Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
SDR2000-00012
SDR2000 - 00012 T . O . C . MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION AND PARKING LOT EXPANSION NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00012 LINE ADJUSTMENT (MIS) 2000-00009 CITY OFTIGARD T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION Community Shaping A Better Development AND PARKING LOT EXPANSION Community 120 DAYS = 10/19/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SVCS. OFFICE ADDTN. & PKNG. LOT EXPANSION CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2000-00012 Lot Line Adjustment (MIS) MIS2000-00009 PROPOSAL: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 11,000 square foot addition (8,200 sq. ft. of office, 2,740 sq. ft. courtyard) to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 6,373 square feet to be used as additional parking. APPLICANT/ TOC Management Services APPLICANT'S Meadowlark Partners, LLC OWNER 6825 SW Sandburg Street REP.: 1750 SW Skyline, Suite #224 PARCEL 1: Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97221 OWNER Charles V. Hoff& William P. French PARCEL 2: 6755 SW Sandburg Street Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: PARCEL 1: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00400. PARCEL 2: (No site address); WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00500. ZONE: C-P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.410, CRITERIA: 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V of this decision. SDR 2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 1 OF 19 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE/BUILDING PERMITS: Submit evidence of complying with the following conditions to the Planning Division. Staff contact: Mathew Scheidegger. 1. Submit a plan prior to recording the lot line adjustment, showing the adjacent lot will not be in violation of minimum landscape requirements according to chapter 18.520 of the Tigard Development Code. 2. Submit a plan showing the east parking area screened according to Section 18.745.050.E, and a landscaped island with one tree for every seven new parking spaces. 3. Submit a plan showing the interior parking stalls on the east-side of the site to have wheel stops that are at least four inches high and located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. This condition is subject to only parking stalls that do not abut a sidewalk 8 feet or greater in width. 4. Submit a plan showing the newly proposed parking stalls meet minimum standards for both standard and compact spaces or indicate and show a 3-foot overhang. If a 3-foot overhang is used to meet minimum standards, the applicant will be required to provide evidence that the site meets the required 15% percent landscape requirement. 5. Construct directional signs that shall be used to locate the bicycle parking area. 6. Submit a plan showing street trees along the frontage of SW Sandburg Street that meet the minimum standards of Section 18.745.040.C. 7. Submit a tree plan prepared by a Certified Arborist that addresses tree planting, removal and protection according to Section 18.790.030. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 8. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the sidewalk, storm drainage connection, water connection and any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in adcition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 9. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement (if one is required) and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 10. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Sandburg Street as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements, and of a species that is approved by the City; and C. driveway apron. S D R 2000-00012/M I S 2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 2 OF 19 11. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant's engineer shall submit final design calculations for the onsite detention facility. 12. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have coordinated with Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) for the proposed additional water service into the site. 13. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facilit y as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. NOTE: Unless the applicant can show that the proposed CDS Technologies unit meets the phosphorus removal requirements of the USA design and construction standards, then they shall provide an alternate facility type. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 14. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 15. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: Staff conducted a search of City records for the address (6825 SW Sandburg Street). Based on this search, Staff found that the site was part of the Salem Freeway Subdivision, which was approved in 1972 under Washington County. Therefore, the City of Tigard does not have any record of land-use applications for the subject parcel. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on the north side of SW Sandburg Street. The site is bordered on the north and west side by property zoned Professional Commercial (C-P). The property to the west is zoned Industrial Park (l-P). The properties to the south are separated by SW Sandburg Street. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site currently has an existing structure. The proposal will add an 11 ,000 square foot addition. The property is located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street; WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00400. The applicant has submitted a service provider letter from USA indicating there are no sensitive land areas on the site. S DR2000-00012/MI S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 3 OF 19 SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicable Development Standards 18.410 Lot Line Adjustment) 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 (Off-Street parking and loading requirements) 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) B. Specific DR Approval Criteria 18.360 C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 D. Impact Study 18.390 SECTION V. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS A. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Lot Line Adjustments (18.420): Approval criteria. Section 18.410.040: The Director shall approve or deny a request for a lot line adjustment in writing based on findings that the following criteria are satisfied: An additional parcel is not created by the lot line adjustment, and the existing parcel reduced in size by the adjustments is not reduced below the minimum lot size established by the zoning district; No new lots will be created as part of this adjustment; two (2) lots exist and two (2) lots will remain after the proposed adjustment. The minimum lot size for the C-P zone is 6,000 square feet. The smaller of the two lots is 50,014 square feet. Therefore, this criterion has been met. By reducing the lot size, the lot or structures on the lot will not be in violation of the site development or zoning district regulations for that district; Both lots are in the same zoning district. Therefore, there is no minimum setback for either parcel. However, Staff cannot determine whether or not the smaller of the lots will be in compliance with the minimum landscape requirements. Therefore, the applicant will need to submit a plan showing the adjacent lot will not be in violation of minimum landscape requirements according to chapter 18.520 of the Tigard Development Code. The resulting parcels are in conformity with the dimensional standards of the zoning district, including: • The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable zoning district; • The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning district. In the case of a flag lot, the access way may not be included in the lot area calculation; • Each lot created through the partition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least 15 feet or have a legally recorded minimum 15-foot wide access easement; and • Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district. The width of the smaller lot at its shortest point is 137.79 feet wide. No flag lot will result from this application. Each lot has frontage on SW Sandburg Street and each lot has at least one access that is at least 15 feet wide. Both lots are zoned C-P, according to Table 18.520.2, no setbacks apply. S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 4 OF 19 With Regard to Flag Lots: • When the partitioned lot is a flag lot, the developer may determine the location of the front yard, provided that no side yard is less than 10 feet. Structures shall generally be located so as to maximize separation from existing structures. • A screen shall be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an accessway is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accordance with Sections 18.745.040. Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed development. Neither lot will be a flag lot; therefore, this standard does not apply. The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway would have detrimental effect on fire-fighting capabilities. No change to the existing access is proposed as part of this Lot Line Adjustment. Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement which will ensure access and maintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partition map. No common drive is proposed with this application. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Any accessway shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress, and Circulation. Both lots have existing access to SW Sandburg Street. Therefore, this standard has been met. Exemptions From Dedications: A lot line adjustment is not considered a development action for purposes of determining whether floodplain, greenway, Floodplain, greenway or right-of-way dedication is not an issue with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Variances to Development Standards: An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in accordance with Chapter 18.370, Variances and Adjustments. The applicant has not requested a variance or an adjustment with this application. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the Lot Line Adjustment criteria 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 plan submitted by the applicant indicates that a 5-foot walkway is provided from the south entrance to SW Sandburg Street. 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 SDR2000-00012/M1S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 5 OF 19 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. Walkways will not cross the access drive or parking lot, therefore, this criterion 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 t required pathways. The applicant's site plan shows all walkways to be concrete. Therefore, this standard has been met. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 provides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with 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 development has 2 points of access into the parking lot that provides 24 feet of pavement, one of which is within 50 feet of the primary entrance. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Access, Egress and Circulation standards have been met. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street, private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the adoption of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040.C. Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The applicant has not provided street trees on the landscape plan. According to the site plan, the site has 270 feet of frontage onto SW Sandburg Street. Therefore, the applicant will be required to submit a plan showing street trees along the frontage of SW Sandburg Street that meet the minimum standards of Section 18.745.040.C. 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. The proposed construction is an addition to an existing use (office), which is allowed outright in the C-P zone. This parcel abuts C-P zoned land to the north, south and east sides of the property; and I-P zoned land to the west side. According to the buffer matrix, no buffer is required where two properties of the same zoning designation abut one another. This application is for the additional square footage of the building, and the proposed parking located on the west side only. Therefore, no buffering will be required. 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 S D R2000-00012/M I S 2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 6 OF 19 • • between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. lees shall be planted in i landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The applicant is proposing to add 19 additional parking stalls on the east side of the property. Therefore, the applicant will be required to provide 1 tree, for each seven parking spaces, planted in a landscaped islands. Currently the additional parking is shown to be screened from the adjoining property by 52, 18-24 inch Azalea Treasure. The standard requires a balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery. Staff finds the proposed screening does not meet the intent of this standard. The north and west sides of the property are found to have an equal balance of low lying and vertical shrubbery. Therefore, the applicant must submit a plan showing the east parking area screened according to Section 18.745.050.E and a landscaped island with one tree for every seven parking spaces. 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; The site plan shows a pre-existing service facility that is fully enclosed. Therefore, this standard has already 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. The site's refuse container is placed on the east side of the property. Plans show the refuse container to be fully screened with a wood fence. Therefore, this criterion has been met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening 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 the east parking area screened according to Section 18.745.050.E, and a landscaped island with one tree for every seven parking spaces. Submit a plan showing street trees along the frontage of SW Sandburg Street that meet the minimum standards of Section 18.745.040.C. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.7551: Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The solid waste and recyclable storage is pre-existing, no new facility is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 7 OF 19 Location Standards: To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The solid waste and recyclable storage is pre-existing, no new facility is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Design Standards: The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. The solid waste and recyclable storage is pre-existing, no new facility is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage standards have been met. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): 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 only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The plans show a total of 76 parking stalls. Four of the parking stalls are designated Van/Carpool spaces. The spaces are located on the north side of the 1Duilding and are 16 feet from the north entrance. Therefore, this criterion has been met. Disabled-Accessible Parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The applicant is proposing a total of 19 new parking stalls. Therefore, one van accessible (9 feet wide with an 8-foot aisle) ADA handicap space is required. The applicant's plans show the entire site to have 76 parking stalls, thus requiring (4) ADA accessible spaces that are 9 feet wide and have 8-foot aisles. The site contains (4) ADA accessible parking spaces. Therefore, this standard is satisfied. SDR2000-00012/M1 S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 8 OF 19 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. Loading/Unloading Driveways: A driveway designed for continuous forward flow of passenger vehicles for the purpose of loading and unloading passengers shall be located on the site of any school or other meeting place which is designed to accommodate more than 25 people at one time. This application does not include a school or a meeting facility. Therefore, this standard does not apply. On-Site Vehicle Stacking For Drive-In Use: All uses providing drive-in services as defined by this title shall provide on the same site a stacking lane for inbound vehicles as noted in Table 18.765.1 of the Development Code. No drive-in service is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Curb Cuts: Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030.N. Curb cuts will be discussed later in this decision. Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. Pedestrian access has been discussed previously in this decision. Parking Lot Striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The lans submitted show the parking spaces will be clearly marked. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. S D R2 000-000 1 2/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 9 OF 19 The applicant's site plan indicates that the proposed parking stalls that abut landscaped areas on the east side of the site will be separated with an extruded concrete curb. Interior parking stalls on the east side will be required to have wheel stops where the adjacent sidewalk is under 10 feet in width. All other parking stalls are pre-existing and will not be subject to this review. Therefore, the applicant will be conditioned to submit a plan showing the interior parking stalls on the east-side of the site to have wheel stops that are at least four inches high and located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. This condition is subject to parking stalls that do not abut a sidewalk 8 feet or greater in width. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The site plan does not show parking stalls to meet minimum standards. Therefore, the applicant will need to submit a plan showing the newly proposed stalls meet minimum standards for both standard and compact spaces or indicate and show a 3-foot overhang. If a 3-foot overhang is used to meet minimum standards, the applicant will be required to provide evidence that the site meets the required 15% percent landscape requirement. Bicycle Parking Location and Access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. The applicant has proposed a 6-space bicycle rack on the north side of the building based off of the current standard of 0.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The bicycle rack is not visible from SW Sandburg Street. The applicant will be conditioned to construct directional signs that shall be used to locate the parking area. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has provided a detail of the bike rack to be used. Therefore, the standard is met. 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. SDR2000-00012/MIS2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 10 OF 19 • Table 18.765.2 states that for Professional Commercial, 0.5 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed addition is approximately 11,000 square feet. Therefore, 4 bicycle parking stalls are required. The applicant has shown a 6- space bicycle rack on the site plan. This criterion has been met. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. Table 18.765.2 states that the minimum parking for Office Use is 2.7 spaces per 1000 square feet. The applicant is proposing an addition of 8,200 square feet of office space. Therefore, 22 parking spaces are required for the new square footage. The pre-existing square footage is 12,400 square feet. The total amount of parking required for this site is 56 spaces. The applicant has proposed additional 19 spaces, giving the project a total of 76 parking stalls. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. 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. The proposed T.O.C. Office building does not receive or distribute material or merchandise. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have not been fully met. However, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be fully met. CONDITIONS: Submit a plan showing the interior parking stalls on the east-side of the site to have wheel stops that are at least four inches high and located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. This condition is subject only to parking stalls that do not abut a sidewalk greater than 10 feet in width. Submit a plan showing the newly proposed stalls meet minimum standards for both standard and compact spaces or indicate and show a 3-foot overhang. If a 3-foot overhang is used to meet minimum standards, the applicant will be required to provide evidence that the site meets the required 15% percent landscape requirement. Construct directional signs that shall be used to locate the bicycle parking area. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-P Zoning District. No signs have been formally proposed. Signs are reviewed through a separate permit process administered by the Development Services Technicians. FINDING: Because signs will be reviewed and approved as part of a separate permit process, this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal (18.790): Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 11 OF 19 The applicant has not submitted a tree plan for the site. Therefore, the applicant will be conditioned to submit a tree plan, prepared by a Certified Arborist that addresses tree planting, removal and protection according to Section 18.790.030. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Tree Removal standards have not been met. However, if the applicant complies with the condition listed below, the standards will be fully met. CONDITION:Submit a tree plan prepared by a Certified Arborist that addresses tree planting, removal and protection according to Section 18.790.030. 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 (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. The landscape plan submitted shows no trees or shrubs over 3 feet in height will be located within the vision clearance triangle areas on both sides of the driveway. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Visual Clearance standards have been satisfied. B. SPECIFIC SDR APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 18.360.090.(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (100-year floodplain); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Space). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses); 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.13 (Drainage); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled). Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. S D R2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 12 OF 19 • The building is not in an area identified as prone to sliding: By adding on to a pre-existing building, the impact on tree preservation is minimal. The existing building is a minimum of 60 feet from the nearest abutting property line, thus providing adequate light and air circulation for neighboring properties and fire fighting considerations have been made by the Building Division later in this decision. Crime Prevention and Safety: A. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; B. Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; C. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; D. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and E. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Windows are oriented towards the parking lot and the street. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this project and provided comments below. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route. The site is adjacent to SW Sandburg Street, which is not an identified transit route. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Provisions of the Underlying Zone: All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall appl y unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. Dimensional Requirements: The following table compares the dimensional requirements with the proposed requirements. As can be seen from the table below, the proposal fully complies. TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES STANDARD C-P Proposed Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sq.ft 66,534 -Detached unit - - -Boarding,lodging,rooming house - - Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 290 ft. Minimum Setbacks -Front yard 0 ft[6] 32 ft. -Side facing street on corner&through lots[1] - - -Side yard 0/20 ft[3] 57 ft. -Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district - - -Rear yard 0/20 ft[3] 84 ft. -Distance between front of garage&property line abutting a public or private - - street. Maximum Height 45 ft 12 ft. Maximum Site Coverage[2] 85% >85% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% <15% S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 13 OF 19 [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795(Vision Clearance)must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] See Section 18.520.050B for site and building design standards. [5] No front yard setback shall be required,except a 20 foot front yard setback shall apply within 50 feet of a residential district. [6] There shall be no minimum front yard setback requirement;however,conditions in Chapters 18.745 and 18.795 must be met. [7] There are no setback requirements,except 30 feet where a commercial use within a district abuts a residential zoning district. [8] The maximum height of any building in the CBD zone within 100 feet of any residential zoning district shall not exceed 40 feet. [9] Where the side or rear yard of attached or multiple-family dwellings abut a more restrictive zoning district, such setbacks shall not be less than 35'. [10] Landscaped areas on existing developed property in the CBD shall be retained. Buffering and screening requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745 shall be met for existing and new development. [11] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. *Multiple-family dwelling unit C-N-Neighborhood Commercial District C-C-Community Commercial District C-G-General Commercial District C-P-Professional/Administrative Office Commercial CBD-Central Business District As demonstrated in the table above, the applicant's plans comply with the dimensional standards of the C-P zone. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the provisions of the underlying zone are met. B. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS (SECTION 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires a local commercial industrial street to have a 50 right-of-way width and 34-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Sandburg Street, which is classified as a local commercial industrial street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 50 feet of ROW, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. No further dedications are necessary. SW Sandburg Street is currently improved with curb and adequate paving. The only improvements not present are sidewalk and street trees. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should provide a new concrete sidewalk and plant street trees adjacent to their development. The applicant's plans indicate they will construct these improvements with their development. The trees they are showing on the plan (Acer Circinatum and Cornus Kousa) do no appear to be on the approved City street tree list. In addition, it does not appear that there are enough street trees proposed to meet the spacing criteria found in Section 18.745.040.C. Prior to construction, the applicant shall revise the landscape plan to include street trees that are approved by the City and that meet the criteria of Section 18.745.040.C. S D R 2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 14 OF 19 • Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. The applicant will meet this requirement by installing the sidewalk along SW Sandburg Street, as proposed on the plan. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. This site is presently served from the existing public sanitary sewer line in SW Sandburg Street. No additional public sewer line work is necessary to support the building addition. 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). The applicant's plan addresses any upstream runoff that flows onto 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. The applicant's building addition will create approximately 12,400 square feet of new impervious area on the site. The applicant's plan indicates they will provide an onsite detention pipe to meet the USA detention criteria. The detention pipe will be a 30-inch diameter pipe with a control manhole at the downstream end. This proposal is adequate. SDR2000-00012/M1 S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 15 OF 19 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. This partition does not adjoin any future bikeway. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. No bikeway is associated with this project. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. No bikeway is associated with this project. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: ♦ The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; ♦ The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; ♦ All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and ♦ Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are no overhead utilities on SW Sandburg Street. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: There is an existing 12-inch public water line located in SW Sandburg Street that presently serves this site. The plan shows that the applicant intends to provide an additional 2 1/2-inch water service for the new addition. This area lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. The applicant must coordinate with TVWD for the additional water service. S D R2000-00012/M I S 2 000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 16 OF 19 Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant is proposing to treat the onsite stormwater runoff with a unit manufactured by CDS Technologies. Staff has reviewed the literature for these units and is not convinced they will address the specific phosphorus removal requirements listed in USA's standards. Staff spoke with the applicant's engineer on July 20, 2000, who said their firm has additional information that will show the units will achieve the removal required. The applicant will need to prove the CDS unit will meet the phosphorus removal requirement or else they will need to provide another type of facility. It is feasible for the applicant to provide an alternate facility. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Grading and Erosion Control: USA Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per USA regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The applicant must provide a grading and erosion control plan as a part of the Building permit submittal. D. IMPACT STUDY (18.390) Section 18.360.090 states, "the Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvement 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. The applicant has provided an impact study addressing the project's impacts on public systems. The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $34,985 based on the use proposed (does not include any credits for the existing building). SDR2000-00012/M1S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 17 OF 19 Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $109,328 ($34,985 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the street system. The unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $74,343. The applicant has proposed to construct a 5-foot sidewalk along SW Sandburg Street since this is the frontage they are obtaining access from. The cost of the improvements is expected to be $4,050 (270 feet x $15 per linear foot), thus it is roughly proportional to the unmitigated impacts. In any event, the applicant has proposed to construct these improvements. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: 1. If existing building was designed and constructed for Seismic Zone 2, the addition will require the existing to be upgraded Seismically to 3. 2. Provide 3 fire hydrants. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and offered the following comment: 1. Recommend installation of lighting standard to NW corner of property to help illuminate the proposed new parking area. Suggest something similar to that being proposed for east portion of property. SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Water District, ICI Cable, PGE, GTE, US West, and NW Natural Gas have all reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VIII. 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 JULY 28, 2000, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 12, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type III Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 18 OF 19 Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS AT 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 11, 2000. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. • i � �' z.. .�; �z_ July 28, 2000 PREPAREY: athew Scheideg DATE ' sis aant Planner (------c ,,, �2_,e_`-.. VI July 28, 2000 APPROVED BY: Richard H. Bewer iour DATE Planning Manage I:\curpin\mathew\sd r\SDR2000-00012.dec.doc S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 19 OF 19 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT lk CITY OF TIGARD I T 7-r �- Exising t IT7IITII � IIiIiTrr3tj&-_./4 7.._ -.-, :^ E� Proposed Lot Line : [:-.. iil ° HP n 1-- 6 !� a �¢ _ _ _11 . _ -L��'1 —I f-' i� i l l I ,r T • I 1 ki p .0_ , _ 1p:/f. -i� !. 1�. -- i. ...e... :. ....�. I --- 't-V77 r-r i l�l` � 41 - d r-p ! i 111._ 1 ~ I y,. - ' i t i 'i/� / : �t� 1 iy i i .4./ .4/4-j^z... •/ <'//1//�///�/�.%' C'i ! 1.�`'-'l 1.�. b ___ l .1 ... \n-g"...,,,,,.._2 ..r....-.11, l'•1` -- -- — - - SW SANDBURG STREET - - - - .- -- -.- -- . . CITY OF TIGARD t SDR2000-000 I 2 /MIS2000-00009 i II CITY OF TIGARO SITE PLAN N T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE (Map is not to scale) & PARKING LOT EXPANSION --• NE r CITY of TIGARD STGEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM III. VICINITY MAP VAR S S w \ . -■ > SDR2000-00012 I - -- M152000-00009 1 r).., Hz. , , , .., FIR LP I, TOC MANAGEMENT �, SERVICES OFFICE SUBJECT ADDITION & PARKING r TAX LOTS LOT EXPANSION Lel • SANDBURG g — LLI I- to TECH CENTEB ~ C.........NN'N''''',.. \ Z • N 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet\\ 1'=378 feel �G LANDMARK LN GjyA —. City of Tigard �Cl -r Information on this map is for general location only and \y f� should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd . N Tigard,OR 97223 4 (503)639.4171 htlp:/Mnwv.ci.tigard.or.us I Community Development Plot date:Jul 24,2000;C:niagicWIAGIC03.APR SITE DEIiE :�1 � � bl Ztr.�i LOT;UNE ADJOST ► EN17: 0 lbt�Ot,f .a,. �s.ti .n, z ,, � g� � ITY OF TIOARD" T.O.C. MA NA CT y I � ' D x _�� > � G .OT EP iDN AND aPARl�i 120 DAYS = 10/19/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SVCS. OFFICE ADDTN. & PKNG. LOT EXPANSION CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2000-00012 Lot Line Adjustment (MIS) MIS2000-00009 PROPOSAL: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 11,000 square foot addition (8,200 sq. ft. of office, 2,740 sq. ft. courtyard) to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 6,373 square feet to be used as additional parking. APPLICANT/ TOO Management Services APPLICANT'S Meadowlark Partners, LLC OWNER 6825 SW Sandburg Street REP.: 1750 SW Skyline, Suite #224 PARCEL 1: Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97221 OWNER Charles V. Hoff& William P. French PARCEL 2: 6755 SW Sandburg Street Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: PARCEL 1: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00400. PARCEL 2: (No site address); WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00500. ZONE: C-P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.410, 18.520, CRITERIA: 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the:Ciiof Trg t°tl:;Comrn fifty DeVeIo{ ment Director's dts nee has APPROVED the above regUS` �;Ubject tr certain coricl��ifio to t fapprdVal. The findrti&!and conclusions on which the decision is basod areii6ted in thatiMil d r±fs1% , available ateC Hall. THIS PPROVAL SHALL BE VALID.FOR 18 M( PI ► CT TE E EET1VE AtEF THM `�► 4 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 (25G) 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 JULY 28, 2000 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 12, 2000 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 AUGUST I I , 2000. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Mathew Scheideoger at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A.q . MI inTIL,1F,;-n-; # ....„., -y r -....."4:) Proposed lot Line iI O L.. I I I I #sax. 1 N, T:, t 11�__!- T.. . y___, F-. J11:! :._ ti 1 �_- ill - s'r. //i/,:I , r II-, m iit_i U / j// o c,- r-¢:=•i ,c,-4-47-0 ,ji #ice#�- ,---./4.�" . . --. :' r" -.. , . . ,; .' . , It -- --. ------ --SWSANDBURGSTREET---..--..-..--.. tt OIL CITY OF TIGARD T SDR2000-00012/MIS2000-00009 SITE PLAN N T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE (Map is not to stale) 1 &PARKING LOT EXPANSION \ �-- •-- �-�� ! I i —"-' VICINITY MAP 1 - iH ■ . ,� SDR2000-00012 MIS2000-00009 - f 11— '77'ri TOC MANAGEMENT =---i � �� ,,,� / SERVICES OFFICE ri r--- ' SUBJECT ADDITION & PARKING 1- I I I TAX LOTS LOT EXPANSION rfl:n ceME NV '-'-' I-- z N W. rGh, i�"T -I1 - J I I Coy emu.-..�.. . • Page 1 of 1 RE: TOC Management Services, 6825 SW Sandburg St, Tigard---Design Review Submittal Matt, Please allow me to clarify the square footage numbers represented in the submitted design review narrative and site plan. While I understand your confusion and sincerely apologize,I believe I can explain the figures. A critical line item is missing from the square footage totals listed on the site plan: "Overall Square Footage-New". This would be "area proposed" (8,815 SF) added to the "atrium area" (2,130 SF),which equals 10,945 SF and corresponds with the "approximately 11,000 sq. ft." of addition as quoted in Section 18.360 of the narrative. At the time of the design review submittal, we were considering the atrium area as a seperate area of square footage to be calculated from the rest,though it clearly is intended to denoted as "new" square footage. Also,the "existing area" calculation listed on the plan, 12,365 SF, corresponds with the "approximately 12,400 sq. ft." listed in the narrative. Allow me also to clarify the "updated" figures which I sent to you yesterday. You may have been confused to see square footages which appear different from those submitted for design review. First, please note that these calculations were made several weeks after design review documents were submitted, so they reflect the slight modifications to the plans which occurred during those weeks. Second,the critical numbers here which correspond with the design review submittal are 7,041 and 4,320,the "New Only" numbers,which equal 11,361 sq. ft. (in line again with the "approximately 11,000 sq. ft." in the narrative). Here,however, I calculated a second number, mostly for benefit of the contractor,which reflects the areas in the existing building which are being partially demolished and are thus to become "new". Here the numbers 1,699 and 1,994 (equal to 3,693)represent the areas of"overlap", where existing building area is being made "new", which is where the figure 15,054 sq.ft. is established. This is not intended to reflect a drastic change in new square footage,but rather to demonstrate the total SF area in which the contractor's work is to occur. I greatly appreciate your understanding in clearing up this matter. There has been no attempt on our part to mislead or change in any way the scope of the project as presented to you for review. I again apologize for the confusing figures and will gladly issue any clarification you might require in order to avoid any delay in your review process. Also, should you wish, I would be happy to meet with you to discuss this or any other facet of this project. Please contact me should you have any additional questions. Sincerely, Brian Greenwood Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects Brian G. Greenwood Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 100 Portland, Oregon 97219 503.245.7100/FAX 503.245.7710 503.977.5205 (direct) briang @amaa.com file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GW}00001.HTM 07/27/2000 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIEF LDER,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW T OF TI CITY OF TIGARD Community DeveCopment Shaping (Better Community DATE OF NOTICE: June 26, 2000 FILE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00012 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (MIS) 2000-00009 FILE NAME: T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION & PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROPOSAL: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct an 11,000 square foot addition to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 5,300 square feet to be used as additional parking. ZONE: C-P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.410, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 400. 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 JULY 11, 2000. All comments should be directed to Mathew Scheide:Ger, 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 BATE 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 JULY 27. 2000. 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 addre;, .ne relevant approval criteria with icient 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." / \ w _ e,O4.CI YetYTIGARDY i VICINITY MAP VI . SDR2000-00012 . h I 1 ( 1 I MIS2000-00009 I--- „- I I I L /\ ��� T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE \II �” [1� ADDITION & PARKING immi �g 11I 0i, LOT EXPANSION 4.1.1i1111 - Mg SITE HiE \__ \ - -.* I ] _ \ . _ I.� N ii 1.... ® - _.___ I ,,,,,,1 ,____, . .. City ofl tgard ___,, _ J REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: July 20, 2000 TO: Matt Scheidegger, Assistant Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SDR 2000-00012, TOC Management Services Addition Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires a local commercial industrial street to have a 50 right-of-way width and 34-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Sandburg Street, which is classified as a local commercial industrial street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 50 feet of ROW, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. No further dedications are necessary. SW Sandburg Street is currently improved with curb and adequate paving. The only improvements not present are sidewalk and street trees. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should provide a new concrete sidewalk and plant street trees adjacent to their development. The applicant's plans indicate they will construct these improvements with their development. The trees they are showing on the plan (Acer circinatum and Cornus kousa) do ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00012 TOC Management Addition PAGE 1 no appear to be on the approved City street tree list. In addition, it does not appear that there are enough street trees proposed to meet the spacing criteria found in 18.745.040.C. Prior to construction, the applicant shall revise the landscape plan to include street trees that are approved by the City and that meet the criteria of the 18.745.040.C. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. The applicant will meet this requirement by installing the sidewalk along SW Sandburg Street, as proposed on the plan. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. This site is presently served from the existing public sanitary sewer line in SW Sandburg Street. No additional public sewer line work is necessary to support the building addition. 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). ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00012 TOC Management Addition PAGE 2 The applicant's plan appears to address any upstream runoff that flows onto 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. The applicant's building addition will create approximately 12,400 square feet (sf) of new impervious area on the site. The applicant's plan indicates they will provide an onsite detention pipe to meet the USA detention criteria. The detention pipe will be a 30-inch diameter pipe with a control manhole at the downstream end. This proposal is adequate. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00012 TOC Management Addition PAGE 3 Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under- grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under- grounding. There are no overhead utilities on SW Sandburg Street. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00012 TOC Management Addition PAGE 4 ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: There is an existing 12-inch public water line located in SW Sandburg Street that presently serves this site. The plan shows that the applicant intends to provide an additional 2 '/2-inch water service for the new addition. This area lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. The applicant must coordinate with TVWD for the additional water service. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant is proposing to treat the onsite stormwater runoff with a unit manufactured by CDS Technologies. Staff has reviewed the literature for these units and is not convinced they will address the specific phosphorus removal requirements listed in USA's standards. Staff spoke with the applicant's engineer on July 20, 2000, who said that their firm has additional information that will show the units will achieve the removal required. The applicant will need to prove the CDS unit will meet the phosphorus removal requirement or else they will need to provide another type of facility. It is feasible for the applicant to provide an alternate facility. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00012 TOC Management Addition PAGE 5 significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Grading and Erosion Control_ USA Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per USA regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The applicant must provide a grading and erosion control plan as a part of the Building permit submittal. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the sidewalk, storm drainage connection, water connection and any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement (if one is required) and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00012 TOC Management Addition PAGE 6 information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Sandburg Street as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements, and of a species that is approved by the City; C. driveway apron. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant's engineer shall submit final design calculations for the onsite detention facility. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have coordinated with Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) for the proposed additional water service into the site. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. NOTE: Unless the applicant can show that the proposed CDS Technologies unit meets the phosphorus removal requirements of the USA design and construction standards, then they shall provide an alternate facility type. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00012 TOC Management Addition PAGE 7 inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 11tig333\usr\deptsleng\brianr\com ments\sdrlsdr2000-00012..doc ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00012 TOC Management Addition PAGE 8 T0:503 684 7297 PAGE: JUL-13 00 13:10 FROM:WASHCO LAND DEV SERV 503-681-2908 WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON VI Department of Land Use and Transportation.Land Development Services 155 North First Avenue,Suite 350-13, Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 (503)846-8761 FAX: (503)846-2908 July 13, 2000 Mathew Schelde gger, Assistant Planner City of Tigard Community Development 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 FAX; 684-7297 # of Pages: 1 RE: TOC Management Services Office Addition and Parking Expansion City File Number: SDR 2000-00012, MIS 2000-00009 Tax Map and Lot Number: 2S1 01 DD /400 Location: 6825 SW Sandburg Street Owners: TOC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. 1---•.. . 0 4.'•*, ......: pi .611„,,,, ,. ! TA I ',.. t!Ida - i ...., _., ,,�,'as rral b uuugou-1 Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation has reviewed the above noted development application but will not be submitting any requirements/conditions. The project site is not adjacent to County-maintained road sections, nor is it expected to generate considerable off-site impacts to our nearby roadways. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please contact me at 503-846-8131. /(5)\'— e- 2•41°t; Anne LaMountain Associate Planner I1 LUT11DATA1SharedlLDS1WPSI-AREtTRANSPITIGITOC MgmtNOCOMM.doc REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CIT,Y,OF TIIGARD Community(Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: lune 26,2000 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer JUL 0 6 2000 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGgRp STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner[x3111 Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDR)2000-00012/LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT[MIS)2000-00009 T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION AND PARKING LOT EXPANSION REQUEST: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct an 11 ,000 square foot addition to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 5,300 square feet to be used as additional parking. LOCATION: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 400. ZONE: C- P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.410, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. 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: JULY 11, 2000. 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: 2.5tcormven-4 %•(\ k0 A\ o . 1v�n� gco iv ka(d #A 1.1‘(\) Qice c\-\ 'b 1NAv \1\)mrtwkit- Qf e pokk A(vA (- 31rc ! Sx+sk-kt SImlg1 fD -40:41 het d e (>06-‘vet Q(o cAm I-159 s■�t_ 1\8h+ on io1 Ra\e) ('lease provide the foffowing information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: iv\ wolk Phone Number[sl: `to►c -\ y, z1 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS cir„r�o T CARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: June 26,2000 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Gary Lampella,Building Official JUN 2 9 2000 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner fx3171 Phone: (503)639-4111/Fax: (503)684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]2000-00012/LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT[MIS)2000-00009 T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION AND PARKING LOT EXPANSION REQUEST: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct an 11,000 square foot addition to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 5,300 square feet to be used as additional parking. LOCATION: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 400. ZONE: C- P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.410, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. 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: JULY 11, 2000. 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: •lF 5-`4Ki1-1 15u WAS VBSrt,Je7 III!➢ CtAISreuc rB, F+R Sets n'c..2,wa_ 2. -t-N.c it-wo no.J CA)+" ' f-2-gds'te 174e • X Priel4 TD b g up4a,44)ao 42> 3 • ��. Pro vivo - /-&.ivx . f Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: R Q4�,a I Phone Number(s): 3q z I REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITYAA OF TI TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: June 26,2000 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheidegger,Assistant Planner[x311) Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: 15031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDR)2000-00012/LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT[MIS)2000-00009 r T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION AND PARKING LOT EXPANSION REQUEST: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct an 11 ,000 square foot addition to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 5,300 square feet to be used as additional parking. LOCATION: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 400. ZONE: C- P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.410, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. 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: JULY 11. 2000. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: (Please provide the fortiyunng information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: I Phone Number[sl: 1 a s CI► ,F TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMA. ITS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE&COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FILE NOISI. _CP Z'2( )- ( )/ FILE NAMEISI: °7r-< C of--( „, e *g/o1 CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS I4-DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO CIT AREA: Central ❑ East ❑ South ❑ West ❑ La Also Place for Review in Library CIT Book CITY OFFICES LONG RANGE PLANNING/Nadine Smith,Supervisor COMMUNITY DVLPMNT. DEPT./Dvlpmnt Svcs.Technicians <POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer 'BUILDING DIVISION/Gary Lampella,Building Official .NGINEERING DEPT./Brian Hager,Dvlpmnt Review Engineer WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,Utilities Manager CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,Property Manager ✓ PLANNER-TIME TO POST PROJECT SITE! SPECIAL DISTRICTS _TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC. DIST.*>AEATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE * TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT * UNIFIED SWRGE.AGENCY 44 Planning Manager I fire Marshall Administrative Office Julia Huffman/SWM Program 15107 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 145 155 N.first Street Beaverton,OR 91006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97015 Hillsboro,OR 97124 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON * _ CITY OF TUALATIN * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS _ Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue 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 414 - 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 (:" US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. '�33 SW First Avenue Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPA2OA) Larry French(Comp.plan Amendments Only) PO Box 2946 _CITY OF KING CITY* Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 Portland,OR 97208-2946 City Manager Salem,OR 97301-2540 15300 SW 116th Avenue WASHINGTON COUNTY King City,OR 97224 _ OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY(Pcwenines 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 _Scott King(CPA) OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 * _Mike Borreson(Engineer) _CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _Sonya Kazen,Development Review Coordinator _Jim Tice)GA) David Knowles,Planning Bureau Dir. Regional Administrator _Carl Toland, Right-of-Way Section(vaCatgns) Steve Conway(General Apps.) Portland Building 106,Rm. 1002 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders °'QPhil Healy(General Apen.) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 _Sr.CartographerlcPAacA,MS14 Portland,OR 97204 _Jim Nims)ZCA)Ms 15 ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A 44 _Doria Mateja(ZCA)MS 14 Jane Estes,Permit Specialist 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 h:\patty\snasters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (Revised: 21-Apr-00) Portland,OR 97221-2414 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Robert I.Melbo,President&General Manager 110 W.10th Avenue Albany,OR 97321 r _ _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'/.Mile of A Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Michael Kiser,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 _GENERAL TELEPHONE _ US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Brian Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer Elaine Self,Engineering Lori Domey,Engineering 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue MC: OR030546 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Tigard,OR 97281-3416 Portland,OR 97219 _TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _TCI CABLE(Apps.Col HallN.of 99W) Marsha Butler,Administrative Offices Joy-Gay Pahl,Demographs&Planning Dept. Diana Carpenter 13137 SW Pacific Highway 16550 SW Merlo Road 3500 SW Bond Street Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton,OR 97006 Portland,OR 97232 *INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOYERNMEMTALAGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/All CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). MAILING RECORDS AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OFTIOARD Community Development Shaping Better Community SiAA, OAF OREGON ) County of`Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Cheri Appropnate Box(s)Below) 0 NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) City of Tigard Planning Director © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR2000-00012/M152000-00009 - T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION & PARKING LOT EXPANSION ❑ 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 Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR:, _ I _ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Heanngs) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF: (Type/Kind of Notice) FOR: tom; _ I (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Heanng,if applicable) A copy the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEESI of which is attached, marked Ibit "A", was mailed, to each names. person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit" ,on luly 28,2001 4• d-so ed in t• United States Mail on ltly 28,2000, postage prepaid. • on tha ' - : ed otic• Subscribed and sworn/affirmed bee me on the / day of Cr'/ ` , 2000. _: oF'1CIAL SEAL jl T f1B[ 6 6F OREG N � �s SHERMAN S. CASPER NOTARY COMMISSION N-0 23409 My Commission Expires: kf G/� cet? MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 13,2003 • EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00012 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (MIS) 2000-00009 CITY OFTIGARD T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION C Shaping A Better t AND PARKING LOT EXPANSION community 120 DAYS = 10/19/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SVCS. OFFICE ADDTN. & PKNG. LOT EXPANSION CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2000-00012 Lot Line Adjustment (MIS) MIS2000-00009 PROPOSAL: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 11,000 square foot addition (8,200 sq. ft. of office, 2,740 sq. ft. courtyard) to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 6,373 square feet to be used as additional parking. APPLICANT/ TOC Management Services APPLICANT'S Meadowlark Partners, LLC OWNER 6825 SW Sandburg Street REP.: 1750 SW Skyline, Suite#224 PARCEL 1: Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97221 OWNER Charles V. Hoff& William P. French PARCEL 2: 6755 SW Sandburg Street Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: PARCEL 1: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00400. PARCEL 2: (No site address); WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00500. ZONE: C-P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.410, CRITERIA: 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V of this decision. SDR2000-00012/M1S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 1 OF 19 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE/BUILDING PERMITS: Submit evidence of complying with the following conditions to the Planning Division. Staff contact: Mathew Scheidegger. 1 . Submit a plan prior to recording the lot line adjustment, showing the adjacent lot will not be in violation of minimum landscape requirements according to chapter 18.520 of the Tigard Development Code. 2. Submit a plan showing the east parking area screened according to Section 18.745.050.E, and a landscaped island with one tree for every seven new parking spaces. 3. Submit a plan showing the interior parking stalls on the east-side of the site to have wheel stops that are at least four inches high and located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. This condition is subject to only parking stalls that do not abut a sidewalk 8 feet or greater in width. 4. Submit a plan showing the newly proposed parking stalls meet minimum standards for both standard and compact spaces or indicate and show a 3-foot overhang. If a 3-foot overhang is used to meet minimum standards, the applicant will be required to provide evidence that the site meets the required 15% percent landscape requirement. 5. Construct directional signs that shall be used to locate the bicycle parking area. 6. Submit a plan showing street trees along the frontage of SW Sandburg Street that meet the minimum standards of Section 18.745.040.C. 7. Submit a tree plan prepared by a Certified Arborist that addresses tree planting, removal and protection according to Section 18.790.030. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 8. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the sidewalk, storm drainage connection, water connection and any other work in the public right-of-way. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 9. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement (if one is required) and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 10. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Sandburg Street as a part of this project: A. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements, and of a species that is approved by the City; and C. driveway apron. S D R 2000-00012/M I S 2000-00009 T.0 C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 2 OF 19 11. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant's engineer shall submit final design calculations for the onsite detention facility. 12. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have coordinated with Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) for the proposed additional water service into the site. 13. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. NOTE: Unless the applicant can show that the proposed CDS Technologies unit meets the phosphorus removal requirements of the USA design and construction standards, then they shall provide an alternate facility type. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 14. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 15. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: Staff conducted a search of City records for the address (6825 SW Sandburg Street). Based on this search, Staff found that the site was part of the Salem Freeway Subdivision, which was approved in 1972 under Washington County. Therefore, the City of Tigard does not have any record of land-use applications for the subject parcel. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on the north side of SW Sandburg Street. The site is bordered on the north and west side by property zoned Professional Commercial (C-P). The property to the west is zoned Industrial Park (I-P ). The properties to the south are separated by SW Sandburg Street. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site currently has an existing structure. The proposal will add an 11 ,000 square foot addition. The property is located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street; WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00400. The applicant has submitted a service provider letter from USA indicating there are no sensitive land areas on the site. S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 3 OF 19 'SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicable Development Standards 18.410 Lot Line Adjustment) 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street parking and loading requirements) 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) B. Specific DR Approval Criteria 18.360 C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 D. Impact Study 18.390 SECTION V. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS A. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Lot Line Adjustments (18.420): Approval criteria. Section 18.410.040: The Director shall approve or deny a request for a lot line adjustment in writing based on findings that the following criteria are satisfied: An additional parcel is not created by the lot line adjustment, and the existing parcel reduced in size by the adjustments is not reduced below the minimum lot size established by the zoning district; No new lots will be created as part of this adjustment; two (2) lots exist and two (2) lots will remain after the proposed adjustment. The minimum lot size for the C-P zone is 6,000 square feet. The smaller of the two lots is 50,014 square feet. Therefore, this criterion has been met. By reducing the lot size, the lot or structures on the lot will not be in violation of the site development or zoning district regulations for that district; Both lots are in the same zoning district. Therefore, there is no minimum setback for either parcel. However, Staff cannot determine whether or not the smaller of the lots will be in compliance with the minimum landscape requirements. Therefore, the applicant will need to submit a plan showing the adjacent lot will not be in violation of minimum landscape requirements according to chapter 18.520 of the Tigard Development Code. The resulting parcels are in conformity with the dimensional standards of the zoning district, including: . The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable zoning district; . The lot area shall be as required by the applicable zoning district. In the case of a flag lot, the access way may not be included in the lot area calculation; . Each lot created through the partition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least 15 feet or have a legally recorded minimum 15-foot wide access easement; and . Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district. The width of the smaller lot at its shortest point is 137.79 feet wide. No flag lot will result from this application. Each lot has frontage on SW Sandburg Street and each lot has at least one access that is at least 15 feet wide. Both lots are zoned C-P, according to Table 18.520.2, no setbacks apply. SDR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 4 OF 19 • With Regard to Flag Lots: When the partitioned lot is a flag lot, the developer may determine the location of the front yard, provided that no side yard is less than 10 feet. Structures shall generally be located so as to maximize separation from existing structures. A screen shall be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an accessway is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accordance with Sections 18.745.040. Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable outdoor recreation areas for proposed development. Neither lot will be a flag lot; therefore, this standard does not apply. The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway would have detrimental effect on fire-fighting capabilities. No change to the existing access is proposed as part of this Lot Line Adjustment. Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement which will ensure access and maintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partition map. No common drive is proposed with this application. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Any accessway shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress, and Circulation. Both lots have existing access to SW Sandburg Street. Therefore, this standard has been met. Exemptions From Dedications: A lot line adjustment is not considered a development action for purposes of determining whether floodplain, greenway, Floodplain, greenway or right-of-way dedication is not an issue with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Variances to Development Standards: An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in accordance with Chapter 18.370, Variances and Adjustments. The applicant has not requested a variance or an adjustment with this application. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the Lot Line Adjustment criteria 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 plan submitted by the applicant indicates that a 5-foot walkway is provided from the south entrance to SW Sandburg Street. 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 S D R2000-000121M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 5 OF 19 '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. Walkways will not cross the access drive or parking lot, therefore, this criterion 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 t required pathways. The applicant's site plan shows all walkways to be concrete. Therefore, this standard has been met. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 rovides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with 0-99 parking spaces is one 30-foot 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 development has 2 points of access into the parking lot that provides 24 feet of pavement, one of which is within 50 feet of the primary entrance. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Access, Egress and Circulation standards have been met. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street, private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the adoption of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040.C. Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The applicant has not provided street trees on the landscape plan. According to the site plan, the site has 270 feet of frontage onto SW Sandburg Street. Therefore, the applicant will be required to submit a plan showing street trees along the frontage of SW Sandburg Street that meet the minimum standards of Section 18.745.040.C. 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. The proposed construction is an addition to an existing use (office), which is allowed outright in the C-P zone. This parcel abuts C-P zoned land to the north, south and east sides of the property; and I-P zoned land to the west side. According to the buffer matrix, no buffer is required where two properties of the same zoning designation abut one another. This application is for the additional square footage of the building, and the proposed parking located on the west side only. Therefore, no buffering will be required. 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 S DR2000-00012/MI S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 6 OF 19 •between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. -trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The applicant is proposing to add 19 additional parking stalls on the east side of the property. Therefore, the applicant will be required to provide 1 tree, for each seven parking spaces, planted in a landscaped islands. Currently the additional parking is shown to be screened from the adjoining property by 52, 18-24 inch Azalea Treasure. The standard requires a balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery. Staff finds the proposed screening does not meet the intent of this standard. The north and west sides of the property are found to have an equal balance of low lying and vertical shrubbery. Therefore, the applicant must submit a plan showing the east parking area screened according to Section 18.745.050.E and a landscaped island with one tree for every seven parking spaces. 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; The site plan shows a pre-existing service facility that is fully enclosed. Therefore, this standard has already 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. The site's refuse container is placed on the east side of the property. Plans show the refuse container to be fully screened with a wood fence. Therefore, this criterion has been met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening 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 the east parking area screened according to Section 18.745.050.E, and a landscaped island with one tree for every seven parking spaces. • Submit a plan showing street trees along the frontage of SW Sandburg Street that meet the minimum standards of Section 18.745.040.C. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.755): Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The solid waste and recyclable storage is pre-existing, no new facility is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. S D R2000-00012/M I S 20 00-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 7 OF 19 •Location Standards: To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The solid waste and recyclable storage is pre-existing, no new facility is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Design Standards: The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. The solid waste and recyclable storage is pre-existing, no new facility is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage standards have been met. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): 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 only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The plans show a total of 76 parking stalls. Four of the parking stalls are designated Van/Carpool spaces. The spaces are located on the north side of the building and are 16 feet from the north entrance. Therefore, this criterion has been met. Disabled-Accessible Parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The applicant is proposing a total of 19 new parking stalls. Therefore, one van accessible (9 feet wide with an 8-foot aisle) ADA handicap space is required. The applicant's plans show the entire site to have 76 parking stalls, thus requiring (4) ADA accessible spaces that are 9 feet wide and have 8-foot aisles. The site contains (4) ADA accessible parking spaces. Therefore, this standard is satisfied. S DR2000-00012/MI S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 8 OF 19 '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.R, 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. Loading/Unloading Driveways: A driveway designed for continuous forward flow of passenger vehicles for the purpose of loading and unloading passengers shall be located on the site of any school or other meeting place which is designed to accommodate more than 25 people at one time. This application does not include a school or a meeting facility. Therefore, this standard does not apply. On-Site Vehicle Stacking For Drive-In Use: All uses providing drive-in services as defined by this title shall provide on the same site a stacking lane for inbound vehicles as noted in Table 18.765.1 of the Development Code. No drive-in service is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Curb Cuts: Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030.N. Curb cuts will be discussed later in this decision. Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. Pedestrian access has been discussed previously in this decision. Parking Lot Striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The lans submitted show the parking spaces will be clearly marked. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. S D R2000-00012/MIS 2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 9 OF 19 The applicant's site plan indicates that the proposed parking stalls that abut landscaped areas on the east side of the site will be separated with an extruded concrete curb. Interior parking stalls on the east side will be required to have wheel stops where the adjacent sidewalk is under 10 feet in width. All other parking stalls are pre-existing and will not be subject to this review. Therefore, the applicant will be conditioned to submit a plan showing the interior parking stalls on the east-side of the site to have wheel stops that are at least four inches high and located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. This condition is subject to parking stalls that do not abut a sidewalk 8 feet or greater in width. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The site plan does not show parking stalls to meet minimum standards. Therefore, the applicant will need to submit a plan showing the newly proposed stalls meet minimum standards for both standard and compact spaces or indicate and show a 3-foot overhang. If a 3-foot overhang is used to meet minimum standards, the applicant will be required to provide evidence that the site meets the required 15% percent landscape requirement. Bicycle Parking Location and Access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. The applicant has proposed a 6-space bicycle rack on the north side of the building based off of the current standard of 0.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The bicycle rack is not visible from SW Sandburg Street. The applicant will be conditioned to construct directional signs that shall be used to locate the parking area. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has provided a detail of the bike rack to be used. Therefore, the standard is met. 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. SDR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 10 OF 19 'Table 18.765.2 states that for Professional Commercial, 0.5 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed addition is approximately 11,000 square feet. Therefore, 4 bicycle parking stalls are required. The applicant has shown a 6- space bicycle rack on the site plan. This criterion has been met. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. Table 18.765.2 states that the minimum parking for Office Use is 2.7 spaces per 1000 square feet. The applicant is proposing an addition of 8,200 square feet of office space. Therefore, 22 parking spaces are required for the new square footage. The pre-existing square footage is 12,400 square feet. The total amount of parking required for this site is 56 spaces. The applicant has proposed additional 19 spaces, giving the project a total of 76 parking stalls. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied. 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. The proposed T.O.C. Office building does not receive or distribute material or merchandise. Therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have not been fully met. However, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be fully met. CONDITIONS: Submit a plan showing the interior parking stalls on the east-side of the site to have wheel stops that are at least four inches high and located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. This condition is subject only to parking stalls that do not abut a sidewalk greater than 10 feet in width. Submit a plan showing the newly proposed stalls meet minimum standards for both standard and compact spaces or indicate and show a 3-foot overhang. If a 3-foot overhang is used to meet minimum standards, the applicant will be required to provide evidence that the site meets the required 15% percent landscape requirement. Construct directional signs that shall be used to locate the bicycle parking area. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-P Zoning District. No signs have been formally proposed. Signs are reviewed through a separate permit process administered by the Development Services Technicians. FINDING: Because signs will be reviewed and approved as part of a separate permit process, this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal (18.790): Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. S D R 2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 11 OF 19 -The applicant has not submitted a tree plan for the site. Therefore, the applicant will be conditioned to submit a tree plan, prepared by a Certified Arborist that addresses tree planting, removal and protection according to Section 18.790.030. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the Tree Removal standards have not been met. However, if the applicant complies with the condition listed below, the standards will be fully met. CONDITION:Submit a tree plan prepared by a Certified Arborist that addresses tree planting, removal and protection according to Section 18.790.030. 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 (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. The landscape plan submitted shows no trees or shrubs over 3 feet in height will be located within the vision clearance triangle areas on both sides of the driveway. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Visual Clearance standards have been satisfied. B. SPECIFIC SDR APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 18.360.090.(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 8.360.090.6 (Private outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (100-year floodplain); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Space). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses); 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.13 (Drainage); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled). Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. S D R2000-00012/MIS 2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 12 OF 19 'The building is not in an area identified as prone to sliding: By adding on to a pre-existing building, the impact on tree preservation is minimal. The existing building is a minimum of 60 feet from the nearest abutting property line, thus providing adequate light and air circulation for neighboring properties and fire fighting considerations have been made by the Building Division later in this decision. Crime Prevention and Safety: A. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; B. Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; C. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; D. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and E. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Windows are oriented towards the parking lot and the street. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this project and provided comments below. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route. The site is adjacent to SW Sandburg Street, which is not an identified transit route. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Provisions of the Underlying Zone: All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. Dimensional Requirements: The following table compares the dimensional requirements with the proposed requirements. As can be seen from the table below, the proposal fully complies. TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES STANDARD C-P Proposed Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sq.ft 66,534 -Detached unit - - -Boarding,lodging, rooming house - Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 290 ft. Minimum Setbacks -Front yard 0 ft[6] 32 ft. -Side facing street on corner&through lots[1] - - -Side yard 0/20 ft[3] 57 ft. -Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district - - -Rear yard 0/20 ft[3] 84 ft. -Distance between front of garage&property line abutting a public or private - - street. Maximum Height 45 ft 12 ft. Maximum Site Coverage[2] 85% >85% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% <15% S D R 2 000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 13 OF 19 '[1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795(Vision Clearance)must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] See Section 18.520.050B for site and building design standards. [5] No front yard setback shall be required,except a 20 foot front yard setback shall apply within 50 feet of a residential district. [6] There shall be no minimum front yard setback requirement; however,conditions in Chapters 18.745 and 18.795 must be met. [7] There are no setback requirements,except 30 feet where a commercial use within a district abuts a residential zoning district. [8] The maximum height of any building in the CBD zone within 100 feet of any residential zoning district shall not exceed 40 feet. [9] Where the side or rear yard of attached or multiple-family dwellings abut a more restrictive zoning district, such setbacks shall not be less than 35'. [10] Landscaped areas on existing developed property in the CBD shall be retained. Buffering and screening requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745 shall be met for existing and new development. [11] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. *Multiple-family dwelling unit C-N-Neighborhood Commercial District C-C-Community Commercial District C-G-General Commercial District C-P-Professional/Administrative Office Commercial CBD-Central Business District As demonstrated in the table above, the applicant's plans comply with the dimensional standards of the C-P zone. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the provisions of the underlying zone are met. B. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS (SECTION 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires a local commercial industrial street to have a 50 right-of-way width and 34-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Sandburg Street, which is classified as a local commercial industrial street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 50 feet of ROW, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. No further dedications are necessary. SW Sandburg Street is currently improved with curb and adequate paving. The only improvements not present are sidewalk and street trees. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should provide a new concrete sidewalk and plant street trees adjacent to their development. The applicant's plans indicate they will construct these improvements with their development. The trees they are showing on the plan (Acer Circinatum and Cornus Kousa) do no appear to be on the approved City street tree list. In addition, it does not appear that there are enough street trees proposed to meet the spacing criteria found in Section 18.745.040.C. Prior to construction, the applicant shall revise the landscape plan to include street trees that are approved by the City and that meet the criteria of Section 18.745.040.C. S D R2000-00012/M I S 2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 14 OF 19 •Sidewalks: Section 18.81u.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. The applicant will meet this requirement by installing the sidewalk along SW Sandburg Street, as proposed on the plan. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. This site is presently served from the existing public sanitary sewer line in SW Sandburg Street. No additional public sewer line work is necessary to support the building addition. 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). The applicant's plan addresses any upstream runoff that flows onto 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. The applicant's building addition will create approximately 12,400 square feet of new impervious area on the site. The applicant's plan indicates they will provide an onsite detention pipe to meet the USA detention criteria. The detention pipe will be a 30-inch diameter pipe with a control manhole at the downstream end. This proposal is adequate. • SDR2000-00012/MIS2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 15 OF 19 'Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. This partition does not adjoin any future bikeway. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. No bikeway is associated with this project. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. No bikeway is associated with this project. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: ♦ The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; ♦ The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; ♦ All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and ♦ Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are no overhead utilities on SW Sandburg Street. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: There is an existing 12-inch public water line located in SW Sandburg Street that presently serves this site. The plan shows that the applicant intends to provide an additional 2 1/2-inch water service for the new addition. This area lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. The applicant must coordinate with TVWD for the additional water service. S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 16 OF 19 'Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant is proposing to treat the onsite stormwater runoff with a unit manufactured by CDS Technologies. Staff has reviewed the literature for these units and is not convinced they will address the specific phosphorus removal requirements listed in USA's standards. Staff spoke with the applicant's engineer on July 20, 2000, who said their firm has additional information that will show the units will achieve the removal required. The applicant will need to prove the CDS unit will meet the phosphorus removal requirement or else they will need to provide another type of facility. It is feasible for the applicant to provide an alternate facility. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection , the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Grading and Erosion Control: USA Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per USA regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The applicant must provide a grading and erosion control plan as a part of the Building permit submittal. D. IMPACT STUDY (18.390) Section 18.360.090 states, "the Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:' Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvement 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. The applicant has provided an impact study addressing the project's impacts on public systems. The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $34,985 based on the use proposed (does not include any credits for the existing building). S DR2000-00012/M I S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 17 OF 19 'Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $109,328 ($34,985 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the street system. The unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $74,343. The applicant has proposed to construct a 5-foot sidewalk along SW Sandburg Street since this is the frontage they are obtaining access from. The cost of the improvements is expected to be $4,050 (270 feet x $15 per linear foot), thus it is roughly proportional to the unmitigated impacts. In any event, the applicant has proposed to construct these improvements. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: 1. If existing building was designed and constructed for Seismic Zone 2, the addition will require the existing to be upgraded Seismically to 3. 2. Provide 3 fire hydrants. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and offered the following comment: 1. Recommend installation of lighting standard to NW corner of property to help illuminate the proposed new parking area. Suggest something similar to that being proposed for east portion of property. SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Water District, TCI Cable, PGE, GTE, US West, and NW Natural Gas have all reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VIII. 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 JULY 28, 2000, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 12, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type Ill Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. SDR2000-00012/M1S2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 18 OF 19 Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS AT 5:00 PM ON AUGUST 11, 2000. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. • July 28, 2000 PREPARED Y: athew Scheideg DATE sis ant Planner ofra July 28, 2000 APPROVED BY: Richard H. Bewer io+i DATE Planning Manage I:\curpin\mathew\sdr\SDR2000-00012.dec.doc SDR2000-00012/MIS2000-00009 T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDTION&PARKING LOT EXPANSION PAGE 19 OF 19 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT " !' • CM Of TIGARD RIIDANMRIAL T �— T` # xistin to Line :* IF 11-1" [TrrIJ 1 1 f I` rrYZ � �> Lot Line : [_--- ill 0 1 1 1 1 I 11 1 I I I I I 1/v=1.'7-rt. itr- 1 I I-----j !741771 /Li ' 1 /_..,'"E.p1VA,-- - i 1 t' lc-1- Filil,....v......, f� Proposed � f -- ; I r � L- � _ 1 -- y ;I 1:—_—_ - ILI ./// •;///,, ;;;7-I • i-—1---- !Ri -:-_-_1 I I ''',/„y ,,,V7 v,• ----,77, r Ivr'.:, 1 _ I /. ' CfF10E LDDITION/1 //' //// / 1 _ _ E /� EAIS NEW EF r —_ l -- — -- —— SW SANDBURG STREET -— — --- — --— -- ---- `` -- -._._ _- ,� 4: CITY OF TIGARD t sDR2000-00012 IMIS2000-00009 CITY OF TIGARD SITE PLAN N T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE (Map is not to scale) & PARKING LOT EXPANSION --.■■ r CITY of TIGARD STI GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM Mak W VICINITY MAP t VARNS ST 1 \ . 1 SDR2000-00012 ST M152000-00009 \ FIR LP �- 7.. - TOC MANAGEMENT iii •C'D...% SERVICES OFFICE I SUBJECT ADDITION & PARKING TAX LOTS LOT EXPANSION SANDBURG ST -----7 CI , i , L. d ton GC TECH CENTER W Z A N 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet 1"=378 feet dG i , A • Gay — City of Tigard ,(� �r Information on this map is for general location only and •rev should be verified with the Development Services Division s a '5' 13125 SW Hall Blvd \ r Tigard.OR 97223 i --— — - -- - --- - - _- - (503)639-4171 http://www.ciAgard.ocus Community Development Plot date:Jul 24,2000;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR ,M.(1 V TOC Management Services SDR2000-00012/MIS2000-00009 6825 SW Sandburg Street T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE Tigard OR 97223 ADDITION & PARKING LOT EXPANSION Charles V. Hoff & William P. French 6755 SW Sandburg Street Tigard OR 97223 Meadowlark Partners, LLC 1750 SW Skyline, Suite 224 Portland OR 97221 . . AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING �> 4O CITY OF TIARD Community Development Shaping f1 Better Community STATE OAF OREGON ) County o ff Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of'Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Crier(Appropriate Box(s)Bebw) ❑ NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) i— City of Tigard Planning Director F2 NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR2000-00012/MIS2000-00009-T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION & PARKING LOT EXPANSION 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) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director O Tigard Hearings Officer O Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: I AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearings) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission O Tigard City Council NOTICE OF: (Type/Kind of Notice) FOR: Lt7 . I (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEISI of which is attached, m. es Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"! ',on 1 1 ! , 00 I a d dep.l•ited in the •nited States Mail on July 28,2000, postage prepaid. lir (-er:o at Prepar-d Notice Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the JO day of CD Cr. , 2000. f''.T".:M�'. OF.'=1CIAL SEAL R lama* E y SHERMAN! S. CASPER �„JNGT' Y P) I3!IC-OREGON My Commission Expires: COa,�r,�,is NO /j 7�ci.3 SIOtE k0. 323409 �f MY COMA.""SSION EXPIRES Fir1'r 13,2003 J EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00012 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (MIS) 2000-00009 A, -41 CITY OF TIGARD T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION Community(Development AND PARKING LOT EXPANSION Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 10/19/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SVCS. OFFICE ADDTN. & PKNG. LOT EXPANSION CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2000-00012 Lot Line Adjustment (MIS) MIS2000-00009 PROPOSAL: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 11,000 square foot addition (8,200 sq. ft. of office, 2,740 sq. ft. courtyard) to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 6,373 square feet to be used as additional parking. APPLICANT/ TOC Management Services APPLICANT'S Meadowlark Partners, LLC OWNER 6825 SW Sandburg Street REP.: 1750 SW Skyline, Suite #224 PARCEL 1: Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97221 OWNER Charles V. Hoff & William P. French PARCEL 2: 6755 SW Sandburg Street Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: PARCEL 1: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00400. PARCEL 2: (No site address); WCTM 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 00500. ZONE: C-P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.410, 18.520, CRITERIA: 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25 ) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies - Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JULY 28, 2000 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 12, 2000 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 AUGUST I I , 2000. 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. CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ----c-----: !I ri1(TIFIL)7—r I 1 H 1 #.. .--.t un<_�. Ir� t -=+�) Proposed lol An, ,- T-o.� _ - # i-1 ,11 r I _�I.__- , 7_.j ;�I L1- I '-�: ,,_ �, I. rAl II�'_ I� IlkYlli� "� " r'l_II nili_I _..it � �� I ����� 0 A� I�l --TJ1171L1 I __ //// /%d/�J,' �.ate°" -- -- ---- --SW SANDBURG STREET --..__.._..___ V --- -- — S-- _ ly — .h CITY OF TIGARD T SDR2000-00012/MIS2000-00009 SITE PLAN N T.O.C.MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE (Map is not W stale) &PARKING LOT EXPANSION VICINITY sr MAP i - - - VARNS-ST 1 R SDR2000-00012 ST M152000.00009 FIR LP 'S o TOC MANAGEMENT i r-, „\ SERVICES OFFICE SUBJECT ADDITION & PARKING 77 TAX LOTS LOT EXPANSION DR / v� SANDBURG ST / �J SANDBURG 1— ce W TFr�1 CENTER_ 1- Z ■ N (( LANDMARK LN r� qly® I NOS .�_.. . .-r...... tv ' r ( i ) k icg EXHIBIT B 2S101 DD-00800 2S101 DC-03900 ACKERLY COMMUNICATIONS OF PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY THE NORTHWEST INC INSURANCE COMPANY 3601 6TH AVE S 6300 WILSON MILLS RD SEATTLE,WA 98134 ATTN:BRUCE ADAMS REAL ESTATE MAN MAYFIELD VILLAGE,OH 44143 2S 101 DA-00104 2S 101 D D-00701 F I G HOLDING COMPANY RFD PUBLICATIONS INC REAL ESTATE ACCTG 9600 SW BOECKMAN 4680 WILSHIRE BLVD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 LOS ANGELES,CA 90010 2S 101 DD-00300 2S 101 DD-00900 HAYTER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHI TARKIAINEN REINO J A AND 23643 SW STAFFORD HILLS DR MARILYN J WEST LINN,OR 97068 20895 SW LEBEAU RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 101 DA-02100 • 01 DD-00703 HEALTH RESOURCES INC TAR •INEN R • J A AND PO BOX 987 MARILY TUALATIN,OR 97062 208'. W LEB• • RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 101 D D-00500 2S 101 DD-00400 HOFF CHARLES V& TOC MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC FRENCH WILLIAM P 6825 SW SANDBERG ST 6755 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 DD-00702 2S 101 DA-02000 J&K PROPERTIES CORP WEST COAST LUMBER 6900 SW SANDBURG RD INSPECTION BUREAU INC TIGARD, OR 97223 6980 SW VARNS PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S 101 DD-00401 25101 DD-00600 NORTHWEST MEDICAL TEAMS WESTERN FAMILY HOLDING INC INTERNATIONAL INC PO BOX 4057 PO BOX 10 PORTLAND,OR 97208 PORTLAND,OR 97207 25101 DD-00100 2S 101 DD-00101 OBIE MEDIA CORP WESTON HOLDING CO LLC 4211 W 11TH 2154 NE BROADWAY EUGENE,OR 97402 PORTLAND,OR 97232 2S 101 DD-01100 25101 DA-01500 PAPE'PROPERTIES INC WWJACK LLC 91434 COBURG INDUSTRIAL WAY 5250 SW LANDING SQUARE#3 COBURG,OR 97440 PORTLAND,OR 97201 2 DD-00200 PAPE' IRTrES INC 91 ,CO U DUSTRIAL WAY -COBURG,OR 97440 Naomi Gallucci CITY OF TIGARD 1 1285 SW 78th Avenue EAST CIT SUBCOMMITTEE Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc UPDATED: 9-Jun-00 Tigard, OR 91223 John Snyder 11100 SW 82od 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 91223 Dieter Jacobs 7775 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 1 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING T O`Akk CITY F TI TIGARD Community(Development S hoping A Better Community STATE OAF oEGoN ) County of`Was ington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, (Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of Tigard;Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Cry nowovdate Box(s)Bela«) © NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: SDR2000-00012/MIS2000-00009 - T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE AND PARKING LOT EXPANSION AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) • City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: i7' / 7 AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Healing) -- City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council E NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearings) • City of Tigard Planning Director - Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF: (Type.Kind of Notice.) FOR: , I (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing.if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEIS) of which is attached, mar ed Ex i ibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B" on 1U ..,42c,_ 0!. -• dept -d i the United States Mail on Me 26,2000, postage prepaid. r- MitIlthr vim (-ers•. a - -pare. �• 've) � C Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ( / day of f (y , 2000. !: �, OFFICIAL SEAL 0 R B IC OF OR N �� "�; SHERMAN S.CASPER `;,� NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON My Commission Expires: 1� /3, Z043 COMMISSION N0.323409 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 13,2003 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIEN. _DER,VENDOR OR SELLER: EXHIBIT A THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTIC E OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FJI�� CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development SkapingA Better Community DATE OF NOTICE: June 26, 2000 FILE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00012 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (MIS) 2000-00009 FILE NAME: T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION & PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROPOSAL: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct an 11,000 square foot addition to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 5,300 square feet to be used as additional parking. ZONE: C-P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.410, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 400. 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 JULY 11, 2000. All comments should be directed to Mathew Scheidecgger, 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 JULY 27, 2000. 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 a relevant approval criteria with s ;lent 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." wrri • CITY of TIGAND / \ J / VICINITY MAP -i• ".......,... ........ — I' SDR2000-00012 1 Ill j I I < MIS2000-00009 Mil 5 _TN, fpli, T.O.C. MANAGEMENT Hilo SERVICES OFFICE _A\■` — � x ADDITION & PARKING 1i�1a∎ ..„ LOT EXPANSION - --F Nil SUBJECT SITE . IIIII • i P .,, .._ N ,0,00,1 ..,,, 7 _, 1 . ,.., „LI_ „, .„.,„ i I �inYnb•gmnouwn onM.na Ca}of Tigard 1.---4, , '--1 1 I ( SUS SW Koo e. M Wwbp•bni B.mu.pwwn E i l 2S 101 D D-00800 2S 101 DC-03900 ACKERLY COMMUNICATIONS OF PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY THE NORTHWEST INC INSURANCE COMPANY 3601 6TH AVE S 6300 WILSON MILLS RD SEATTLE,WA 98134 ATTN:BRUCE ADAMS REAL ESTATE MAN MAYFIELD VILLAGE,OH 44143 2S101DA-00104 2S101DD-00701 F I G HOLDING COMPANY RFD PUBLICATIONS INC REAL ESTATE ACCTG 9600 SW BOECKMAN 4680 WILSHIRE BLVD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 LOS ANGELES,CA 90010 2S 101 D D-00300 2S 101 DD-00900 HAYTER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHI TARKIAINEN REINO J A AND 23643 SW STAFFORD HILLS DR MARILYN J WEST LINN,OR 97068 20895 SW LEBEAU RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S101DA-02100 • 01 DD-00703 HEALTH RESOURCES INC TA' •INEN R • J A AND PO BOX 987 MARILY TUALATIN,OR 97062 208'. W LEES- • RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S101 DD-00500 2S101 DD-00400 HOFF CHARLES V& TOC MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC FRENCH WILLIAM P 6825 SW SANDBERG ST 6755 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 DD-00702 2S 101 DA-02000 J&K PROPERTIES CORP WEST COAST LUMBER 6900 SW SANDBURG RD INSPECTION BUREAU INC TIGARD,OR 97223 6980 SW VARNS PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S 101 DD-00401 2S 101 D D-00600 NORTHWEST MEDICAL TEAMS WESTERN FAMILY HOLDING INC INTERNATIONAL INC PO BOX 4057 PO BOX 10 PORTLAND,OR 97208 PORTLAND,OR 97207 2S 101 D D-00100 2S 101 DD-00101 OBIE MEDIA CORP WESTON HOLDING CO LLC 4211 W 11TH 2154 NE BROADWAY EUGENE,OR 97402 PORTLAND,OR 97232 2S 101 DD-01100 2S 101 DA-01500 PAPE'PROPERTIES INC WWJACK LLC 91434 COBURG INDUSTRIAL WAY 5250 SW LANDING SQUARE#3 COBURG,OR 97440 PORTLAND,OR 97201 2 DD-00200 PAPE' �R'ICES INC 91 QO uB Rt34NDUSTRIAL WAY --COBURG,OR 97440 CITY of TIGARD rj IC INFORMATION 5�5TEN AREA NOTIFIED (S00') T li For: Sheela h O'Connor 004 I Re: 2S I0I D , 400) Emi FIR LP y/ x CI 25101DA0 00 Mill 41111 Z 5101DA0 000 ti 251010A01 00 1 \ 7 --—. MI III 1 '..-I Nil. 2S11q.;IDp01100 p 25101000027 251010000100 / SUBJECT IL D� _ SITE - SAND: - s 1 2510100001 I\\ I2S101DD003c�0 I 251010000401 ` �'._.._ i I I 251010000500 ��__ N "2$101DC03900 —\ - 251010000701 • '' 251010000712 251010000600 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet V=352 feel 25101 0000703 Alk‘ 2�101DDOp900 251010000800 ---� City of Tigard I Information on this map is for general location only and should be venfied with the Development Services Division. ---- -- 13125 SW Hall Blvd .-a I Tigard,OR 97223 1 (503)639-4171 http:llwww.ci.tigard.or us Community Development Plot date: Mar 13,2000;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR ■ 23 101 DD-00800 2S 101 D C-03900 ACKERLY COMMUNICATIONS OF PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY THE NORTHWEST INC INSURANCE COMPANY 3601 6TH AVE S 6300 WILSON MILLS RD SEATTLE,WA 98134 ATTN: BRUCE ADAMS REAL ESTATE MAN MAYFIELD VILLAGE,OH 44143 2S 101 DA-00104 2S 101 D D-00701 F I G HOLDING COMPANY RFD PUBLICATIONS INC REAL ESTATE ACCTG 9600 SW BOECKMAN 4680 WILSHIRE BLVD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 LOS ANGELES,CA 90010 2S 101 DD-00300 2S 101 DD-00900 HAYTER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHI TARKIAINEN REINO J A AND 23643 SW STAFFORD HILLS DR MARILYN J WEST LINN,OR 97068 20895 SW LEBEAU RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 101 DA-02100 01 DD-00703 HEALTH RESOURCES INC TA'• •INEN R • J A AND PO BOX 987 MARILY TUALATIN,OR 97062 208'. W LEB' • RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 25101 DD-00500 25101 DD-00400 HOFF CHARLES V& TOC MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC FRENCH WILLIAM P 6825 SW SANDBERG ST 6755 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 D D-00702 2S 101 DA-02000 J &K PROPERTIES CORP WEST COAST LUMBER 6900 SW SANDBURG RD INSPECTION BUREAU INC TIGARD,OR 97223 6980 SW VARNS PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S 101 D D-00401 2S 101 D D-00600 NORTHWEST MEDICAL TEAMS WESTERN FAMILY HOLDING INC INTERNATIONAL INC PO BOX 4057 PO BOX 10 PORTLAND,OR 97208 PORTLAND,OR 97207 2S 101 D D-00100 2S 101 D D-00101 OBIE MEDIA CORP WESTON HOLDING CO LLC 4211 W 11TH 2154 NE BROADWAY EUGENE,OR 97402 PORTLAND,OR 97232 2S 101 DD-01100 2S 101 DA-01500 PAPE'PROPERTIES INC WWJACK LLC 91434 COBURG INDUSTRIAL WAY 5250 SW LANDING SQUARE#3 COBURG,OR 97440 PORTLAND,OR 97201 2 DD-00200 PAPE' RTrES INC 91 CO UR DUSTRIAL WAY ----COBURG,OR 97440 03/10/00 FRI 14:22 FAX 5032976184 MEADOWLARK Z001 Meadowlark Partners,LLC Skyline Blvd. Suite 224, Portland,OR 97221 1750 SW Sky FAX Date: 3!10100 Number of pages including cover sheet: _1 r From: To: Sheelagh O'Con; patty in Planning Phone: (503)297-6080 phone: (503)693-4171 Fax phone: (503)297-6184 Fax phone: (503)684-"1297 CC: REMARKS. 0 Urgent ❑ For your review ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please comment r0 Patty' please provide me with the names of property owners Pursuant to our telepho conversation a few moments ago, p p within 500 feet of 6825 SW Sandburg Road. I am in need of this information for a neighborhood meeting. Please also include three sets of address labels(as we talked about.) Thank you,and please call with any questions. APPLicANT� rER /Qs 05/09/00 16:06 $503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD 0 00_-003 A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW �' TYPE II APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hal!Blvd_, Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX:(503) 684-7297 PRE-APP.HELD WITH: GENERAL [NFORinATl4L DATE OF PRE-APP.:— Property Address/Location(s): 6825 SW Sandburq �+ rPP+ FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tigard , OR 97223 Tax Map&Tax Lot#(s): 2S101DD00 Case No.(s): SD •— (7 Other Case No.(s): Receipt No_: _ Site Size: 1 . 53 Acres _ _ — Application Accepted By: Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)': TOC Manaciameat zf rxri r'es Date: l7 00 Address: 6825 Phone: (5503 ) 620_17] City: Tigard. [ti? Zip: 97223 Date-Determined To Be Complete: Applicant': Meadowlark Partners , LLC Comp Plan/Zone Designation: Address: 1750 SW Phoned 5 0 3)297-64180 City: Portland , OR Zip: 9722 CIT Area: • When the owner and the applicant are different people, the Rey 11n6448 licurpinUnasterslsdra.doc applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession - — 1 with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this REQUIRED $U { L [- MI5_ application. ♦ Application Elements Submitted- } Application Form pilOPQ$AL SUMMARY • owner's Signature/Written Authorization property request Site Title Transfer Instrument or Deed The owners of recorof the subject ape be sy specific): �"� Development Review approval to allow (please P ) 0--Site/Plot Plan **See attached " Cr.:of copies based on pre-app r�teck list) lEl Site/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/z-x 11") D-Applicant's Statement of copies based on pre-app check list) ❑ Construction Cost Estimate 0 USA Sewer Use Information Card (Distributed/completed at application submittal) 0 2 Sets of Pre-Addressed/Pre-Stamped Legal Size Envelopes la-Filing Fee (under x100000).,.... ..$ 800.00 ($100,000-$999,999)....$1,600.00 .._$1,600.00 al Million&Oyer)........$1,780.00 $ 55!510,000) 1 05/09/00 TUE 16:13 [T%/R% NO 5649] 05/09/00 16:07 $503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD ij003i003 • List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: **none** ,,APPLICANTS: z To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the •Es IR • S BMI A EL MEN as i I 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 -n ::ed -st 10 th. ma be ,t•cs-d t• or '1 •o •d u••n e s ect • Pro P If the application is granted, PP g- ranted, the a licant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. are true; • All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith,ound thet and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this app may 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 00 Owner's Signature Owner' Sig ature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 05/09/00 TUE 16:13 ETX/RX NO 56491 Customer Receipt CITY OF TIGARD Printed:05/17/2000 11:22 User: front Station: 02 Operator: KJP Rcpt No: 0002244 Date: 05/17/2000 Customer No:000000 Amount Due: 2,071.35 Name: TOC MANAGEMENT SERVICES Cash: 0.00 Address: 6825 SW SANDBURG ST Check: 2,071.35 TIGARD, OR 97223 N/A 0.00 Change: 0.00 Type Description Amount LANDUS Land Use Applications 2,071.35 04. 4131D4 (p 2' a S 5 r b 44.411 CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Skapinq ?Better Community f, LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS =10/19/2000 FILE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00012 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (MIS) 2000-00009 FILE TITLE: T.O.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES OFFICE ADDITION & PARKIN_ LOT EXPANSION APPLICANT: M 5dow al rk Partners, LLC OWNER: T.O.C. Management Services 1750 SW Skyline, #224 6825 SW Sandburg Street Portland, OR 97221 Tigard, OR 97223 PHONE/FAX: (503) 297-6080 REQUEST: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct an 11,000 square foot addition to the existing 12,400 square foot office building and Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust the eastern lot line to include 5,300 square feet to be used as additional parking. LOCATION: 6825 SW Sandburg Street; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101 DD, Tax Lot 400. ZONE: C-P; Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, 18.410, 18.520, 18.705, 18.745, CRITERIA: 18.755, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. CIT AREA: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I ❑ TYPE II [ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV DATE COMMENTS WERE SENT: JUNE 26, 2000 DATE COMMENTS ARE DUE: JULY I I, 2000 HEARINGS OFFICER [MONJ DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM ❑PLANNING COMMISSION [MONJ DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM I 1 CITY COUNCIL [TUESJ DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM STAFF DECISION [TENTATIVE] DATE OF DECISION: _JULY 27, 2000 COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION 1 VICINITY MAP ❑ LANDSCAPING PLAN ❑ ARBORIST REPORT ❑ SITE PLAN ❑ ARCHITECTURAL PLAN ❑ TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY NARRATIVE GEOTECH REPORT H OTHER: STAFF CONTACT: Mathew Scheideciger, Assistant Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext. 317 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN CHECKLIST Project: l&— FOR Date: (a(P,( )o LAND USE APPLICATION SUBMITTALS ll ll []COMPLETE ❑INCOMPLETE Existing and proposed contours shown? Are adjacent parcels impacted by proposed grading? ❑Yes E No Adjacent parcel grades shown? STREET ISSUES [r Right-of-way clearly shown? El Centerline of street clearly shown? Er Name of street(s) shown? L Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown? -0 Pik' Profiles of proposed streets - 1 P Future Streets Plan provided? (subdivisions and some partitions) ❑ profiles ❑ topo shown on adjacent property? 4:it P Traffic study required/submitted? Q Do proposed street grades comply with City standards? Er Check widths proposed on public streets _NPR Are private streets proposed? ❑ under 6 lot minimum? ❑ commercial driveway entrance required. ❑ width appropriate? ❑Other: SANITARY SEWER ISSUES [�' Existing/proposed lines? 001P' Stubs to adjacent parcels required? WAFER ISSUES a Existing/proposed lines? [r Existing/proposed fire hydrants? STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES Er Existing/proposed lines? [r Preliminary sizing calculation of water quality.provided? Er Water quality facility shown on plan? � ir'h E does area provided match calculations for size requirement? I� Stubs to adjacent properties required? Er Water quality and/or detention shown outside of any wetland buffer? i:\eng\brianrVnastersipublic facility plan checklist.doc June 9, 2000 tai i CITY OF TIGARD Meadowlark Partners, LLC OREGON 1750 SW Skyline, #224 Portland, OR 97221 RE: Notice of Incomplete Submittal-SDR2000-00012 (TOC Office Building) To Whom It May Concern: The City received your request for Site Development Review (SDR) approval for the above-referenced project on SW Sandburg Road. Based on a preliminary review of your application materials, Staff has determined that your submittal is incomplete for the purposes of continuing with Site Development Review. The following clarifications and additional information are required before Staff can consider your application complete and begin the review: 1 . Envelopes are metered, must be stamped. 2. Lot line adjustment will take away parking from the adjoining business, need information on existing parking on other site to confirm it will not go below the minimum. 3. Submit arborist report. Existing conditions plan shows many trees within the expansion building area and expansion parking area. The narrative indicates they are insignificant but we need information on size, quality, and protection method prepared by the arborist. 4. Need information addressing the existing and proposed lot size for lot line adjustment. Once the required information has been submitted, Staff will deem the application complete and begin the review process. If you have any questions about the information contained in this letter, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 x317. Sincerely, i 1 ,t4,f ›./'' —-- - 2 / . Mat ew Scheidegger Assistant Planner i:\curpin\mathew\sdr\SDR2000-00012.acc.doc.dot c: SDR2000-00012 Land Use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON June 22, 2000 Meadowlark Partners, LLC 1750 SW Skyline, #224 Portland, OR 97221 RE: Notice of Complete Application Submittal — SDR2000-00012 To Whom It May Concern: The City has reviewed your submittal material and finds that your application is complete. Staff will now review your application for Site Development Review. A decision will be rendered within 6-8 weeks. I am available to answer questions and otherwise assist you as may be required at 639-4171, extension 317. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If I am not available, please leave your name and phone number so that I can call you as soon as possible. Sincerely, /,; LZ":7‘j Mathew S t?Id Assistant Planner i:\curpin\mathew\sdr\SDR2000-00012.acc.acc.doc.dot c: SDR2000-00012 Land Use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 TOC Management Services 6825 SW Sandburg Street Tigard, OR 97223 TABLE OF CONTENTS ♦ TOC Management Services Proposal Summary • Narrative, Submittal to City of Tigard ♦ Neighborhood Review Meeting ♦ Will Serve Letters • Geotechnical Report ♦ City of Tigard Pre-Application Conference Notes ♦ Construction Budget Estimate TOC MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL SUMMARY TOC Management Services contemplates the construction of an 11,000 sq. ft. addition to the existing (approximately 12,400 sq. ft.) office building they currently operate, located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street, Tigard, Oregon. This new two-story addition to the existing two-story structure will be designed to compliment the existing building's architecture. The use of stone and/or concrete as a base for the addition will be developed to enhance the architectural character of the overall structure. Approximately 5,300 sq. ft. of additional land will be added to the site at the eastern property line, via a lot line adjustment, that has been negotiated with the neighbor to the east. This additional land will be used to accommodate a revised parking area and driveway. No construction is contemplated on SW Sandburg Street, other than making utility connections to the storm / sewer system, and relocation of the connection to the gas main. The project meets all landscaping and parking count requirements within the city. A new sidewalk is being added along the frontage of this property, along SW Sandburg Street, to assist in the development of pedestrian facilities throughout the vicinity. i Narrative TOC Management Services Submittal to City of Tigard Code Chapter Section 18.360 (Site Development Review) The proposed addition of approximately 11,000 sq. ft. to the TOC Management Building, located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street in Tigard, Oregon,constitutes a major modification to the existing building of approximately 12,400 sq. ft. Section 18.360.090 (Approval Criteria) A. 1 This building is an addition onto the existing building, and does not affect Sandburg Street or the utilities involved in Sandburg Street. A. 2 The building addition in located so as to minimize the grade changes and conform to the natural drainage that is existing on the site. A. 2-a-2 Geotechnical report was prepared by GeoDesign, Inc. and concludes that the project is not a threat to ground slumping or sliding. A. 2-a-3 The addition to the existing building does not affect the proximity to other buildings in regard to light, air circulation or fire fighting. A. 2-a-4 The clear story nature of the courtyard design provides for sun penetration into the building and wind considerations have been taken into account. A. 2-b An existing specimen, Japanese Maple, has been relocated onsite to preserve the specimen trees. A. 3 Exterior Elevations are being developed to compliment and enhance the existing structure. A. 4 No buffering, screening or incompatibility between adjoining uses exists since the project and the addition are compatible with the adjoining uses. A. 4 b Rooftop units are located at an elevation such that they are not observed from the street and will not be obtrusive to neighboring properties. The trash enclosure areas are tucked up next to the building and will remain in existing location that is not obtrusive to the neighbors to the East. A. 5 Privacy and Noise is not applicable. A. 8 This project is not in the proximity of the 100-year flood plain. A.10 Crime prevention and safety has been given sufficient consideration with regard to entrances, windows and light fixtures as can be shown by the elevations and site plan. A.11 Public Transit- A sidewalk is being added along SW Sandburg Street adding to the construction of sidewalks in the neighborhood. A.12 Landscaping- More than 15% of the gross area shall be allocated to landscaping when the project is complete. H:\SHARED\DAVID\TOC\NARRATIV.DOC 1 05/16/00 9:51 AM Section 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures / Impact Study) This project has been determined to be an administrative approval as noted in the pre- application notes. In addition, the Lot Line Adjustment is a Type One procedure as well. Section 18.390.080 (General Provisions) B. Pre-Application Conference was held for this project on March 2, 2000 with Matthew Scheidegger (Assistant Planner) presiding. Section 18.410 (Lot Line Adjustment) This project involves a lot line adjustment, and the acquisition of approximately 5,300 sq. ft. of the neighboring property to the East(Coiltron property). This additional land area has been negotiated with the adjacent property owner and is subject to this approval as well as lot line adjustment approval. The lot line adjustment is acceptable to the neighboring land owners and it is necessary for the purpose of improving access around the building, as well as providing additional parking for the added square footage to the building. Section 18.410.030 (Application Submission Requirements) All application submission requirements will be accommodated and will be shown on the lot line adjustment documents prepared by WRG Design. Section 18.410.040 (Approval Criteria) A. 1 The parcel reduced in size is not below the minimum lot size established in the zoning district. A. 2 No structures will be in violation of zoning district regulations in the area. A. 3 The resulting parcels are in conformity with the dimensional standards of the zoning district. As are shown in the attached lot line adjustment document. A. 4 No flag lots are being created. Section 18.410.050 (Recording Lot Line Adjustment) A. Prior to the completion of the land sale, the lot line adjustment must take place and the sale will not be consummated until the lot line adjustment has been accepted by land use review. Once the land use review has been approved, the lot line adjustment will be recorded and the land sale will be consummated. G:\SHARED\DAVID\TOC\NARRATIV.DOC 2 05/09/00 8:34 AM Section 18.520 (Commercial Zoning District) The zoning map designation for this project is C-P. Professional / Administrative Commercial District. This project is suitable for this district in that it continues the existing professional and administrative use. The proposed project is an outright permitted use as shown in the use table for the C-P zone. Section 18.520.040 (Development Standards in Commercial Zones) This project exceeds the minimum lot size, lot width,front, side and rear yard setbacks. The maximum height of 45 feet is not exceeded, nor is the maximum site coverage area and the minimum landscape requirement of 15% is exceeded. Section 18.520.60 (Additional Development and Design Guidelines) A. 1 a The design of the building incorporates special architectural details through the use of stone at the base to enhance the building complexity and provide an organic base to the new project. Other similar architectural units are used such as roof form, exterior building materials and window pattern to compliment the existing structure. The parking for the structure is generally along the sides of the project, and therefore not particularly visible from the street. The project is connected to the general pedestrian facilities by a walkway with less than a 5% grade. Section 18.705 (Access /Egress / Circulation) Access, egress and circulation are not being materially changed by this project. The existing circulation through the site has been maintained, although modified by the addition of parking along the Eastern access driveway. Connections to SW Sandburg Street remain unchanged. No joint access has been constructed or contemplated. No new curb cuts are included. Minimum number of driveways has been accommodated. Only one driveway is required for the parking count, and two are included. One drive is being widened. Section 18.745 (Landscaping and Screening Standards) The addition to the TOC Management Building is in an area currently occupied by a wood deck and a couple of small trees. A specimen cherry tree has been relocated to outside the area of expansion, and has been preserved. The eastern edge of the project site will be expanded into additional parking and revised and re-graded driveway area. 95% of the existing vegetation will remain, and as many trees as possible will be saved and relocated during the reconstruction of the project. The landscaping plans will reflect the minor nature of the modifications. Street trees along SW Sandburg Street will G:\SHARED\DAVID\TOC\NARRATIV.DOC 3 05/09/00 8:34 AM e be added to conform to the City standards. All landscape is irrigated and all new landscape will continue to be irrigated. Any large trees that may be impacted by the development work will be protected to their drip lines with protective fencing. No screening and buffering are required due to the addition of this project. Section 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste / Recycling Storage) The existing solid waste disposal area is next to the building on the East side. It is contemplated that this area will be expanded to conform to current requirements, and the franchise hauler, Pride Disposal, has been contacted for approval and site servicing compatibility. It is intended that all solid waste and recycling will be handled as it has been in the past. This area is screened from view due to its location next to the building and the material around the screen will be compatible with the exterior materials of the building and the new addition. The minimum storage area of 4-sq. ft. per thousand square feet of gross floor area will be accommodated. Section 18.765 (Off Street Parking / Loading Requirements) There are currently 46 parking spaces located on-site. The proposed parking consists of twelve 81/2 foot wide standard stalls, thirty six 71/2 foot wide compact stalls, three accessible stalls and twenty five 9 foot wide standard stalls, for a total new count of seventy six total stalls. This ratio is 3.7 per thousand square feet of building. _The _______) existing floor area consists of 12,364 square feet, and the proposed additiof 10,940 square feet brings the new total area to 23,304 square feet. All parking spades-are- located off street and on the property. (Please refer to site plan.) A bicycle parking area will be located within 50 feet of the primary entrance,or bicycle parking will be allowed inside the facility with access at grade on the East side of the building. The off-street loading facility will be provided for along the eastern side of the project by way of an on grade access in the off street driveway. The pre-application conference identified that the project would require a minimum of 55 spaces, and a maximum of 84 spaces. The minimum being 2.7 per thousand and the maximum being 4.1 per thousand. This project contemplates 76 spaces, which provides 3.7 per thousand and falls within the required and allowed amounts in the "B" parking zone. Section 18.780 (Signs) Currently, a small ground mounted monument sign of approximately 24 square feet is located near the western driveway entrance. This monument sign will be redesigned and modified, but will conform to City sign standards. Section 18.790 (Tree Removal) G:\SHARED\DAVID\TOC\NARRATIV.DOC 4 05/09/00 8:34 AM As previously mentioned in the landscape section (Section 18.745) a specimen Japanese Maple has already been relocated to accommodate the construction of this addition. Other minor trees will be relocated and re-used on site, as shown by the landscape plans. No major trees will be impacted at this time. Protection measures will be implemented to save any trees that are in the proximity of construction. Section 18.795 (Visual Clearance Areas) Both driveway entrances to the project do not have any visual clearance issues involved. SW Sandburg Street is a cul-de-sac and very little traffic moves in and out on a regular basis. Section 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards) This project is situated on the site such that it has very little effect on the street and/or utilities on SW Sandburg Street. All work on this job will be guaranteed for at least one year depending on the system. Section 18.810.060 (Lots) As mentioned earlier in the narrative,this project will involve the addition of land on the eastern lot line. A lot line adjustment will need to be approved for the inclusion of approximately 5,300 square feet of land. The purchase and sale agreement for the land has been negotiated with the neighbor to the east, Coiltron,and the land owners are in agreement with the proposed expansion of use. The residual lot area for Coiltron still falls within the minimum lot area standards and no setbacks are affected relative to the Coiltron building. Section 18.810.070 (Sidewalks) A sidewalk will be added along the frontage of the property along the curb of SW Sandburg Street. Section 18.810.100 (Storm Drainagel Potentially a new connection to the storm system may be required due to the addition of a storm water holding facility equal to the impervious area being created. This additional facility will be reviewed and approved by Unified Sewerage Agency under the new water quality regulations and permitting process, dated February 7, 2000. Ms. Allison Rhea has been contacted for her review of the proposed addition. G:\SHARED\DAVID\TOC\NARRATIV.DOC 5 05/09/00 8:34 AM • Impact Study Transportation System: The addition to the TOC Management Building is being designed to accommodate an additional staff load of approximately 15 people. This load will occur over a three to four year period. The impact to the transportation system is negligible as a result. Bikeways: There are no bikeways in the vicinity, therefore,there is no impact to bikeways. Drainage System: While an additional 12,400-sq. ft. of building impervious area is added, the storm drain system is being only incrementally affected since a storm water retention system will be added to the project. Parks System: The parks system will have no impact since the individuals that will be employed at TOC Management Building already live in the area,and are currently accounted for within the park system. Water System: The current water usage at TOC is limited to restroom and drinking fountain use and an additional 15 people over four years would mark a very negligible impact. Sewer System: An addition of 15 people over four years will provide a negligible addition to the sewer system in this area. Noise Impacts of the Development: No noise impacts for this development over the long run will occur with the exception of the construction period of approximately six (6) months,in which noise will be limited during working hours in any case, and no residential areas are within enough proximity during the work day to be effected. G:\SHARED\DAVID\TOC\NARRATIV.DOC 6 05/09/00 8:34 AM LANDSCAPE NARRATIVE TIMBER OPERATORS COUNCIL OFFICE REMODEL SOIL CONDITIONS The project site will retain over 75% of existing landscaping. tSoils are wind deposited silts which were amended at the time of original landscaping. The surface is mulched with medium grind bark to a depth of 2-4 inches. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES All stockpiled soils will be either contained behind silt fencing,protected by tarping, or both to keep soils from being eroded and carried off site.All areas are to receive landscape material capable of holding soil in place.All sloping terrain will be landscaped with either lawn or groundcover. All shrub and ground cover soils will receive a minimum 3 inch incorporation of compost and will be surface mulched with medium grind barlanulch to a depth of 21/2 inches. These measures will increase soil permeability,fertility, and eliminate surface erosion as intended. SUBMITTED BY: Charles S. Rosenfeld/Landscape Architect Rosenfeld Associates•Landscape Architecture&Planning 3 c OOO --/ AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE ... . ... .......... . .. .......... . ......... . WITHIN SEVEN(7)CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 � �c In t I, J Q; �G ( \ VLY' , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in aroposed affecting the land located at (state the app ximat location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) (02)2-S , �V�G��1A, r. f iVA 012. '117- , and did on the l day of cwcv] -00 o J -V— personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a 'S,-\ e. meeting application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting o� discuss the proposal. . The sign was posted at (A �ici (state location you posted notice on property) 11 . tt t, ,„ , ("( e--m, 1,1 (-1,-' Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the n day of —r (l 01Z- , G. i /a'�g OFFICIAL SEAL ) % �f ') i PAULA E. NUTT ( s - •) , �� NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON r /I \.. 1 COMMISSION NO.315585 ) NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG.23,20021 My Commission Expires: C-2_ - 4-2- (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: I TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: I Name of Applicant/Owner: I Address or General Location of Subject Property: LSubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): h:Uogin\patty tnasterslaifpost.mst AEADOWIARK PARTNERS LLC March 13, 2000 RE: NEIGHBORHOOD REVIEW MEETING PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT—TOC MANAGEMENT SERVICES EXPANSION Dear Resident/Property Owner: TOC Management Services is the owner of the property at 6825 SW Sandburg Street in Tigard, Oregon. TOC is proposing to expand its facilities. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard Planning Department, we would like to take this opportunity to discuss the proposal with you in more detail. The purpose of this meeting is to provide a forum for the applicant and surrounding property owners/residents to review the proposal and to identify issues so that such issues may be considered before the formal application is turned into the City. This meeting gives you the opportunity to share any special information you know about the property involved. We will attempt to answer questions, which may be relevant to meeting development standards consistent with the City of Tigard's Community Development Code. You are invited to attend a neighborhood meeting on Monday, April 3, 2000 at 7pm at 6825 SW Sandburg Street(TOC Management Services Building). Please note this meeting will be an informational meeting on preliminary development plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. Depending on the type of land use action required, you may receive official notice from the City of Tigard for you to either participate with written comments and/or an opportunity to attend a public hearing. I look forward to discussing the aforementioned proposal with you. Please call me at (503) 297- 6080, or fax me at(503)297-6184 if you have questions. Sincerely, Meadowlark Partners, LLC As Agent for TOC Management Services � %4•O111 . David R. Lintz Enclosure • 1750 S.W. Skyline Boulevard • Suite 224 • Portland,Oregon 97221 • FAX 503-297-6184 • 503-297-6080 • 576N 0\1 1/ /co _ oelvoges COMPA4far (ZSe scu 74rz_iN AeacycwlQ..l4_7)g .r 7bG (Jie nitt1-14x,- Lay sk &why/ars-5Fr. 14e",k, f_ticia uttA".. afv-p.,=i,r1A. PIEADOWIARK PARTNERS LLC On April 3, 2000 at 7:00p.m., TOC Management Services held a neighborhood meeting in their offices located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street, Tigard, Oregon. The sign in sheet was distributed, and those signing in were: 1. Dave Lintz of Meadowlark Partners, LLC (the project manager) 2. Jay Seeley, Finance Director of TOC Management Services 3. Phil Juckeland of Western Family Foods, located at 6700 SW Sandburg Street 4. Julie Mithen of Doug Bean& Associates located at 101 SW Main Street, representing Progressive Insurance Mr. Lintz conducted the meeting and introduced the project to those attending. Questions centered around the look of the building. Ms. Mithen asked if there would be any work in SW Sandburg Street. Mr. Lintz responded that only minor connections to modify existing utilities might occur. Mr. Juckeland was interested in the exterior appearance, since he is the neighbor directly across the street. No objections to any of the work that TOC Management Services was planning were expressed. Ms. Mithen requested a copy of the site plan and elevations be sent to her, and Mr. Lintz responded that he would send a copy of the plans to both Ms. Mithen and Mr. Juckeland. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30p.m. • 1750 S.W. Skyline Boulevard • Suite 224 • Portland,Oregon 97221 • FAX 503-297-6184 • 503-297-6080 • 7. 1(fl H , , AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE - WITHIN SEVEN(7)CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Halt Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 • Q Al Q�1 V (ít\Av' rV' , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a�roposed affecting the land located at (state the app ximat location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) (D952-S .1 OiVlft1AALPi 11-. 1 1 tack c1 M. a3",2 , and did on the 1 day of A GWGVI )-6e o personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a �,-\ 1 eve4 U ' 14i/ r application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting fo discuss the proposal. . The sign was posted at CA IGt 0VLv6 C . (state location you posted notice on property) t(. ,� t- I ( ii' i Signature (fn the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the n day of Ly4, 0-.-,. °.s i ....... , /_ j ;!ice. OFFICIAL SEAL 1 E. NUTT y � i NOTARY PUBUC-0 GON ( s ii \t."f COMMISSION C-OREGON NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG.23,2002( My Commission Expires: c - _Z - 4-2- (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME — PROJECTOR PROPOSED NAME: ------------------------------------------I I TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: I Name of Applicant/Owner: I Address or General Location of Subject Property: LSubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s) ______ ________j -------------------------------- h Uogin�pariyMasters\attpQ msl AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. City of Tigard ) t ` I, �,rJell/� �() f C��v�o r being duly sworn, depose Y p and say that /..L J , IOC) 10 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) ^ 7 WQ Sao t,9tiW - -nCCty 1 Cry a copy of whidh 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 de,P�osited n the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at Val-e 7\( Q o U�.G( y ( ' with postage prepaid thereon. J A I,>, I I C [Olt C-1/- ,Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) cio 2 d Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the o�d day of `� OFFICIAL SEAL ( / hil411M0.1a ,i• T, PAULA E. NUTT ?dais (/) OTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON `• � COMMISSION Nc 315585 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG.23,2002 My Commission Expires: .Q (Applicant,please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Name of Applicant/Owner: Address or General Location of Subject Property: I Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s)_ — — -------------------------- h Uoginlpady\rnasterslaffmailmsl 2S 101 D D-00800 2S101 DC-03900 ACKERLY COMMUNICATIONS OF PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY THE NORTHWEST INC INSURANCE COMPANY 3601 6TH AVE S 6300 WILSON MILLS RD SEATTLE,WA 98134 ATTN:BRUCE ADAMS REAL ESTATE MAN MAYFIELD VILLAGE,OH 44143 2S 101 DA-00104 2S 101 DD-00701 F I G HOLDING COMPANY RFD PUBLICATIONS INC REAL ESTATE ACCTG 9600 SW BOECKMAN 4680 WILSHIRE BLVD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 LOS ANGELES,CA 90010 2S 101 DD-00300 2S 101 D D-00900 HAYTER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSH1 TARKIAINEN REINO J A AND 23643 SW STAFFORD HILLS DR MARILYN J WEST LINN,OR 97068 20895 SW LEBEAU RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S101DA-02100 • 01DD-00703 HEALTH RESOURCES INC TA' •INEN R • • J A AND PO BOX 987 MARILY ► TUALATIN,OR 97062 208•• W LEB• • RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S 101 DD-00500 2S 101 DD-00400 HOFF CHARLES V& TOC MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC FRENCH WILLIAM P 6825 SW SANDBERG ST 6755 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 DD-00702 2S 101 DA-02000 J&K PROPERTIES CORP WEST COAST LUMBER 6900 SW SANDBURG RD INSPECTION BUREAU INC TIGARD,OR 97223 6980 SW VARNS PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S 101 DD-00401 2S 101 DD-00600 NORTHWEST MEDICAL TEAMS WESTERN FAMILY HOLDING INC INTERNATIONAL INC PO BOX 4057 PO BOX 10 PORTLAND,OR 97208 PORTLAND,OR 97207 2S101DD-00100 2S101DD-00101 OBIE MEDIA CORP WESTON HOLDING CO LLC 4211 W 11TH 2154 NE BROADWAY EUGENE,OR 97402 PORTLAND,OR 97232 2S 101 D D-01100 2S 101 DA-01500 PAPE'PROPERTIES INC WWJACK LLC 91434 COBURG INDUSTRIAL WAY 5250 SW LANDING SQUARE#3 COBURG, OR 97440 PORTLAND,OR 97201 2 DD-00200 PAPE' R'1 IES INC 9143 O UR DUSTRIAL WAY �COBURG,OR 97440 Beverly Froude Ed & Fran Egan 12200 SW Bull Mountain Road 14635 SW Bull Mountain Road Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Craig Smelter Earl & Marilyn Elias 14900 SW 103rd Avenue 13540 SW Village Glenn Drive Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Joan Best Craig Minor 10705 SW Murdock Lane, # F2 14210 SW Windsong Court Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Kathy Palmer Paul E. Owen do John Tigard House 10335 SW Highland Drive 14260 SW High Tor Drive Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Jeanette Phelps 15305 SW Bull Mountain Road Tigard, OR 97224 Jack Biethan 15525 SW 109th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Carolyn Mirich 15025 SW 141st Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Charlie & Larie Stalzer 14781 SW Juliet Terrace Tigard, OR 97224 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Suzanne Riles Don & Dorothy Erdt 13215 SW Genesis Loop 13760 SW 121st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Kathleen Anderson Mary Skelton Debra Seeman 12132 SW Lansdowne Lane 10355 SW Walnut Street 13372 SW Clearview Way Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Jack Biethan Tim Esav Sue Siebold 15525 SW 109th Avenue PO BOX 230695 15374 SW Thurston Lane Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97281 Tigard, OR 97224 Debra Muir Twyla Brady Mark Bogert 15065 SW 79th Avenue 9360 SW Edgewood Street 14445 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Stephen Bicker Mary Ann Melvin Sally Christensen 14235 SW 97th Avenue 10395 SW Bonanza Way 15685 SW 76th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Jack Biethan John Snyder Sue Rorman 15525 SW 109th Avenue 11100 SW 82nd Avenue 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Jan 26 '00 14:22 P. 01/01 N pICEDW/H PGEPortland General Electric Company JAN Z 1!2`P9 121 SW Sal Streit•Portland,Oregon 97204 i. January 26, 2000 Meadowlark Partners Dear Shela; in response to your question about compacted fill over the PGE easement on the property located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West. There is not a problem with placing fill over the easement. The wire is inside of conduit and therefore is accessible to PGE personnel. However care must be taken if any supports or rods am driven into the ground, the wire and conduit are at a depth of 3 feet plus and care must be taken not to dig into the wire. Any damage done to the vaults, conduit or wire will be the responsibility of property owners or contractor. Please free to call Ted Powell at 464-8120 if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely; 4-4APOW/Il Ted Powell PGE Property Service 01/26/00 WED 14:14 [TX/RX NO 5255] MAY-11-2000 15:28 ANKROM MOISAN ARCHITECT S 503 245 7710 P.02/03 UIF"1 4, Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment ANKRta 1‘ iSAN Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County MAY 10 2000 . �_ �- �C3 0 k C�lvt� Jurisdiction ■ !-' �_t C Date __ Map Tax Lot 1 l IJ - cX,.� 00_^Owner 7 )( �_v� •C�j� „� - Site Address �Q.�Lr j '-i�i,•�� ;.,YL r1r1 [ ��-) . _ _ _ _ '? Contact / U o,f . ---J -� �r4 t: v�'rY� Proposed Activity � Address t. ± � � a (5 Z.(j 1lJ0(C� _ asc�c-z��cf __pa_Lk_,,k_,,i\___c:.\,/ . ....______. pby_ . Phone eh 2'; --i K)c , v.-2_45 '-/I n Y N NA Y N NA USA Composite Map L 1 t ] Stormwater Infrastructure maps Map #_ 2. `_)Lt,v J Li QS # . . ❑ i 11p1 Locally adopted studies or maps - 1 I 1 Other - . . _ . l JJ Specify _ Specify Based on a review of the above information and the requirements of USA Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order 00-7: 0 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. Ix( 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. n The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development. NO SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. Comments:C-1- _ t 15e-\-1-Q- Y1/1 L LA- 0. - It .1 t -1 (?i , Reviewed By: �� _.____ Date: _ E Udmintbeslgn and Constracilon SlandardslAR Phone LoglFormslRevlsed Pre-Screening Form 4-17-00.doc 05/11/00 THU 15:16 [TX'RX NO 5661] MAY-11-2000 15:28 ANKROM MOISAN ARCHITECT S 503 245 7710 P.03/03 S :.,1r-i a fir'`.' ._d. ai',`c: • I .. a 1!,• •: 7 .'1.4:;:•0"..i....,,, if ..[. E I; +, ..}1,1 t E` y ash' a-;''.-::::''''1,4'. s�7:'... ■liiiii ;..... • • %.0„:„....::,,,...::..: . ..:.. ..:....:14*,.:4,.,-i.r, „...1,1.1 Li .....,... ....:..:::iiv.!.i;.,,:.:'t• ',47e,-"' •r.' . :'-' ': • it • /II Eden li ,. •-.. .• .......1 . „...,„,,,, 44...r..1441°.',,. 4P•rit';.*.. .,..,or 4. . .. . ! ?i,lki"7‘r.q''''-l•' 4,.'1•1,`-... ''.L',- 'tov_ii,,,,.,,...; ... f••;*i' • ...,... mic_, .-.1—,i ...,....--0,- .!;:y.:. ,:.r.,...-::Ft',,,,,,:;..I. ,., . ,..,....:.-:.%:,.. :,..::: . .,:,, ',... .:- r% Pa milL11 ELL 90 '. ; :IL. EMI Mil IWO. ',.' Ir. .:,::'aidillINI t-equattainti ,,,L..k.-•V.!'„•,,. ..':- ' ''...-_,M -7n--"••• ____---.1:'-011104.1311Eniiim ‘21 ,:..L... ...rim...v.4„.„,...r,.........F,:i.,••••: . .. • , •...:t;4. -, -.._, esmi._,•..moismai,:.,, ,, .,..li.i..2.,,..... ...:_• 10. .-...„4=0.., ..a.e.„. . 1 ifil.-2,..),:i.:.:r•.:.,..:'..ip • • ‘ t ,.c.„.. ,r",),6',.e...' . . •.-101 ._ :001 • IV ....,.. . .... 7,.. -. Wm( ,Fir as.. . • .. ¢} �:: .. :.ice •`°Mk m . . .tv '. . \ '. • 1 • ..• ••.':.:. .-: a I [1 1 / 0 i CD 0 C C2 Q so -n 0 0 coal N N a) t0 Q p w co co N co c N 3,. r cil a 0 X c a 42 M 05/11/050 THU 15:16 [T%/R% NO 5661] McCORMACK PACIFIC 7190 S.W.SANDBURG ST. TIGARD,OREGON 97223 (503) 624-2090 CONSTRUCTION BUDGET ESTIMATE PROJECT: TOC Addition OWNER: TOC LOCATION: Tigard,Oregon ARCHITECT: Ankrom Moisan BUILDING AREA: 26,460 S.F. ORIGINALDA1 3!27/00 BUILDING ARE 26,460 S.F. OFFICE AREA : 26,460 S.F. OFFICE AREA 26,460 S.F. DESCRIPTION ORIGINAL BUDGET MODIFICATIONS TO BUDGET CURRENT TOTAL COST TOTAL COST $IS.F. PERCENT , TOTAL COST S./S.F. (TOTAL COST S!S.F. PERCENT _ GENERAL CONDITIONS $149,744 55.66 7% SO 50.00 $149,744 $5.65 9% GENERALSITEWORK S175,141 $6.62 9% ($42290) ($1.60) $132,851 55,02 8% EXTERIOR STRUCTURAL DEMO $49,875 $1.88 2% $0 $0.00 $49,875 $1.88 3% FOUNDATIONS $70,591 $2.67 4% SO 50.00 $70,591 $2.67 4% SUPERSTRUCTURE $313,336 SI1.B4 16% ($44,595) ($1.69) $268,741 $10.16 17% EXTERIOR WALLS $180,626 $6.83 9% ($36,065) ($1.36) $144,561 $5.46 9% NOT USED $0 50.00 0% 50 50.00 $0 $0.00 0% TWO HOUR SEPARATION WALL $0 S0.00 0% 50 $0.00 $0 $0.00 0% EXTERIOR WALL FINISHES $14,097 $0.53 1% 50 $0.00 S14,097 $0.53 1% INTERIOR SPECIALTY EQUIPMENT $42,150 $1.59 2% $0 $0.00 $42,150 $1.59 3% EXISTING INTERIOR DEMO 542,492 S1.6f 2% ($35,215) ($1.33) $7,277 $0.28 0% NEW OFFICE FINISHES S462,946 $17.50 23% ($104,127) ($3.94) $358,820 513.56 23% RE-FINISH EXISTING OFFICE AREA $167,509 $5.33 8% (5142,812) (S5.40) S24,697 50.93 2% PLUMBING&SITE UTILITIES S19,660 50.74 1% $0 $0.00 $19,660 $0.74 1% HVAC S130,569 54.93 6% $0 $0.00 5130,569 54.93 8% FIRE PROTECTION $0 $0.00 0% $0 $0.00 SO $0.00 0% ELECTRICAL 379.573 53.01 4% $0 $0.00 $79,573 $3.01 5% PERMITS&FEES&CONSTRUCTION TE:BY OWNER SO $0.00 0% 50 50.00 50 50.00 0% CONTRACTORS FEE $113,898 $4.30 6% ($24,346) ($0.92) $89,592 53.39 6% TOTAL COST 52,012,206 S76.05 100% ($429,409) ($16.23) 51,582,797 $59.82 100% 033,XD TOC add2 on_ds 2 or 12 1,! rmack Paci rc ?Pilo) ees:)Tch Re Tort GEODESIGN , INC . GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL. AND GEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES TOC Office Building Addition Tigard, Oregon GDI Project: Transwestern-4 For Transwestern Commercial Services 17400 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd., Suite 230 • Portland, Oregon 97224 • Phone (503) 968-8787 • Fax (503) 968-3068 GEODESIGN , INC . GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND GEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS April 18, 2000 Transwestern Commercial Services 1750 SW Skyline Boulevard Portland, OR 97221 Attention: Mr. Dave Lintz Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services TOC Office Building Addition Tigard, Oregon GDI Project: Transwestern-4 GeoDesign is pleased to submit our "Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services"for the proposed addition to the TOC Office Building. The proposed addition is located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street in Tigard, Oregon. Our services for this project were conducted in accordance with our proposal dated March 15, 2000. We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service to you. Please call if you have questions regarding this report. Sincerely, GeoDesign, Inc. J George Saunders, P.E. Principal cc: Mr. Roger Superneau, Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects, P.C. (3 copies) JES:GPS:kt Attachments Document ID:Transwestern-4-geor Three copies submited 17400 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd., Suite 230 • Portland, Oregon 97224 • Phone (503) 968-8787 • Fax (503) 968-3068 Table of Contents Page No. INTRODUCTION 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 Surface Conditions 2 Subsurface Conditions 2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 General 3 Erosion Control 4 Site Preparation 4 Construction Considerations 5 Structural Fill 6 Cut and Fill Slopes 7 Shallow Foundations 7 Floor Slabs 8 Retaining Structures 9 Pavement Recommendations 10 Site Drainage 11 Seismic Considerations 11 OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION 12 LIMITATIONS 12 FIGURES Vicinity Map Figure 1 Site Plan Figure 2 APPENDIX A Field Explorations A-1 Laboratory Testing A-2 Key to Test Pit and Boring Log Symbols Table A-1 Soil Classification System and Guidelines Table A-2 Boring Logs Figure A-1 GeoDesign, Inc. i Transwestern-4:041800 Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services TOC Office Building Addition Tigard, Oregon For Transwestern Commercial Services INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation of the proposed office building addition. The site is located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street in Tigard, Oregon. The site location relative to surrounding physical features is shown in Figure 1. Mr. Roger Superneau of Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects, P.C. provided us with a preliminary site plan (Figure 2). Current plans are to construct an 8,200-square-foot addition to an existing two-story, wood-framed office building. The addition will likely be wood-framed as well. Based on our experience with similar structures, we anticipate interior column loads for the building may approach 150 kips and the exterior wall panel footings between 3.5 and 4.0 kips per lineal foot. The maximum floor slab loading will likely be 150 pounds per square foot (psf). In addition, the existing driveway on the east side of the building will be realigned, and additional parking spaces will be added along the eastern property margin. The new parking area will expand onto an existing landscaped planter and encompass a portion of an existing paved parking lot. Based on preliminary plans, this will require several feet of structural fill and include construction of a Keystone retaining wall system along the eastern property margin. A grading plan was not available at the time this report was prepared. Based on the topographic setting, we anticipate that fills will be less than 8 to 10 feet in the parking lot addition, and less than 2 to 3 feet in the building addition. PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of our geotechnical engineering services was to explore subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for foundation support and site development. Our scope of work included the following: • Mark boring locations and coordinating underground utility locating at the boring locations. Coordinating field explorations with property owners. • Drill four borings using a trailer-mounted drill rig subcontracted by GeoDesign, Inc. One boring was located within the proposed building footprint, and one within the driveway on the east side of the proposed addition. The borings were advanced to 31.5 feet below the ground surface. Additionally, two borings were located in the area of the proposed retaining wall construction. The borings were advanced to 11.5 feet below the ground surface. • Obtain disturbed and relatively undisturbed soil samples at 2.5- and 5.0-foot intervals in the borings. GeoDesign, Inc. 1 Transwestern-4:041800 • Classify the materials encountered in the borings. Maintain a detailed log of each exploration. Observe groundwater conditions in the explorations. • Perform laboratory testing consisting of natural moisture content and dry density determinations of selected soil samples. • Provide recommendations for site preparation, grading and drainage, stripping depths, fill type for imported materials, compaction criteria, trench excavation and backfill, use of on-site soils, and wet/dry weather earthwork. • Provide geotechnical-engineering recommendations for design and construction of shallow spread foundations, including allowable design bearing pressure, minimum footing depth and width, and resistance to lateral loads in the form of passive resistance and base friction. • Provide recommendations for preparation of floor slab subgrade. • Evaluate the settlement of foundations and floor slabs. • Provide recommendations for retaining walls including lateral earth pressure (equivalent fluid pressures), drainage, and backfill requirements. • Provide recommendations for construction of asphalt pavements for on-site access roads and parking areas, including subbase, base course, and asphalt paving thickness. • Provide recommendations for subsurface drainage of foundations, floor slabs and pavements, as necessary. • Provide recommendations for Uniform Building Code (UBC) seismic site coefficients and evaluate the risk of liquefaction. • Provide a written report summarizing the results of our geotechnical evaluation. SITE CONDITIONS SURFACE CONDITIONS The footprint of the proposed building addition is landscaped with several trees up to 20 feet in height, shrubs, above-ground planter boxes, and concrete walkways. Bark dust and other organic soil associated with area landscaping is present over much of the building footprint. A shallow (up to 4 feet in depth) concrete pond is present in the center of the landscape area, a portion of which extends into the building footprint. A wood-framed gazebo has been built over the pond. Landscaping south of the proposed building footprint consists of bark dust and few shrubs. Some shrubs and small trees had been removed or transplanted at the time of our exploration. The driveway along the east side of the existing building is paved with asphalt concrete (AC). The landscaped planter east of the driveway is covered with several small trees, shrubs, and ivy. The planter slopes to the east away from the driveway, while the driveway climbs north from SW Sandburg Street. A level parking lot, currently owned by the neighboring business to the east (Coiltron), is located at the toe of the sloped planter. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS We explored subsurface conditions by completing four borings (B-1 through B-4). The borings were completed to depths varying between 11.5 and 31.5 feet. The approximate locations of the borings are shown in Figure 2. GeoDesign, Inc. 2 Transwestern-4:041800 Select soil samples from the borings were tested to determine the natural moisture content and in-situ dry density (dry unit weight). The subsurface exploration, exploration logs, and laboratory test results are provided in Appendix A. In general, we encountered medium stiff silt fill overlying stiff to very stiff silt in the near surface of the proposed building areas, with hard silt deposits observed at depth. Boring B-1, located within the proposed building footprint, encountered approximately 4 inches of bark dust at the ground surface overlying medium stiff silt fill with trace sand and gravel. The fill extended to approximately 4.5 feet below the ground surface. Based on the existing site topography, fill may be present to greater depths in the southeast corner of the proposed building footprint. Underlying the fill, we observed stiff to very stiff silt with trace clay and coarse sand. This soil is consistent with near surface native soil observed in B-2, located in the driveway east of the proposed building footprint. The soil grades to very stiff to hard silt with trace fine sand to sandy silt, which was observed to the maximum depths of our explorations (31.5 feet) in Borings B-1 and B-2. In general, we encountered medium dense gravel and sandy gravel fill overlying stiff native silt deposits in the vicinity of the proposed parking lot and retaining wall (Borings B-3 and B-4). We observed medium dense sandy gravel fill to a depth of 1.5 to 2.0 feet below the ground surface. The fill overlies stiff silt with trace to some clay and occasional sand, which was observed to the maximum depths of our exploration (11.5 feet) in Borings B-3 and B-4. Borings were not located within the Coiltron pavement areas, and instead were located within the adjacent planter strips. Therefore, AC and baserock thickness in the proposed parking lot addition footprint were not obtained. Laboratory testing of selected samples resulted in soil moisture contents varying between 21 and 28 percent for soil within 5.0 to 10.0 feet of the ground surface. Moisture contents of soil below 10.0 feet are generally between 30 to 41 percent. The dry density varied between 81 and 99 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), with an overall average of approximately 90 pcf. Groundwater was observed in Borings B-1 and B-2 at 19 feet and 15 feet below the ground surface, respectively, at the time of our exploration. Groundwater was not observed in Borings B-3 and B-4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on the results of our subsurface explorations and analyses, it is our opinion that the proposed structure, with the anticipated design foundation loads, can be supported on shallow foundations. If soft soil or existing fills are encountered at the base of the foundation excavations, it will be necessary to overexcavate this material and support the footings on granular pads. Our foundation recommendations are provided in the "Shallow Foundations" section of this report. GeoDesign, Inc. 3 Transwestern-4:041800 The native silt can be sensitive to small changes in moisture content and difficult, if not impossible, to adequately compact during wet weather. If construction is planned for the wet season, the project budget should reflect the recommendations for wet weather contained in this report. A more detailed discussion is presented in the "Construction Considerations" and "Structural Fill' sections of this report. The following paragraphs present specific geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed development. EROSION CONTROL The soil at this site is eroded easily by wind and water. Therefore, erosion control measures should be planned carefully and be in place before construction begins. Erosion control plans are required on construction projects located within the City of Tigard and Washington County. Measures that can be employed to reduce erosion include the use of silt fences, hay bales, buffer zones of natural growth, sedimentation ponds, and granular haul roads. In general, erosion control measures must limit sediment transport to less than 1 ton per acre per year, as calculated by the Universal Soil Loss equation. SITE PREPARATION Trees, shrubs, planter boxes, sidewalks, and other site improvements should be removed from all building, structural fill, and pavement areas. Root balls should be grubbed out to the depth of the roots, which could exceed 2.0 to 3.0 feet below the ground surface. Depending on the methods used to remove the root balls, considerable disturbance and loosening of the subgrade could occur during site grubbing. We recommend that soil disturbed during grubbing operations be removed to expose firm undisturbed subgrade. The resulting excavations should be backfilled with structural fill. If grubbing activities disturb less than a 12-inch depth of soil and provided the earthwork is being completed in the drier summer period, it may be possible to scarify, moisture condition, and compact the disturbed material in place. The existing topsoil/root zone should be stripped and removed from all proposed building, structural fill, and pavement areas and for a 5-foot margin around such areas. Based on our explorations, the average depth of stripping will be approximately 6 inches, although greater stripping depths may be required to remove localized zones of loose or organic soil, particularly in landscaped areas. Greater stripping depths (approaching 12 inches) should be anticipated in areas with thicker vegetation and shrubs. The actual stripping depth should be based on field observations at the time of construction. Stripped material should be transported offsite for disposal or used in landscaped areas. A member of our geotechnical staff should observe exposed structural subgrades and foundation excavations after stripping and site cutting have been completed to determine if there are additional areas of unsuitable or unstable soil. Our representative should observe a proofroll of structural fill, pavement, and slab subgrades with a fully-loaded dump truck or similar heavy rubber-tire construction equipment to identify soft, loose, or unsuitable areas. In areas not accessible to proof-rolling equipment, the subgrade should be evaluated by probing. Areas identified as soft, unstable, or otherwise unsuitable should GeoDesign, Inc. 4 Transwestern-4:041800 be over-excavated and replaced with compacted materials recommended for structural fill. Areas that appear too wet or soft to support proofrolling or compaction equipment should be prepared in accordance with the following recommendations for wet weather construction. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Trafficability of the silty areas of the site may be difficult during or after extended wet periods or when the moisture content of the surface soil is more than a few percentage points above optimum moisture content. When wet, the silty surficial soils are easily disturbed and may provide inadequate support for construction equipment. Proofrolling of the subgrade should not be performed during wet weather or if wet ground conditions exist. Instead, the subgrade should be evaluated by probing. Soils that have been disturbed during site preparation activities, or soft or loose zones identified during probing, should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. The use of granular haul roads or staging areas will be necessary for support of construction traffic during the rainy season or when the moisture content of the surface soil is more than a few percentage points above optimum moisture content. A 12-inch thickness of imported granular material generally should be sufficient for light staging areas and the basic building pad, but is generally not expected to be adequate to support heavy equipment or truck traffic. Haul roads and areas with repeated heavy construction traffic should be constructed with a minimum thickness of 18 inches of imported granular material. The imported granular material should consist of crushed rock that has a maximum particle size of 4 inches, is well-graded, and has less than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. We recommend that a geotextile be placed as a barrier between the subgrade and imported granular material in areas of repeated construction traffic. The geotextile should have a minimum Mullen burst strength of 250 pounds per square inch (psi) for puncture resistance and an apparent opening size (AOS) between an U.S. Standard No. 70 and No. 100 Sieve. As an alternative to placing 12 to 18 inches of granular material, the subgrade can be stabilized using cement amendment. If this approach is used, the thickness of granular material in staging areas and along haul roads can be reduced to 6 inches. This recommendation is based on an assumed minimum unconfined compressive strength of 100 psi for subgrade amended to a depth of 12 inches. Cement amendment is discussed below under the "Soil Amendment" section of this report. We recommend that 3 to 4 inches of imported granular material be placed at the base of footing excavations completed during wet weather conditions. The granular material reduces subgrade disturbance. GeoDesign, Inc. 5 Transwestern-4:041800 STRUCTURAL FILL General All material used as structural fill should be free of organic material or other unsuitable materials and particles larger than 4 inches in diameter. On-Site Material The on-site materials consist of silt, which can be used as structural fill provided they are adequately moisture conditioned. Silty soils are generally sensitive to small changes in moisture content and are difficult, if not impossible, to compact adequately during wet weather or when their moisture content is more than a few percentage points above the optimum moisture content. Our experience with similar soils indicates that the moisture content of the on-site materials are likely greater than the optimum moisture content for compaction. Therefore, moisture conditioning will be required to achieve adequate compaction. We recommend using imported granular material for structural fill if the on- site material cannot be properly moisture-conditioned. As an alternative, use of the on-site silty material as structural fill may be acceptable if it is properly amended with portland cement or lime. When used as structural fill, the on-site material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 6 to 8 inches and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D 1557. Fill placed in lawn and other unimproved areas should be compacted to not less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Imported Granular Material Imported granular material for structural fill should be pit or quarry-run rock, crushed rock, or crushed gravel and sand. It should be fairly well-graded between coarse and fine material and have less than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. The material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 12 inches and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. During the wet season or when wet subgrade conditions exist, the initial lift should be approximately 16 to 18 inches in uncompacted thickness and should be compacted by rolling with a smooth-drum roller without use of a drum vibrator. Trench Backfill Trench backfill for the utility pipe base and pipe zone should consist of well-graded granular material with a maximum particle size of 3/4-inch and less than 8 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. The material should be free of roots, organic matter, and other unsuitable materials. Backfill for the pipe base and pipe zone should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557, or as recommended by the pipe manufacturer. Within building and pavement areas, trench backfill placed above the pipe zone should be compacted to at least 92 percent of ASTM D 1557 at depths greater than 2.0 feet below the finished subgrade and as recommended for structural fill within 2 feet of finished subgrade. In all other areas, trench backfill above the pipe zone should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. GeoDesign, Inc. 6 Transwestern-4:041800 Soil Amendment Portland cement amendment is used to stabilize and strengthen in-place soils, or to permit use of silt and clay soils as structural fill when moisture contents are above optimum. As an alternative to the use of imported granular material in haul roads, slab and pavement areas, an experienced contractor may be able to amend the on-site soils with portland cement to obtain suitable support properties. The amount of cement used to amend the soils generally varies with moisture content. It is difficult to predict field performance of soils to cement amendment due to variability in soil response and we recommend laboratory testing to confirm expectations. However, for preliminary design purposes, we expect acceptable soil strength will be obtained using an amendment rate of 5 pounds portland cement tilled to a depth of 12 inches. When used for construction haul roads, the amended surface should be protected from abrasion by placing a minimum 6-inch thickness of crushed rock. The crushed rock may typically become contaminated with soil during construction. Contaminated base rock should be removed and replaced with clean rock in pavement areas such that the minimum thickness of free draining base at the surface is 6 inches. The permeability of cement-amended soil is extremely low. Because of the low permeability, cement amendment should not be completed in landscape areas, or, the cement-amended material should be removed from landscape areas prior to planting. In building areas, there is a risk that rain water can perch within the slab rock over the cement-amended soil during wet weather, resulting in trapped water under the floor slab. Trapped water can result in slab curling, excessive floor slab moisture, and damage to flooring. We recommend that cement-amended subgrade under building areas be sloped at a minimum of 0.5 percent, with the water collected at the perimeters of the building and routed to a suitable area and discharged away from building. It is not possible to amend soils during heavy or continuous rainfall. Work should be completed during suitable conditions. CUT AND FILL SLOPES Permanent cut and fill slopes should not exceed 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical). Buildings and pavements should be located at least 5 feet from the top of cut and fill slopes. The slopes should be planted with appropriate vegetation to provide protection against erosion as soon as possible after grading. Surface water runoff should be collected and directed away from slopes to prevent water from running down the face of the slope. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Allowable Bearing Pressure Based on the results of our subsurface explorations and analyses, it is our opinion that the proposed structure, with the anticipated design foundation loads as previously described, can be supported on shallow foundations. The foundations should be founded on undisturbed native silt or approved structural fill. Footings should not be founded on the existing fill at the site. GeoDesign, Inc. 7 Transwestern-4:041800 We recommend an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. This is a net bearing pressure; the weight of the footing and overlying backfill can be ignored in calculating footing sizes. The recommended allowable bearing pressure applies to the total of dead plus long-term live loads and may be increased by up to one-third for short-term loads such as those resulting from wind or seismic forces. Continuous wall and spread footings should be at least 18 inches and 24 inches wide, respectively. The bottom of exterior footings should be at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The bottom of interior footings should be placed at least 12 inches below the base of the floor slab. Foundations should not be supported on soft soils or the existing fill at the site. If soft soils or fill material are encountered at the base of foundation excavations, it will be necessary to overexcavate to firm native soil and support the footings on granular pads. The granular pads should extend 6 inches beyond the margins of the footings for every foot excavated below the footings base grade. The granular pads should consist of crushed rock or crushed gravel and sand that is fairly well-graded between coarse and fine, contain no organic matter or other deleterious materials, have a maximum particle size of 2 inches, and have less than 5 percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. The imported granular material should be compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557, or, as determined by one of our geotechnical staff, until well-keyed. We recommend that a member of our geotechnical staff observe the prepared footing subgrade. Total static settlement of footings founded as recommended is anticipated to be less than 1 inch. Differential settlements between adjacent foundation elements should be less than 1/2 inch. Resistance to Sliding Lateral loads on footings can be resisted by passive earth pressure on the sides of the structures and by friction on the base of the footings. Our analysis indicates that the available passive earth pressure for footings confined by structural fill or for footings constructed in direct contact with the undisturbed native silt soil is 340 pcf. Typically, the movement required to develop the available passive resistance may be relatively large. Therefore, we recommend using a reduced passive pressure of 250 pcf. Adjacent floor slabs, pavements, or the upper 12-inch depth of adjacent unpaved areas should not be considered when calculating passive resistance. A coefficient of friction equal to 0.35 may be used when calculating resistance to sliding. FLOOR SLABS Satisfactory subgrade support for building floor slabs supporting up to 150 psf area loading can be obtained on the existing undisturbed native stiff to stiff silts or on structural fill. A 6-inch-thick layer of imported granular material should be placed and compacted over the prepared subgrade to assist as a capillary break. Imported granular material should be crushed rock or crushed gravel and sand that is fairly well-graded between coarse and fine, contains no deleterious materials, has a maximum particle size of 11/2 inches, and has less GeoDesign, Inc. 8 Transwestern-4:041800 than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. The imported granular material should be placed in one lift and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. A subgrade modulus of 200 pounds per cubic inch may be used to design the floor slab. Settlement of floor slabs supporting the anticipated design loads and constructed as recommended is not expected to exceed about 1/2 inch. Vapor barriers are often required by flooring manufacturers to protect flooring and flooring adhesives. Many flooring manufacturers will warrant their product only if a vapor barrier is installed according to their recommendations. Selection and design of an appropriate vapor barrier, if needed, should be based on discussions among members of the design team. We can provide additional information to assist you with your decision. RETAINING STRUCTURES General Our retaining wall design recommendations are based on the following assumptions: (1) the walls consist of conventional, cantilevered retaining walls; (2) the walls are less than 12 feet in height; and (3) the backfill is level, drained, and consists of imported, angular gravel or coarse sand. Reevaluation of our recommendations will be required if the retaining wall design criteria for the project vary from these assumptions. For walls not restrained from rotation, an equivalent fluid pressure of 42 pcf should be used for design when calculating lateral earth pressures. Superimposed seismic lateral forces should be calculated based on a dynamic force of 6.7H2 pounds per lineal foot of wall, where H is the height of the wall in feet, and applied at 0.6H from the base of the wall. Footings for the retaining walls should be designed as recommended for shallow foundations. As stated above, our recommendations are based on the assumption of drained conditions. Drains that consist of a 4- to 6-inch-diameter perforated drainpipe wrapped in a geotextile filter should be installed behind all retaining structures. The pipe should be embedded in a minimum 2-foot-wide zone of drain rock and sloped to drain (minimum slope of 0.5 percent) toward a suitable discharge. The geotextile should have an AOS between the U.S. Standard No. 70 and No. 100 Sieve and a water permittivity greater than 1.5 sec-1. The drain rock should be uniformly graded, have a maximum particle size of 3 inches, and have less than 2 percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve (washed analysis). Backfill material placed behind the wall and extending a horizontal distance of 1/2H, where H is the height of the retaining wall, should consist of the well-graded sand or gravel, with not more than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. Alternatively, the on-site soils can be used as backfill material provided a minimum 2-foot-wide column of drain rock wrapped in a geotextile is placed against the wall. The rock column should extend from the perforated drainpipe or foundation drains to within approximately 1-foot of the ground surface. The drain rock should consist of well-graded gravel, with not more than 2 percent by weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve. GeoDesign, Inc. 9 Transwestern-4:041800 Backfill should be placed and compacted as recommended for structural fill, with the exception of backfill placed immediately adjacent to walls. Backfill adjacent to walls should be compacted to a lesser standard to reduce the potential for generation of excessive pressure on the walls. Backfill located within a horizontal distance of 3 feet from the retaining walls should be compacted to approximately 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. Backfill placed within 3 feet of the wall should be compacted in lifts less than 6 inches thick using hand-operated tamping equipment (such as jumping jack or vibratory plate compactors). If flat work (slabs, sidewalk, or pavement) will be placed adjacent to the wall, we recommend that the upper 2 feet of fill be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. Settlements of up to 1 percent of the wall height commonly occur immediately adjacent to the wall as the wall rotates and develops active lateral earth pressures. Consequently, we recommend that construction of flat work adjacent to retaining walls be postponed at least four weeks after construction, unless survey data indicates that settlement is complete prior to that time. Keystone Retaining Structures We understand the parking lot addition will include construction of a Keystone retaining wall along its eastern boundary. Based on the conceptual site plan, pavement areas will extend to within a few feet of the top of the wall. Vehicle loads should be accounted for in wall design, based on anticipated line loads and their distance from the wall itself. Our scope of work does not include the design of Keystone walls. The walls should be designed by a licensed engineer. The design criteria presented above for lateral earth pressures and foundations should be incorporated into the wall design. PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The pavement subgrade should be prepared in accordance with the previously described site preparation, wet weather construction, and structural fill recommendations. Our pavement recommendations assume that traffic at the site will be primarily passenger cars and small trucks. We do not have specific information on the frequency of the vehicles that will use the area. However, we have assumed that traffic conditions will consist of no more than 5 two- to three-axle trucks per day. Our pavement recommendations are based on an assumed soil resilient modulus value of 4,500 psi and a design life of 20 years. In access roadways and areas trafficked by buses and trucks, we recommend a pavement section consisting of a minimum of 3.0 inches of AC pavement underlain by a minimum of 9.0 inches of crushed rock base. A pavement section of 2.5 inches of AC over 7.0 inches of aggregate base can be used in paved areas that will be exposed to passenger car traffic only. In addition, we recommend that a geotextile separation layer be placed on the undisturbed subgrade and under the crushed rock base in the truck traffic area to prevent migration of the silt up into the base course. The geotextile should meet the requirements previously presented. GeoDesign, Inc. 10 Transwestern-4:041800 If the subgrade is stabilized with portland cement, a section consisting of 2.5 inches of AC over 4 inches of crushed rock base course should be appropriate in passenger car traffic areas and 3.0 inches of inches of AC over 6 inches of crushed rock base course in the bus and truck traffic areas. These sections are based on a minimum unconfined compressive strength of 100 psi and a mixing depth of at least 12 inches below the crushed rock base. All thicknesses are intended to be the minimum acceptable. The design of the recommended pavement section is based on the assumption that construction will be completed during an extended period of dry weather. Wet weather construction could require an increased thickness of aggregate base. The AC pavement should conform to Section 00745 for standard- and heavy-duty asphalt pavements of the Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, Oregon State Highway Division, 1996 Edition. The crushed rock base should conform to Section 02630 of these specifications and have less than 5 percent passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve. Crushed rock base should be placed in one lift and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. SITE DRAINAGE We recommend that all roof drains be connected to a tightline leading to storm drain facilities. Pavement surfaces and open space areas should be sloped such that surface water runoff is collected and routed to suitable discharge points. We also recommend that ground surfaces adjacent to buildings be sloped away from the buildings to facilitate drainage away from the buildings. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Base Shear We recommend that the building be designed using the applicable provisions of the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code for Zone 3. The 1997 edition of the UBC contains recommendations for seismic site coefficients (Ca and CO relative to average soil properties within the upper 100 feet of the soil column. For this site, we recommend using UBC soil profile type Sc. This classification results in Ca = 0.33 and C,, = 0.45. Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading Liquefaction can be defined as the sudden loss of shear strength in a soil due to an excessive buildup of pore water pressure. Liquefied soil layers generally follow a path of least resistance to dissipate pore pressures, often resulting in sudden surface settlement, sand boils or ejections, and/or lateral spreading in extreme cases. Clean, loose, uniform or silty, fine-grained, saturated sands are particularly susceptible to liquefaction. Lateral spreading is a liquefaction-related seismic hazard. Areas subject to lateral spreading are typically gently sloping or flat sites underlain by liquefiable sediments adjacent to an open face, such as riverbanks. Liquefied soils adjacent to open faces may "flow" in that direction, resulting in lateral displacement and surface cracking. Based on our subsurface exploration, the near-surface soils are comprised of stiff to very stiff silt. Groundwater levels at the time of our exploration were observed greater than GeoDesign, Inc. 11 Transwestern-4:041800 15 feet below the ground surface in the building area. We performed an analyses of liquefaction based on SPT blow count data, relative soil fines content, groundwater levels, and anticipated earthquake ground acceleration. Based on our analyses, the near-surface soils have a low risk of liquefaction and should not cause significant damage to the proposed structures. Accordingly, based on the low risk of liquefaction of surface soils, the risk of lateral spreading at the site is low. OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION Satisfactory foundation and earthwork performance depends to a large degree on quality of construction. Sufficient monitoring of the contractors activities is a key part of determining that the work is completed in accordance with the construction drawings and specifications. Subsurface conditions observed during construction should be compared with those encountered during the subsurface exploration. Recognition of changed conditions often requires experience; therefore, qualified personnel should visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect if subsurface conditions change significantly from those anticipated. We recommend that GeoDesign be retained to observe earthwork activities, including stripping, proofrolling of the subgrade and repair of soft areas, performing laboratory compaction and field moisture-density tests, observing final proofrolling of the pavement subgrade and base rock, and asphalt placement and compaction. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by Transwestern Commercial Services and its design and construction team for the proposed project. The data and report can be used for bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as warranty of the subsurface conditions and are not applicable to other sites. Exploration observations indicate soil conditions only at specific locations and only to the depths penetrated. They do not necessarily reflect soil strata or water level variations that may exist between exploration locations. If subsurface conditions differing from those described are noted during the course of excavation and construction, reevaluation will be necessary. The site development plans and design details were preliminary at the time this report was prepared. When the design has been finalized and if there are changes in the site grades or location, configuration, design loads, or type of construction for the buildings, the conclusions and recommendations presented may not be applicable. If design changes are made, we request that we be retained to review our conclusions and recommendations and to provide a written modification or verification. GeoDesign, Inc. 12 Transwestern-4:041800 The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time the report was prepared. No warranty, express or implied, should be understood. ♦ •♦ We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service to you. Please call if you have questions concerning this report or if we can provide additional services. Sincerely, GeoDesign, Inc. 4-or James E. Stone, E.I.T. �p PRpti, Engineering Staff ve�GINk-k-4 `�c 40,4V, -Sti-L- atir.4 z, 1 5 jM ���vG�Y 25.1�9� �4 George Saunders, P.E. Q�c P.5& :: Principal 601z000 GeoDesign, Inc. 13 Transwestern-4:041800 il 1 , r •' ))/.:4 T1 MR ) ��j// 35�2�; W 1 L 7/; ,',f� . I % I . tz, Y w , ,tit,, _ \ / � / 1 ;Ih J �' rt -i ). ,,,_-_ ____ __,:. _,,,/ le. y. (--,- ,/ /0. ; / ).1 r_ ) ) , / 4 : ,,,- -. H- IIIPst.,‘,%,,,, -,., s. __., \VMA- ,-)4/ \ ./.. de— \ 'c ^', , \„ \,'a, —\'''''W\% /-4 4,,i,,,f.fr ., -- , / i . ,.....1\p-„, : i „,-. , ‘., ,,,,,,,, ,,,,i i-1 _,-.\,--- , i 1! ._-, , ,, .,.. , ,,, 1,-;.-„,_ ./, *I", _ 1.,,., rf iiiii ..„..;■14,--12-',...., i II 1 i ,,-::/ ,1 1, )...) , ., 0_ ., C, II ' '•o :;:**701 ' / o ^Sao;' �\�� l �) �II;.l 111 0 'i 6+ ➢1 Q ,��= r �.�, � ��l,u 0111' ��� e� <==lz I . i ) 4[ + j. ik i i% k•co,..Zi,r_ii_ 2 r,Powivitif.• ---v_ l".1 Imo_ y V . "QI.c's�`�2-6/:-..-1":..3--- . -= '.--4",.----Z._I4V'L4 w LJJ:73. .7: I____,1117- :,iirailAMICU.'.-.'raffigure- 1 ItAl N, ;,- 49 I 7•iii:- /. : • /- u • • y maw\ /// N.4 gf). ',IVI,:-.:::\.4. ' . 06 --- _ .„..--41.! lir,' 6,-e.---- ',./ ...„, ,-\ 1 . . lit ir-i I r..S.N irr,,-_- _...„;., .::::,:::::::::::::: ce - x 40 T-1--- I lir, .-I - •II I ��� ti � jam*mar,. — - `� ..,144 -- 11_∎I co lit ' / .4 44 1�A rr h _ssix - . . �, - -•:: _i . • ( � �,t / ' 0 ■• 150 r.% ill ���� U /6 : 1 1- U. ‘'.I t!liarrillgrt? f tl ..... .WI*:•..1 t:44"- °pAi?P' -----7," il\- I 1..NRIAtke " . __=--- tit'--L-0,14), 1 , „.....0;;:,A.:. , ... ., ..4.,.. .. .. . ;-. ---... ., o' , i 1 wit - `!.✓' rn .1II .H-- 1. Z�IIP �.4- - 1f�"' HIS 0 �% Q. `°_..`� _,! \��j!/��'�-- • I� ����I � .!"'�®:I oar 1 ..:24,I� W 1 ,,,1, . - �� ;� �e .,,,, ,„,„,,,,,,,044 I / II WIRVA4t\t44,11.'/.0-' .,% \. a 71 ill( .---- ..± /reaRilCc\ 41 / • • .. , ,,,. 3/ i 6 n --N.,k 1 I cipiricri _ .\ _..,- a. /711::' . 417ffilf tekvg-- ..,,,,,e11 : ','N'i rik U...) . .,1 ii111 _1_,. it ,: 14110 In cl d 6 • : R41/4' ye*** .**i% ilrillp, -I --- -7-7-7!,em , .-1 ': 8 2 g 7 LLI 0 ..:. lommi • ___1 i- .-.t frkw.olvtiq el-, . ,....41,. ,....lea, ..., , 04... I . lee,, .,,, 3.‘vi: .1: .N 1 cr lk;,, • -V,V,!*A,ottl*\ 0 I_ „„feke_,.--_==.4.11„4e-i--avkillilkitt' / - It-, :(12-§ ”a2, N‘\\ i_Sit.._..k. 14 7/..., ',,47\\*.'.. ..t--,41417.. ..4,iiiiyrtitly lir. 3116, . ' rim ■ • • (5 . U- I I 112G 8 . X if — �cT'vgr�v �t�rtTfx /_...........3 ., z 12. $40,/.4,1... 16% . ,,,in i i 1 t26=k�� 1 � —� a. (1I Gt't-1oU • Z Q 1t 6- c`'-) I �1 x O P , ADV �- / �` W H : • I ow.;It- / d' F- ie---7 `) ,v = C._ I~XIST)N G 111 LDI t16 I I OG 1 '�� K-e-Y5 v (I�) 1 3A _ 1 I 1 i Ntr l& , N 1- Z ovVEfz FIN.FL K. 1✓1.1=x! Zl°I-' T I OxD H w 4 tTTI f-�. ---r--� FiN 6 w V /// -- + 20 l ' �/AL r01 -' I I 1 ' i 1 U .. =.i sB-3, �-r-R1 M / t = �I 1_-L-Pro N•7717"..\. r(��� e74�sP / 1 III, I �`. r- — • . ..: r , /1/ .Y11-- I \. )(1- -F-1 t.6 NI l_PINI& t_______r _ . . i ,,B-2 / /. N II Pr-i r', B-1 vAwlrloN. - -. 129 ( orfA� EXPLANATION: 9 12vo apt , 1 / b.� 1 V `I + Xt5r�16 - -,pt, , ■ �B-7 riff/ / • f Ot t*. •�- " �N \ BORING .:---*-T IN"! J Z 0 ______■___......l \\....." V) W • N 0 -- 0 1/32'= 1'0" W SITE PLAN BY ANKROM MOISAN r ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS. v APPENDIX A APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS General Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by completing four borings (B-1 through B-4) to depths varying between 11.5 and 31.5 feet. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown in Figure 2. Exploration locations were chosen based on a preliminary site plan provided to our office by Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects, P.C. The locations of the explorations were determined in the field by pacing from site features. This information should be considered accurate to the degree implied by the methods used. Greg Van Dehey Soil Exploration of Banks, Oregon, drilled the borings using a trailer- mounted drill rig equipped for solid flight auger drilling methods on March 28, 2000. The explorations were observed by a member of our geotechnical staff. We obtained representative samples of the various soils encountered in the explorations for geotechnical laboratory testing. Classifications and sampling intervals are shown in the boring logs included in this appendix. Soil Sampling Samples were obtained from the borings using a 1.5-inch ID split-spoon sampler in general accordance with guidelines presented in ASTM D 1586. The split-barrel samplers were driven into the soil with 140-pound hammer free-falling 30 inches. The samplers were driven a total distance of 18 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is recorded in the boring logs, unless otherwise noted. Relatively undisturbed samples were obtained using a standard Shelby tube in general accordance with guidelines presented in ASTM D 1587, the Standard Practice for Thin-walled Tube Sampling of Soils. Soil Classification The soil samples were classified in accordance with the `Key to Test Pit and Boring Logs Symbols" and "Soil Classification System and Guidelines,"copies of which are included in this appendix. The logs indicate the depths at which the soils or their characteristics change, although the change actually could be gradual. If the change occurred between sample locations, the depth was interpreted. Classifications and sampling intervals are shown in the logs included in this appendix. LABORATORY TESTING Classification The soil samples were classified in the laboratory to confirm field classifications. The laboratory classifications are included in the boring logs if those classifications differed from the field classifications. Moisture Content We tested the natural moisture content of selected soil samples in general accordance with guidelines presented in ASTM D 2216. The natural moisture content is a ratio of the weight GeoDesign, Inc. A-1 Transwestern-4:041800 • of the water to the dry weight of soil in a test sample and is expressed as a percentage. The moisture contents are included in the logs presented in this appendix. Dry Density We tested selected soil samples to determine the in-situ dry density. The tests were performed in general accordance with guidelines presented in ASTM D 2937. The dry density is defined as the ratio of the dry weight of the soil sample to the volume of that sample. The dry density typically is expressed in pounds per cubic foot. The dry densities are included in the logs presented in this appendix. GeoDesign, Inc. A-2 Transwestern-4:041800 KEY TO TEST PIT AND DORING LOG SYMBOLS SYMBOL SOIL DESCRIPTION LOCATION OF SAMPLE OBTAINED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 1586 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST LOCATION OF SPT SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO SAMPLE RECOVERY LOCATION OF SAMPLE OBTAINED USING THIN WALL, SHELBY TUBE, OR GEOPROBE SAMPLER IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 1587 LOCATION OF THIN WALL, SHELBY TUBE, OR GEOPROBE SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO SAMPLE RECOVERY LOCATION OF SAMPLE OBTAINED USING DAMES AND MOORE SAMPLER AND 300 POUND HAMMER OR PUSHED LOCATION OF DAMES AND MOORE SAMPLING ATTEMPT (300 POUND HAMMER OR PUSHED) WITH NO SAMPLE RECOVERY LOCATION OF GRAB SAMPLE WATER LEVEL GEOTECHNICAL TESTING EXPLANATIONS PP POCKET PENETROMETER LL LIQUID LIMIT TOR TORVANE PI PLASTICITY INDEX CONSOL CONSOLIDATION PCF POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOT DS DIRECT SHEAR PSF POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT P200 PERCENT PASSING U.S. NO. 200 SIEVE TSF TONS PER SQUARE FOOT W MOISTURE CONTENT P PUSHED SAMPLE DD DRY DENSITY OC ORGANIC CONTENT ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING EXPLANATIONS CA SAMPLE SUBMITTED FOR CHEMICAL ND NOT DETECTED ANALYSIS NS NO VISIBLE SHEEN PID PHOTOIONIZATION DETECTOR HEADSPACE ANALYSIS SS SLIGHT SHEEN PPM PARTS PER MILLION MS MODERATE SHEEN MG/KG MILLIGRAMS PER KILOGRAM HS HEAVY SHEEN P PUSHED SAMPLE KEY TO TEST PIT AND GEODESIGN , INC . BORING LOG SYMBOLS TABLE A-1 ' SOIL CLASSIFICATIOi. SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL NAME GRAVEL CLEAN GRAVEL GW Well graded, fine to coarse gravel More than 50%of GP Poorly graded gravel coarse fraction - COARSE GRAINED retained on GM Silty gravel No. GRAVEL WITH FINES o. Sieve SOILS GC Clayey gravel More than 50%retained on SW Well graded,fine to coarse sand No.200 Sieve SAND CLEAN SAND More than 50%of More Poorly graded sand coarse fraction passes SM Silty sand No.4 Sieve SAND WITH FINES SC Clayey sand ML Low plasticity silt SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC Liquid Limit CL Low plasticity clay FINE GRAINED SOILS less than 50% ORGANIC OL Organic sill,organic clay More than 50%passes MH High plasticity silt No.200 Sieve SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC Liquid Limit CH High plasticity clay,fat clay greater than 50% ORGANIC OH Organic clay,organic silt HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat SOIL CLASSIFICATION GUIDELINES GRANULAR SOILS COHESIVE SOILS STANDARD STANDARD UNCONFINED RELATIVE DENSITY PENETRATION CONSISTENCY PENETRATION COMPRESSIVE RESISTANCE RESISTANCE STRENGTH (TSF) Very Loose 0-4 Very Soft Less than 2 Less than 0.25 Loose 4- 10 Soft 2-4 0.25-0.50 Medium Dense 10-30 Medium Stiff 4-8 0.50- 1.0 Dense 30-50 Stiff 8- 15 1.0-2.0 Very Dense More than 50 Very Stiff 15-30 2.0-4.0 Hard More than 30 More than 4.0 GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION Boulders 12-36 inches SUBCLASSIFICATIONS Cobbles 3- 12 inches Percentage of other material in sample Gravel '/-3 inches (coarse) Clean 0-2 1/.-3/.inches(fine) Trace 2- 10 Sand No. 10-No.4 Sieve(coarse) Some 10-30 No. 10-No.40 Sieve (medium) Sandy,Silty,Clayey,etc. 30-50 No.40-No.200 Sieve(fine) Dry=very low moisture,dry to the touch;Moist=damp,without visible moisture;Wet=saturated,with visible free water. SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM GEODESIGN, INC. AND GUIDELINES TABLE A-2 ■ 111 • N-VALUE DEPTH GRAPHIC MATERIAL DESCRIPTION "A ADDITIONAL FEET LOG .:5) • MOISTURE CONTENT,% TESTING • -0 0 50 100 ML- Medium stiff, dark brown to brown and i I I I E FILL light gray SILT FILL with trace sand and I I I I I 1 � I gravel; moist. i 1 I I I I I I [ I f ML Stiff, light brown and tan mottled SILT 5 — with trace clay and coarse sand; moist. ' '1 � � II 0 . ! � I 10 -------- Ill Ai 1 ! • ! ML Stiff,tan and orange-brown mottled SILT i I 1 I with trace clay and sand; moist. I f I I I I j I f I I I I i I i { ; ! I I ! { i { becomes ve ry 1 1 I ii ' I ' 15 -- I i I t 1 stiff at 15.0 feet I ' � ! ! � l I f1 I ! i PI I I I •! ! DD=81 PCF --------- ML Very stiff to hard, light brown to tan SILT with trace fine sand and light gray silt V lenses;wet. ii11 '• i � 20- fit U lit li I ( I ( , Ii f I11 I I 1 � j1 II { I , II ! I 25 ! !0 ' I 4 °� 11 Ii 1 III II II I I I I I 1 t f 30__ i El 13r 1 I I f ID*, I i Boring completed at 31.5 feet on March 28,2000. Iii i � II 1 35 _ III f i i I I I I I I II 40 I 0 100 ❑ROD 0 RECOVERY G EC) DESIGN, INC. BORING B-1 TRANSWESTERN-4 APRIL 2000 FIGURE A-1 • N-VALUE DEPTH GRAPHIC MATERIAL DESCRIPTION % ADDITIONAL FEET LOG Q • MOISTURE CONTENT,% TESTING N _o 0 50 100 AC ASPHALT CONCRETE (2-inches thick). I I 1 ! ! I III I I GP GRAVEL base rock (5-inches thick). I I I I I I I I I I MH Stiff, light brown SILT with some clay, j I I I I I i trace coarse sand and gravel; moist. II ji 5— becomes very stiff at 5.0 feet ( I I I PI I I 1 0 I I I I DD=99PCF i II 1 ! ,./! MH Very stiff,orange-brown SILT with some I I light gray clayey silt lenses and trace I i28 coarse sand; moist. I I I io -------r ML Very stiff, brown SILT with trace fine III II I i sand and light gray silt lenses; moist. D I 41 I I 1 I IIIIIiI ✓/— ML Very stiff, brown and light gray, I i I I I Q variegated SILT with trace fine sand; i l i we I 1 11 Ell l 15 t. 0 ! Il I Iil III I I I ' 11 Ili III 1 --------- I il + l I / ML Hard, light brown to tan,fine sandy SILT; l wet. I i ` I I 1 I l 20— � IiI ' �i I Illli I I II I E 1 I E I I i1 ` 1I II II ' II � I i I , 25— . I fi11►1/2 II Ili - I II II 30— ! 1111 ; I Ili j1I ! ' ' I I '{ I , Boring completed at 31.5 feet on I I March 28,2000. I I I i j f I IIIEII II ` i1I I 35— IIiI I 11 ' III III ' I II I I I ! II I I I . 0 CI RQO [I RECOVERY 100 G EC) DESIGN, INC . BORING B-2 TRANSWESTERN-4 APRIL 2000 FIGURE A-2 • N-VALUE DEPTH GRAPHIC MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ADDITIONAL FEET LOG H • MOISTURE CONTENT,% TESTING —0 � 0 50: 100 II I �4� GW Medium dense,gray sandy GRAVEL; I I ! I I I i i I ! I i >7� moist(4-inch thick barkdust layer over i I ( I I ! ( I l • iii• fabric at surface). i ! . MH Stiff,brown and light gray mottled light - brown SILT with trace clay;moist. 1 1 1 MH Stiff,light brown SILT with some clay; , I �I 5— moist. i I D ! 1131 i I i i 1 I 11 I I j it 1 I ! II jiI ! � j I with occasional light gray silt lenses I I I I I I I below 8.0 feet I I I I i I MH Stiff,tan and light gray SILT with some ! i IiII 1 i ! i11I 10 clay and occasional black sand;wet. b I i 1 ! I I ! I I . 11 ! • ji 1 iij ! ij i i Boring completed at 11.5 feet on I I ! I I March 28,2000. 11 I l I I ! I ji i i5— III 1 1 I II1 11 I illll Iii ! 1 Ill 111 i iE I i I i 11 I1II I I 1 I - 1 I ' 111 ! 1 20— I I I ( I 1 I - i i ! j I i 1 { i 1IiE � i � I ! I l i 17 ! 1 I t I illi 1 111 11 { 1 ! ii 25— ( I I I1I 111 I I ) I II1 ' ill 30— - Ii � Iil i l jl . _ i 1 II11 11 I I I III j . i ) 1 1 - ! 35— 1 Ili ( 1 ll I I I ! I IIIII j ii ; 1i 1 1 I1 ! Il1jl I lilt : II Iii I t 1lj11111 ( ! II i ! I ! l ! II - 1 ! III ! 1 I � ! ! S1I ii 0 50 100 ❑RQD ❑ RECOVERY GE •DESIGN, INC. BORING B-3 TRANSWESTERN-4 APRIL 2000 FIGURE A-3 J • N-VALUE DEPTH GRAPHIC MATERIAL DESCRIPTION c- ADDITIONAL . FEET LOG N • MOISTURE CONTENT,% TESTING 0 50 100 —0 �tefil GP Sandy GRAVEL (2-inch thick barkdust I I ' layer at surface). I ' I ' I ' I i • 1 I IIf II ` ML- Medium stiff,dark brown SILT FILL with 1 I I i FILL occasional debris;moist. I i I I ! 12i MH Stiff, brown and dark gray SILT with Al '• trace clay,sand and gravel; moist. I I I 1 I I I I ' E I ! 5— with occasional dark brown and yellow I 1 I I ( • I I I , silty sand lenses at 4.5 feet PI i I • I �� becomes very stiff at 5.0 feet I ' Ii 1 ML Stiff,light brown SILT with trace fine I I I I 1 1 1 1 sand and occasional tan silt lenses; [I 13 I� I I moist to wet 1 1 I 1 1 I I I E io �_ ML Stiff to very stiff, tan SILT;moist to wet. 1 I I 1 I I 1 I Al6 411 II II IIIiIjI Boring completed at 11.5 feet on I I I March 28,2000. 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I — {{i I 15 � ! 1Ei 11 { i11 1 1 1 I i I !( 1111 1 1 1I1 t1 ' i1 II ! IIIi Ili1 � I IIii - 111 , I 1 111 it 11 I IIi1III 20— I ; I { I1 I 11111 ; 1 I I{1 } 11 ' 1 Ilii ► Ii1I111 1 111 I 1111111 111I ' l � ii 111 IIj - III II{ I I t i t l 25— I I I 1 . 111 I • 11 1 11 11 ` 11 • i : Ilis II 111 1 II 1 III ' II � I ' I III . III I 11 II 30_ I1 1I1 1111 1 li I II I it I i II I 1 III 1 E II 1 I III I i } I ` IIIi1 1 1 1 1 i — i 111 35— I I I 111 I 1 I IIi111 — 1 11 I f I VIII I I • 11 III 1 I I i 111 I II I III 1 I I ! I 1i 40 o so 1 1 II ' IFI 1 1 4 I ! ❑RQD El RECOVERY 100 G EO DESIGN, IMc_ BORING B-4 TRANS WESTERN-4 APRIL 2000 FIGURE A-4 v . TOC Building Site Storm Review Drainage Report May 16, 2000 • TOC Office Remodel Tigard, Oregon Prepared For J.H. Seeley, Jr. TOC Management Services 6825 SW Sandburg Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 and Roger Superneau Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects 6720 S.W. Macadam Suite 100 Portland, Oregon 97219 Prepared By: Brent Sanborn, P.E. WRG Design Inc. 10450 SW Nimbus Portland, Oregon 97223 Nt. Typical Parking Site Plan Layout ` 4� k Best Management Practice �.,,, for treatment of stormwater runoff from parking lots, The characteristics of the CDS technology provides ,,' vehicle service and storage facilities. 9y P TOTAL SITE-7.6 ACRES for the capture and retention of virtually all trash . \ \ \ \ and debris, the effective capture of oil spills and Storm Drain - \� \ `,.\\\\\ _ .._\ __. ^, the opportunity to apply sorbent material to the CDS "1" \ separation chamber. It optimizes the exposure of _Y \{ sorbent material and allows effective capture and Storm Drain retention of the low concentrations of free oil and (LOT NO. 10) (LOT NO 9) \ \ \ r, grease from parking lots. \ � ��\ ` { •�� ' g P 9 BUILDING-1 BUILDING-2 0 " s low,31,860 SF 40,528 SF \• ` \\ : r I �*^" r _ .- Separation Chamber \ \ \ �a\� - -4 '-� "'-* , 7._ ' 1® %" t� t Main \ \ t and Screen Storm Drain \�' \ �� t — ry I Pollutants are captured inside • \ ` \'; \ �" V \ ' ' �; j }' •-: (t. ../ - the separation chamber, while � � • ��� ,'� r r aT the separation screen with `` Storm Drain / i% `I . � the water asses through '_' `�='' �� �; �� • ..1 , 0.048 inch opening. "'� i % ''�It„ „A / °"'� f4� r_ v Single CDS unit treats �.. %i��." � li 6 acre of 6►. s, �/ '= ..4-, �, R entire 7 �% l r �+► �/� - commercial site. �' .n. A CO '. 1 i Deflective Separation ' J 1„ t Screen ; �" .�.�, t : l 1[4 .4 t �� How CDS Works. The CDS system :_: i 0 � rah _ :✓ ' =�,► , uses indirect screening. Pollutants . 1 /'f'\nop are deflected away from the i /- '`0I , � ' screen face. Hydraulic balancing i Ott FSW30_28 FIBERGLASS Storm drain inlets Nair. ensures the screen does not block • CDS unit installed per ' �'� %� or become clogged. manufacturer's P ' Parking lot runoff F"' i specifications I � I Single CDS unit captures and removes Storm drain s CDS Technologies Services Now oil and grease in addition to trash,debris • Standard layout and specifications for most installations ` and coarse sediment before parking lot ' • Maintenance manual �_ I runoff discharges to storm drain ''' • Maintenance and cleanout services • Certification to regulatory agencies on maintenance ' v � � The CDS unit can also be placed within an existing stormwater '. "° and cleanout when performed by CDS system. Its remarkably small footprint takes little space and • Project site plan, conceptual layout and consultation requires no supporting infrastructure. CDS TECHNOLOGIES, Inc., is building on for large installations. Pollutants of Concern from Parking Lots • Trash and debris widespread success in removing gross pollutants C;" from stormwater and res ondin to re uests for Drawings and Specifications o g q• Vegetative material application of its technology to control pollutants in c in • Planning and construction drawings available in AutoCad format • Oil and grease runoff from smaller sites. CDS has expanded its • CDS installation and oil sorbent medium specifications available • Heavy metals-dissolved and particulate product line to treat runoff from parking lots and in electronic formats. • Vehicle combustion products. vehicle storage facilities. CDS's product line includes ECHNOLOGIES units capable of treating a wide now range, up to 300 cubic feet per second (cfs). Stormwater Pollution Control Federal Clean Water Act Requirements CDS Technologies, Inc Municipalities are required by National Pollution Discharge IIIII1�1�11`\\ Elimination System (NPDES) permits to reduce stormwater 1 16360 S. Monterey Road, Suite 250 1255 La Quinta Drive, Suite 218 Web: http://www.cdstech.com/ pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. cps Morgan Hill, CA 95037 Orlando, FL 32809 email: cds @cdstech-us.com Tel: (408) 779-6363 Fax: (408) 782-0721 Tel: 407-855-8848 Fax: 407-855-7818 New development and re-development projects are required to Toll Free 888-535-7559 Toll Free 800-848-9955 develop and implement Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) that include construction and maintenance of Best TECHNOLOGIES Management Practices (BMP). Stormwater Pollution Control Key Features of the CDS Technology Cost - Effective Installation • Eliminates need for treatment at multiple storm drain inlets N . k. • Centralizes maintenance effort • Small footprint • Underground, unobtrusive and easy to install ,, Minimal Construction • Non-blocking and non-mechanical IF . �► \ Effort to Install ; • Low maintenance cost with safe and easy cleanout of pollutants FSW30_28 • Eliminates need for Frequent cleanout of catch basins ( 4 = • Capture oil spills. 1 t ' • 1. Preassemble Diversion Weir Box oA and CDS unit above ground. gr} "7� CDS Technology Pollutant Removal Capability f� 2. No crane required. • Captures all parking lot litter greater than 0.048 inches ,r ' Assembled unit is light-weight. .7'.-,,L-z--A. . • L w ,,.-.. • Effective when combined with sorbents in the capture of 80-90% of the oil and � 3. CDS unit is off the pipeline alignment. �' :' grease found in parking lot runoff* - n " , Small diameter foot print. _�.. i' • Effective in capture of fine sand and larger particles 4 `„ 4. Gravel or sand backfill speeds • Provides essential first step of treatment train (absorption, filtration and infiltration) installation and reduces compaction i-�, b -_-3 when regulations require removal of dissolved metals and other pollutants attached effort. _ , to very fine particles. r . -- •Studies conducted by Professor Michael Stenstrom, PhD., at the UCLA found that "the addition of sorbents material within the separation chamber of CDS units 1:: e . .• can remove 80 to 90% of the oil and grease at concentrations typically found t 3 14 ' ,; -'- in stormwater."Levels of used motor oil were reduced to less than 1 mg/L :` _, - b... ` r .r � L_- during this study. Co Copies of Professor Stenstrom's report are available from y: _'. r�° '" - - 9 Y P P < , - - 4j: ; �t CDS Technologies to assist in the selection of the optimum sorbent material. `z �S � < � �. �-.: _, ti, ra �„ Design Considerations Current Clients (Partial List) / • Impervious drainage area served • Orlando, Florida : "' • Design flow of pipe • Brevard County, Florida t ", .j sar`Q�P . • Design treatment flow • City and County of San Francisco "'-.; .. b < • Head loss • United States Navy a� � i" ; 1f� n . :x • Grated inlet covers • City of Anaheim • �',: t ;, rN y,..� r • Traffic loading. '�w r 9 City of Santa Monica ,,,;,,. -' ` s 7 Y.• • Ventura County Flood Control District. Capacity and Physical Features Maintenance and Cleanout Maintenance Requirements A . Capacities** *•• Annual inspection and power wash + r. Manufacture Model' Treated Runoff Sump Oil Design Depth Below Foot Print P P �t �' `' Material Designation Impervious Flows Storage Storage Head Loss Pipe Invert Diameter screen ,t" s'",....;:: _ R . Area (acres) cfs yd3 gals (ft) (ft) (ft) • Inspection of unit after first major "`."•: 't '�. ..r ._ :44,-..--: seasonal storm f , `� FSW20 20 2.0 1.1 0.7 24 0.31 4.5 4.5 Removal of captured pollutants when k ": �;/ Zr xi "� Fiberglass - P P i / i �.r,;%+` FSW30 28 6.0 3.0 1.8 53 0.43 5.3 6.0 sump two thirds to three quarters full t `�'~ i` «. PSW30 28 6.0 3.0 1.8 101 0.43 7.0 6.5 Remove and replace oil and grease • 1 • jj °;3•",2'11, 15 It Precast Concrete - sorbents when fully discolored/coated ��.`-� '. �f�ty• P `' _._ ` PSW50_50 22 11 1.9 318 0.78 9.6 9.5 with oil. , ���4,.rts t `CDS Fibreglass (F), Precast (P), Stormwater (SW). ) ��� ` ✓� ° �Qr j i� t rte., � '''�. .''4 ilt i, j MS's^:. 7;jar:� , •Flow capacities and sump sizes may be customized to meet your site specific needs. l , .' . , i ! + ! `� `s i °,Yfiy.k‹. 1w h, 5/8/00 9 : 55 : 23 WRG Design I. page 1 TOC BUILDING ADDITION CITY OF TIGARD PLAN REVIEW B. SANBORN DETAIL BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: POST10 NAME: POST DEVELOPMENT 10 YR EVENT SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 0 . 25 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 . 60 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres 0 . 25 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 0 . 00 98 . 00 TC 0 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 ' PEAK RATE : 0 . 20 cfs VOL: 0 . 07 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) 10 310 0.0341 610 0.0477 910 0.0284 1210 0.0213 1510 20 320 0.0341 620 0.0477 920 0.0284 1220 0.0213 1520 30 330 0.0342 630 0.0477 930 0.0284 1230 0.0213 1530 40 340 0.0381 640 0.0424 940 0.0284 1240 0.0213 1540 50 350 0.0381 650 0.0424 950 0.0284 1250 0.0213 1550 60 360 0.0381 660 0.0424 960 0.0284 1260 0.0213 1560 70 0.0030 370 0.0420 670 0.0389 970 0.0266 1270 0.0213 1570 80 0.0030 380 0.0420 680 0.0389 980 0.0266 1280 0.0213 1580 90 0.0031 390 0.0421 690 0.0389 990 0.0266 1290 0.0213 1590 100 0.0103 400 0.0493 700 0.0372 1000 0.0266 1300 0.0213 1600 110 0.0103 410 0.0493 710 0.0372 1010 0.0266 1310 0.0213 1610 120 0.0104 420 0.0494 720 0.0372 1020 0.0266 1320 0.0213 1620 130 0.0158 430 0.0601 730 0.0354 1030 0.0266 1330 0.0213 1630 140 0.0158 440 0.0601 740 0.0354 1040 0.0266 1340 0.0213 1640 150 0.0158 450 0.0602 750 0.0354 1050 0.0266 1350 0.0213 1650 160 0.0201 460 0.0727 760 0.0337 1060 0.0249 1360 0.0195 1660 170 0.0201 470 0.0727 770 0.0337 1070 0.0249 1370 0.0195 1670 180 0.0201 480 0.0737 780 0.0336 1080 0.0249 1380 0.0195 1680 190 0.0222 490 0.2011 790 0.0319 1090 0.0249 1390 0.0195 1690 200 0.0222 500 0.2011 800 0.0319 1100 0.0249 1400 0.0195 1700 210 0.0222 510 0.2002 810 0.0319 1110 0.0248 1410 0.0195 1710 220 0.0236 520 0.0968 820 0.0319 1120 0.0231 1420 0.0195 1720 230 0.0236 530 0.0968 830 0.0319 1130 0.0231 1430 0.0195 1730 240 0.0236 540 0.0966 840 0.0319 1140 0.0231 1440 0.0194 1740 250 0.0261 550 0.0705 850 0.0301 1150 0.0231 1450 1750 260 0.0261 560 0.0705 860 0.0301 1160 0.0231 1460 1760 270 0.0262 570 0.0704 870 0.0301 1170 0.0231 1470 1770 280 0.0301 580 0.0530 880 0.0301 1180 0.0213 1480 1780 290 0.0301 590 0.0530 890 0.0301 1190 0.0213 1490 1790 300 0.0302 600 0.0529 900 0.0301 1200 0.0213 1500 1800 . 5/8/00 9 : 55 : 23 am WRG Design Inc. page 2 TOC BUILDING ADDITION CITY OF TIGARD PLAN REVIEW B . SANBORN DETAIL BASIN SUMMARY Watiet Q.1)1ll-t .S' I. D-15 d.o5 cis (1-6w Fs..ovv) BASIN ID: POST2 NAME : POST DEVELOPMENT 2 YR EVENT SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 .25 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 2 . 80 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres 0 . 25 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 0 . 00 98 . 00 TO 0 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 0 . 15 cfs VOL: 0 . 05 Ac-ft TIME : 490 min TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) 10 310 0.0254 610 0.0369 910 0.0220 1210 0.0165 1510 20 320 0.0254 620 0.0369 920 0.0220 1220 0.0165 1520 30 330 0.0254 630 0.0369 930 0.0220 1230 0.0165 1530 40 340 0.0286 640 0.0329 940 0.0220 1240 0.0165 1540 50 350 0.0286 650 0.0329 950 0.0220 1250 0.0165 1550 60 360 0.0286 660 0.0328 960 0.0220 1260 0.0165 1560 70 0.0010 370 0.0317 670 0.0301 970 0.0206 1270 0.0165 1570 80 0.0010 380 0.0317 680 0.0301 980 0.0206 1280 0.0165 1580 90 0.0010 390 0.0317 690 0.0301 990 0.0206 1290 0.0165 1590 100 0.0058 400 0.0374 700 0.0288 1000 0.0207 1300 0.0165 1600 110 0.0058 410 0.0374 710 0.0288 1010 0.0207 1310 0.0165 1610 120 0.0058 420 0.0375 720 0.0288 1020 0.0207 1320 0.0165 1620 130 0.0101 430 0.0458 730 0.0274 1030 0.0207 1330 0.0166 1630 140 0.0101 440 0.0458 740 0.0274 1040 0.0207 1340 0.0166 1640 150 0.0101 450 0.0459 750 0.0274 1050 0.0206 1350 0.0165 1650 160 0.0136 460 0.0557 760 0.0261 1060 0.0193 1360 0.0152 1660 170 0.0136 470 0.0557 770 0.0261 1070 0.0193 1370 0.0152 1670 180 0.0136 480 0.0564 780 0.0261 1080 0.0193 1380 0.0152 1680 190 0.0155 490 0.1547 790 0.0247 1090 0.0193 1390 0.0152 1690 200 0.0155 500 0.1547 800 0.0247 1100 0.0193 1400 0.0152 1700 210 0.0155 510 0.1541 810 0.0247 1110 0.0193 1410 0.0152 1710 220 0.0169 520 0.0747 820 0.0247 1120 0.0179 1420 0.0152 1720 230 0.0169 530 0.0747 830 0.0247 1130 0.0179 1430 0.0152 1730 240 0.0169 540 0.0745 840 0.0247 1140 0.0179 1440 0.0151 1740 250 0.0190 550 0.0545 850 0.0234 1150 0.0179 1450 1750 260 0.0190 560 0.0545 860 0.0234 1160 0.0179 1460 1760 270 0.0190 570 0.0544 870 0.0234 1170 0.0179 1470 1770 280 0.0222 580 0.0410 880 0.0234 1180 0.0165 1480 1780 290 0.0222 590 0.0410 890 0.0234 1190 0.0165 1490 1790 300 0.0222 600 0.0409 900 0.0234 1200 0.0165 1500 1800 • • 5/8/00 9 : 55 :24 am WRG Design Inc . page 3 TOC BUILDING ADDITION CITY OF TIGARD PLAN REVIEW B. SANBORN DETAIL BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID : POST25 NAME : POST DEVELOPMENT 25 YR EVENT SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 50 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE ▪ TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 4 . 00 inches AREA. . : 0 . 14 Acres 0 .35 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 0 . 40 cfs VOL: 0 . 14 Ac-ft TIME: 500 min TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) 10 310 0.0607 610 0.0997 910 0.0605 1210 0.0458 1510 20 320 0.0607 620 0.0997 920 0.0605 1220 0.0458 1520 30 330 0.0608 630 0.0997 930 0.0605 1230 0.0458 1530 40 340 0.0692 640 0.0890 940 0.0606 1240 0.0459 1540 50 350 0.0692 650 0.0890 950 0.0606 1250 0.0459 1550 60 360 0.0692 660 0.0890 960 0.0606 1260 0.0459 1560 70 0.0062 370 0.0778 670 0.0819 970 0.0569 1270 0.0459 1570 80 0.0062 380 0.0778 680 0.0819 980 0.0569 1280 0.0459 1580 90 0.0063 390 0.0779 690 0.0818 990 0.0569 1290 0.0459 1590 100 0.0181 400 0.0930 700 0.0784 1000 0.0569 1300 0.0459 1600 110 0.0181 410 0.0930 710 0.0784 1010 0.0569 1310 0.0459 1610 120 0.0182 420 0.0931 720 0.0783 1020 0.0569 1320 0.0459 1620 130 0.0266 430 0.1154 730 0.0748 1030 0.0570 1330 0.0460 1630 140 0.0266 440 0.1154 740 0.0748 1040 0.0570 1340 0.0460 1640 150 0.0267 450 0.1156 750 0.0748 1050 0.0570 1350 0.0459 1650 160 0.0332 460 0.1422 760 0.0712 1060 0.0533 1360 0.0422 1660 170 0.0332 470 0.1422 770 0.0712 1070 0.0533 1370 0.0422 1670 180 0.0332 480 0.1443 780 0.0712 1080 0.0533 1380 0.0422 1680 190 0.0362 490 0.4040 790 0.0676 1090 0.0533 1390 0.0422 1690 200 0.0362 500 0.4040 800 0.0676 1100 0.0533 1400 0.0422 1700 210 0.0363 510 0.4023 810 0.0676 1110 0.0533 1410 0.0422 1710 220 0.0391 520 0.1986 820 0.0678 1120 0.0495 1420 0.0422 1720 230 0.0391 530 0.1986 830 0.0678 1130 0.0495 1430 0.0422 1730 240 0.0391 540 0.1982 840 0.0677 1140 0.0495 1440 0.0419 1740 250 0.0444 550 0.1460 850 0.0641 1150 0.0496 1450 1750 260 0.0444 560 0.1460 860 0.0641 1160 0.0496 1460 1760 270 0.0445 570 0.1458 870 0.0641 1170 0.0496 1470 1770 280 0.0524 580 0.1103 880 0.0642 1180 0.0458 1480 1780 290 0.0524 590 0.1103 890 0.0642 1190 0.0458 1490 1790 300 0.0525 600 0.1102 900 0.0642 1200 0.0458 1500 1800 • • 5/8/00 9 : 55 : 24 am WRG Design Inc . page 4 TOC BUILDING ADDITION CITY OF TIGARD PLAN REVIEW B . SANBORN DETAIL BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: POSTS NAME : POST DEVELOPMENT 5 YR EVENT SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 25 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 . 20 inches AREA. . : 0 . 00 Acres 0 . 25 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 0 . 00 98 . 00 TC 0 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 0 . 18 cfs VOL: 0 . 06 Ac-ft TIME : 490 min TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) 10 310 0.0298 610 0.0423 910 0.0252 1210 0.0189 1510 20 320 0.0298 620 0.0423 920 0.0252 1220 0.0189 1520 30 330 0.0298 630 0.0423 930 0.0252 1230 0.0189 1530 40 340 0.0333 640 0.0377 940 0.0252 1240 0.0189 1540 50 350 0.0333 650 0.0377 950 0.0252 1250 0.0189 1550 60 360 0.0334 660 0.0376 960 0.0252 1260 0.0189 1560 70 0.0019 370 0.0369 670 0.0345 970 0.0236 1270 0.0189 1570 80 0.0019 380 0.0369 680 0.0345 980 0.0236 1280 0.0189 1580 90 0.0019 390 0.0369 690 0.0345 990 0.0236 1290 0.0189 1590 100 0.0080 400 0.0434 700 0.0330 1000 0.0236 1300 0.0189 1600 110 0.0080 410 0.0434 710 0.0330 1010 0.0236 1310 0.0189 1610 120 0.0080 420 0.0434 720 0.0330 1020 0.0236 1320 0.0189 1620 130 0.0129 430 0.0530 730 0.0314 1030 0.0236 1330 0.0189 1630 140 0.0129 440 0.0530 740 0.0314 1040 0.0236 1340 0.0189 1640 150 0.0129 450 0.0531 750 0.0314 1050 0.0236 1350 0.0189 1650 160 0.0168 460 0.0642 760 0.0299 1060 0.0221 1360 0.0174 1660 170 0.0168 470 0.0642 770 0.0299 1070 0.0221 1370 0.0174 1670 180 0.0168 480 0.0651 780 0.0299 1080 0.0221 1380 0.0174 1680 190 0.0188 490 0.1779 790 0.0283 1090 0.0221 1390 0.0174 1690 200 0.0188 500 0.1779 800 0.0283 1100 0.0221 1400 0.0174 1700 210 0.0188 510 0.1772 810 0.0283 1110 0.0221 1410 0.0174 1710 220 0.0202 520 0.0857 820 0.0283 1120 0.0205 1420 0.0174 1720 230 0.0202 530 0.0857 830 0.0283 1130 0.0205 1430 0.0174 1730 240 0.0202 540 0.0856 840 0.0283 1140 0.0205 1440 0.0172 1740 250 0.0226 550 0.0625 850 0.0268 1150 0.0205 1450 1750 260 0.0226 560 0.0625 860 0.0268 1160 0.0205 1460 1760 270 0.0226 570 0.0624 870 0.0268 1170 0.0205 1470 1770 280 0.0262 580 0.0470 880 0.0268 1180 0.0189 1480 1780 290 0.0262 590 0.0470 890 0.0268 1190 0.0189 1490 1790 300 0.0262 600 0.0469 900 0.0268 1200 0.0189 1500 1800 • 5/8/00 9 :55 : 24 am WRG Design Inc. page 5 • TOC BUILDING ADDITION CITY OF TIGARD PLAN REVIEW B. SANBORN DETAIL BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: PRE10 NAME : PRE DEVELOPMENT 10 YR EVENT SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 25 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE • TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 60 inches AREA. . : 0 . 25 Acres 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 0 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE : 0 . 13 cfs VOL: 0 . 04 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) 10 310 0.0077 610 0.0366 910 0.0239 1210 0.0187 1510 20 320 0.0077 620 0.0366 920 0.0239 1220 0.0187 1520 30 330 0.0077 630 0.0366 930 0.0239 1230 0.0187 1530 40 340 0.0111 640 0.0331 940 0.0240 1240 0.0187 1540 50 350 0.0111 650 0.0331 950 0.0240 1250 0.0187 1550 60 360 0.0111 660 0.0331 960 0.0240 1260 0.0187 1560 70 370 0.0148 670 0.0308 970 0.0226 1270 0.0188 1570 80 380 0.0148 680 0.0308 980 0.0226 1280 0.0188 1580 90 390 0.0148 690 0.0308 990 0.0226 1290 0.0188 1590 100 400 0.0203 700 0.0297 1000 0.0227 1300 0.0188 1600 110 410 0.0203 710 0.0297 1010 0.0227 1310 0.0188 1610 120 420 0.0203 720 0.0297 1020 0.0227 1320 0.0188 1620 130 430 0.0283 730 0.0286 1030 0.0228 1330 0.0188 1630 140 440 0.0283 740 0.0286 1040 0.0228 1340 0.0188 1640 150 450 0.0284 750 0.0286 1050 0.0228 1350 0.0188 1650 160 460 0.0387 760 0.0274 1060 0.0214 1360 0.0173 1660 170 470 0.0387 770 0.0274 1070 0.0214 1370 0.0173 1670 180 480 0.0394 780 0.0274 1080 0.0214 1380 0.0173 1680 190 490 0.1257 790 0.0262 1090 0.0215 1390 0.0174 1690 200 500 0.1257 800 0.0262 1100 0.0215 1400 0.0174 1700 210 510 0.1252 810 0.0262 1110 0.0215 1410 0.0174 1710 220 0.0003 520 0.0678 820 0.0264 1120 0.0200 1420 0.0174 1720 230 0.0003 530 0.0678 830 0.0264 1130 0.0200 1430 0.0174 1730 240 0.0003 540 0.0676 840 0.0264 1140 0.0200 1440 0.0173 1740 250 0.0022 550 0.0517 850 0.0251 1150 0.0201 1450 1750 260 0.0022 560 0.0517 860 0.0251 1160 0.0201 1460 1760 270 0.0022 570 0.0516 870 0.0251 1170 0.0201 1470 1770 280 0.0047 580 0.0399 880 0.0252 1180 0.0186 1480 1780 290 0.0047 590 0.0399 890 0.0252 1190 0.0186 1490 1790 300 0.0047 600 0.0399 900 0.0252 1200 0.0186 1500 1800 5/8/00 9 : 55 : 25 am WRG Design Inc . page 6 TOC BUILDING ADDITION CITY OF TIGARD PLAN REVIEW B . SANBORN DETAIL BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: PRE2 NAME : PRE DEVELOPMENT 2 YR EVENT SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 25 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 2 . 80 inches AREA. . : 0 . 25 Acres 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 0 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE: 0 . 08 cfs VOL: 0 . 03 Ac-ft TIME: 500 min TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) 10 310 0.0027 610 0.0255 910 0.0172 1210 0.0136 1510 20 320 0.0027 620 0.0255 920 0.0172 1220 0.0136 1520 30 330 0.0027 630 0.0255 930 0.0172 1230 0.0136 1530 40 340 0.0049 640 0.0232 940 0.0173 1240 0.0137 1540 50 350 0.0049 650 0.0232 950 0.0173 1250 0.0137 1550 60 360 0.0050 660 0.0231 960 0.0173 1260 0.0137 1560 70 370 0.0075 670 0.0216 970 0.0164 1270 0.0137 1570 80 380 0.0075 680 0.0216 980 0.0164 1280 0.0137 1580 90 390 0.0075 690 0.0216 990 0.0164 1290 0.0137 1590 100 400 0.0111 700 0.0210 1000 0.0165 1300 0.0138 1600 110 410 0.0111 710 0.0210 1010 0.0165 1310 0.0138 1610 120 420 0.0112 720 0.0210 1020 0.0165 1320 0.0138 1620 130 430 0.0165 730 0.0202 1030 0.0166 1330 0.0138 1630 140 440 0.0165 740 0.0202 1040 0.0166 1340 0.0138 1640 150 450 0.0165 750 0.0202 1050 0.0165 1350 0.0138 1650 160 460 0.0236 760 0.0195 1060 0.0155 1360 0.0127 1660 170 470 0.0236 770 0.0195 1070 0.0155 1370 0.0127 1670 180 480 0.0241 780 0.0195 1080 0.0155 1380 0.0127 1680 190 490 0.0813 790 0.0187 1090 0.0156 1390 0.0128 1690 200 500 0.0813 800 0.0187 1100 0.0156 1400 0.0128 1700 210 510 0.0810 810 0.0187 1110 0.0156 1410 0.0128 1710 220 520 0.0456 820 0.0188 1120 0.0146 1420 0.0128 1720 230 530 0.0456 830 0.0188 1130 0.0146 1430 0.0128 1730 240 540 0.0455 840 0.0188 1140 0.0146 1440 0.0127 1740 250 550 0.0353 850 0.0180 1150 0.0146 1450 1750 260 560 0.0353 860 0.0180 1160 0.0146 1460 1760 270 570 0.0353 870 0.0180 1170 0.0146 1470 1770 280 0.0008 580 0.0275 880 0.0181 1180 0.0136 1480 1780 290 0.0008 590 0.0275 890 0.0181 1190 0.0136 1490 1790 300 0.0008 600 0.0275 900 0.0181 1200 0.0136 1500 1800 5/8/00 9 : 55 : 25 am WRG Design Inc. page 7 TOC BUILDING ADDITION CITY OF TIGARD PLAN REVIEW B . SANBORN DETAIL BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: PRE25 NAME : PRE DEVELOPMENT 25 YR EVENT SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 50 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 4 . 00 inches AREA. . : 0 . 34 Acres 0 . 16 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 0 . 35 cfs VOL: 0 . 12 Ac-ft TIME : 500 min TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) 10 310 0.0392 610 0.0914 910 0.0572 1210 0.0439 1510 20 320 0.0392 620 0.0914 920 0.0572 1220 0.0439 1520 30 330 0.0393 630 0.0914 930 0.0572 1230 0.0439 1530 40 340 0.0474 640 0.0820 940 0.0574 1240 0.0440 1540 50 350 0.0474 650 0.0820 950 0.0574 1250 0.0440 1550 60 360 0.0475 660 0.0820 960 0.0573 1260 0.0440 1560 70 0.0029 370 0.0560 670 0.0758 970 0.0539 1270 0.0440 1570 80 0.0029 380 0.0560 680 0.0758 980 0.0539 1280 0.0440 1580 90 0.0029 390 0.0561 690 0.0757 990 0.0539 1290 0.0440 1590 100 0.0083 400 0.0700 700 0.0728 1000 0.0541 1300 0.0441 1600 110 0.0083 410 0.0700 710 0.0728 1010 0.0541 1310 0.0441 1610 120 0.0084 420 0.0701 720 0.0728 1020 0.0541 1320 0.0441 1620 130 0.0122 430 0.0904 730 0.0697 1030 0.0542 1330 0.0441 1630 140 0.0122 440 0.0904 740 0.0697 1040 0.0542 1340 0.0441 1640 150 0.0122 450 0.0906 750 0.0697 1050 0.0542 1350 0.0441 1650 160 0.0152 460 0.1157 760 0.0666 1060 0.0507 1360 0.0405 1660 170 0.0152 470 0.1157 770 0.0666 1070 0.0507 1370 0.0405 1670 180 0.0152 480 0.1175 780 0.0666 1080 0.0507 1380 0.0405 1680 190 0.0167 490 0.3460 790 0.0634 1090 0.0508 1390 0.0406 1690 200 0.0167 500 0.3460 800 0.0634 1100 0.0508 1400 0.0406 1700 210 0.0167 510 0.3447 810 0.0634 1110 0.0508 1410 0.0406 1710 220 0.0195 520 0.1766 820 0.0637 1120 0.0473 1420 0.0406 1720 230 0.0195 530 0.1766 830 0.0637 1130 0.0473 1430 0.0406 1730 240 0.0195 540 0.1762 840 0.0636 1140 0.0473 1440 0.0403 1740 250 0.0246 550 0.1318 850 0.0604 1150 0.0474 1450 1750 260 0.0246 560 0.1318 860 0.0604 1160 0.0474 1460 1760 270 0.0247 570 0.1315 870 0.0604 1170 0.0474 1470 1770 280 0.0316 580 0.1004 880 0.0606 1180 0.0438 1480 1780 290 0.0316 590 0.1004 890 0.0606 1190 0.0438 1490 1790 300 0.0317 600 0.1004 900 0.0605 1200 0.0438 1500 1800 • • 5/8/00 9 : 55 : 26 am WRG Design Inc . page 8 TOC BUILDING ADDITION CITY OF TIGARD PLAN REVIEW B . SANBORN DETAIL BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID : PRE5 NAME: PRE DEVELOPMENT 5 YR EVENT SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 0 . 25 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 . 20 inches AREA. . : 0 . 25 Acres 0 . 00 Acres TIME INTERVAL • 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 0 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 0 . 10 cfs VOL: 0 . 04 Ac-ft TIME : 500 min TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN TIME DESIGN RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF RUNOFF (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) (min) (cfs) 10 310 0.0051 610 0.0310 910 0.0205 1210 0.0161 1510 20 320 0.0051 620 0.0310 920 0.0205 1220 0.0161 1520 30 330 0.0051 630 0.0310 930 0.0205 1230 0.0161 1530 40 340 0.0079 640 0.0281 940 0.0207 1240 0.0162 1540 50 350 0.0079 650 0.0281 950 0.0207 1250 0.0162 1550 60 360 0.0079 660 0.0281 960 0.0207 1260 0.0162 1560 70 370 0.0110 670 0.0262 970 0.0195 1270 0.0162 1570 80 380 0.0110 680 0.0262 980 0.0195 1280 0.0162 1580 90 390 0.0110 690 0.0262 990 0.0195 1290 0.0162 1590 100 400 0.0155 700 0.0253 1000 0.0196 1300 0.0163 1600 110 410 0.0155 710 0.0253 1010 0.0196 1310 0.0163 1610 120 420 0.0156 720 0.0253 1020 0.0196 1320 0.0163 1620 130 430 0.0222 730 0.0244 1030 0.0197 1330 0.0163 1630 140 440 0.0222 740 0.0244 1040 0.0197 1340 0.0163 1640 150 450 0.0223 750 0.0244 1050 0.0197 1350 0.0163 1650 160 460 0.0310 760 0.0234 1060 0.0185 1360 0.0150 1660 170 470 0.0310 770 0.0234 1070 0.0185 1370 0.0150 1670 180 480 0.0315 780 0.0234 1080 0.0185 1380 0.0150 1680 190 490 0.1032 790 0.0224 1090 0.0186 1390 0.0151 1690 200 500 0.1032 800 0.0224 1100 0.0186 1400 0.0151 1700 210 510 0.1028 810 0.0224 1110 0.0185 1410 0.0151 1710 220 520 0.0566 820 0.0226 1120 0.0173 1420 0.0151 1720 230 530 0.0566 830 0.0226 1130 0.0173 1430 0.0151 1730 240 540 0.0565 840 0.0226 1140 0.0173 1440 0.0150 1740 250 0.0006 550 0.0434 850 0.0215 1150 0.0174 1450 1750 260 0.0006 560 0.0434 860 0.0215 1160 0.0174 1460 1760 270 0.0006 570 0.0434 870 0.0215 1170 0.0174 1470 1770 280 0.0026 580 0.0337 880 0.0217 1180 0.0161 1480 1780 290 0.0026 590 0.0337 890 0.0217 1190 0.0161 1490 1790 300 0.0026 600 0.0336 900 0.0217 1200 0.0161 1500 1800 , SECTION Q RISER 1 SECTIONS 24"0 COVER AND FRAME ' i i FINISH GRADED EL '� 153.00'' I J- , I 7 15'-6" - 5'-0" , FIBERGLASS SEPARATION — 1 CYLINDER k INLET 20'-8" 1 -�, 1 ., 8'-6" 15'O 24'0 I INLET PIPE CURET PIPE L �--�1 i ..r- f 1 1 2'-15' PIPE INVERT INV EL a 137.49' I ---I a ' SEPARATION 2'_7• ir SCREEN SECTION 5'-2' , 6. CUT DEI�TH ( %CET I) PIPE 'l ..., pJ\`"T 'r" � `'''"' BACKFILL WITH 2'-3- r SUMP i wfc.Py :: AGGREGATE Ir ::::,.14....;:i, SUMP EXTERIOR 5'-0" I INV EL 132.32' 6'-0' CDS MODEL PMSU20_20, 1. 1 CFS CAPACITY CO LEGACY EMMANUEL DATE 4/19/00 . SCALE CDsTmHOSPITAL DRAW" W. STEIN SHEET PORTLAND, OR AAPROV. T 2 ECHNOLOGIES PATENTED L - 8d WdVT :ET 000E 6T '-.tdd TELO ESL 80V : 'ON XUA H031 SQl : WO?!d P . F---00. SHT 2 PIPE AND MH RISER 1 24"0 ROTO-HAMMER OR SAW PIPE OUTLET I CUT OPENINGS FOR PIPE INLET AND OUTLET ■ 7i II 1111M1 CENTER OF SCREEN, ` ` 1� 22"0 SUMP OPENING �r -/,,,, . „n ` ® 1001, /i.. iriii� i( /�iiii ii4iii 11L/..l1 LL/.t i z........(4.._/_. G r OIL BAFFLE 25"0 SEPARATION \ in- ' 12" CENTER OF SCREEN //'� . MH RISER + \ SECTIONS /r--1 I I . i 1 1 • ATTACH SCREEN / ti TO SLAB USING 4 ACCESS RISER, ANCHOR BOLTS, ` " SUPPLIED BY CDS. I 5 -0 I.D. 4" FLANGE ON INLET SIDES, ATTACH SIDE AND BOTTOM 6" FLANGE ACROSS BOTTOM FLANGES TO WALL OF MH RISER USING ANCHOR BOLTS 5"0 (6 MIN), SUPPLIED BY CDS. PIPE INLET I'FLOW L___No. SHT 2 CDS MODEL PMSU20_20, 1 . 1 CFS CAPACITY STORM WATER TREATMENT UNIT I 4/19/00 SCALE ` ���a`� LEGACY EMMANUEL %•CiDs.1 HOSPITAL DRAWN W. STEIN SHEET PORTLAND, OR APPROV. 1 TECHNOLOGIES , PATENTED L — Ld WdET:ZT 0002 6T 'add TZLO Z8L 80t' : 'ON XHd H03.1 SQD : woad +'f CDS TECHNOLOGIES General Information and Discussion SUBJECT: Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS®) - Treatment of Storm Water Runoff Storm Water Pollution Control CDS Technologies® is an innovative best management practice (BMP) that is well suited to treat a large range of storm water flows and conditions. CDS Technologies® offers a solid separation unit to treat storm water runoff as well as the runoff from vehicle parking and other areas subject to the buildup of oil, grease, sediment, trash and debris. CDS® units can also treat the effluent from wash racks as a pretreatment for oil/water separators. The following overview touches briefly on this new solid separation technology and discusses the potential beneficial applications of CDS® units to treat storm water runoff. Applications • Storm water treatment to remove: Trash, debris, vegetation, coarse and medium sediments and some fine sediments • Combined Sewer Overflows: Control Floatables Reduce Total Solids and Total Suspended Solids • Capture oil & grease using sorbents within the separation chamber • Divert dry-weather low flows • Protect storm water pumping facilities from the negative impacts of rock, coarse & medium sediment, grit, trash and debris • Pretreatment: Infiltration and direct filtration systems — (Sediment and Detention Basins) Adsorption/absorption processes Oil/water separators CDS Technologies, Inc. • http://www.cdstech-us.com/ • cdscdstech-us.com 16375 South Monterey Road, Unit C, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 • Phone: (408) 779-6363 • Fax (408)782-0721 Corp Headquarters, 70 Mansell Court, Suite 225, Roswell, GA 30076, • Phone: (770)641-6650 • Fax(770)641-6649 CDS General Information and Discussion Mar-99 CDS Storm Water Treatment Technology CDS°units were initially developed to separate gross solids from storm water flows by a non-blocking, indirect screening process, which captures 100% of the floatables and removes 100% of all particles equal to or greater than the screen opening. Additionally, the following section will highlight the solid separation efficiency of a large percentage of solid particles smaller than the screen opening. CDS® units achieve this quantifiable efficiency without blockage of the screen face through the establishment of hydraulically balanced forces within its separation chamber. The CDS® technology utilizes the existing energy of the fluid flow to effect solids separation without mechanical assistance. There are no moving parts or mechanical equipment associated with a CDS® unit. Through research and field application, the technology is now refined to successfully capture sediments and floatables under very high flow rate conditions. CDS's innovative and unique storm water treatment technology assures the capture of gross pollutants, permanently removes trash and debris and efficiently separates coarse, medium, and some fine sediments from storm water discharge. CDS® units retain 100% of the material they have captured, even under high flow conditions when storm waters overflow the unit's bypass weir. CDS® units do not wash out during high flow or flood events! Once pollutants are captured in the CDS® unit, they are retained until properly cleaned out. Separation Screens CDS® units come equipped with a stainless steel (ASTM 316L) expanded metal screen having a screen opening of 4700 microns (0.185 inches). A 1200-micron (0.0475 inches) screen is also available if finer separation is necessary. A CDS® unit equipped with the smaller 1200-micron (pm) screen has the same hydraulic capacities as, does a CDS® unit equipped with the 4700 pm screen. The removal efficiency tables in the following sections lists the removal efficiencies of these screens as determined in laboratory evaluations. These removal efficiencies are verified to be achieved throughout the entire treatment flow processed by a given CDS® unit. There is no attenuation of these removal efficiencies or blocking of the screen face as the flow rate increases. Coarse and Fine Sediment Removal Dr. Tony Wong, Monash University, Chaulfield, Victoria, Australia was the first to evaluate and verify CDS's exceptional efficiency at removing gross pollutants and coarse sediment. This paper is a compilation of extensive work by the University of 2 .CDS General Information and Discussion Mar-99 Monash. Dr. Wong presented the paper at the 1997 Water Environment Federation 70th Annual Conference and Exposition (WEFTEC '97) in Chicago. Dr. Wong's evaluations determined that CDS's non- blocking, indirect screening process captured 100% of the floatables and removed 100% of all particles equal to or greater than the screen opening. The sand particles used in this evaluation had specific gravities (SG) of approximately 2.65. Dr. Wong's laboratory evaluations of these sand particles have shown a 100% capture efficiency of particles '/2 the screen opening size, a 93% capture efficiency of particles a third the size of the screen opening and 50% capture efficiency of the particles that average 20% the size of the screen opening. There is no attenuation of these removal efficiencies or blocking of the screen face as the flow rate increases up to the design treatment flow of a given CDS® unit. CDS® units come equipped with a stainless steel expanded metal screen having a screen opening of 4700 pm (0.185 inches). CDS® will also provide a unit equipped with a 1200 pm (0.0475 inches) screen if finer separation is necessary. The following table lists the coarse sediment removal efficiency as determined by Dr. Wong for a CDS® unit equipped with a 4700 pm screen. COARSE SEDIMENT REMOVAL Continuous Deflective Separation Technology (Indirect Screening — 4700 Micron Screen) Particle Removal Efficiency* Particle Size as Screening Standard Screen Openings percentage of Removal 4700 Micron (0.185-inches) screen%)opening Efficiency Microns Inches 100 100% 4700 0.185 50 100% 2350 0.093 33 93% 1551 0.061 20 50% 940 0.037 *Particle SG = 2.65 Professor Wells of Portland State University and Professor Stenstrom of UCLA recently carried out fine sediment removal efficiency evaluations. Professor Wells of Portland State University has finished conducting an evaluation of the capability of CDS's continuous deflective separation technology to remove fine sediments. Professor Wells' work focused on determining the CDS® unit's removal efficiency for a range of fine particles normally found in storm water. The fine particles used in this evaluation had size distributions and specific gravities that attempted to represent the majority of the mass of fine sediments typically found in storm water runoff. Professor Wells' work 3 .CDS General Information and Discussion Mar-99 expanded upon earlier work done by Professor Stenstrom at UCLA. Though the primary focus of Prof. Stenstrom's evaluation addressed oil and grease removal, he also determined some fine sediment removal efficiencies of sand particles. The following table lists the removal efficiencies as determined by Professors Wells and Stenstrom for a CDS" unit equipped with a 1200 pm screen using sand particles having SG of approximately 2.65. FINE SEDIMENT REMOVAL Storm Water Filtration Treatment Unit (Indirect Screening — 1200 Micron Screen) Sand Particle Removal Efficiency* Particle Size as Screening Standard Screen Openings percentage of Removal 1200 Micron (0.0475-inches) screen opening Efficiency ( /o) Microns Inches 100 100% 1200 0.0475 35 to 50 93% 425 to 600 0.017 to 0.023 25 to 35 85% 300 to 425 0.012 to 0.017 12to25 30% 150to300 0.006to0.012 7 to 12 22% 75 to 150 0.003 to 0.006 *Particle SG = 2.65 A CDS''' unit equipped with the 1200 pm screen has the same hydraulic capacity, as does a CDS'a` unit equipped with the 4700 pm screen. Although CDS's in-house and third party research work is not yet completed for a 600pm screen using particles with SG of 2.65. Initial results of these evaluations are showing 100% capture efficiency for 300 pm and 65% for particles above 80 pm. These results are in close agreement with results from Prof. Well's and Prof. Stenstrom's fine sediment removal evaluations. CDS Technologies`H believes that fine sediment removal evaluation work of CDS® units equipped with 400 pm size screens will achieve enhanced removal efficiencies of very fine particles. Removal efficiencies are expected to be directly proportional to this smaller screen aperture, as are the removal efficiencies of the 4700 and 1200 pm screens. CDS'H' units equipped with screens smaller having aperture sizes less than 1200 pm will have less hydraulic treatment capacity, but significantly greater removal efficiencies of particles in the 75 to 150 pm range. 4 CDS General Information ano ,cussion Mar-99 Capture of Gross Pollutants The Co-operative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology recently concluded an 18- month, detailed study in which various storm water pollutant-trapping systems were evaluated under real service conditions, and the results compared. This work is the first of its kind in Australia. It brings together the analytical skills and resources needed for such a wide ranging study, yet ensures the independence and objectivity of a leading research group. The results achieved by the CDS° technology, in these findings, are very positive. For example, on p.63 of From Roads to Rivers, the CDS° device is described as 99% efficient over the 12-month monitoring period. CDS Technologies° has purchased these reports in order to provide storm water managers and water resource consultants with the information that engineering teams will need to fully plan strategies and make decisions based on performance, proven under controlled conditions, by independent experts. CDS° has these reports available for review. Copies of these reports may be obtain directly from: Cooperative Research Centre For CATCHMENT HYDROLOGY Department of Civil Engineering Monash University Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia International Phone: 011 61 3 9905 2704) Fax: 011 61 3 9905 5033 For more information on the CRC for Catchment Hydrology visit their website: http://www-civil.eng.monash.edu.au/centres/crcch/. The author of this study, Robin Allison, spoke at the conference for "Urban Storm Water Management in the Southwest" in Long Beach, California, September of 1998. In this field study, the performance of the CDS° unit proved to be the most efficient and cost effective pollution control device of all the structural storm water treatment technologies evaluated. Oil & Grease Treatment of Storm Water Runoff The placement of one strategically located CDS° unit can cost effectively and efficiently treat the storm water runoff from small or large vehicle parking lots or traffic laden areas, rather than treating the runoff at multiple points in the storm drainage system. 5 CDS General Information and �...cussion Mar-99 Laboratory tests by Professor Stenstrom from the University of California Los Angeles that were performed in 1998 have shown that the addition of sorbent material within the separation chamber enables the CDS® unit to capture more than 80% of the free oil and grease transported within the storm water. This removal efficiency is achieved at 1/2 the unit's treatment design flow. Removing 80% of the free oil and grease should be readily achieved, given that oil and grease are generally mobilized during the first part of storm events when the unit is certainly operating at less than its design capacity. Once in contact with the sorbent media, the oil and grease cannot escape the CDS® unit. Additionally, the CDS® unit will always effectively remove the range of solids, trash and debris mentioned above. • Because the oil and grease in storm water are pollutants of concern, it should be understood how oil and grease are transported in storm water and wash rack effluent if their effective removal is to be achieved. Oil and grease are transported in storm water and wash rack effluent in four different ways: 1. Attached to trash and debris such as Styrofoam and leaves 2. Attached to coarse and fine sediments 3. Free or floating oil and grease 4. Suspended and emulsified within the storm water flow The CDS® unit is effective at removing oil transported by the first three methods. As stated earlier, a CDS® unit is quiet effective at removing solids and the addition of sorbent material within the separation chamber enables the unit to effectively capture 80% of the free oil and grease. Researchers studying the quality of storm water runoff have advised that 50 to 80% of the total oil and grease within storm water are attached to sediments. They also indicate that the visual sheen on water surfaces are less than one (1) milligram per liter (mg/L) and can only be effectively removed using sorbent material or biological treatment methods such as grassy swales. Oil/Water Separator Efficiencies Though the initial application of CDS® units was intended for use as a gross pollutant trap, the continuous deflective separation is proving to be effective in a variety of storm water, wastewater, and industrial applications calling for the efficient separation of solids from liquids. A CDS® unit makes an ideal pretreatment for oil/water separators, preventing the concentration of solids within the storm water runoff or effluent from wash racks from overwhelming and clogging the filtering and coalescing mechanism of oil & grease and oil/water separators. 6 . ,CDS General Information and tnscussion Mar-99 CDS Technologies® is presently working with a number of Cities to enhance the effectiveness of installed oil/water separators. It appears to be quite common for installed oil/water separators, consisting of coalescing plate modules, to become in- effective, because of the significant vegetation, sediment and debris loading that interferes with the coalescing of the oil and grease globules. Many of these oil/water separator installations represent significant capital improvement projects that never achieve their design performance due to the solids content of the storm water runoff or wash rack effluent. The additional expenditure for the installation of a CDS® unit as a pre-treatment to these oil/water separators usually represents a small percentage of the initial oil/water project costs and will readily bring the total system back on line and functioning at capacity. • Treatment Trains The concept of establishing treatment trains to effectively remove target constituents of concern from storm water runoff is being aggressively applied by the Puget Sound Naval Ship Yard in Bremerton, WA. The Controlled Industrial Area of the shipyard presently services and dismantles nuclear vessels and other ships. This activity occurs in a completely paved area with the discharge leading directly to the waters of Puget Sound. Recognizing the need to remove the heavy metals from the storm water runoff, a storm water treatment train has been installed to ensure their removal. In late June of 1998, a CDS® unit model PSW50_42 equipped with a 1200 micron (.0475 inches) screen has been installed in front of a finer filtration and absorption system at the Puget Sound Naval Ship Yard in Bremerton. The effluent from this CDS® unit will allow the following fine filtration and absorption system to effectively remove the remaining constituents of concern without diminished capacity due to clogging from sediment, trash and debris. A CDS® unit has also be installed by the Ventura County Flood Control District as a pretreatment to a sediment detention basin. This CDS® unit prevents 100% of the gross pollutants from entering the basin. It provides one point at which trash, debris, and coarse sediments can be easily removed with a vactor truck. The CDS® unit assures the aesthetics of the basin. Additionally, the CDS® unit extents the service life of the basin and reduces the frequency of maintenance requirement by heavy equipment within the basin. Sizing a CDS Storm Water Treatment Unit for a Development Site We recommend that CDS® units be sized to treat a storm event having a return period of 3 to 6 months. Runoff flows from such events roughly correlate to a rainfall event 7 CDS General Information anc cussion Mar-99 lasting 1-hour with an intensity of '/z-inch, typically producing one cfs of discharge in storm drains for every 2 acres. CDS® believes a storm event of this intensity will mobilize and transport the mass of pollutants within a catchment into the storm drain system. This general method is used to calculate runoff treatment flows to size CDS® units. A more detailed consideration of the local hydrology, topography and land uses for a given site could result in different design storm water treatment flow than that determined from our suggested method. However, CDS's suggested method of determining a treatment flow is generally satisfactory given the speculative nature of estimating the flows necessary to mobilize the pollutants of concern. The HYDRAULIC DESIGN section of CDS's Technical Manual also addresses this suggested method for calculating a design storm water treatment flow for a given site development or storm drain. Once the design treatment flow is determine, the correct size CDS® unit, having the adequate flow capacity, can be selected from the list of available pre-manufactured fiberglass or precast concrete units or designed as a cast in place unit for larger treatment flows greater than 62 cfs. CDS Technologies® provides pre-manufactured fiberglass and precast concrete units capable of treating storm water flows from zero to 62 cfs. These units are easily constructed, especially the pre-manufactured fiberglass and small precast units. Cast in place units can be readily designed and constructed to treat flows ranging from zero to 300 cfs. CDS Design and Services CDS® furnishes full engineering services as appropriate to bring a project to successful completion, including conceptual planning, hydraulic analysis and site design, contract documents suitable for competitive bid and construction inspection or management. Operations and Maintenance The CDS® units are self-operating, there are no moving parts and the unit is gravity driven, utilizing the available hydraulic energy within the water flow. The screen and supporting hardware are stainless steel and should resist corrosion for many years. In short, operation and repair requirements of installed CDS® units are minimal. Maintenance of a given CDS® unit consists of cleaning out the sump on a seasonal basis and a suggested annual inspection of the screen surface. CDS units have large storage capacities within their sumps in relation to each unit's design treatment flow. A significant benefit of the CDS® system is the easy maintenance and cleanout using vactor trucks, which eliminate worker exposure to materials captured in the units. 8 pDS General Information and D...,.ussion Mar-99 Sump cleanout is a critical component of a successful CDS® operation. CDS suggests a vacuum truck clean out the sump and unit approximately 4 times per year. The frequency of cleanouts is site dependent and is based on the land use of the catchment and the actual pollutant loading. Typically, a unit will require more frequent cleanouts at the start of the rainy season. It is the first several rainfall events that will wash a large percentage of the accumulated pollutants down the storm drain to be captured by the CDS® units. Construction • CDS® units have a small construction footprint and once installed below ground, the access covers are seamless and unobtrusive. The pre-manufactured fiberglass units are typically installed in a prepared shallow excavation in less than 2 hours. Precast units up to the PSW70 size CDS® units are stacked into a prepared excavation and backfill to the height of the intake structure (pipe invert) within a morning. The casting of connection collars and the diversion weir typically require another two days for these larger precast units. The largest precast unit and those locations requiring cast in place CDS® units involve a longer construction duration and are site dependent when considering the complexity of the installation. I hope you find the packet informative and I look forward to discussing potential applications for CDS® units to treat your storm water runoff. If you would like copies of the third party reports mentioned in support of the statements made in this discussion or you have questions, please call me at (888) 535-7559 or email wstein @cdstech.com to further discuss this innovative BMP. Respectfully, Walter Stein, P.E. Manager— Project Development 9 LANDSCAPE NARRATIVE TIMBER OPERATORS COUNCIL OFFICE REMODEL SOIL CONDITIONS The project site will retain over 75% of existing landscaping. tSoils are wind deposited silts which were amended at the time of original landscaping. The surface is mulched with medium grind bark to a depth of 2-4 inches. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES All stockpiled soils will be either contained behind silt fencing,protected by tarping, or both to keep soils from being eroded and carried off site. All areas are to receive landscape material capable of holding soil in place.All sloping terrain will be landscaped with either lawn or groundcover. All shrub and ground cover soils will receive a minimum 3 inch incorporation of compost and will be surface mulched with medium grind barlanulch to a depth of 2 1/2 inches. These measures will increase soil permeability, fertility, and eliminate surface erosion as intended. SUBMITTED BY: Charles S. Rosenfeld/Landscape Architect Rosenfeld Associates • Landscape Architecture & Planning EREp Ver. PROJECT TEAM: i "x'o G7EfS CCNSTRJCTICN C LS.1ART, OF OF 0�•C, IOC PL4NADEYEHT SERVICES EEADO L.ARC PAR TNER5 LLC -• 6075 1J 3..40131143 STREET fS0 SA 9KTL6.DCLILEvARCT SUIIE 724 1GARD.OR 51:7) PORTLAND.OR 31221 I 15031670-1110 150)7731.6060 • 15037•70.3333 II. 1503,231-6104 14. _ i •cJ.Ct Contact. JAY SEELEY Rojo.Conuct,DAVID LINT2 z H Jay 4..RJ.loeo-9 EIlel...o.PONAGE ... • < U I . N.e 1 Md1411 ASSOGTATED ARC.IIECT6 11eCORMACK PA.:EIC �l - '' � .. • •120 6Y MACADAM AVEM,E. SURE 1CO 1190 SS SANCDUR"STREET _ O = I PCRTLANC.OR 31213 TGARD.OR 31223 _•r.� - . - •, 1-A . :e 1. '30)1245.1100 150)1624-20`3 `�i. Yff_ ` :__ )1243.1110 I4. 150)1633-A)4 fI. �. ,ry oat A-o`El.c ROGER SUKR2AU RoJxl Con.cl.,TERRY EDGAR All - .-•• • JEFF PEVRALA 1. •'�f!'�� Tg:_ : ' +,v \.t+7f O 1• ^ML E1G)EERM'-. JG�•II^" ap.clncsm -� ■ ay y ,. .41 x "�){• WIG usrr+ tEC■eR-aL E.GeEER n..Ig,.t.�1le o..yA, - =- - r- �=ii t ., - ,� LYtJ = /xU�/ Ix. p• IC.,0 641 NIIp06 AvENIE.6011E RA 1TU 64C t- ' v'-- - 1 -• 1 f '• A4 r..-- 1 ? I -- PORTLAND OR 31223 700,6E ASR ORE• 1 1 1tTr""y�j(( Y - " ,02^ �� L • Y r - - J./ z ,�+ • .9E31603-5333 PORTLA C.OR 31714 w )� .61 l X� « 11 47:�0.4.► 'R 4 1-'•1� ■5:11 603.534a q. 1503,7)4-0346 rat 77 `I -1..:. --,-_-‘,:;j::- _ •'1 t 1 ) .,„,e` 'f•_ i k•--'7---- < < I• ...J.c,Cr.g w. e1Em Sd.G' 1.!IT (50)1224.061-N.. f ,1.4• 1 t f ti r F t i,i.,,3r t `, -'_4 ,. `'' ■ -"s';‘"Li=i-SIC I•E geam Project t-e. . 6COTT HOLLER M_ t ., �r4?•.`rh.. :(r1k-...t•?7-. = ' ... .e ../i I 53,..J3,. TROT IEi6YCA c� .cotlmoS4•, •Angco. --` �.-r_ y _.�_ ..-�•.:_`-4 ..."` - _ ._-'•-� 111E7G.SII0 CW4EER E.Efm.4A1 E.r0EER-.1..,g...,,,Uy 241 .r•VL31L CVO. TM E.G!RERS I4C ELEC-RICAL ENGINEERS LLC - • >=•.<-. .. ir"*t W 3333 W RILL,AvE.LE 220 E.01213103 . ... - ' _ J V PCTL YO.OR 51}01.•35) 3 4ERI000,CR 11140 ! 'E y ' ..- 5 z 130):722-445) (50)7625-4443 I 1 • r- `'••• _ 1' /•":.I• 1 322)1740-LS)3.4 (50)1675.411 16. • . ,. ♦•�.:'.u�`.• �.o R J.e:Ens..6r. KEVIN KAPLAN.P! Re4.et Erg...r, &RED KC.I1 may- w:�. I. .. LLJ w. WL•.6,.PRca+ N'!g'•g4c•ce. w\ I...❑ O Pz L O pu GEO DS�C .s Ew - _ 1��••••••• [7•"1 o O 11400 6x:PPE!00aE6 moon.6011E 730 - row-1....v..O R 3-724 -- VO Project Egros, Jet 610•! ,„1 ABBREVIATIONS: VICINITY MAP: kNNEET INQEx: iq co•'� ( •2 ,;''It i(1J`' r 2- 'rf j4.� ,j.,/ lyI■ C6 COVER SHEET• 333 7 Cl PREL R11N4VT GRAONG/ER06104 CONTROL RAN :. I p5E' �� t �)�.-• C7 PRELPMART UIRnT RAN • .. R `x w e.7- 1�Ie .� AAiO 311E PLAN• '^w _ .w. �P N1 ��w ••!•6 I '�1� 11 J` , I I { 611E DETAILS _ ..•••• g e... Ix.... . ,.1`10"E x{..rn •Tfi••":::, 7.10 Ale LOIK RCOR PLAV e + ::•- ..,n . .6��•- I h". L+-,1a. 19YEV'y Al F1AN _OCR PLAN . v:: - ..t----- ,_ .n ,' ff/kf AL ELEVATE:NS TS.- • :%.. - _ - - -__ -_111177 [T. .n i3,4 1, �7 .5. - LI fYtEl YNART LA�b6CAFE PLANING PLAN Q' LI t. e^. -L^ .w. I. �. .P T.ry offs', sl..r[; :-i7 - _...11,15U-- r._ w� e-.- nl - E7E R If., ,..1..... - I..;' 't� 41:•1 -.. ,:, _ t ,I._._ _ iTM°I••• •µ1 I'•1,1- .REf k dW .1.4... •%.w Ly�,1 1 +N11 >_ `:,.*. T 17,.-1,."``0000 Y r��'1� 1'.lio.,t:7• r r. j 131 u I 1 ...ji>1 �;gif* 1 1�i a• ._ - ... .... -N. . __ 't aw �.•4., :J 1 "', ..•, z;i4;h , A 4- ? I.)t-""I'"_sN :.'REA.F,., cl.IF51'11 I 4l..•• gR i a c�ocrrAP 1.c st.rv_•Y ; 13 Pd• •COR11C11 a d LCY T 1 Irrt . 7 UR H+IN C i 1w7v-, AV L 11/1d M E 0R}AtsiM Rrn.N 3IN0 R4f_ GNCNV 9.80.tSa- a • I.‘..r........1 m[". i^ • { D srw. N e • • u,ywl„ "iw + -- -- —,�—� «...1111... _ - —B ,,`, _ — -- ---- p F,a W%�.r I wI 1 RR i Or _ •' J -_-_ _--__--=:—.... __ _1} �_1 R�-_i��7YO ry r.u.wr •1r.r-rwr r PerrEn O.Y • I =----....::::::,"":7.::::•n- /% /rI Ji f i+F r i(,.�r/1/Fr - //tt _ —- [ro fu...r.a f(,i•//7/7; ,J/I!r/ w rr t' � =Jt» S-- �: •~ ..,.r... ....er ...MV.".. '',•• ✓ r. j/j r / /��,rr,l ! r/ /j//(„ii�j f�//..•••4,-..9?,',+� %1 -,..4,/ T'� rasa__:- •-tm• le., /r��f. ..� !r�y/,j s•�°�f��/fir!'.t; /i/ ` i"'`/�,�i (l /�-- !��'[1 11 'r. •'•r •j. .v i. I ./• r ri 4,''� qr II/ STORM oRArNAC[" lEC•LN4. c t s+or. '',I ,�(� `// S jlI r .m..��M mz:i.xv�. �T/f' f.�/' '��i'I (`J i-�m1`c�w'u:i )j 'j <` 7 4 co.c U+-v l� �1; ./.,i.$77.410•'I��l; �' tie,7:3=4 b:\,, 1 rli I I • (''t;---:�:,rgt” eo .....d bg �ip,piiti �-)40ffi I ',MI?. +,,4 1;,....•t .fur/ p.�r�....... m =fin ¢ O_i r •1�'(+J J l c�`�t�f/, � �f.., i� _ '%j ! II .1/..:.,..:4:',-<•• m�1�r"".1 = :w:: Um II 1 1 fr�/frrr!/�, r r: { , r., i :.F"r i `Il ' / .r�♦IY. 0":.w.1 a' • - eole..v. J•+( f '!1., l� ♦ 11 /� �' •i .r a., \li ri(/ ,''''S;/1 /.' C)x .. . .a_ q J r ..n -/�,} 1 �.f/.�'. Y 1, <D ........ ,1111,WA re.111 FS M //`{) /,, /,:4.4;';', "�,:,. "" L-w \ ;� _ I ii :.:1'.'.4:t/ `// Y wsrJ' I I , S1M YwR - . a u ---1--1—_ / t r{ i IhJ \, ° . yy I ).-1r----- (/// W [wnan n¢ I- ,; _ .F. --}_ ',17-5;,..._,» /�/�_ 1{ �t,e t\i M/ SAItl+ARY... R: J rrf [C[JJ� .._71 _ C1• —•— F 1111 __ � I :K: ti.: ® .., J j� f//�" • ,l, M.fIN .[.' art n O h !/( •f r/ / hr,i f,//Ary/r J♦..r. 4 ♦41/11 f�"4:. -- //r/ yip( / r yi/i.-rrr 1.r4~/�Jt// .i.L �/,^/ ,(r !./•�`/ '3'/ef r.. fi -- —_-- _ r1.:. '. worn rn r /> rI' • 700001 D.R 1 AAAW.,P D.... , m 51.04A.01 rn \ Me 10.rocs, WWI NU I .rw-w..l as.n 1P: EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP ,:= =' -' x°...On- CO I - • •-21 i ! . I_E-GEND 5 2 ? EROSION PPNEIMUCTR,KIES, z C)mu..mos.coma PSKOV TACO OE RAZES - COWPER - PMESESSI IS C CONTOUR 0 M.KT.03.1E0 DIVETION AS•CONSRESCOOR IINTREERCE. CC 1' l' --ORS-- - . ROSES T T M. ; EEEMASKNILICt.AND CJIADING MOTES 1=1 - PROPOSED 0.211•12 AMOK - PIROPOSED W.1.1.0•4 . .1,J...:„..,...SP.0.7,trnomS NM PROPOSED IC SOW ACE CROSS - 2 i i • . E - PROPOSED RCIMERMIS NMI % 6 • i il —. .— - PROPOSEC ER0905=ORM KR(0 I 2) POI 2 Ir41.17::D.,Er ITT;Ir A-0.,NIE Al MOM)21.1111110M. F., .. 0 - PROPOSED sonoot SACS •C ELEVATOR • I 124141::(Ni 320Wf e MC SALT WWI MD 12. , : 1.ca, 0 A 2 1 4 I rg 7 f,• .1 ,ral=r10 . rAl 0 Mate :..••••••••■fts /.4;ct..Zr .• 4.7 ' • .... ..,7,7,-,,. .......,...••-•-- ..-..-re•...---71,7.--i•-:.-:-..77......,--,- 17 7 '1../_--•-,f0.4:.,. .0 1_-_1•7.:-:_-k-.1: - . : *41 , op-- ..„...-- ... , . ,....,..- , -- ..."--/ ;1.', Pl_.,,p,'P. ----7-_._-,.-:- •::_•--- A _ ._jaill,Alt . i.e. gamma n .,■t:. MOW"..........." ' ----/L y•-:::::::, .r.r.masa," • -_---- ,„ ,.,,,,,.. ,, , 011:,,,i,rj,-,E571,. ,•/- *,..-4 ____----... . .. , ,..•If •..- 0.------ - - "' 0 • , r---7 i.:772----- ...- .../". ..,'" j .....ci...1.i.rm2 r‘ .,....g. '• / iitim-1711 __. .•;-• f i 1 1 I / i __ p..„„ _ _ ,...__ _ _1, _ __ .__ 1., r• , '. ",... .._. .- 'r- I( I.0 // •1 r.,, „ ecoll ..... > •-•-r---,00' • t 1 , : / :\ ,.,;,•‘7,'_., I \ II; / . ...-. ..... /----A ril I tv idd !VII lib--./ / , ..---. , ..- 1 r t ...--- 8:4 .4 io -e.• "r‘P ..i -1 ti i I II/;'/,./. \ 1 I-.‘vt. LW. -4211 ., .. ' .;""'"' '. .:744.:4111..211iH:■*: . ,/ • . i . fr.,- -ft:. ,tix .-^ 2, - -;.:;,,,. .- ,.- - ..- ....' ,-1-- = . 1 ,1. /---. . •4 :i,. ,,,,t,,,... ,....,,,, ,!•• , 4 7 1 1 IC '.• ,3•.. ; ill /tit I/ : .., , I., ..1,..,.f., .„ ,,. Q ..., \\\,.... .... 0.._.\,,, _! ,it, i :.,v , 7•41;•,4! •$. • •,:• -, AMP) .'77--,'4'4 - s--- .;)--, .--- • - I:, ''•,-",•:, mmir;•••..t54''A,, '*• , ...... .-; • - i/i 4-------\ ,,-,. f -"' ''''■.: •-'' -Akie 4tqY, it2 — -"'V't• ''Ff' • I ': • •141Mr4t,f-filik 7, '-''' ,,••• •• 4 ■ ii. .e -- / r -- '..,\;7. (/ /lir.____ ,T;,-.i!-. .. .-,-,71,,,,-..7.-a, if,, „..-.,-..ft..,id,,,,,11,,, .:. ,1.Er...alfikg.-pet ti.,', /; e-f.:-„it.,;,,,,,,, . 1 tom . ,w / t 1 - •/VA! \-11/11 '* - -./ //,. ,,,, ,)qA.-t .,,,, :. j-- ..: t." A.' ■'''Lr '''''' 'lifi2-Wr'' fil'' / .....1 . / _7. - /4. .........}f-, ;\/mattife„,air,..11.., ..iitytt i,•,:•.•• •; .••„".i , ' • • - 1 " . --' tz --- ,-, / --•-- ...:___1',‘..,••••.-, ,, ';••'' '• ' -'I- - „•„_.__• .•• ,',: 1 '''1•''''0..: P 4c.',.- -,::,:_,/ ....:--// 1/1---.-- ' . (4 „, / 0 i --, ---yo/, ..-------.4„, / -- ..------------- ,- ----._- , --'P. - 4-- —... --__ ,,.., - r,r.'4,•-k--)"'_----)-1..- . - ---;'‘"-."-- ' -- •--....../j/ An oor •il, „...•..., ... -' .....-.1,_-•, • .. . -41,. ...........-6 • ; ?..,z, \ , i 1 \ \ \ ‘, 1 \ , , \ \ \ . .. rmart11 MIRO..01 Mon MON 0.4rt 1k01110111 • P '' ‘ 4) \ _ - __ _ __. . _ _ ___ _4_ A__ __4. . ,_ . . SAN BUACik STRItt \ . •es--‘' t . • / 8 / / / ..' ; / / i' /• ,••• / - -- - --- -/ _ .i L i Z. Li • / ' / • i / / ,,, • . .2CT 010 ANC051 -- .—1....—. ._ '= 1 —I -1.-_--VP''—1'2'-!-''I-7 - ‘---z - '--*I- 7/ • i .... - OAR 3/115/00 011. 16 i ...... . ....`",......_..—A2r-- .....,... Int— PRELIM GRAD/NO • SKI I REAKER-.-...-- a . - . . .. ,. • . . ' • . . . • .'........:. :.••• .• . , . . . • • . . . . . ' • • . . . •. . . eR i CONSTRUCTION NOTES I c 11 ca6nao IT 001•411004.DPW.,cut.55..1(541 aan q r„ 17 COI6I•ucr rcc atom.(91 0[nra WE,c) / r0.61/noca[nm-c 11V'ltS 1'mA6.waw 156(Rp[s115s m.c u 1 [- (mental m coax 5/ullm w.v.ws) i .n1or 15o/oe noun nR(5a loam x..,a u.[s 156.Pt•,[w.cf. 3 '.to.to coati./Nam mw..rs) • 5• �1 aD.[.' •�' sM.[.roan.cli Gxl.MRS,5477✓!4.)t°[P.°,!1005 s-rl 91 60. 0 R it .fi s... D(aw TOP l0 Coa:O•/NUI*COW.(1) o y I •.1•• ry P .. 47AA,,,..t,,.0a `.,A*„_w4.._,,, , - S f..v 4,4 4 4.. [L ` f;l. STOF NOT 8 elA 11.i -- ---- - ---- - •-- - -- — - - - F 1st Y.- T MMullil Snoop+[[v RO••-'UMa u \ y7 pp`•�a\y\`� t 'tas. ape[[.AOnBrri- Yr -i♦ / M[Woo...P1A.s 50,o..lclo.l 1U\�/.�' )id• 1 cs./r ��. r: TC la ml nv..rte.ulm 1.u1rw u,e5 VV__ '�,t f ,,,.� .� M,•-+515+15 r:) f; ,y "ll' 1 1 .•a o cos 4,70[5 otw:o_n.. as uP,cnS. \ I [..s,,f ro, -/ •.`Fry''.' 11-+ •1 St n n,Pnrn n cos: laep w-,5014 ,�rt{. :N•�� 3i..44-,,�.'4f440 *... f 111 lxLmrwv.an iJ' .. *;H..14,4,1�1 ,in O 1p rin n n6na i,'557.4 1.!./Is•so 4'. x 5 X` " x;r..1n Mel,�.6S 1(06 I S s Y. 41,R `r co..sn ms*w • .a .r.101 StI Mt .......,...•,....•.,.,,' : 0.17 ;n ire l IX <SM.. •T s_vJ•. Y♦C 111J./<_:1-.4 NL)IC_a 9377d6 9•S 000 VS XCvb 3YJsJIO lO!nO mars bJ 1v1O1 fi 000U.0•9L —MISS • 'OC•ieIV JiMA SC 0.V21v IS CC !JP 1JV••••• •GlIS 91 ••O01VS 919191X3 S.PIVJ 3,1347 m N' '1d AUG``/ „Icon Mb ! I • �. ♦. r..:.l'.ti:••,�......•. ... 111. 1 1 1 .:.11.. ,. 01U Alq- g nun Ma.a rr•re �'Te or 0Q`�' •-CROLN Tc°5 - riill fro.w.", I �1 G ■.• ce.xe-r..Wwyi/I >' X O PI°E FI_LE7 IS/C'ONC. ,_II Z U vY !� >>!>'' J • _-GONG.PAVING •.. ll: 1--11 x i, 101E16 O "`•�<.. mot �� .4 � + t OM &1 �▪G\� R,/� ....1 ..•.�illllll • t '"vz rrYa,r v.culLa �S W%son ti, , aw. e.[a 1 I ert•...WPM OPAL rnl.,e•ar r'KM ;': r .+r V m rere�rt r[ce.•We.r: -7'.CONC.FILLED d'lir 4R�[eL,�'� e.oraro.oWLwe w PPM e•..nv DAM w ` i W'�eo:.io� - 'wv.awrw•.W-r+.am.ro NOL:S vr.r4rrwrC rlw.•r p.wrtl.v'r,[tl ` Y1 • e CONCRETE PEI .CROSSWALK TYP. STL. BOLLARD , AREA LIGHT BASE N e ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOLS ® ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL Mr tlauL. ..bw W 'e'•1�' awa.ltl A 40., W wr.0100. •P••rl PM 10 K.L. I.e.e L W rj{ U I :I C 1 it N z s ' MT. wr[v 7105• O1ar A wO '�1 ILa1a3 a lane,w PI W,�� •,0r tl[6Ya f�•1 m0 _ vr..n•SAC... . 1144 sen•rwca• .oae� u coat..e.1a,e'tl-ac rarer C7 Fa ol<• e r:zar cu •. \ 'p_ e• r. ..o Q C „F 'I,T/• i-' wru.•.WOOL) r»pa mP - yry �v7� ' i �- _ __: _ PUMP 111.0•:•..POO Q ! . 4...4j..�.A..,,a,T m.•.. CAR°OO1 •lLL�•+.•�(� �.a.`w.e�..... I �ry �,: O E - w a r.. 1 C _ . - I-• • l';417.11141'"'"° [rrt•M Nr11 i UINEELSTOP at CURB e SIDEWALK EDGE •17•04.1%; O EXTRUDED CONC. CURB i CARPOOL PARKING STALL W PAVING ARROWS 1.110 e f..: .e r•r•r C0[ea..Wa W PM re rr. M••1 am • I 1(140•• , .l,••N. W is.1'ir.�P.. w W...•efa�..felP7 C•a -..-4.•.....m W .. wa= . I \ r L f ....IN.ate:1• i �•- •• "{ 4rovu•�.a 1 • .r..oc1•rA '� 5 •... OLi:wa r I /.w aw.ir - 1V, . • • FV 1.e- C0.�� ru'ieiv w POW i '''''."6"' . \1;�. ___E—F..•e T. ....m �� \� , -- r.crs<c..-•av AR _ _ �cW-n•rwo w•1u•fril =141"4"...-...., .oe•ro w-� fO • Qi f';.`...�01 ».r oc 11 x1 `�IL.@Yt- /tlnlc.r.oarnv-o• can mIo+c us k. 4 •A" 0 SIDEWALK DETAIL 0 CAST CONC. CURB i, BICYCLE RACK 0 a ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN I. ..N- A41 W'•.'-r eOCrlr tis� Nl w'•tor •-� 1111. .I:aWa� „•.r-r 0.0 E)ESIGN F:L E c 'NitT �••_ 4I.1 fa 1 ' ID 10e0.t. -S. • Magi eJA••■•••■Nom a, Ii ir 1 1 LI 1 Z . i • _ .. < u 1 _ ... 0 = f u . , • , :... T r ,-,.---. . 1 Li i I . u o J i; z c•-• - I ult ---17717':T=3 "--- .- a lb,:iil —40...' . 1---1 1.1■1.1 7 ' • 1 ii ,"-e• ' H i 1 . . d ril '.,- DIP iz ! ! • , 7.0...■11.11 1 L 0. -• MO 1 114 o 95 0 fr---- 4 7.--i--7,— Ii __J. I q I 0 0 1----ji ,— • 0 0 t.' , . , • / • _ -, __ } - _4 .. ../ I 7 1 _I , I 1,170.AtreS C1 .M. T.5. CE1•3 OPPICE .. CT] i r... -6- I „k) k.1 IL -__, ) •Le...<No - _ --. 0•L■••I MORIN GA2..0,4•701.__ OA2.0 LOWER LEVEL PLAN (TD ,• &GALE.W•r•er L."--12:....')1(1A 57-..C•,/:E1,.J UE.'5'-'11 I I . •.. • • •.... . . . . , . .. . . • . . • . Fi• 1 11111111 GO,01001, 11101.211 CD - • -='.1 n optvi 0 1 ../Thr c'214"Pl T-73 no T.,.1} ClIAIN LEVEL PLAN A21 6c.ALe,ty..r-e• 7 7 rweE 110Erv"6 LJ PLAN WOR, DES'61•1 FE7IFLAJ C411.T1V.TTAI •611. 1141 z 0 0 z ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS 0.11 NINFINOCC •A• JONN 00.SU 42) . . • • • D met, • k mita, .N ./.. " . . —•- - i't — .1111111611131MIMI 11111111.1111 I L ; P.1 , 44-vgii.- _. 111_11-:::•7::: ----_--E-. _-_- ..-...... . Z ...• ._=_----------•—■- • _, ..,it,. t.1.i.pr,,,,,cek -- .,• - ------ ....,.. < . i 7:4. ..iiii.,,,,_LEE„I ...._!IL _ . fl-ilii vi - t I --- -,ty....r.:,..,.0, Nui-•4-4.311,17.7.7•4, t..7,.. TV.—'5:.:._, 11..• 'i A-- oistrioa.- ..,1-1.:,_..:,..cF.A _ .A - - ,,MP,. -. . •••• - - —' . ...2, ... • .2i - ...--._., u a±.71.4.41.--Ii:Ri-.........-.. •.T,. -1--litc-1---0 - 1 - 2 osouT14 ELEvATION 0 ■- 1 A30.,5G.ALE .4.•1'4,' •../ < • i< '-• i • U tii)) I I I _...-.. ..— ... z . • to • _ < < —. .,., .. ...—....— 111111111111111111111i1 N VI- 1°...._.1"1.'.--?= -OF ........... ___ MIMI ---'---- -----'-'-''-"' -- ' - - cn . - - - 7---"":777--r ■IIMII u.1 (.) it - _ L z PION 0 N .,.., 1---_,•''-:-__.-m----.-'-1M-..44,711,-Mii,:,Ati I_:i z-t-- ---..A -. —. ___. 0 gi_wi,[04,::-:-.. .'......- .0-r....L....0- .-.. • nr. - - ...orgr,44.- - - lifirille,46- (At 5z .,_ . 0 0 V•••• 0 .8 eEAST ELEVATION gli a S' g ._......._..... ......._..._... . . 4-4...___: . ' . L1 --1.--f---1-1-1 t____,____,,...__ U al --— --- - . • ---_----_,---..., . _ 111[1-E_-. "'I-. ..—.. -•- t- --' 1.-_,- - _ _ i in, ._ -------•. . - . ------- 7---- =: 01101T1011.1 ---mu."...IMO*.1,4•16 41 O 6 k a!! LTs\NORTI-1 ELEVATION x111 lil---1 ki,..,3C3/5C.LLF ,.••1.•0. Ill . .. ---47=-1--—-, - - d----...- ... ■•••,.••• , [ 1_-_-„i . I IL__Lill :I X N . ".. _____ . .._ _ .... . __ .... .._ i,,. , .i',.-- 'f'. / - r=-1L l'-i ' -:•.',..;''.... _. -.7i=-_,. - : __r!•„,1J,E.2_1___,_ia!,_ -• T.o._-:;r- - • 4.-w-1•;77,*.i ghWEST ELEVATION ------ - " -----• .'" 4,.9ir vat:i, wir SCALE,.4.•,.,.. 1...)FSICaN C,-F.VIT.71...1 SUF ,--1 I -AL 43 ° . . . . . . . . .. ...... . . . .. . . . . . . . . i i tit + t AIIIL T+:Z�A°`�+ ' ?'4'3.x'2t,�tO ,."W3-.* �^"$t -ott ,� ,sue ^`;+ t y •`\ - ' ^_.�,° ^ t•....' �[ t — — j5t 1 \` - it 1N : - I yI a-u WOOA 4 p Qo 1 `'.v� .•:1/4..„,..,..-_:. ,.: 7.epre .xis • / \•'.:.*: Y4▪ 1.-:----1.--r—---- . 1 —- 11410 I _ _� ; ' j fi 1 ► c - L II I (&74.1 -,, t .,,, _k• I� I ._T -r f FA. • ei , ..,....i.,,, ...„.........„ ...,... ,..., .....„_ _ ....,,,.. ,,....,: ,;., ,,,,..:,,..". 4.kAlr 1, • ,.....,... T"' " ---- l • I• I I 1 I `•i` �= t�,1 1 , _ 0......_____ 1--\,A, . , g. [[--gy�pp yy 1 .....„.... ....S.::•s Y6•`..::t.i..._. ..6..0 .„ •• ®_ IBS lSifDiRn iiR 6 C tl 4!41•.111 Y.t w tot.,.. ...':•+.`....%R\ag4ec•e,-.e.u,o•o,'•=.;ggea:. rr1 y''reease es• 1 ..-ii (*) 1; 1! firri[ II” I :ii I 1 i 11 .EYIll=li.aacillil 31i1i ' '.'•':1: :9 3 as s•1:C .t At as l►}.■Aiii - S .p fi0'.......OAAAAAALA.A4Ii S•[3ZSuS S 4 SRf64 - I i i.l ti ra' I 1:1 - Ill��i .i oLT 4 • • . .. I • ii 6 � • try r r' F41:g iJ _ TOC MANAGEMENT SERVICES A N K R O M M O I S A N �; "ti^^ a s D•�.....ASSOCIATES BUILDING ADDITION ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS ao 1--% " w Y 'fil•1101.1...."'O 6825 SW SANDBURG STREET ..... t 02.3]OI: R TIGARD.OREGON 1 I SITC CANDSCAFF 1 4r...Any.• • saloN DNEflI4MOD lNiOI ,I,VDI'IddV ilild • r . . ' CITY ' OF . TIGARD 444,4, PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES '`i' arrop naaRn.on>:aon Community(Development (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) SIapvzgA(Better Community NON-RESIDENTIAL PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: !` d C STAFF AT PRE-APP.: /I/ APPLICANT: �C ,7/ .57 ✓ ' d AGENT: . sie-r /,-vi &efi Phone: (-50_A 6.an— !71O Phone: 0 ) 08c) PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN. LOCATION: 025 S —5 -oaGc4 51 - TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): `J - r NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: 5te PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: % . r 4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN cc MAP DESIGNATION: CC - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: C — C.I.T. AREA: _ FACILITATOR -- - PHONE: (503) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE:(aoo sq. ft. Average lot width:5-t) ft. Maximum building height: ft. Setbacks: Front a ft. Side ) ft. Rear O ft. Corner ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: /5 %. [Refer to Code Section 18. 57.2,0 l 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 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page I of 9 NOH-Resdenuil Appbatwn/PLnn n Dnnion Section SPECIAL SETBACK ➢ STR: TS: feet from the centerline of ➢ LOWER INTENSITY ZONE'• feet, along the site's boundary. ➢ FLAG LOT: 1 I-FOST SIDE ARD SETBACK. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.731] SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: ➢ A maximum building floor area . site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; ➢ All actual building setbacks will be a -. alf(1/2) of the building's height; and ➢ The structure will not abut a residential zoned i i [Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.BJ PARKING AND ACCESS rtt,‘cA ` 5 !4e--> 8e/ •REQUIRED parking for this type of use: if. 769e2r) ,4ac q izze 9 Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): 76 SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: • Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. • Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. [Refer to Code Section 18.765.040] .q Handicapped Parking: ��S' All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. • BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Minimum number of accesses: l Minimum access width: 3O . Minimum pavement width: Q'f/owls vts_off e) 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 all OF TIGARD Pre-Appliation Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 NOM-Res.ential Appliotion/Piannmg Diriswn Seam • te______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 18.705.030] 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 18.765.080) 4____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 18.795) 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. C feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. - feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: LANDSCAPING 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 18.705) CM Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 NON Resdentul AppLcnon/N ng DM l340(1 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 pre ides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOP 1, ENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAG WAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTAB E GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- applicatio conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify se itive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the .: ' itions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development applica '• -. Chapter 18.84 also provides re• lations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELO' NT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. [Refer to Code Chapter 183151 STEEP SLOPES When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior o issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the appr•val standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report s all be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations fo achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY[USA]BUFFER STA I ARDS,R&0 96-44 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACE TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wi.e enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR .HALL BE A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of he sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the with of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a p rtion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of t' - vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachments . be 15 f-et, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegeta -: ►•rridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, th- a ecage width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, constructio activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or •,her activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided b the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: Y 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 pa • may not be constructed closer than ten (10) feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless ...roved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize di- urbance to existing vegetation; and 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 CRE 6 ES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the egetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to b• used for the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R&0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,De,ign for SWM) QTY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 MON-Mcsdmual Appliunon/Planing Denson Section WATER RESOURCfSDVERIAy DISTRICT The WATER RESOURCES (WR) OVERLAY DISTRICT implements the policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Ian and is intended to resolve conflicts between development and conservation of significant tlands, streams and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inve tory. Specifically, this chapter allows reasonable economic use of property while establishing ear and objective standards to: protect significant wetlands and streams; limit development n designated riparian corridors; maintain and enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capa ity; preserve native plant cover; minimize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wild ife habitats; and conserve scenic, recreational and educational values of water resource area Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) :nd the "safe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These p,ovisions require that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. T e Tualatin River, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1 100 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annua flow less than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). • Major streams in Tiga . include FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIB I a RY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FISH-BEA-ING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigard inc de Summer Creek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain sho ributaries of the Tualatin River. Riparian Setback Area: This AREA IS MEASURED HO' IZONTALLY FROM AND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP-OF-BAN OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The riparian setback is e same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). ✓ The standard TUALATIN RIV R RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. • The MAJOR STREAMS RI 6ARI ' ► ■ •TBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. • ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MI •- STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no riparian setback; however, a 25-foot , ater quality buffer" is required under Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) standards adopted .. d administered by the City of Tigard. [Refer to Code Section 18.797.030] Riparian Setback Reductions The DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE e _ -SPECI a IC REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJOR STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK : AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or impervious surfaces otherwise prof ibited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resourc: is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in prese -d portions of the riparian setback area. Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Area . TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCTIO , the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantially disturbed at the ti - e this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on the Vegetation Study equired 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 rip:rian setback area for the last five years; Y That vegetation was not removed contrary to the provisions of Section 18.85.050 regulating removal of native plant species; CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 NON-Resdenual Appluuon/Plannn{Onnion Section ➢ That there will be no infringement into the 100 year floodplain; and ➢ The average slope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. [Refer to Code Section 18.797.100] k4P 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 .1 ITIGATION gp 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 18.790.060.E] CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 NON-Aesidentiol Appliotaa/Plmning Divisioa Section >kNARRATIVE _ 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(C)nditional Use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 18.765(Off-Street Parking/loading Requirement) 18.340(Directors Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) 18.775(Sensitive Lands Renew) 18.350(Planned Development) 18.105(Access/Egress/Grallation) (�'"18.780(Iigns) X 18.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Accessory Residential Unit) 18.785(Temporary Use Permit) 18.370(Variances/Adjustment) - 18.715(Density Computations) -- 1 8.790(Tree Removal) 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 18.195(Visual Clearance Areas) 18.385(Miscellaneous Permit) 1 8.725(Environmental Performance Standards) 18.191(Water Resources(WR)Overlay District) ^X 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) 18.798(Wireless Communication facilities) X 18.410(tot line Adjustment) 18.740(Historic Overlay) DC. 1 8.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) 18.420(land Partitions) 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) 18.430(Subdivisions) 18.745(landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.510(Residential Zoning District) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) (2)t 1 8.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) e='( 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) 18.530(Industrial Zoning District) -- 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) 4151 PACT 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 18.390.0501 _NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FF 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 Surveyor's 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 an Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 NON-Reiidtntial Appi ton/Plennint Decision Section j► ;UILDING 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: / cc7) 5Wti'k e-04/ '/.1), / s ciC c e ft tf $ CSI fig (,-;90a413� g•�-� c o7 r���,�'e GrT ? r car u�G* 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-Appliation Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Flaw:Drviston Section The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land us- decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard „ — -, t!—_ . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is avail.'. e 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: �%t. _ _ �� _ i�r��-s' - ► - 4144, CITY OF TIC'RD IANNING1 t 510 - t F PE: I ILD— I=RE-APP. MEETING PHONE: (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-1297 E-MAIL (staffs first name)@ci.tigard.or.us H:\patty\masters\Pre-App Notes Commeraal.doc (Engineering section:preapp.eng) Updated: 28-Feb-2000 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 NOM-Aesdennil Apphuuoa/Phnnmt Drown Section PRE APPLICA TION CONFERENCE INFORMATION The City of Tigard February 17, 2000 APPLICANT: T 0 C Management Services 6825 SW Sandburg Street Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 620-1710 AGENT: Meadowlark Partners, LLC David Lintz 1750 SW Skyline Blvd., Suite 224 Portland, OR 97221 (503) 297-6080 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The building located at 6825 SW Sandburg Street, Tigard, Oregon, is currently occupied by TOC Management Services (TOC). TOC is proposing to expand its existing office building and increase parking to accommodate the expansion. A purchase of an adjacent strip of land (lot line adjustment) will be needed to facilitate the expansion. SITE PLAN: Two copies of the site plan are enclosed. PROPOSED USES: The proposed use for this project is the expansion of an existing office use. TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NUMBERS: Attached is a copy of the information from Washington County's web site, which identifies the tax lot as 2S 101 DD00400. CURRENT OWNERS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: The current owner of the site is TOC. TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION: Attached are copies from Washington County's web site that illustrate topographical information for this site. MONOPOLE: This project is not a monopole project. PRE-APPLICATION FEE: Enclosed is the pre-application conference fee of$240.00 QeoNET Map http://www.co.washington.e 'scr...251&clicky-647607.19078&Parcels=on On Click 0 Zoom In 0 Zoom Out 0 Pan 0:' ° .4" -.: rrr r I T axlots Streets *■r •� — nk Street Names t , { � Plan Desig. il 1 {i,vac{4 u{u Fire Dist ; UGB School Dist. i wry ; - �t {{ •...,441.7-5,...—x C,POS ff Si o bD �£v4+v f4 a{ rl.^„f rcr„°49 rr{q MX1 '" wi^uwv"" Cities {{{ wuw sw { Contours 4 ,Q{ r MMh Shaded Relief k ' ur _____ USGS Quad ij KK Mr Air Photos ;� Refresh Map County View 1 of 1 2-17-00 2:27 PM District Report http://www.co.washington.or. -r...24251&they=647607.19078&Parcels=on Overlay Information For 2S101DD00400 Jurisdiction: TIGARD Subdivision/MLP: SALEM FREEWAY SUBDIVISION Fire District: TVFR School District: TIGARD-TUALATIN Commissioner District: 3 Water District: TVW Park District: Within Enhanced Sheriff Patrol District: No Within Urban Road Maintenance District: N CPO: CPO4M Plan Dist: C-P Call TIGARD for information Within Urban Growth Boundary: Yes Planning Responsibility: Community Plan Area: Aproximate Elevation: 300 ft Census Tract: 307 Census Block Group: 0307002 Census Block: 209 Zip Code: 97223 Election Precinct: 35 Garbage Hauler: Pride Disposal Garbage Hauler Dropbox:Pride Disposal 1 of 1 2-17-00 2:25 PM QeoNET Map http://www.co.washington.or cr...&parcely-647607&Button=Refresh+Map On Click Q Zoom In Q Zoom Out O Pan ()Identify Taxlot ✓ Taslots -�, - -N. ✓ Streets ✓ Street Names '�-- �, �,ti / ✓ Plan Desig. P - \ \ Fire Dist I L `\\� ,.:`� � /1 UGB ,;•:::�:. \ �\. ' -,� School Dist. C-P I�—— . ' `.` CPOS ( � I-L '\ Cities C-P Contours ti y I Shaded Relief ..e 1 `1 USGS Quad ''',...,z--. ,�� 1 Air Photos �`�;;_, Refresh Map '' fs1 I _ County View 1 of I ,_I-_nu 2 50 I'M GeoNET Map http://www.co.washington.or ':r...&parce1y-647607&Button=Refresh+Map On Click er Loom In Q Loom Out O Pan 0 Identify Taxlot III ✓ "Iaxlots1..''Nr, » f i"`; ' �4,4 . ✓ Streets ' � z ,n ✓ Street Name F�. ✓ Plan Desig. 'f,, 4,„,., Fire Dist ,;' �t � ,mpg ^° -School Dist.: a , ( PUS .. . ✓ Cities .; ; �. Contours �' Shaded Reli' ,, USGS Quad Z,,,,,,/,,-,,, ■• AiI Photo '''.7-',(1:-',',..= Refresh Map 1 -,;a ' County View i 1 of 1 ')-17-00 2:52 PM GeoNET Map http://www.co.washington.or cr...&parcely=647607&Button=Refresh+Map • , i CIick` O $ ;$ .1,• ,woIll 9iEt 0,46agaigidIMINIMIr ✓ r5 Streets ,'' �--- Street Names 1 � t Plan Desig. !"' �� �— r Fire Dist i'�`'t. 1 f=., 1 `r L i iCll3 i i i \\.) zs i School Dist. .� .. •,r° �' `•.7 CPOS f1 u'4 Cities �i . — _ r r _.. °��__!._. , ./ k ' e ' _ .✓ Contours `10 Shaded Relief . ,. . - �..I ✓ USGS Quad a "-" _ ' Air Photos �� - _ ti 1 • �, .' I Refresh Map . . it _.:2_.. —^I....... i County View 1 of 1 2-17-00 2:55 PM Qwnership Information http://www.co.washington.or.us/cfd. Si01DD00400&TAXLOTS ACT=R459907 • Address: 6825 SW SANDBURG ST 1 -rket Land Value: $455, 870 Aprox Acres: 1 Tax Lot ID: 2S101DD00400 1 -rket Bldg Val: $698, 690 Bldg Sq Ft: 0 Account: R459907 1 -rket Total Val: $1, 154,560 Year Built: 0.0 Prop Code: 201.0 Taxcode: 023.81 1 of 1 2-17-00 2:56 PM PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION Q CC lopment Shaping 93etter community ZS of Dn PUBLIC FACILITIES �.` * 4w The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: ( ) to feet from centerline. ( ) to feet from centerline. ( ) to feet from centerline. ( ) to feet from centerline. Street improvements: ( t'r street improvements will be necessary along -vJ CAp-AD T. to include: f feet of pavement r�� cis ,,,E Tom [F A-a-+Dk( (Tconcrete curb C tF 001 t--6•11 P� � storm sewers and other underground utilities 1__d/ S -foot concrete sidewalk R"street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OF Tf6ARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Umlauting Iepertment Section ( ) - stre nprovements will be necessary alc to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete-curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ) street improvements will be necessary along to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ) street improvements will be necessary along to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees (1 street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district. The following street improvements may be eligible for such an agreement: (1.) (2.) ( ) Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 016 hulassrlig uspfrtmeetSsctl.. • are on the opposite ie of the street from the site. If th e in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW . Prior to , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) � inch line which is located . . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. is -espo stb1itty-to (-, Water Supply: (M The C- - Phone:(503) x'25 11 provides public water service in the area cf this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection:- Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: mill, (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. > 11,1 i►.til l(o)g Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 EigI...ttu I.grtm..t Section newly created impervious s ices. The resolution contains a pi ion that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ( -) Construction of an on-site water quality facility. iF �� �� '�` )''� '.'› ( ) Payment of the fee in-lieu. > �'o,D� Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. P� it PERMITS Engineering Department Permits: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a permit from the Engineering Department. There are two types of permits issued by Engineering, as follows: Street Opening Permit (SOP). This permit covers relatively minor work in a public right-of-way or easement, such as sidewalk and driveway installation or repair, and service connections to main utility lines. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. The cost of this type of permit is calculated as 4% of the cost of the work and is payable prior to issuance of the permit. CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 016 Etill.eeMH Department Section In addition, the pen ?e will be required to post a bon r similar financial security for the work. Compliance Agreement (CAP). This permit covers more extensive work such as main utility line extensions, street improvements, etc. In subdivisions, this type of permit also covers all grading and private utility work. Plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The cost of this permit is also calculated as 4% of the cost of the improvements, based on the design engineer's estimate, and is payable prior to issuance of the approved plan. The permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security, and execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. Prior to City acceptance of any permitted work, and prior to release of work assurance bond(s), the work shall be deemed complete and satisfactory by the City in writing. The permittee is responsible for the work until such time written City acceptance of the work is posted. NOTE: If an Engineering Permit Is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. CITY OF TICARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Deportment Section GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS Fe UBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: 1 • `°" ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF Phone: [5031639-4111 Fax [5031684-1291 hApatty\masters\preapp.eng (Master section:preapp-.mst) 04-March-1999 CITY OF TICARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 (uIussrtei IgertmeetSectie. Pre-Apps (CD Meetings) March 2000 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Thursday, March 02, 2000 8:00 8:30 9:00 Pre-app w/David Lintz @ 297-6080 9:30 10:00 Pre-App 10:30 11:00 Pre-app 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 2:36PM Friday,February 18,2000 A4 Gs4 rC, PvF /b-/'cs 9s 9 Aim /e&sr rCy. G ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS I 1 31'-6' I- * 0 009 — - — — EXISTING : Elii 1 . . PROPERTY L ���� \ � LINE Oa, N <z u \ y W L ..EL"............■,........_ \N o i % 2 W REUSE O 1 wr-TYr. Y 0 O *4 —PROPOSED z ADJUSTED \ < < E PROPERTY LINE O L L ■ 4111N S TOG PARKING APPROXIMATE M SITE NEW ROW. LINE ` \ / EXISTING 7 EXISTING, • G L W BUILDING U � L W M ,Z EW cu O �F z I ao ,...!1 N ‘ r U\le / TOTAL = 50,118 S/F ± o L = LANDSCAPE = 18,100 S/F \ SANDBURG L LANDSCAPE = 36 io 4 e STREET L / § '11\448,6 Q411•• ef W ll PLAN R I NORTH COf LTRON SITE PLAN (1) °• InV00 ... MT OAR• IOV!O a .vw ra.- avea SCALE: la=301-0' DM- Imo. I . 3AL OF 0 EET. r.._._ -_ 1 1, 3T-6' - - 0 OCO - -• 'i_PROPEEXISTING RTY L �•� LINE lb N Z < u \ W _ F i O V 1 �r A Aeux DL V 06.1T-TTIF Y O bZ PROPOSED Z N ADJUSTED < < I PROPERTY LINE O . \ ,' L \ • • 21 s TOC PARKING APPROXIMATE SITE NEW R.ow• LINE "—° �` /—EXISTING 7 x RO.W. EXISTING W 1 BUILDING - U 1 rrw ais , O �W E" ;z E IS Q o C7 ct 1 ::'' as j U TOTAL = 50,118 S/F ± o L = LANDSCAPE = 18,100 S/F SANDBURG L LANDSCAPE = 36 % STREET L / ® - - - - _ 0_ - - - - _ _ to I- T) ....\ PLAN NORTH COILeTfRON SITE P, ,� N T �.�. n�. NT DAM• 14~ n�- ca T aw a- \Y)Of DYM• la«. SCALE: 1"=30'-0" i l .0 ep t OF MEETS Sent By: WAG DESIGN INC; 503 603 9944; Aug-25-00 4:37PM; Page 2/2 in CJ> - r \L7 r SO e_Z=Dd - bc:iO\-L --1--------i5K , 4/1,((3- 0 /(13- :;•47'00"E 175.26'± �1 i r ar,r-----.#fir` r ova 139.64't r,..„. .,,,I I Oillibibs OCEPTOM In 17 I.I I 14q1M.41.13 4 r a/ PR Oat rd w•nn ITILII r;i PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE 4�. o�,o,� ill �� ritlitilk OLD LINE POR- .�' �� • I � EXISTING , ;�� 'i►1`° PROPOSED :t�Nati I� r,,44.-' m ;;, 1`' I , EXISTING S 7, � � HANDICAP : , _ k f � l i- y REGULAR 1124 fit# TOTAL rai rrr � ,� r / St0lL 1pi0 .) it / ..i 6.imh. i ' • ail• Dt. 0 �w� vir -i /7 Sent By: WAG DESIGN INC; 503 603 9944; Aug-25-00 4:37PM; Page 1 /2 W R G D F S I I N �- FAX TRANSMITTAL To: ,� _ ^ • v- Date: $(2_,c-(c=O Company: c., o; -zke,,arc . No. Pages including cover: Fax No: ,:• 17."0 Hard copy to follow: Yes . From: 'Tr-cc„„+,ti,,e. Re: %, SG *At N. WRG No./Project Name: For Your: ❑ Review and Comment ❑ As Requested ❑Use El Information/File Comments: C- Sly 2-G>cO - C:C>°lZ T c_n PA. °4 - 1 f T ,s C-oQ -{0V-Q '¢EtZ, .k, Cc. PLANNERS • ENGINEERS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS • SURVEYORS 10450 SW Nimbus Ave., Portland, '{OR 97223 / (503) 603-9933 (tax) 603-9944 /r/// ` ,.N10,> / Ie vuci is ! _/V/x,i7nria