk , mot,°f wayly residents peen SW 65th zOUing ZONING CEDE. °fig: is Cif°f Tigard mug ° that C Phe fOEO P' °f �o CO proposal: g Code sections d tel"cl�y ceased applicable to . dus 7'age2- AT&T Wireless Services Tigard NE Cell Site Chapter 18.520— Commercial Zoning Districts Table 18320.1 indicates that Wireless Communication Facilities are permitted in the CG, General Commercial zone subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.798. Chapter 18.798—Wireless Communications Facilities Section 18.798.050 states that a new tower in a permitted use in the C-G commercial zone is subject to Site Development Review as regulated by Chapter 18.360,using the approval criteria contained in 18.798.050.B. Following is a listing of those criteria and the applicant responses thereto: B.1 Aesthetic: a. New towers shall maintain a non- reflective grey finish or, if required by the FAA Comment: The proposed tower will be a galvanized metal pole that will weather to a dull grey color. b. If collocated on an existing tower is requested, the design of any antennas... Comment: This proposal does not involve collocation c. If collocated on an existing non-tower structure is requested..... Comment: This proposal does not involve located the antennas on a non-tower structure. B.2 Setbacks a. Towers designed to collapse within themselves shall be setback in accordance with the setbacks of the base zone. Comment: The monopole and antenna configuration are designed to withstand 80 mph winds as required by the Uniform • -Page 3- AT&T Wireless Services Tigard NE Cell Site Building Code which assume a worst-case failure point at the ground base of the tower. It is not anticipated that such an event would take place but, if it did, the forces causing such a collapse would effect all of the property in the immediate area to some degree. Exhibits 6 and 7 are letters from the tower manufacturer and the tower engineer that attest to the monopole's structural • integrity. In addition, the foundation for the monopole is specifically engineered taking into account core samples from the specific location. The C-G zone has the following setbacks: 0' front; side and rear setback is 0' unless abutting a residential zone in which case the setback is 20 feet. By definition, the front yard is the east lot line fronting on SW 65th. This makes the west lot line the rear yard and the north and south lots lines are side yards, none of which abut a residential zone. The monopole does not infringe into any required yard setback area. b. Towers not designed to collapse within themselves.... Comment: This provision is not applicable as the tower has been designed to comply with"a"above. B.3 Tower Spacing Comment: There are no existing towers within 500 feet of the proposed facility. Collocation protocol letters were sent to the other wireless providers. There responses(submitted with the pre- application conference request}, indicated that there were no existing facilities available. -page 4- AT&T Wireless Services Tigard NE Cell Site B. 4 Tower Height Comment: The proposed monopole is 120 tall. As will be noted on Sheet zA3, Exhibit 4, the pole has been designed for collocation. B. 5 Lighting Comment: No lighting is proposed. As of the submittal date of this application AWS has not received comments from FAA regarding hazard markings or lighting. B. 6 Fence and Security Comment: The entire cell sire area is enclosed within a 7 foot high chain link fence with three strands of barb wire for a total height of 8 feet. 1B.7 Landscaping and Screening a. Landscaping shall be placed outside the fence.... Comment: All landscaping is placed outside the fence and is designed to satisfy the requirements of the City's code. b. When adjacent to residentially zoned property Comment: The proposed cell site is not adjacent to residentially zoned property thus this provision in not applicable. B. 8 Noise Comment: The equipment shelter has an air conditioning unit which operates within the dBa levels cited in this section. Chapter 18.798—Decision making Procedures Section 18.798.040.2e requires an Impact Statement on the effect of the proposed development on public facilities and services. Comment: The proposed facility will have little if any impacts on public services. It is an unmanned facility that does not require water or sewer connections. It will generate only one to two vehicle trips per month. It is electronically monitored for fire and unlawful entry. Telephone and -Page 5- AT&T Wireless Services • Tigard NE Cell Site electrical services are required and they are currently available at the site. No expenditure of public funds or improvements or extensions of public facilities are required by the proposed development. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY Comment: Exhibit 9 is a form from that agency indicating that the proposed cell site does not encroach onto any sensitive area nor is it within 200 feet of such areas. CONCLUSIONS: Based on all the information set forth above and contained in the site plan,the request for a site development review should be approved as submitted. All applicable Code criteria have been satisfied. December 3, 2000 SHV/me -vie 6- • n • • 5. 930 0 s _5/Ac _� !oi _ � . No. 12 E!3 1 ° a .moo °4-.4 N 0.0. •. S� • j • 2• `ZeG1. ,i 1•1.6>".--'''.--''.--.-----'---'-'.--. IRO _ J T �• —L, ,e ° o ' z76400 43Ac o 9 4 /� d A... ° . ..� ..- ° No map �Q 131.. NS7' 255 W �o �l K Y r r, 3•,�z6 5° i C.S No.13200} N 1 9 ~ �! . . TIGARD NE CELL SITE . • PROJECT DESCRIPTION: I TAX LOT H200 AT&T,ARELESS SERVICES PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW CLU.STE. 58751'05.C I 75.00 --1, NE SOCK or WCRX SNAU.INCLUDE THE PLACEMENT OT A NEW MONOPCLE WIN ANTENNAS AND A NEW PRE-FABRICATED EOUIVENT SHELTER ON A POURED-IN-PLACE CONCRETE FOUNDATION 5• TAX LOT 6300 L_ 4, NEW AT&T WIRELESS 0 . . . .... . 1.1 CELL SITE . . / :. .,-: . -.1;.• ,;...-. ; . •.. .,- . ..,*,...8, 4 re .. ' ':' •...•i.. .•••••• .04 ' .."• ' NEW MONOPOLE .411:1111. lill. * • '; it " PAO'''.' .1_,Z-■,...Wili z:, ....,,eur ±20' ..• 1. '..I'., -..saminintar, . .,,-.,, per.,.t. ., ,•,' R .4......,:vc,-.2.4..... 1'.o...-,. , ' S1-•-".I:K*1 T••-—%-.1 1..'.•...:;':.,. .4'•7.-...-•-..t•:s'''I••-:.•-•:..••':..:...•1'?',."?..•.....:.,`.1'...t...:.!•.1.:••I\.-.I..%?.;:'.4:.:.....,i.':••.••'..•. :'''*,...••4 4.•.•••s :\• •.•.••••''••• .-.fi-i-,ll„i2 4t4t,i;„i.5.tn.,2A6 i4s,-„t,,,,i,t,..:.,Va.1...t-0iFt z.:.w ?•-k;„e -. .. .. .4 .: ....)0.-...k!•,.:•-•..;:••:•%.. . . . ' . . . •.•••• • : .t •.:.......„.....,.. . • -.. • •• ., Niko ir .. •.•.. NEW LEASE AREAS FOR k FUTURE CARRIERS : :•;:fi .• '• ' .: ...': i ...... , ...!7;;:.:',;'..... .- . . 4. • •*. (/) VOr., '. •4. .:i;' ,.."..1..;.: *:.;;.%;•. ./11.;?;,','•:,;. •.• '14:VW.'" % i •l'. •• .:. ...,';',::: f;•.-•.:-••:.44...4%4 •14,/,•ri••:'.I -•• • • .......,., 4..i.,,, ...nz •VO,..,.'•• ...•,-:1, . -,%:..:'..zs•Ort !"....*.•', ';'.AI,, POE gM. .•..,.,?4;;::,;1A,l.,...,.t‘t1 t::o":kkl1jfi;le:..••s.::;,".;.r_';:...,,.•-:"•',-'.,-.'.:-'' '-,-•,-- .•,■;•1:••„:,,t•t..•.;4••,..•:":..::. ■"tI.,....•'.";../:•.•;.•44,,1..•••••••••.,..:'•••".?*::'.,•■k......w.,."::..l''{.'::.,.'.'..•.*?•■;.7..(T,..'L',':7::_.Z...'s•..•.'.*•,‘3{•.•••••.•.'C1....•;.._?;.''..?•4.4'• •:.::.. .f•.••• .••• •• SITE ACCESS ROAD ; WEST PORTLAND . .' - 1 • r4 . UA0 • •..•• . 2 1 I • • 1 • • •• " ••••• •.. • tt° 2 S •■• •••• ••• 541 NORTH VICINITY MA G. • / 8 . SEE SURVEY FOR ADOITIONAL INFORMATION NORTH r-: • P E t SI TE PLAN NO SCALE 75 SCALE: 1" ... 60. (IT) CONTACTS 0,.. ...A10._ AT&T YARELESS SERVICES CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: BECHTEL (503) 252-0028 SHEET INDEX S'. AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES PROJECT MANAGER: JAMES KRAMER (503) 635-1300 v.,- AI. COYER SHEET A6. SHELTER FOUNDATION DETAILS AT&T WIRELESS EQUIPMENT ENGINEER: MIX LEINWEBER (503) 306-7592 A2. ENLARGED SITE PLAN A7. FOUNDATION & WAVEGUIDE DETAILS e...i..2 A3. EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A8. WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE DETAILS ARCHITECT: MNB ARCHITECTS: RICK HASAPIS (503) 232-2117 A4. SHELTER FOUNDAT'ON PLAN A9. GENERAL NOTES A ELECTRICAL ENGINEER: R & W ENGINEERING: GREG ROBERTSON (503) 292-6000 A5. SITE DETAILS LI. LANDSCAPE PLAN etSI NAND Owner. .. .. Project: AT&T WirelessW TIGARD NE m•IIII,Illt Ana** Cell Site Sheet TILle: COVER SHEET ,m. mut vociumott DATE DitAin■ ! 10N ID CMCCOD AltlATED .111.eia4411•::11:14VC.714•215•1:11111117,1./ell=11:1%111101M1•. ( ..+T: y ..4, • .4 / • - A' C=1. AFICI—ITECTS Portiewl,Om.ItrIal TIGARD,OREGON g _a tZ/ /•■4 0-3 r...) • KEYNOTES= ,..., , ONEW 120' MONOPOLE TOWER WITH ANTENNA PLATFORM i • :.••`�'- 29'�0• ONEW GRAVEL YARD . �+.\.. t. 3 COMBINED LEASED AREA PROPERTY UNE. LEASE AREA: 50' X 75 p l'..,.....':':: \ • / .. t •, O SITE AREA � 3750 50. FT. � /.. • ...• �: ',. ., •1\• •. ... O NEW 7'-0' HIGH CHAIN UNK FENCE W/(3) STRAND BARBED / /" FUTURE'L€A§C..•. • . • ,-:.... ''• /WIRE. FENCED AREA: 3504 S.F. /;...: Af;EA.,,... ..,'• \` 29',0. O NEW 11'-6' X 26'-0• PREFABRICATED EQUIPMENT SHELTER ,fUIUFtE LE95E •.. .: \ SEE SHEET A4 FOR FOUNDATION PLAN. y Iv % ' . , ONEW ANTENNA PLATFORM AT 120' WITH (3) PANEL ANTENNAS / `�� AND (3) FUTURE PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR. . s. •�• ''•' ": ./ ,�. PLATFORM AZIMUTH: 15' 135' & 255' h NOTE: CONFIRM.THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF ANTENNAS WITH THE BECHTEL SITE CONSTRUCTION COORDINATOR. ^ L. �•: ( - F.P URE'•LEASE % . :/ O NEW WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE c y \ , .AR5A.•. . 1,', / / S NEW S'-0" x 5'-0' CONCRETE PAD N / /•' ,' . "'''.:. t,,*�;' !"�1 ���' ( .,•• ' ' ` ONEW 12'-0' WIDE ACCESS GATE • > y/ 0 NEW 12' WADE GRAVEL ACCESS DRIVE t.S © 0 FUTURE CARRIER LEASE AREA 1-el• \\ /• 0 TOWER LEASE AREA \��'•.. . ,I.: •' .II "'o' FITIJRE'LEASE; i.'..:2/' / O13 AT&T WIRELESS LEASE AREA PROPERTY UNE: i ∎' :^• . . . LEASE AREA: 24' x 40' SITE AREA - 950SQ. FT. • 0'0• \ '�' ".w.,'•.'- 1 4 NEW LANDSCAPING - SEE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHEET iL1 2o•-'0" ` ''-J/. .r NOTES: I. SEE ELECTRICAL FOR LOCATION OF METER * 1?`0• \ Sf t , 2. LOCATE EXISTING UNDERGROUND•UTIUTIES PRIOR TO EXCAVATION • • Wil' 3 SEE GENERAL NOTES ON SHT. A9 AND AT&T WIRELESS SERVICE N • • STATEMENT of WORK FOR AoanQNAI INFORMATION, NORTH C I TE P L` V y� ° • �D D 1" = 10'-0" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION A' MO. RIM!MUM= 14.11 111L071 NORCO OEM= MIMS ,.: Owners 1‘ otects Sheet Title: ATAT&T Wireless; TIPrdARD NE SITE PLAN MP IT""^"• Cell Site o w erN�Mss mum Or30" >L'', q W • • NOTES NEW AT&T•(3) SECTOR ANTENNA PLATFORM: 1. TOWER DESIGN BY OTHERS. TIP OF POI (3) PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR 2. TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN BY OTHERS. (3) FUTURE PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR Al�iliwyl Oa ii i iii NOTE: CONFIRM THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF 3. ANTENNA DESIGN BY OTHERS. il ANTENNAS WITH THE BECHTEL SITE CONSTRUCTION i COORDINATOR. I I , U I TOWER TO BE DESIGNED WITH COAX EXIT PORTS FOR FUTURE CARRIERS • NEW 12O'-0" HIGH MONOPOLE • . 0 I r NEW AT&T EQUIPMENT SHELTER NEW AT&T CABLE BRIDGE II, II I NEW 7'-0" HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE W/ (3) STRAND BARBED WIRE. NEW 12'—O" ACCESS GATE i �1 0 1 �tt� ... ' .t ct ►�.. iri i-i,1$r`1� I ci1.•,i s.0--2%.,_-1 ,, )F EAAr or 1\i 11 {�1•}+ffi d\t l�!j ,T,re, b i4 FINISH it lsSi:di;o:'•41°��•I,,N4IN,1•.4oItY 0iNi,l, E>maly4�'�'��lAt 1' g,�yS fl.,,gl���,'��s Waw••a.��"at e�M§1.14N4S. ADE ettl 1• •s...:t.a_l 1.1 L J.-■. a n .c. 1 i! ..+uw• g. SOUTH ELEVATION3,2 EAST ELEVATION 8 1/16" - 1'—O" I/16* — 1'-0" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTI( `r Owner: Project: Sheet TSUe: w. Intl IESCISI pac WI Horn MGM t� uTlo►Y I (VINE AT&T Wirelesse TIGARD NE ELEVATIONS Z A "°°^ Cell Site ARCS-III I '"°"`°'"'•�'°� TM"o esooh . Q = Ca —1 w 1.` ��``Rt�' .. 'ARE TIE �Odr.: 1-146;;;41.°1:.%.:40:&%44,44...,.. ����� ' 1 Ni' TURHBUC(LE• 493. / \,......4 .4I..:14.244.74.014..1%012 RUBBER HOSE • le/ ` 41114,,��yy !' x 2'HARDf100D STAxE 4*/ / -- 404(mil.,/h OR APPROVED EQUAL 4'• s LAO vl l\ .:Air MULCH l.. 6' . rig 'C40 BVRLAP iR04 :le/ ihit '4.4 ,,'.` / �if■.4 30' �6. *:;',4:::.::r.:' TOP 1 3 CF BALL 4. 4'.4417 .14:, /a ' �����,� f /d'9 I^rma TREE(TAME TER J At I-Alp' NEW TREES AND �t4445:•`�3"� I . BUFFER AS REQUIRED --/I �0 ( 2" CAL. ) 1-1. r DECIDUOUS TREE �m III PLANTING DETAIL ( NDS O' NOT TO SCALE eUrrFRPe NORTH 0 LANDSCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE LEGEND: 1/16--1.-o- (.1!!!) .4., ittgro, NEW TREES: ' NORWAY MAPLE (Acer platonoides) SEE DETAIL 2 2" CALIPER � b. FOR STAKING (8) TREES NEW LANDSCAPE BUFFER: ARBORVITAE (Thujo occidentolis 'Smorgold') LANDSCAPE NOTES: \:J (SEE NOTE 2) (Emerald Green 1 GAL. O 3'-0 O.C. I. LANDSCAPING IS INTENDED TO FULFILL CITY OF TIGARD LANDSCAPING (59) SHRUBS Sc SCREENING STANDARDS. . `4101 NEW GROUNDCOVER: 3' MIN. BARK MULCH ON BARE SOIL 2. ALL NEW LANDSCAPING IS DROUGHT RESISTANT AND THEREFORE Q REQUIRES NO IRRIGATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION er Owner: r—� Protect: Sheet Title: Ho. roau<oucermor 5 T1 D IR erac+� ocn® Amarm MND AT&T Wireless TIGARD NE LANDSCAPE "4 ..e7vs•,1111•1111111.7rl<•ne..11LICaw.t• ZL1 e 11100^'°'^^" Cell Site PLAN AACHrTECTS '"'"'• "191 MOM,OaaoN I 1 H ;=7 4 Lri Fite Number -7 3 7 • (tl_ j1 Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County Jurisdiction C Date 12/ Map & Tax Lot j 5 1 fj . - G37•& Owner Pq Site Address f c)cr 5-5 5-c-}(-; -_51r Contact -5-r2v>LQP - t!' Proposed Activity c /%r//,( _ ,/P /�_ Address -4�o5 tit 2--1 1 . /,&• / a,R74, �i� 7 77_ 1/ 11 Phone F r- c245-- Y N NA Y N NA USA Composite Map r-f- Stormwater Infrastructure maps Map # i� 1 �� •[I � QS # Locally adopted studies or maps < Other Specify r Specify Based on a review of the above information and the requirements of USA Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order 00-7: Sensitive areas potentially exist on site or within 200' of the site. THE APPLICANT MUST PERFORM A SITE CERTIFICATION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER OR STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. If Sensitive Areas exist on the site or within 200 feet on adjacent properties, a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required. Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or within 200' of the site. This pre- screening site assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect - water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. NO FURTHER SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE A STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development. NO SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. Comments: Reviewed By: Date: } z \06 Returned to Applicant `f Mail Fax Counter] Date k2A. \00 13y'1rQ Exhibit 8 TIGARD NE CELL SITE TAX LOT 62C0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ATV"ARMLESS SERVICES PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW CELL SITE. 58757'05"C 175.00 THE SCOPE Cr WORM SHALL INCLUDE THE PLACEUENT OF A NEW MONOPOLE WIN ANTENNAS AND A NEW PRE-FABRICATED M OVENT SNCITER ON A PWRED-N-PLACE CONCRETE FOUNOATIO. TAX LOr6J00 NEW AT&T WIRELESS • { CELL SITE• f NEW MONOPOLE I tz) r t20 Ip . ... :.s...:(i. , 1 ,,,,,,,, ,::,....:.".. ,,...i L� ...:..:. i , it ik. tit , • .,'; .,...ge.464,w... ::,. ...1.....,.:..,..,..... . •• • .,,17,........0,...7.6.04.g2 . • ..,.._,.,aeo:e..,..1.,. R 9 .. ij • • 9W. OZ.i'y I.YF NEW LEASE AREAS FOR 7_10 ti .s•: FUTURE CARRIERS S^ i' 1 '.f ;x. r>iy}), ! I3 "' '; SITE ACCESS ROAD �il WEST PORTLAND / ...;,..1., !� y, 11s y`L Olt SUBSTATION NORTH VICINITY MAP SEE SURVEY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NORTH SITE PLAN t NO SCALE t SCALE: 1' 1 60' 6 CONTACTS D 15 6 6 AT&T YARELESS SERVICES CONSTRUCTION I MANAGER: BECHTEL L (503) 252-0028 eAT&T WIRELESS SERVICES PROJECT MANAGER: JAMES KRAMER (503) 635-1300 SHEET INDEX N Al. COVER SHEET A6. SHELTER FOUNDATION DETAILS °� AT&T WIRELESS EQUIPMENT ENGINEER: MICK LEINWEBER (503) 306-7592 A2. ENLARGED SITE PLAN A7. FOUNDATION & WAVEGUIDE DETAILS -, A3. EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AB, WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE DETAILS ARCHITECT: MNB ARCHITECTS: RICK HASAPIS (503) 232-2117 AA, SHELTER FOUNDATION PLAN A9. GENERAL NOTES ELECTRICAL ENGINEER: R & W ENGINEERING: GREG ROBERTSON (503) 292-6000 AS. SITE DETAILS L1. LANDSCAPE PLAN tel Owner: �' Project: Sheet Title: �• IBRUR o®c1umDN DATE DRAWN DESIGNED CNECEID APPROVED MNB AT&T Wireless TIGARD NE COVER SHEET �. ��ca.�rrr�+ uv�.arsu.,��. A tl-F P--�ry �-�P••� IrOr n.0...... Cell Site ia �77t•.t:t:ut�lrilL �.1"'ci- 1 G1--.I O P•.u.,.,D.r•w rill - - TIGARD,ORWON KEYNOTES: =o • ONEW 120' MONOPOLE TOWER WITH ANTENNA PLATFORM j 29',0, ONEW GRAVEL YARD / ...1%om. `• ` �3�0.. (> COMBINED LEASED AREA PROPERTY LINE. LEASE AREA 50' X 75 • / '' r'• . `�`•�...` /3�0• ARf•4 • SITE AREA 3750 SO. FT. �,' tir: `rr.�•t '+' 1�1' ONEW 7'-0• HIGH CHAIN UNK FENCE W/ (3) STRAND BARBED .•' / {' 'VIVRE'C€At&r`• :' '''•' .� WIRE. FENCED AREA 3504 S.F. /: /)13EA;r• .r ' ��� 2 _ 5 NEW 11'-6' X 28'-0• PREFABRICATED EQUIPMENT SHELTER /' •''• ` • `g. 0••O SEE SHEET A4 FOR FOUNDATION PLAN. ` ��.��' :' �r'•Ft1iURE'LESSE ' 1� O 6NEW ANTENNA PLATFORM AT 120' WITH (3) PANEL ANTENNAS �•' " ' . `/: "t• ' �� • AND (3) FUTURE PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR. b ,�. • � ,r' t, j,.• PLATFORM AZIMUTH: 15', 135' & 255' + ,' ': '• ti'; ,. . .. ' �•''' \1 NOTE: CONFIRM THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF ANTENNAS WITH P• '•1 r •;.. '•r ' �'„, 'i•' ",••' +; ':T THE BECHTEL SITE CONSTRUCTION COORDINATOR, i 0 4�, �, +. ':;: ,• / ::::1 :D::0::NORETE /. ti ' . . ':-.'•:'r � •fLdURf''IEAS PAD gr /•' ••�• rr la^"'°H 1• •b •t " ®"�" i •O NEW 12'-0' WIDE ACCESS GATE / +'' V .• 7 )Q NEW 12' WIDE GRAVEL ACCESS DRIVE * 466 , �' 1/ )) FUTURE CARRIER LEASE AREA ':a ` 7``•' 'l` , i •' •j••'+•' 2 TOWER LEASE AREA �, : -%:.•;.._.: . . .'T. :'• t ,:•' s.'•+ ''I O)3 AT&T WIRELESS LEASE AREA PROPERTY UNE: �' � � LEASE AREA: 24' x 40' SITE AREA 950SQ. FT. I0• .' ^'•'` .0 NEW LANDSCAPING - SEE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHEET zLI ��• ,r :h;,/ NOTES: • —!. • 1. SEE ELECTRICAL FOR LOCATION OF METER /?�O•'` /11 ',J• 2. LOCATE EXISTING UNDERGROUND-UTIUTIES PRIOR TO EXCAVATION • •• : 1' 3. SEE GENERAL NOTES ON SHT. A8 AND AT&T WIRELESS SERVICE • 6.to STATEMENT OF WORK FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. NORTH SITE PLAN q�� ,_10 �� $ ,• _ ,D.-o- NOT FOR CONSTAUC1101 g �• $0. 3ZI D110$ N I x MM ii4► MOOD mr ,mm MNB Owner. Project: AT&T Wireless TIGARD NE Sheet Title: e: SITE PLAN p zA2 P "°°IT Cell Site hrt m•,Or.•••7riMl mum,oa>ro011 NOTES NEW AT&T (3) SECTOR ANTENNA PLATFORM: \ 1. TOWER DESIGN BY OTHERS. TOP OF POLE (3) PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR \ 2, TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN BY OTHERS (3) FUTURE PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR �'�1M! NOTE: CONFIRM THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF *!in! 3. ANTENNA DESIGN BY OTHERS. ANTENNAS WITH THE BECHTEL SITE CONSTRUCTION COORDINATOR. i I TOWER TO BE DESIGNED WITH COAX EXIT PORTS FOR FUTURE CARRIERS I NEW NEW 12AT&0'-0T "EQUIPMENT HIGH MONOPOLE 0 ° e4 NEW AT&T CABLE BRIDGE II NEW 7'-0" HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE W/ (3) STRAND BARBED WIRE. NEW 12'-0" ACCESS GATE Ai% L_Ill ktAVP AVidi 1 0 1 1 -•� }}t -. fr i'-y-�t ll/ X�1,1,r,-':-;:l 1 1 1 1 ►1Frrip1 1 �3 I, 1 1 1 1 1 �`11 k 1x'� 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 b 11 FINISH tl,\ �21iSlftid?`Y iI t1�Sd(.tdt°ISiY�d'dY�d`1'11�'iltl't a1rS1 C! 1 CI t1 o/t1 1 SI!�il1;1�Sd(�, 31 tl id Rd S1 t1 S` I•°o GRAD- �:j'�••t�!tiy:js•1111'raf&alWil•!!!!lrril,%:: 4,<< itip .qgi , A:''Lt "'" "4x .illITlllll4•„i+ii�.F1'...a:.'.k"'i•�ltrja- SOUTH ELEVATION o 4/ 8 15 A2 EAST ELEVATION 1/16" - 1'-0" 1/16" = 1'—O" NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ,;, NO. UW D< T)07/ its DVTX DQTQI CaL� A T$0?© Owner: ° Project: Sheet Title: tip' �7i i^a.iA�:�^ mm�• MNB AT&T Wireless' TIGARD NE ELEVATIONS � �eW�ii�ir% zA P,,,,^.,';, 91!01 Cell Site ARCHITECTS Mtn,Demob _ - 1.Vi.• I/ . ?ARE TIC dili ��•.H. Nil TURNBUCKLE s .�q ` 4/ ` 1��T' \i`' � ' RUOOER NOSE 7 I `` al* V,f,„ APP.G--- 204.444, I/ / `1•H�j�'�'f�`i'%„' 3 OR APPROVED'AL DUAL STAKE V/ \ �• r ..11 irifii I `AT'\ - BE RN . n• y0' ���6' +1.if i•• +:v,.• j 'EMOTE BURLAP fROu :u—n,�p•�.11.� / X0,1, WIN. I41N. +rte:,.li.Cr.: TOP 1/3 OF GALL 067-0,.--,, a i **s3.. /V `—TVACE TREE DIAMETER NEW TREES AND -,i,, 4�� `8.4' 04%. ` BUFFER AS REQUIRED /(� 2" CAL. .• 4-'4 DECIDUOUS TREE ^7 0 4 �� PLANTING DETAIL "0`0• " NOT TO SCALE B�erf NORTH O LANDSCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE LEGEND: ,16"_1 .O• t .'.� SEE DETAIL 2 20 CALIPER MAPLE (Acer platanoides) ✓ri,�� FOR STAKING (8) TREES 0 NEW LANDSCAPE BUFFER: ARBORVITAE (Thuja occidantolis 'Smargold') LANDSCAPE NOTES Q (SEE NOTE 2) (Emerald Green? 1 GAL. ® 3•-0 0.C. 1, LANDSCAPING IS INTENDED TO FULFILL CITY OF TIGARD LANDSCAPING (59) SHRUBS & SCREENING STANDARDS. g. NEW GROUNDCOVER: 3" MIN. BARK MULCH ON BARE SOIL 2. ALL NEW LANDSCAPING IS DROUGHT RESISTANT AND THEREFORE Q. REQUIRES NO IRRIGATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION $ _ _ , Owner: Project.: Sheel TiUC: M�i,TA b 7JPTT�f�71•A111�93wa= �mlrm nnmrrm N. AT&T Wireless TIGARD NE LANDSCAPE zL1 FV1.H I C 7 ^'O ans. 1 2 — Pen..,o.o.r mal Cell Site TMAro.UQ70K PLAN - 1 saloN DNEflI4MOD lNiOI ,I,VDI'IddV ilild - � I1 t r G ' ' a PRE-APPLICATION to E 'RENCE NOTES naRaD°"(;°li Community'Devetpuent (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) sr.,1g��l+etfercorrntunfty /,, NON-RESIDENTIAL PRE-APP.MTG.DATE. / /�'%�/ STAFF AT PRE-APP.. �l S///bk/ APPLICANT: 5 �.r, ,r 141 i( AGENT: Phone: ( 5.'"i!;") j• S. -Y Phone: ( ) PROPERTY LOCATION: /r_ ADDRESS/GEN. LOCATION: le 95-s .5 1-L) 2 y r • TAX MAP(S)/LOT#(5): .9177--/30('--) NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: J •�c �.� c tea: _� ;<c c(�( j e rc er.) PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: •.�" L-f, - _r /?J�s 1 `,' �' (c"l( ,7;e. r' ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: .7,i� �. , ti, ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: C.I.T. AREA: ";' FACILITATOR PHONE: (503) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE: ? sq. ft. Average lot width: ,!)C) ft. Maximum building height: L 3 ft. Setbacks: Front e) ft. Side cJ wft. Rear 0--2C,ft. Corner(c- et--,ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: /`5 %. (Refer to Code Section 18. SZ i ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2'/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0001 Oil OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page I of 9 NDRlaideatiwl APPlicitiw/Plmuq Drumm Section fi rr 0/1 to,/ • ) S1No /D 6430o o eft 431d &gat PPE-4600 - D 000 ate inap / 113 ; o1.4.) S I SPECIAL SETBACKS > STREETS: feet from the centerline of > LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. > FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.1301 SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PRIVISIONS BUILDING HEIGH EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet pro -d that: • A maximum building floor areoosite-,a>ea ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; ➢ All actual building setbacks will be at least hal((%)of the building's height; and • The structure will not abut a residential zoned istrict. (Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.BJ /} PARKING AND ACCESS REQUIRED parking for this type of use: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): ( ) NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES)1A,Y BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. / PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as-felLQws: ➢ Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, )nches x 18 feet, 6 inches. ➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 "et, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width include tile width of a stripe that separates the parking space from adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3) feet of vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of re d parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. (Refer to Code Section 18.765.0401 Handicapped Parking: / All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPR PRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. e minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking-stel1;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. Minimum number of accesses: / Minimum access width: 3 (` , . Minimum pavement width: All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: [Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 and 18.7051 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 NON Nadeau!ApplWtion/%uming Division Section WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS 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. (Refer to Code Section 18.105.0301 LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS 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. (Refer to Code Section 18.765.0801 k CLEAR VISION AREA 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. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.1951 BUFFERING AND SCREENING 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. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7451 The REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: /LAANOSCAPING 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. (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.1051 011 0F TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 NON.Aesideaual Appl■unoolhanint Dnision Section SIGNS SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon 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 review before the Hearings Officer. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7801 SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely jdentify 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 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7151 STEEP SLOPES When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.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. 1 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY[USA]BUFFER STANDARDS,R&0 96-44 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING EIGHT (8) FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than ten (10) feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetation; and Y WATER QUALITY FACILITIES may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of ten (10) feet with the approval of the Agency or City. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R&0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Design for SWM1 art OF TIGARD Pre-Appliatton Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 NON-Aevdenad AppLcuan/Plannni Dimon Section ` Z WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY OISI I..t:T 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. ➢ ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no riparian setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) standards adopted and administered by the City of Tigard. [Refer to Code Section 18.197.030] Riparian Setback Reductions 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 18.85.050.C. 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 18.85.050 regulating removal of native plant species; CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Appliation Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 MON-ladmtal AppltutanRlviag Drama Seam ➢ That there will be no infringement into the 100-year fl000t„dln; and ➢ The average slope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. [Refer to Code Section 18.797.100] m TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS A TREE PAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: • Retainage of less than 25% 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. [Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.CJ MITIGATION REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. • If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: • The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. • The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. [Refer to Code Section 18.190.060.EJ QTY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 NON-Anid,ntul Applirilan/Planng Orman Section NARRATIVE The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.3901 CODE CHAPTERS 18.330 frdiaonal use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) - 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) - 18.340(Directors Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) 18.350(Planned Development)✓� 18.105(Acass/Egtess/Gm,laoan) 18.780(Signs) 18.360 bite Development Review) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) 18.185(Temporary use Permits) 18.370(Variances/Adjustment) _ 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790 0 Remov ree � 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendment) 18.720(Design Conpatibikty Standards) 18.795(Yswal Clearance Areas) 18.385(Miscellaneous Pettit) 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) 18.197(Water Resources(WR)Overlay District) 18.390(Derision Making Procedures/Impact Study) 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) ( 18.198(Wireless Corrmunintian FariGties) 18.410(list line Adjustments) 18.140(Historic overlay) 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) 18.420(land Partitions) 1 8.742(Home Occupation Permits) 18.430 vns om) 18.745(landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.520(Cormtercial Zoning Districts) 18.155 (nixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) 18.530(Industrial Ioning Districts) 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) VIMPACT STUDY 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. • [Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050] '?NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING 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. [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout] SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicants are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyors Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. (County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-88841 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page T of 9 NONlesideatiil Apphution/Plannint Decision Section 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). RECYCLING Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7551 ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: y(�-rr 2 rL /L�,� !P^ /4% c t4f ``4,--“$ zc // /c- 5"Y- //c- , L l rt,c_s,_ .(rte ���C . ”7 s 27/ i Ct ( c� �7' 2:s �� .S !• 4 t�� L.r ley:11 1. `75 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. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 MON Aadtaciil A bution/%annnt Dnwon Section The Planning Division and Engineering Department will penorm a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all lard .use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard �� 4 � (.7)(/ c e . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is avaiRdble 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. 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: • tf_ . CITY OF TI6ARD LANNING IYISION - SAAFf PEON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: (503) 639-4111 FAX (503) 684-1297 E-MAIL (staffs firscsame)@ d.tigard.or.us H:lpatty\masters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc (Engineering section:preapp.eng) Updated: 28-Feb-2000 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 MOM#esideatul Appliatioa/Flannnt Orwell Semon p 2ea Oop- °x —rues. Nau. "1 :oa.M • CITY OF TIGARD A LAND USE APPLICATIONS CITY pF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE CHECKLIST Community(Development PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCES MUST BE SCHEDULED IN P OR E COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER FROM 1. All of the items identified within this check mulm of one (1) week prior tol officially received by the Planning Division a minimum a pre-application conference date/time to allow Staff ample time to prepare for the meeting. A pre-application conference can usually be scheduled within 1-2 weeks of the Planning Division's receipt of the request for either Tuesday or Thursday mornings. Pre-application conferences are one (1) hour long and are typically held between the hours of 9:00-11:00 AM. 2. The application process for requesting a pre-application conference is initiated by the applicant in the form of a lette_=Plan (submit 2 copies of each), containing the following pertinent information: Name, address and telephone number of the applicant and agent if applicable. 4/ brief description have Staff research h pr or to the meeting.questions/issues that you would like to • Site plan showing the proposed lots and/or building layouts, drawn to scale. Show the location of the subject property in relation to the nearest streets; and the locations of driveways on the subject property and across the street (this is beneficial in providing a more accurate assessment of possible issues concerning development). 4' The proposed uses. 4 Tax maps and lot numbers for all subject properties. +l Current owners of the subject property, if other than the applicant. ♦ ,1 Topographic information (include contour lines if possible). * If the pre-application conference is for a MONOPOLE project, the applicant must attach a copy of the letter and proof in the form of an affidavit of mailing, tat the collocation Protocol was completed (see Section 18.798.080). +V $240 pre-application conference fee. IF MORE THAN 4 PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO THE C CITY IN ADVANCEISO CONFERENCE IN YOUR GROUP, PLEASE INFORM THE THAT ALTERNATE ROOM ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE MADE. i:\curpin\rnasters1revised1Pre-app Chccklist.doc Revised:11-May-2O -mmisrm SPENCER VAIL ° PLANNING CONSULTANT October 27, 2000 City of Tigard Planning Dept. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 re: Pre-application conference On behalf of my client, AT&T Wireless Services, I hereby request a pre-application conference to discuss procedures necessary to initiate a land use review application that would allow for a Wireless Communications Facility to be located at 10955 SW 69th. This property is legally described as Tax Lot 6300 on Map 1S 1W 36AD. It is owned by Portland General Electric Company. The proposed cell site is adjacent to the PGE's West Portland substation. The proposed facility would be comprised of a 120'tall monopole,with up to 12 directional antennas affixed to a triangular platform, 4 antennas per face. At the base of the monopole would be a 12'by 28'by 10'tall electronics equipment shelter. The specifics of the proposal are noted on the attached site plans-4 pages. Attached is a copy of the required collocation protocol letter. Within the 10 day response period I received a written response from Verizon Wireless and Qwest(attached). I also received a telephone response from Laura Craig of VoiceStream indicating that they had no facility within a 500 foot radius of the proposed site. No other responses were received. I would like the pre-application conference to cover such issues as the procedure required, whether or not a neighborhood meeting is required and estimated time line for processing the application. A check in the amount of$240,the required pre-application conference filing fee, is attached. Very truly s urs 04, AC- -ncer H. Vail 4505 N.E. 24TH AVENUE • PORTLAND, OREGON 97211 • 503/281-8245 • FAX 503/284-5506 •••sirl SPENCER VAIL ° PLANNING CONSULTANT _ October 16, 2000 Nextel Communications Qwest Wireless Attn: Manon Burke Attn: Heather Kesten 8405-B Nimbus Avenue 5950 NE 122nd Beaverton, OR 97008 Portland, OR 97230 VoiceStream PCS Sprint PCS Andrew Nenninger, Real Estate Mgr. Attn: Bally Mal 1500 NE Irving, Suite 530 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97232 Pleasanton, CA 93588 Verizon Wireless Attn: Lori Lagerstedt 5430 NE 122nd Avenue Portland, OR 97230 Pursuant to the requirements of 18.798.080 AT&T Wireless Services is hereby providing you with notice of our intent to meet with representatives of the City of Tigard in a pre-application conference to discuss the location of a new free-standing wireless communications facility that would be located at 10955 SW 69`x, Tigard, OR. In general, we plan to construct a monopole of 120 feet in height for the purpose of providing cellular service. Please inform us whether your company has any existing or pending wireless facilities located within 500' of the proposed facility that may be available for possible collocation opportunities. Please provide us with this information within 10 business days after the date of this letter. Your cooperation is appreciated Very truly yours Spencer H. Vail see map for reference (on back of letter) 4505 N.E. 24TH AVENUE • PORTLAND, OREGON 97211 • 503/281-8245 • FAX 503/284-5506 R F dr) i Q1 14! 41 Ponana M sr pa ,f_j.--7-- ? ,.s+ _e a f - SITE • �. . 77" .. LOSO Ir.V45 ' j p Ci .. S+111! S< l3D � � p{ .. i l I Sr.....1. SPENCER VAIL O PLANNING CONSULTANT October 16, 2000 Nextel Communications Qwest Wireless Attn: Manon Burke Attn: Heather Kesten 8405-B Nimbus Avenue 5950 NE 122nd Beaverton, OR 97008 Portland, OR 97230 VoiceStream PCS Sprint PCS Andrew Nenninger, Real Estate Mgr. Attn: Bally Mal 1500 NE Irving, Suite 530 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97232 Pleasanton, CA 93588 I Verizon Wireless v gy p © �Qx12 W i re(SS S(�S i n \Attn: Lori Lagerstedt V 5430 NE 122nd Avenue D0 'ortland, OR 97230 OFAU N • Pursuant to the requirements of 18.798.080 AT&T Wireless Services is hereby providing you with notice of our intent to meet with representatives of the City of Tigard in a pre-application conference to discuss the location of a new free-standing wireless communications facility that would be located at 10955 SW 69th, Tigp, OR. In general,we plan to construct a monopole of 120 feet in height for the purpose of providing cellular service. please inform us whether your company has any existing or pending wireless facilities located , within 500' of the proposed facility that may be available for possible collocation opportunities. Please provide us with this information within 10 business days after the date of this letter. Your cooperation is appreciated Very t y yours Vi• erH. V.11 see map for reference (on back of letter) 4505 N.E. 24TH AVENUE • PORTLAND, OREGON 97211 • 503/281-8245 • FAX 503/284-5506 ,A �� °k e �9s 6 $ &:6 .4.,'‘i i;1'..'4,''.' < 114 i / * n sit` Y '¢fi tit 'CY„t.�. IA Yom`4 ----ii 4 �.;. '✓r -i Cli 61EA. • \ Zi � Z \,,,i � Bs Lasser Rd 4 b ti L. •e>/Y199 i.••.t ._._._-.._W!N.VZtL7PF!]!ti.__.._.. o` ti, 10' msit) "ot.7 oAk s1^�A Br e9tn Awe � !1% } It sNromeye j 6 6r 71►1 Ava Oat 26 00 12: 27p US 1st Wireless 5r 254-7496 p. 1 ()west Wireless, L.L.C. 5950 NE 122nd . Portland,OR 97230 October 26,2000 Qwest. VIA FACSIMILE(503/284-5506) Mr. Spencer H. Vail Planning Consultant 4505 NE 24th Ave. Portland, OR 97211 RE: AT&T Wireless Services Proposed Facility Located at 10955 SW 69th Ave., Tigard,OR Dear Mr.Vail: Pursuant to your letter of October 16,2000, Qwest Wireless does not have a wireless facility within 500' of the referenced address. Qwest's surrounding facilities that may or may not be available for collocation are located at: 1. 6900 SW Sandburg,Tigard(POR 074); and 2. 8777 Burnham, Tigard(POR 075). If you need more information,please call me at 503/422-8342. Sincerely, QWEST WIRELESS,L.L.C. Brenda Slavin Property Specialist Wireless Authorized Consultant USA }.. s.?::' YZrff4/ CITY of TIGARD ......"...7 ,; y :, ;: X22':-: ::;>:•: ' '' {.� � -; :%•;r fi ,f .,;.:. • • ) :. ::.:'rYf.iY 'r.•;,....,::::' f }fi'ft 5' i..f.��.�.... f ` / � fk pq1 .. :.. ,. ::j, ::::::Yr'•i::Ff: ( /' �.::. :{•:v-'i;i:':$:j1::::i:r:r^ir..v :i: "4x ;k ..n;: ;,yt;:{: vF,..},... .v ...}r.:�':;:+:i:r :: SY.:. 12 :C •i.{•i):•::•�:{)::yy.CJ r,•S GEOGRAPHIC INFO MA1ION SYSTEM J ::.i '•Q.. t.:::• ::nrflf'::v.v:- nv�r fE::: - :''f-:•. .. :j•t�4'} SQL! • Y R ;(L F f app[ �y s: .. ,.�}.. { " f<. v �'"pal � �' `�4ff'Fl/ .l:i'.F'`•F• , f ::::. v.: ]�i�� .'t'fF/ (�c'4 F � f �,�J4:/•• ,. . „.k., :`{:.:. ..... .... .,......::::::::::.:k4:::50:01.:: ''-'7.':::::::::::::._.�:.:: ..: ::::.: -,,,•. ...::.:... } VICINITY MAP t:: .. x. ..:. •f ...:. ::.,,. ..... : -w•.:, ...,..� ":t. ii 3r tf26 ttv :ii; :... n : .:•. ... ..Y....{.: ::... -v:::.}5:...:. .. ..�5(- ,. ... {:Lp..:::•:::::.v..:,:;:.. /. ..f,++ ;11.1 i:.ri"f .r ...... 4. .. .. .. .. .... . :: :... .. .....)..,-. . ....... ..........•::.... .-.r :l•v . :..�.:i :.:::3:i'i :^1:241;n... of :::: .•,,;,+.,;�•':.;:.;{,1i,5:i• ,{.. :. : -n, .......... .: : :: .r..::+,x•}:•rY :-r } :. s.: :'.�/+r:'!�{r��'4 /.fn ::.::•f•1�6:'y.. i::-ss)YfG.:;:�:?s: �., `'¢�}. ,v ,J.,. -. 55 {.:.<•:•::::.:. r, :::>::�::);:i: !: :Jr n..? ri r ` .••<?d:i::)..•:.• .:._. � � .... ... �:Jn ..:is .. . :::"::�:. ; -::+?� :.:+:;:..::•: :1'fF• -w: .., .r.•kf:..rx.'.; �:r•. r. . . : ..,,.. t '..rfJ) .: .,: -::::. :::.�•••:>'"'' :fj�}•/: {{ut: -.{Sio::::::�:: ♦ k.�. 'f,'.';�i a,�� �J•:5:, .• .a•.� .... ...:::nr �N. �:� •�:-::..":, :�::>':?:;+i{{�.:. :..fit: •f ,♦�,.,,',,,:y//.): r•k'•/r J??.. r . .. :•: y . . ._. v.,.. ::::::.. ..::" ... 3 .;:of{;;„ `�-s�.-:-.-:: .^:`•` iff//% {.,:: ....n...�.,{.. .....: .... :.}.. ). .: ..at •• ..:. ��:.:.:�.. ... ..:r:: :... : •:••b`. �r':<s>`-::::::::::-r--r'♦�.k.•♦-:..�::f/:,:�Yf/J-,`",.:{c;':....-:. :.1...:...... l'✓.•f' ..r...?F1.... . ..... ............. .. . ..... ..................... ........ . ......... .. .... ... ........................,.:.... •i:•iil{r•Y'SSii:th:: "-:ems.-.'.. .. .... . .:... ......... ........... ................ ..... ........... ::... .. ...................... ..+.��w:f.•):i:_-:is ...3 :..1,. ,?:. . .. r. .........v ..v...v. .. }.. ................... \:.v:�-::-::�::-::�:�))Y)}iii:' :;.'.”:�::�'::Si::�:::{.:::.)::: : : v::::.-:� :�..r-::'./.. J.:: •:'' sr- ,{s.,-::::::..::::::..::.::: ;'{';�/♦'{. Monopole Tower f}:.. .... +��", ... . :.•.b .................. ::.):�>};:oa;3;�)r:;•i:4sYis:•i:4:4> )z .:. .:: :..,: . ,jF::... .... ,..• .:::,,.>F.. �} _: r ... ... ............ .. :::: : : ::•nJ?•::•:::::.::• � !-::::::::::::�:::::::::::�:..:�::..::............ ...::.:::. rte.; ... n...... to ....:,:. _..? .. ...::::.,•:::•-::.,-::< - .. .. ... : ..... ....,..,..:::::::.::.: ................ .......::::::::rr:::: �'t:::;. 1 S 136AD 06300 .,. . .... .. r.r. �..... :... ..-:.�.,:. r::•::::::.5•.:...... _.:..... .v....FF...... ., ..,... F..:ft:•.:?::�::i:�i::fi:SS�Yi-::n{-: :,:r::r•::•::::::.�::•::».-...... .v.--1,r:,.:a..// ,..�:�""''.•:•::{-.,.:;.;).;:;. ..�...<i:. ...�?C {...:.::, jL>{ �.;;;..,::...:•:::.........: .t ...f. .:.i?:,.,,,::::,.. ..4$'f rr.�.u:.r•:;:::�::..� si. #i�:::.. :•:::,?•i:,-� ::.-: •...........r..,.::•.; .., ,:). •`.::�•r/nr:':•..;t•:�L.... l ..,,:r...H.••:::::....{:?.:.,,,._ i - .: ::::.: Y :. +:•:• :;:::::::::s» );>:" a.r::::) ):,.:. .......• ::. :0 �::. ff+t•;::;,;> 11001 SW 65TH AVE. N-.{::::..nY�:::::.;�h. : ......;..{4 , r nf:ttr....:.:........... ::.:Yif•`%`: �f�ffsrLYi.:f#t!4�+#.. �'.$ii-::. ..:J,{.`,:,. +•>:;:ra+r''+: � .::::::. ... : .:. -.:. - ..:::::..,.n..,.;r„ ...: ::::�� .::„r,YF..,:..:r:;;�s;�:�)}r� fr :�:%?PS:Yv,. ..9F1�:....... . �!/'s:•.... :» .......... .... .. ::... f r. .....: .:::: : ...... .......:.:::::.:::.:::.gib:rus:::-::.....:. `rr. `. .`?-:. /♦�.y• ' .:. •.... .' -. v•:r. ' '. ::'::...::.v/.v::. ....... :�:::� ::::::.i':.... .. S: f�f.•':•�v.•F.�. - �:'}:+ f•.:Y.•i:FX?i r�;;j:': w: :!y> :...,ivlf.};,. F ..y�,,�"jS :;;y{;r/.Tr"/.-.{.,,. J's ,. if. �, f�• Y',}. :::i>;:. -.r....- :.:{,.,. .. •'gyp :iy: •x3,`Y•-'.- ,;.as;•},)j .��'< .. •' 'f .... ,�...•"sff+l<fF:S:� . )?�:�:;';•:•; �:' :..'r`•''`S2'_.•<.`iY �,t+ . 4,lY.}r... >. �, i,.;; .e.� -.,•JKv'{ s,{'.: ... ., u"4 r a Po ::, ,.� }ijt.i:}'•; .y. ::.,::::!;.;....:::... :-„,4,",?`i�;: . vkt{ti:::::y:{ ' '�:46 r.'J .. :?• '.)..� � v ... 'v. :!/}iii%:Si}ii:?•i.:.. ..;:' ':1,; �..:•� :::.`i:::S:j::'fi:t :{{:n�:!:¢l- $}' -`:.}tt' �'.' :y„” ..;\ F ' f ���f�),-S ,�<` .:. Y Iy F �...;.q'q�p�(yyv:"::: ' �: Jt k1` � f Y .. , }� �w,l� rr / /FF 8 ' d • f,yjy Jur yy '. - wih, R, R! -.yts %. :'>i?' x°J', .'t'2+ l/f y i1: ' ;_w ,,,HHHfff--- � t `� ` b )'-J• w The tower will be located sF J at the PGE site }f'tax lot 1 S 136AD 06300, Y f K but will have a separate Y ! f n ter' address. X be j AT&T :: �w • ":).' F x 65 h A � ,� �A ;ai n Y . . ;. . 1100 SW .:......: , ;2;Rt;:At:�i :� Y Rk J '+h�"ts 2> ;.. k�� g � f `i•: w. 22Sy� «f rxks� k t t �ct,� A ' ?�� , 'ad 0 50 100 200 Feet y y 2 . \ 1=132 feet�`i `ti � c':. -'. :'+::ti:j:f::::$t^`C'4)y}'-.`:R.E f'C b+,,rof.�i r �� :0,11+*15° \\- ).,.. .Cv;:j;,v,.j. :4 , to��} `•:`.;;j�: `: �.' \, ; ;:,::::::;`. „Y.<;,, .,0<.::iQccc.}$:WY.a?bs r� 4+A T :- • �:, ..`J. ., ;..: tsi): "a. }y, � Cih'ofi��ard ate( ��}}�� ,��Q 4,.v:.::_"•'�.,ttA.\n� �,y�i � ,',4 :.•:�.v' •.'i:vi'jv;: .:.,�,'>,%.`�j,�.v,,::v;.),`�`�4. �.•.. :v+,,�`,,..,��,? `::::{b`A�:,�}.,r •„i.. ,•.dr .,. .y.�tiCi3,gwA7br ''s'4' ::iv'i��: '"i` Iniormetion on this ma is for nerall«etion ml eno 10 a ¢;}:oFC:::; `C:-. y4,.;,, x...„- , Sw::' ::::<,..:\ ...tbg;• ..h,\kt.::: °nb P Y� <'�s:?% • ' S':.'•'t' s'ik1 .;, "W'' ° '1 ?- ` yE ,\:v,�", } should be veritfeO with Ne Devepment Services Division-•� ^3 3 Y R ,_ `�' •`•i. x .Y $t` •Y• C i S4' Q ` ` a 13125 SW Hl Blvo y, -"S' ` ` i A , f• \ ,`< 1 f,¢ Tigaro.OR 7223 t:'' + ,�3,>^•�• ;> ::::: +:•� -i+•' `. . .\.,.'. 'r' t< }����j.� (5031639- 7 v -w. .)::. ^�?y' ..::'vvv.:n. ..'�#'.::” n--\' :.::` .\ ::\Y'n.:,::;`+:>}:'Y:' `M+A"+ ,.�'"^at`'' AIIpJAvww.a.hyafGor.us•itto 1,... i.. ..i: .:. .- ,.'., •l ...b:t£., :,,.: `0:.....:. ,t•- ti v,3�p .......+:vx....,.:.......>>.. ...'3:4.: '..:5:"i:......... .., ., .. .... .... 0 ' J3D CYi'.SC ���111 / • 9 ist L ' 4'1oo k50¢ 0 -vo _ � 507 1 PGE 10900 10955 65TH AVE. 10998 q0 , I0 , 1/jog Pku-i 4 TIWARD NE CELL SITE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: I 7AX LOT 6200 AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW CELL SITE. 589'51'05"E 175.00 THE SCOPE OF WORK SHALL INCLUDE THE PLACEMENT OF A NEW MONOPOLE WITH ANTENNAS AND A NEW PRE-FABRICATED EQUIPMENT SHELTER ON A POURED-IN-PLACE CONCRETE FOUNDATION. . 2 TAXLOT6300 _? h i 8 0 NEW AT&T WIRELESS 0 1 10 P �, 2 h 2 CELL SITE 1 6,I V: i ;Ft)) ef 1 bit (3-.. (.., .... '{ Sw Pombna StSw Pasa�en 3 b0 3 in Ili ' Sw ak.S`t ' i E I 2 -H S i.S to I St / & � ay / NEW MONOPOLE .. i / t 91 p „ e t a StiI r Pa I. ? lag-' = �.i _��p tsr'l % t _ 0 7` ` ±20' 6w N y f am J, V IFiv `Gap 510 I a %fry"'- \ :T s F ' I osezi. --w41;', L , ; ` SITE ,. ,i %- r Li., 3 7 / 1 -'. ":--<•,...-:- - A-4..---,. -' ej� F / ' L�9at way ;1` NEW LEASE AREAS FOR• FUTURE CARRIERS \ . , PGE Q SITE ACCESS ROAD ' �s WEST PORTLAND I bc - � SUBSTATION 1 Sw Atian a St 2' ::: , •. _ c• NORTH / • Q SEE SURVEY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NORTH ..... ., VICINITY VIAP ID SITE PLAN %/� NO SCALE SCALE: 1” = 60' CONTACTS _ _ 0 15 30 60 120 CO•at AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: BECHTEL (503) 252-0028 SHEET INDEX o^ AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES PROJECT MANAGER: JAMES KRAMER (503) 635-1300 �� Al. COVER SHEET A6. SHELTER FOUNDATION DETAILS ° AT&T WIRELESS EQUIPMENT ENGINEER: MICK LEINWEBER (503) 306-7592 A2. ENLARGED SITE PLAN A7. FOUNDATION & WAVEGUIDE DETAILS A. Y ARCHITECT: MNB ARCHITECTS: RICK HASAPIS (503) 232-2117 A3. EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A8. WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE DETAILS o ( ) A4. SHELTER FOUNDATION PLAN A9. GENERAL NOTES _-° ELECTRICAL ENGINEER: R & W ENGINEERING: GREG ROBERTSON (503) 292-6000 A5. SITE DETAILS L1. LANDSCAPE PLAN 0 a 0 W 1V1N13 Owner: Project: Sheet Title: NO. ISSUE DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN DESIGNED CHECKED APPROVED A ISSUED FOR E/ 0MME CNT 9 27 00 NBH RPH AT&T Wireless = ISSUED FOR 9 29S Al TIGAR D NE COVER SHEET 9 �O00o ARCH Cell Site TIGARD. OREGON KEYNOTES . ,-/�o� rte. '• .' ``... . NEW 120' MONOPOLE TOWER WITH ANTENNA PLATFORM ° • •'`` 29' Oy • NEW GRAVEL YARD 5-.p' ��� (.fgS£ qR © COMBINED LEASED AREA PROPERTY LINE. LEASE AREA: 50' X 75 0 -:•,;.'-•: • • •� ' . • .• SITE AREA = 3750 SQ. FT. * . � .. . � ; ... • ��.`. QNEW 7'-0" HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE W/ (3) STRAND BARBED N ' • • . /: • '` FUTURE:•LEASE :• - • • . '' ' WIRE. FENCED AREA 3504 S.F. Tr /.. :� AREA• �': :`���.. Z9' © SEE SHEET A4 PREFABRICATED SHELTER ..r.: :' :• ` - <4./ / •• 6 FUTURE LEASE Q /:•• , .. , / AREA •. �,` ..' .',•�- - `0"•6 NEW ANTENNA PLATFORM AT 120' WITH (3) PANEL ANTENNAS v af.. AND (3) FUTURE PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR. o / '. �•. �" jQ ' '' PLATFORM AZIMUTH: 15' 135' & 255' p NOTE: CONFIRM THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF ANTENNAS WITH ``) J'. / ,$ ' - THE BECHTEL SITE CONSTRUCTION COORDINATOR. ' 0 • •••h� / . ' ►:. • • FUTURE LEASE •/ .• NEW WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE o :••:':'.::„,..: •• `': / - , ' •. / .,: �- � • . : .AREA • � ./ . .• . •••• .40 • • • • • :. .. 8 NEW 5 -O x 5'-0" CONCRETE PAD / «r "trriz t°' o , / - ' 9 NEW 12'-0" WIDE ACCESS GATE o i / . �; � ;• : '�•` . ': .r. �. : • • /' t lff 1 10 NEW 12' WIDE GRAVEL ACCESS DRIVE © •`nt 0 FUTURE CARRIER LEASE AREA 1 % 14 ® TOWER LEASE AREA ----`'<_ ,'S • - •. :....:7,-;.-.-- FUTURE 'LEASE " *:::••••••': ./ ./ • • '•' •• :• ' • . . -I. ' AREA: . - • / • ® AT&T � WIRELESS LEASE AREA PROPERTY LINE. '� ''' '' LEASE AREA: 24' x 40' SITE AREA = 950SQ. FT. 40. 0" • / 14 NEW LANDSCAPING - SEE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHEET zL1 lam.` : -• / 0 2 ' „ "- ` / 0'0„ 9 NOTES: —� 1. SEE ELECTRICAL FOR LOCATION OF METER 10 04 ' 2. LOCATE EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO EXCAVATION 1' • 8 3. SEE GENERAL NOTES ON SHT. A9 AND AT&T WIRELESS SERVICE N STATEMENT OF WORK FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. NORTH SITE PLAN 0 5 0 CN 8 e 1 = 1 Q'-0" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Owner: ► Project: Sheet Title: I/o. NAM DOCONlfoll MU DAM DWOUm MO= APPNOVm 1\tINJB AT&T Wireless TIGARD NE SITE PLAN - 1600 SA 4t6 Avenue „I,A 2 Portland. Oregon 117801 Cell Site ?!0& 01110011 a - - - NOTES NEW AT&T (3) SECTOR ANTENNA PLATFORM: TOP OF POLE (3) PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR 1. TOWER DESIGN BY OTHERS. -. . (3) FUTURE PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR 2. TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN BY OTHERS. !! Iw! aM NOTE: CONFIRM THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF li 611 i1 3. ANTENNA DESIGN BY OTHERS. h Ilf; ANTENNAS WITH THE BECHTEL SITE CONSTRUCTION p il {I" COORDINATOR. ' Iiji ij!„ IIIS; I.Ej, fI I!sll I fi III I• II II 41 11/1; I I; II .VIII li T TOWER TO BE DESIGNED WITH COAX III!! {i ' I' 'Ili+ III EXIT PORTS FOR FUTURE CARRIERS ill' 1# !, l II}'j' i', I l NEW 120'-0" HIGH MONOPOLE 41011 I o f'jii o f N NEW AT&T EQUIPMENT SHELTER ij I ,I I' {I3� NEW AT&T CABLE BRIDGE lil iii I,, i "i NEW 7'-0" HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE Iii ' {,1 W/ (3) STRAND BARBED WIRE. !?, I I (,a( 1 ilii NEW 12'-0" ACCESS GATE 111 1111 '1ii � tirA _ ` o FINISH 1 1101 112 ,..4.: xId 11112 , i+l :�4I:�4 1;11;�t AI. 1/ 1, :l! 24.4141. 1!'I! �t 14 ,.1 P124 tg �d; tii.A..:�1 GRADE ,.. I►.. 1 CO �1"y'ysy.y. � "'<�t q. R�r1►y• 4► 1► an �I ygye i1► yr M•yty� y+yry�y� �.. �, y..y►yeyryrpr��. j �� �. .. �_1. � : i 1. t_:�.: _. i_ :�.j ,,.. co N o SOUTH ELEVATION o 4 16 32 EAST ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION `V No. ISM DESCRIPTION DA'I'S DRAWN DESIGNED =COD APPROVED IMINE3 Owner: Project: Sheet Title: A ISSUED FOR WAIN/COMMENT rT o[27 - N - RPM AT&T Wireless TIGARD NE ELEVATIONS 1 FOR 9/28 w 1800 SW 4th Avenue Z A 3 /�n� Portland. Oregon 07201 Cell Site o AR TIGARD. OREGON a TIGARD NE CELL SITE PROJECT DESCRIPTION; I TAX LOT 6200 AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW CELL SITE. S89'S1'05 E 175.00' THE SCOPE OF WORK SHALL INCLUDE THE PLACEMENT OF A NEW MONOPOLE WITH ANTENNAS AND A NEW PRE—FABRICATED EQUIPMENT SHELTER ON A POURED—IN—PLACE CONCRETE FOUNDATION. 2 N ) i TAXLOT6300 z — ? ° _ NEW AT&T WIRELESS 4. CELL SITE Iv L0: r Sw Po ena 8 . Pa m" f 3 0 II lf I el :en / NEW MONOPOLE pine Sty _ �I B1 Q8Ign _ � E+" V �S''0" ,/ -w il I g ,,,,r;:::,,i;:.--,.....c.T.:„'"-, 0 "//. ,./, O �5h I ' ff;'. i '" _„,,_ ko 4, 4.,,,,... „....,-;..4,.,,,....:„._ 1 ..4„.„, v--------) ' ti 7,---- --i---- : • . 1 ".:.:.„.....„.,_ 0,,,,,.;..0,-,,,,,.; . „.„.„--- ,-,..- • • • . . altkilititz,‘:,c17,,,. 1 � / �„.. \i‘.- i . sr b \°: Q# Nj' tes�ss' a4 ' e �, c h a NEW LEASE AREAS FOR CO Z r �� \°'N:: . :.: FUTURE CARRIERS �� � 1 • m € PGE Q SITE ACCESS ROAD p WEST PORTLAND ° . a IX to, mein a Si btir Haines St SUBSTATION ° l a R 1 1--- 1 1 .. .. ': ° 5 NORTH .' i / VICINITY MAP t NORTH NO SCALE SITE PLAN %� 45... CONTACTS CTS SCALE: 1" = 60' Y 1 f1 0 15 30 60 120 n;k..-r::: AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: BECHTEL (503) 252-0028 SHEET INDEX AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES PROJECT MANAGER: JAMES KRAMER (503) 635-1300 0— Al. COVER SHEET .. AT&T WIRELESS EQUIPMENT ENGINEER: MICK LEINWEBER (503) 306-7592 A2. ENLARGED SITE PLAN ARCHITECT: MNB ARCHITECTS: RICK HASAPIS (503) 232-2117 A3. EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS L1. LANDSCAPE PLAN ,g ELECTRICAL ENGINEER: R Sc W ENGINEERING: GREG ROBERTSON (503) 292-6000 _ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION I IVINB Owner: Project: Sheet Title: No. EWE E DESCRIPTION DAzs DRA NISM1�n CE!CUD Arrmvsc AT&T Wireless — TIGARD NE COVER SHEET A ISSUED FOR NI REVIEW/COMMENT � � oo NCI ►�►+ I ISSUED FOR ZONING 9/28/00 z A 1 1800 SW 4th Avenue Cell Site A nu1 TL" 7 Portland, Oregon 87201 TIGARD, OREGON KEYNOTES . NEW 120' MONOPOLE TOWER WITH ANTENNA PLATFORM ,o ` - 29' i. r-, r� © NEW GRAVEL YARD /.• -0" Q- l 'SSE COMBINED LEASED AREA PROPERTY LINE. LEASE AREA: 50' X 75 0 / •• �.� 'ter �^ 15' /16t4© SITE AREA = 3750 SQ. FT. 1 4 NEW 7'-0" HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE W/ (3) STRAND BARBED / I :.': FUTURE LEASE • .••. , , ---..... WIRE. FENCED AREA 3504 S.F. Q cv NEW 11'-6" X 28'-0" PREFABRICATED EQUIPMENT SHELTER / / . SEE SHEET A4 FOR FOUNDATION PLAN. / 6 FUTURE LEASE ,• �Q /. / : AREA ` 1 "0" 6 NEW ANTENNA PLATFORM AT 120' WITH (3) PANEL ANTENNAS ry /. r;•~ ' ��� o / AND (3) FUTURE PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR. �4: ; ` PLATFORM AZIMUTH: 15', 135' & 255' p NOTE: CONFIRM THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF ANTENNAS WITH io / THE BECHTEL SITE CONSTRUCTION COORDINATOR. • I.. `:• is•_• . ' :•FU.TURE LEAS / • NEW WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE o / 1 ri, i �. / 8 AREA / 8 NEW 5'-0" x 5'-O" CONCRETE PAD ..ii to/ / . .. a�P , •�� \ , / / ,i • • ®;V . . . '' / 9 NEW 12'-0" WIDE ACCESS GATE ./ '-(-• ;.),* , 10 NEW 12' WIDE GRAVEL ACCESS DRIVE 7. © \`\ ; h : ::,' , ••! 0 FUTURE CARRIER LEASE AREA 1 .b 14 TOWER LEASE AREA ```,;,�` , C :_ ••_o FUTURE LEASE•` � o AREA .// . ® LEASE AREA:S24' O Ex S x SITE TEPAREAR= 950SQ. FT. : ..;ti :. ' , •:. . .. :,..: ..,.• 14 NEW LANDSCAPING - SEE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHEET zL1 �� �.'. '' . . "; / 4 • >----'-'•o" '9 NOTES: 1. SEE ELECTRICAL FOR LOCATION OF METER 10 /2-0" ." 2. LOCATE EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO EXCAVATION .4 7' 00 3. SEE GENERAL NOTES ON SHT, A9 AND AT&T WIRELESS SERVICE N STATEMENT OF WORK FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. NORTH� SITE PLAN w4__p_______30 N �� 1" = 10'-0" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N NO. 158111 0x DAfl Mill �em a Aim Owner: Project: Sheet Title: 0 IVINB AT&T Wireless E TIGARD NE SITE PLAN c:. ARCHrTECTS 1 zA2 600 SW 4th Avenue Portland, Oregon 07201 Cell Site TIGARD. 088011 , NOTES NEW AT&T (3) SECTOR ANTENNA PLATFORM: 1. TOWER DESIGN BY OTHERS. TOP OF POLE (3) PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR (3) FUTURE PANEL ANTENNAS PER SECTOR N • 2. TOWER FOUNDATION DESIGN BY OTHERS. ei IIi ail NOTE: CONFIRM THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF 1� :NI l • 3. ANTENNA DESIGN BY OTHERS. ANTENNAS WITH THE BECHTEL SITE CONSTRUCTION COORDINATOR. I I TOWER TO BE DESIGNED WITH COAX EXIT PORTS FOR FUTURE CARRIERS NEW 12O'—O" HIGH MONOPOLE - 0 `(N NEW AT&T EQUIPMENT SHELTER IIIII NEW AT&T CABLE BRIDGE i I NEW 7'—C" HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE # W/ (3) STRAND BARBED WIRE. \ '! ill I l ,, III NEW 12'-0" ACCESS GATE II i kirrAfA • A ' o'N IA 'VfOli• . At 4,10) ...N/.4 i ,•I O ■■ I I II �� i o FINISH :1� `/1'11{ ►I 1 cif 1, � � .1 1,.;I T'1'��11 (.lt :� 1�;1�1�11 rGRADE � :y ! 4,:g in! A , It �.I►. .K 1/ 11 .1o4 11 Ora!tit 11 a1\111.1\1�1111\1 t�! -...c., SOUTH ELEVATION 0 4 8 16 32 EAST ELEVATION 0 1/16" = 1'-O" 1/16" = 1'-0" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CN Owner: Project: Sheet Title: NO. ISSUE DESCRIP17ox DATE DRAWN DE31GNED CHEC aD APPROVED MNB AT&T Wireless — TIGARD NE ELEVATIONS A ISSUED FOR REVIEW/COMYEN? 9j27 NCI REM 1 ISSUED FOR ZONING 8/2d 0O 1600 nd 4tr Avenue Cell Site zA3 O ARCPortland. Oregon 97201 1. HITECTS TlGARD, OREGON �= %S 1 ���r,. _ = WIRE TIE `� i ` r',�� {!�`I* -\1 .w = TURNBUCKLE / \� ��' .� N. / RUBBER HOSE i / �;'.;�fq�1F> WRAPPING '4 Vi Vie,1• t1 � �I \X1 1 r 1 rt �nr�r� -2" X 2" HARDWOOD STAKE ,� / \: ,b/�y9. OR APPROVED EQUAL t"7 ra ••�1, • ,� / , : MULCH ft '■� BERM in 1� / 1� _4%."�� Off, •����-„iollp .cam . .. .. AV/ lee .�;' 30"— 6" :•.•s.• -EMOVE BURLAP FROM - ► t r` MIN. •oo•••••°•'•••••••••• r TOP 1/3 OF BALL .. t ►. 1 (r L MIN. .,,. ,.... �`• 4 ` /e. 0.0.1i' A'41,4 `#!' r / TWICE TREE DIAMETER r NEW TREES AND 4 r` / BUFFER AS REQUIRED ` / l 2" CAL, ) 1 \ . , 11 °(� DECIDUOUS TREE �'=j PLANTING DETAIL 3,\ Q CO 'Nps Li NOT TO SCALE NORTH o LANDSCAPE PLAN T LANDSCAPE LEGEND: 1/16"=1'-0" � _ NEW TREES: NORWAY MAPLE (Acer platanoides) h_ SEE DETAIL 2 2" CALIPER .� FOR STAKING (8) TREES LANDSCAPE NOTES' NEW LANDSCAPE BUFFER: ARBORVITAE (Thuja occidentalis 'Smargold') ` (SEE NOTE 2) (Emerald Green) 1 GAL. @ 3'-0" O.C. 1. LANDSCAPING IS INTENDED TO FULFILL WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDSCAPE (59) SHRUBS o "SCREENING & BUFFERING" REQUIREMENTS — o o NEW GROUNDCOVER: 3" MIN. BARK MULCH ON BARE SOIL 2. ALL NEW LANDSCAPING IS DROUGHT RESISTANT AND THEREFORE REQUIRES NO IRRIGATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 L 1VINB Owner: Project: Sheet Title: NO. ISSUE DESCRIPTION DATE DRAWN DESIGNED c�c>� APPROVED AT&T �Pi re 1 e s s �" 1 ISSUED FOR ZONING 9/2B/(f6' NBH PEM TIGARD NE LANDSCAPE 1600 SW Atli Avenue Cell Site PLAN - Z L ARCHITECTS Portland, Oregon 97201 0 TIGARD, OREGON